Thanks for review. I concur. Worth noting: 1) INI has no Air Manager panels/instruments. Drives me wacko to fly with mouse. The FBW AM panels are complete and very nice,. Even includes an overhead panel popup. I run the panel set on 2 touchscreens with knobster. 2) The INI has RNAV/RNP with RF, but it seems a bit wonky. Leaves me high, turns are greater than standard rate and speeds in RF don't always slow properly. The ZFW/ZFWCG is on fuel prediction page instead of INIT-B. How many has that tripped up? Definitely FPS hit even with 4090. 3)FBW should rollout RNAV/RNP soon, but they said that 3 years ago. 4) FBW probably better for newbie. ILS is what most do anyway. The DOCS are great. Air Manager panels. Needs secondary FP and dual MCDU. Sounds and PB better.
FBW because of its comprehensive docs. But Fenix wasn't too hard after all, they share many of the same procedures as FBW and iniBuilds after all; besides, with great addition of comprehensive VNAV functionalities it's definitely over the top
Recommending new players FBW to later transition to fenix is the best tip honesty. When i jumped to fenix i thought its gonna be a little difference in detail and realism, but its night and day.
My thought process was that for a beginner to airliners an ILS approach is easier to understand if you’ve done them already in a GA plane, so the fbw is fine to start with since it is much more stable. After that, it’s worth to try the ini for the RNAV approach, since it’s an easy transition.
@@matejmarosz20Three plus years and counting! I suppose the same applies to independent MCDU's and a performance calculator in the EFB? And I know the usual counter to that always used to be "well it is free, what do you expect?" but given we've now got the INI version as part of the sim that line isn't the debate winner it used to be.
My first choice is FBW. The reason behind this is that FBW saved the default A320 included with Microsoft Flight Simulator when it first launched. They went through many ups and downs, dealing with an incomplete SDK and even releasing their product on Xbox in the Marketplace at one point. My second choice would be Fenix because of its high level of detail in textures and its study-level accuracy. I find both the FBW and Fenix to be more stable than the inbuilds A320. During a test flight, I noticed the inbuilds A320 swayed left to right a lot when following the navigation.
I'll stick to the FBW because I am having a hard time landing the Inibuilds. Even if the approach is stabilised and smooth when I am at 30 feets above the rwy and start flaring the Inibuilds would start gliding over the rwy. I have never had this issue with the FBW.
Great review and discussion as always, Marc. Question: how are you doing the internal walk-through of the plane? Is that using external camera? I still can't do proper external views. I tried the ini, but I found the default views to be really awkward. I'm just too accustomed to the FBW, I suppose. The RNAV/RNP may be a good enough reason in itself to work with it more, though.
Thanks Pete, I was using the drone cam to get a lot of the external shots. All my wing views are the interior cameras views 1-9 though. For those you should be able to just walk through the cabin door to get to wherever you want for it
Merci Christine :) I considered including it, but I think you’ll be better off with any of the other 3, especially considering how much they ask for it. Even on Xbox, I don’t think it’s worth the asking price.
fbw is prob the best, but if they made the inibuilds one be able to automatically have the flightplan from the default msfs flight plan globe thing maybe that 🤔
I doubt they will implement that since it’s meant to be part of the experience to set it up from cold and dark, but hey you never know! I know a lot of people who would like that feature too.
@@Xpnvh Use Simbrief it is free. Load a complete correct flight plan with weights fuel planning and then load it into most MSFS aircraft. including FBW and INI. MSFS globe flight planner is laughable, a bust really. Use the same fp over and over in simbrief. Just enter dep/destination differently.
@@Xpnvh If you don't like planning then A320 or Airliners in general probably not a great choice. The Longitude Super mid-sized jet is easy with awesome G5000, Auto throttle, nose wheel steering etc. IMO best aircraft for VATSIM and single pilot flying.
@@FlightSimSchool INI has panel states which are pretty nice. XP 12 has ability to save flight and situations from anywhere and resume later with flight plan/ weights/ config etc. Impossible with MSFS. Very hard to practice partial flights, like landings, takeoffs, phases etc. Everything is gone on restart. Looking at Toliss.
@@DownTheRabbit-Hole Hmmm. I got the Wingwin FCU and EIFIS panel, Logitech Radio panel, and using Fenix 's integrated MCDU on my tablet. Working great.
Thanks for review. I concur.
Worth noting:
1) INI has no Air Manager panels/instruments. Drives me wacko to fly with mouse. The FBW AM panels are complete and very nice,. Even includes an overhead panel popup. I run the panel set on 2 touchscreens with knobster.
2) The INI has RNAV/RNP with RF, but it seems a bit wonky. Leaves me high, turns are greater than standard rate and speeds in RF don't always slow properly. The ZFW/ZFWCG is on fuel prediction page instead of INIT-B. How many has that tripped up? Definitely FPS hit even with 4090.
3)FBW should rollout RNAV/RNP soon, but they said that 3 years ago.
4) FBW probably better for newbie. ILS is what most do anyway. The DOCS are great. Air Manager panels. Needs secondary FP and dual MCDU. Sounds and PB better.
