Hello there, I am Alexander and I am considering buying your A321NEO product for MSFS 2024. I currently have the Fenix Simulations A319, A320, and A321 and I am liking some of the features you guys have to offer with this aircraft including the LR variant. What I was concerned about was how I currently have the Fenix and I was thinking I should just wait for their NEOs to get a more consistent fleet, although I am not sure whether or not they will make an XLR variant or even an LR variant. Could you guys please tell me if there is any possibility of the XLR or A320NEO planned across the roadmap and maybe some key features that make your aircraft more unique and better than the Fenix series.

this whole 0 ACT / 1 ACT / 2 ACT / LR / XLR variant thing is really a black box for me haha.

Its a wonderful aircraft you wont regret it if you buy it..... way better than the fenix 

20 hours ago, Miguel de gonzalo said:

Its a wonderful aircraft you wont regret it if you buy it..... way better than the fenix 

Well, I wouldn't say it's simply better. You could just as easily argue that it's weaker in some of the more "superficial" areas, such as visuals, sound, the cabin, EFB design, or the walkaround features.

On the other hand, it has the edge when it comes to the flight model, systems depth and accuracy, VNAV, ATSU workflow, and features like MEL. It also has that certain mojo that many people appreciate.

At the end of the day, we're lucky to have two top-notch options that keep things interesting. Once FSL goes fully MSFS 2024-native, we should see better performance, and once the A320neo arrives, we'll have a much broader range of variants to choose from as well.

As for the XLR, I recently learned that it's actually a fairly different aircraft compared to the LR. Beyond the obvious range increase, Airbus introduced a number of structural and systems changes to certify the aircraft for the new mission profile. Apparently, Airbus is also rolling many of the XLR's improvements into the rest of the A320neo family through what they call "Update 4."

Fenix´ Amir said they might never introduce an XLR, or maybe at a later stage. 

As far as I´m concerned I would prefer a Concorde coming earlier or an A330 Neo by FSL ...

2 hours ago, Claas Krause said:

 As far as I´m concerned I would prefer a Concorde coming earlier or an A330 Neo by FSL ...

This, We dont have alot of 330's available, and if we do its the classic ones, would like a proper NEO variant I know we have a freeware one, but tried it, and sure its nice. But not for me.

1 hour ago, Chris Oddsund said:

We dont have alot of 330's available

It's mystery to me why a developer hasn't done a high fidelity A330.

7 hours ago, David Porrett said:

It's mystery to me why a developer hasn't done a high fidelity A330.

Well, I think iniBuilds would have done it, but they ended up developing the default A330 and wanted to focus on the A340, A350, and A380 afterwards... so their narrative makes sense.

Fenix and FSLabs have kept all of their attention on the narrowbodies... completely understandable.

PMDG is Boeing, so all good there.

It's Aerosoft. They underdelivered on the A330 CEO (call it what you want), so an A330neo is still nowhere to be seen, even though every single day someone asks about it on their Discord.

With ToLiss, they also had to do the A340 before anything else (don't ask me why).

So this rather unique mix of circumstances is what got us into this situation.

It's almost criminal that PMDG doesn't even have the 787 on the horizon. Mercifully, it looks like we'll have Vector's rendition to look forward to.

On 3/30/2026 at 4:04 PM, Alexander collins said:

roadmap and maybe some key features that make your aircraft more unique and better than the Fenix series.

That list would be quite big!

On 7/24/2026 at 1:15 AM, David Porrett said:

It's mystery to me why a developer hasn't done a high fidelity A330.

Oh wow, I wish an FSLabs one!

On 7/23/2026 at 7:45 PM, Claas Krause said:

Well, I wouldn't say it's simply better. You could just as easily argue that it's weaker in some of the more "superficial" areas, such as visuals, sound, the cabin, EFB design, or the walkaround features.

On the other hand, it has the edge when it comes to the flight model, systems depth and accuracy, VNAV, ATSU workflow, and features like MEL. It also has that certain mojo that many people appreciate.