FBW because of its comprehensive docs. But Fenix wasn't too hard after all, they share many of the same procedures as FBW and iniBuilds after all; besides, with great addition of comprehensive VNAV functionalities it's definitely over the top
Recommending new players FBW to later transition to fenix is the best tip honesty. When i jumped to fenix i thought its gonna be a little difference in detail and realism, but its night and day.
too bad FBW doesn’t support RNAV approach.. might be a bummer. for now maybe inibuild is a go to airplane for beginner.. and it’s also free.
My thought process was that for a beginner to airliners an ILS approach is easier to understand if you’ve done them already in a GA plane, so the fbw is fine to start with since it is much more stable. After that, it’s worth to try the ini for the RNAV approach, since it’s an easy transition.
@@g_pazzini fbw supporting rnav is just a question of time, as the functionality should come into it when the a380 releases somewhat.
@@matejmarosz20Three plus years and counting! I suppose the same applies to independent MCDU's and a performance calculator in the EFB? And I know the usual counter to that always used to be "well it is free, what do you expect?" but given we've now got the INI version as part of the sim that line isn't the debate winner it used to be.
My first choice is FBW. The reason behind this is that FBW saved the default A320 included with Microsoft Flight Simulator when it first launched. They went through many ups and downs, dealing with an incomplete SDK and even releasing their product on Xbox in the Marketplace at one point. My second choice would be Fenix because of its high level of detail in textures and its study-level accuracy. I find both the FBW and Fenix to be more stable than the inbuilds A320. During a test flight, I noticed the inbuilds A320 swayed left to right a lot when following the navigation.
That's pretty much how I feel as well :)
I'll stick to the FBW because I am having a hard time landing the Inibuilds. Even if the approach is stabilised and smooth when I am at 30 feets above the rwy and start flaring the Inibuilds would start gliding over the rwy. I have never had this issue with the FBW.
The FBW hand flies the best of the two for sure.
@@FlightSimSchool this problem has been discussed on MSFS forums and reported to the Inibuilds dev team but they don't seem to care much about it.
@LePerlashez Yeah, I also understand it from their point of view: it’s way better than the default 320 was overall, so they consider the job is done.
The ini has a weird quirk with the top of descent indicator on the MCDU- it doesn’t show the correct time for TOD
I really like your videos. Can you tell when in the flight you should engage the LS and the APPR?
I usually enable it just before turning final, but you can do it as early as the initial approach fix, I think.
Thanks!
Love the video. Hate the new youtube UI.
There’s a new UI?
Great review and discussion as always, Marc. Question: how are you doing the internal walk-through of the plane? Is that using external camera? I still can't do proper external views.
I tried the ini, but I found the default views to be really awkward. I'm just too accustomed to the FBW, I suppose. The RNAV/RNP may be a good enough reason in itself to work with it more, though.
Thanks Pete, I was using the drone cam to get a lot of the external shots. All my wing views are the interior cameras views 1-9 though. For those you should be able to just walk through the cabin door to get to wherever you want for it
Excellent vidéo,thanks,nothing on the LVFR 320?
Merci Christine :) I considered including it, but I think you’ll be better off with any of the other 3, especially considering how much they ask for it. Even on Xbox, I don’t think it’s worth the asking price.
thank you merci pour l'info 👍
A320 CEO have CFM 56 or IAE V2500 engine option just pointing out
I thought I did mention it? Either way thanks for pointing it out.
@@FlightSimSchool you mention leap on the fenix ceo version, still CFM tho 😁 cheers
It’s funny cuz I pretty much only fly the IAEs because they sound so much cooler :D
Fenix is closed to home cockpit builders. Anybody know why? Seems like it would promote sales.
I'm not sure, but if I had to guess I'd say it's likely a licensing issue.
fbw is prob the best, but if they made the inibuilds one be able to automatically have the flightplan from the default msfs flight plan globe thing maybe that 🤔
because i dont feel like planning out the flight i wanna do it instantly (im impatient)
I doubt they will implement that since it’s meant to be part of the experience to set it up from cold and dark, but hey you never know! I know a lot of people who would like that feature too.
@@Xpnvh Use Simbrief it is free. Load a complete correct flight plan with weights fuel planning and then load it into most MSFS aircraft. including FBW and INI. MSFS globe flight planner is laughable, a bust really. Use the same fp over and over in simbrief. Just enter dep/destination differently.
@@Xpnvh If you don't like planning then A320 or Airliners in general probably not a great choice. The Longitude Super mid-sized jet is easy with awesome G5000, Auto throttle, nose wheel steering etc. IMO best aircraft for VATSIM and single pilot flying.
@@FlightSimSchool INI has panel states which are pretty nice. XP 12 has ability to save flight and situations from anywhere and resume later with flight plan/ weights/ config etc. Impossible with MSFS. Very hard to practice partial flights, like landings, takeoffs, phases etc. Everything is gone on restart. Looking at Toliss.
FBW because it's FREE!!
The original is best for flying VFR. Doesn't complain at you every 20 seconds. Why would you ever fly a 320 that way? Because you can!
fenix
They do not allow home cockpits. Sad. Otherwise I would purchase. FBW will always have open architecture for Air Manager panels, home cockpits etc.
@@DownTheRabbit-Hole Hmmm. I got the Wingwin FCU and EIFIS panel, Logitech Radio panel, and using Fenix 's integrated MCDU on my tablet. Working great.
FBW
Agreed :)
Neo