At the end of the day, we're lucky to have two top-notch options that keep things interesting. Once FSL goes fully MSFS 2024-native, we should see better performance, and once the A320neo arrives, we'll have a much broader range of variants to choose from as well.

As for the XLR, I recently learned that it's actually a fairly different aircraft compared to the LR. Beyond the obvious range increase, Airbus introduced a number of structural and systems changes to certify the aircraft for the new mission profile. Apparently, Airbus is also rolling many of the XLR's improvements into the rest of the A320neo family through what they call "Update 4."

Fenix´ Amir said they might never introduce an XLR, or maybe at a later stage. 

As far as I´m concerned I would prefer a Concorde coming earlier or an A330 Neo by FSL ...

Long list buddy, vnav , brakes  temperatures, systems, mel etc etc and yeah , FSL is better 

On 7/27/2026 at 1:20 AM, Vasilios Grekousis said:

Oh wow, I wish an FSLabs one!

yesssss

20 hours ago, Miguel de gonzalo said:

Long list buddy, vnav , brakes  temperatures, systems, mel etc etc and yeah , FSL is better 

yes sure. but it really comes down to what a person seeks for in flight simulation and we also have to wait and see how both products progress into 2027. but as of now, regarding system depth ... there you go

On 8/14/2026 at 8:16 PM, Claas Krause said:

yes sure. but it really comes down to what a person seeks for in flight simulation and we also have to wait and see how both products progress into 2027. but as of now, regarding system depth ... there you go

Well there is not much to disscus here.... the own word describe it , filght SIMULATION , simulate the aircratft if you dont want what a real pilot does everyday , and do not want to simulate it you have war thunder or ace combat.... i dont really care what people seek or prefer , when you get into the word simulation thats what you get....

1 hour ago, Miguel de gonzalo said:

Well there is not much to disscus here.... the own word describe it , filght SIMULATION , simulate the aircratft if you dont want what a real pilot does everyday , and do not want to simulate it you have war thunder or ace combat.... i dont really care what people seek or prefer , when you get into the word simulation thats what you get....

Well, the FSLabs makes you suffer in certain ways, whereas the Fenix might "be there for you." Real-world pilots sometimes like the Fenix just as much as the FSLabs, and although the FSLabs has the golden reputation in the flightsim community (and predominantly there) for having "more system depth," that doesn't mean it's free of noticeable deviations from the real thing either.

So really it comes down to asking an invested simmer which things matter more to that particular person. The Fenix is by no means an arcade piece of software, and the FSLabs is obviously not some D-level simulation.

For myself... I love the joy of the Abwechslung / Variedad / Change of pace — being able to stay within the A320 family and still have two flavours of simulation. That fact alone brings me a lot of joy. I'd honestly just ask people what kind of vibe they enjoy more, and that's very much a matter of discussion. 🙂 This is a forum for exactly that.

On 7/24/2026 at 6:42 AM, Claas Krause said:

With ToLiss, they also had to do the A340 before anything else (don't ask me why).

Their A346 was more of a trial than anything else. They struggled to adapt to the new simulator and correctly picked a model that wouldn't taint their other successful X-Plane models if "stuff" hit the fan. So much so, they are re-releasing the external model in the next few weeks. 
They also picked an aircraft no one was in actual active production.

My only complaint with FSLabs is public: They take too freaking long to fix their bugs, with extremely long update cycles that frustrate people.

But if you ask me who should be making ANY Airbus on a regular basis, I would choose FSLabs... but only if they commit to FS2024 native productions and hire some more 3D artists. 

Fenix is, and will always be, that neighbour's shiny new Mercedes, looks awesome, attracts the looks, even sounds awesome, but it's just a Renault 1.4L engine inside. FSL's is that 5 year old BMW, rough on the edges, not even the stereo works sometimes, but it's a race car in disguise... 

1 hour ago, Joao Pinto said:

My only complaint with FSLabs is public: They take too freaking long to fix their bugs, with extremely long update cycles that frustrate people.

But if you ask me who should be making ANY Airbus on a regular basis, I would choose FSLabs... but only if they commit to FS2024 native productions and hire some more 3D artists. 

Fenix is, and will always be, that neighbour's shiny new Mercedes, looks awesome, attracts the looks, even sounds awesome, but it's just a Renault 1.4L engine inside. FSL's is that 5 year old BMW, rough on the edges, not even the stereo works sometimes, but it's a race car in disguise... 

lovely put, and while I would argue against your analogy I love it nonetheless! and yes - 2024 native is so important (so all you 2020 people out there - see it as fan service! )

FSLabs engineering can be sexy to the bones and this is why we are here. unfortunately the team is small and has unbelievably popular (might be the most skewed competition out there right after Rhodiumcode's new A350 lol) competition

but, I believe Fenix are working ... and this is why it´s taking some time ... on a real and comprehensive product overhaul. I think FSLabs are doing the same. The eventual outcome will be pure bliss for simmers and both will have their flavour, real airbus enjoyers will buy both nonetheless. Of course, things might be spicier if the FSLabs A320 Neo would hit the shelves earlier than the Fenix.

Baci!

On 8/23/2026 at 12:28 AM, Claas Krause said:

Of course, things might be spicier if the FSLabs A320 Neo would hit the shelves earlier than the Fenix.

I doubt it. Not just because Fenix was already in "final stages" earlier this year and decided to postpone, but also because FSL hasn't even announced it yet.

In the end, however, both are prudent enough to only release something significant. If you look carefully, they are the only two companies in actual direct competition with the NEOs right now. They are not taking chances because they both know one launch will harm the other, that's just how it is. 

On 8/25/2026 at 9:22 AM, Joao Pinto said:

I doubt it. Not just because Fenix was already in "final stages" earlier this year and decided to postpone, but also because FSL hasn't even announced it yet.

In the end, however, both are prudent enough to only release something significant. If you look carefully, they are the only two companies in actual direct competition with the NEOs right now. They are not taking chances because they both know one launch will harm the other, that's just how it is. 

This is a very interesting perspective. Are you hinting at something along the lines of them having a quick chat every now and then and being, in a sense, professional friends? I’d actually love for that to be the case.

When you say “prudent,” I read that as them both respecting and acknowledging the turf they’re operating in—the A320 space in MSFS 2024. One could certainly argue that an earlier Fenix release might take some of the wind out of the sails of a later FSLabs A320neo release. On the other hand, you could make the opposite argument: FSLabs might actually benefit from getting there first, simply because of the novelty and the fact that they would have the A320neo space more or less to themselves for a while.

At the same time, I’m sure there’s a sizeable portion of the community who would simply wait for the Fenix and spend their money on it regardless, because that’s what they had planned to do anyway. And, of course, plenty of people will happily enjoy both. They each have their own strengths, and I think there’s room for both products to coexist quite nicely.

I’m really curious to see whether FSLabs will go for a truly native MSFS 2024 version of the A320neo, especially now that the community is slowly but surely—and, at this point, rather undeniably—moving towards MSFS 2024. A native 2024 implementation could potentially address quite a few of the performance concerns, not only for a new product but perhaps eventually for the existing A321neo as well. If that were the case, the single biggest criticism I’ve seen levelled at FSLabs could potentially be taken off the table altogether. That could bring quite a few more people into the FSLabs ecosystem, which is something I’d genuinely love to see.

In any case, thanks for sharing your perspective! Feel free to elaborate a little more on how you see the whole situation. It’s nice to have something to chew on while we’re waiting, haha.

And yeah, I suppose they’ve more or less announced it already, at least to the extent that they’ve said they intend to bring their entire lineup to MSFS eventually. So I wouldn’t necessarily expect some huge reveal trailer or anything. FSLabs have never really been the “fancy announcement trailer” kind of developer anyway. 😄 (AviationLads Trailer incoming?)

Not hinting at anything. I have no insider perspective on what happens at corporate level but I can guess. I just think they don't want to release anything unpolished or that could fall in the "inferior" category compared to the opposition. And that's a good strategy for the top companies.

Regarding promotion, everyone promotes, it's not like someone can just drop an addon without some level of hype (maybe if you're LatinVFR and you want to overshadow some other developer building an A380, wink-wink), especially if your past releases and subsequent updates were kind of shaky.

1 hour ago, Joao Pinto said:

Not hinting at anything. I have no insider perspective on what happens at corporate level but I can guess. I just think they don't want to release anything unpolished or that could fall in the "inferior" category compared to the opposition. And that's a good strategy for the top companies.

Regarding promotion, everyone promotes, it's not like someone can just drop an addon without some level of hype (maybe if you're LatinVFR and you want to overshadow some other developer building an A380, wink-wink), especially if your past releases and subsequent updates were kind of shaky.

makes total sense, didn´t see it from this perspective. again, I think both devs want to step up their game in general. FSLabs might wanna get better regarding sounds, performance (the big one, 2024 native), visuals, up-to-dateness in look&feel if you know what I mean ... and Fenix might add MEL and more "realism" in general, on top of their lackluster VNAV ...

and yeah ... AviationLads FSLabs trailer - haha I would love that!

I think it will all come down to: "who releases first?"

Pros: The eagerness to get an A320NEO will make people jump on the first one, regardless of who it is. Brand faithful customers might wait, but for how long if the rival plane is out there? Furthermore, when the second arrives, who would want a "duplicate"?

Cons: The second on the finish line will have to polish further but, above all, to tune or improve, even add, what the first released missed. The added pressure on the team will also make them push a better product overall.

My take: Fenix launches first, sells like hot buns, FSL launches later and over time they'll be neck-to-neck. When that happens, it will come down to what's your "favourite brand?".

Both are qualified, both are detail oriented, both are serious developers... but one is often quicker to deliver. Needless to say Fenix already has FS2024 native experience and FSL does need sometime to get there. But I would expect bugs on both sides.

As for MEL in the Fenix, honestly, I would argue if that's an actual selling point for the majority of users. Hardcore users? Of course. But those aren't the vast majority.

El 23/7/2026 a las 11:45 a. m., Claas Krause dijo:

Bueno, no diria que es simple mejor. Se podría argumentar con la misma facilidad que es más debili en armas de las áreas más "superficiales, como las imágenes, el sonido, la cabaña, el diseño EFB o las características del recuerdo.

Por otro lado, tiene venta en cuanto a modelo de vuelo, profundidad y precisión de los sistemas, VNAV, flujo de trabajo ATSU y características como MEL. También tiene esa certeza mojo eso mucha gente lo aprecia.

Al final del día, tenemos suerte de tener dos opciones de primer nivel que mantienen las cosas interesantes. Una vez que FSL sea completo nativo de MSFS 2024, deberíamos ver un mejor rendimiento, y una vez que llegue el A320neo, también tendremos una gama mucho más amplia de variantes para elegir.

En cuanto al XLR, reciente supe que en realidad es un avión bastante diferente en comparación con el LR. Más allá del evidente monumento de alcance, Airbus presenta una serie de cambios estructurales y de sistemas para certificar el avión para el nuevo perfil de misión. Aparentemente, Airbus también está incorporando muchas de las mejores del XLR al resto de la familia A320neo a través de lo que ellos llama „Actualizare 4".

Fenix' Amir dijo que tal vez nunca introduczcan un XLR, o tal vez en una etapa posterior. 

En lo que a mi respecta, preferiría un Concorde que venga antes o un A330 Neo de FS

Me he estado preguntando algo sobre el A321neo y el Complemento GSX Pro. Cuando entro en la ruta en el ATSU INIT—, la aeronave carga los datos EFB y puedo cargar combustible y equipaje a través de OFP DATA—it me pide que complete el INIT AOC. Sin embargo, al hacerlo, se completa automáticamente toda la información de ruta en la MCDU. ¿Sabes cómo cargar esos datos para que la aeronave se cargue vía GSX y la información aparezca en el EFB, sin completar automáticamente todos esos datos de ruta y vuelo? Siento que eso lo hace un poco menos realista.