RALF9636

Have been away for a while and could test only today. Now MCE does not reply the checklist item at [ ]Before Start to the line -- complete //2 despite the "//2" but keeps repeating this line after a few seconds (like a normal checklist line). When I reply with "complete" MCE then confirms along the lines of "checklist to the line confirmed, continue below the line", but then after a few seconds asks again for "Before start to the line", starting an endless loop.

Works fine here.

I did. Still the same. No. I just see my responses to the checklist items.

Err... no... 8700K, 1080TI here. Desperately waiting for hardware comparison tests with MSFS2024 to finally get a new PC...

This looks very interesting. A competitor for GSX can't come soon enough. If SI manages to provide ground services without a menu failing to load on every second flight and without service vehicles running through each other and the user's aircraft, SI will clearly be a winner. To be a complete substitute for GSX a follow me car and parking guidance like VDGS would also be necessary though. Hopefully these things will be added later as well.

Trying to find the changelog I found that version 2.2.42 actually was released already August 19th 2024. From their discord: Roy Kro — 19.08.2024 18:06 Hey Captains, FSRealistic v2.2.42 is now available for update To update, run FSRealistic, go to Update tab, and press the Update button. Fixed Memory leak, causing occasionally FSRealistic to crash during long flights 10 different sounds were broken and not playing as expected Thanks, rkApps.

I miss the option "Provide ready-to-go-presets with optimal results like shown in the promo screenshots so that users don't have to spend hours fiddling around with all kinds of parameters".

Confirmed. I see the same behaviour as described and shown in the video (I always set the altimeter myself so I never bothered.).

No luck with 3.1.0.3. Same as before. Confirmed. I see the same behaviour as described and shown in the video (I always set the altimeter myself so I never bothered.).

There is no forum (anymore), just Discord. You find the link to their Discord channel right next to the "Support" button in the FSHud main UI.

It seems this is related to the "Sync Displays" option in the Fenix app. After activating this option the MCE callouts are again roughly in sync with the IAS indication on the PFD.

Probably not necessary. The issue only occured since one of the latest updates of the Fenix. Previously the IAS indication was correct. So obviously this is a new bug in the Fenix and I'm sure they will fix it.

So I also changed the flaps speeds in the A320_ref.txt and A320S_ref.txt files and now MCE uses the correct flaps speeds in the A321. But now obviously theses speeds would also be used in the A320 (which would be wrong). MCE seems to use the same ref.txt file for both the A320 and the A321 (and presumably also the A319).

I changed this section [FLAPS_MAX_SPEEDS] 1=235 2=215 3=195 4=190 in the files A321_ref.txt A321S_ref.txt AirbusA321_ref.txt But MCE still complains "Speed to high" when going to flaps 2 at 210 kts. Can I see somewhere which ref.txt file MCE uses for the current aircraft? For the A320 MCE recognizes the correct speeds, so complains with flaps 2 at 201 kts but accepts it at 199 kts, so this does not seem to be reated to the following issue: Indeed it seems it is a Fenix issue. I monitored IAS (on the PFD) and GS (on the ND) during the takeoff run and there are some discrepancies (wind included of course). The MCE callouts are correct when I calculate IAS from GS and wind. The IAS indication in the Fenix seems to be lagging behind a little.

delete

Two things I noticed flying the Fenix A321: 1. MCE reads the correct values from the FMC into the Monitor page of the MCE UI, but the speed callouts on takeoff (100kts, V1, VR) come about 10 kts too early (also on the A319, I haven't checked the A320). 2. MCE does not take into account that the A321 has higher speed limits for the flaps than the A320 and so the FO moans about speed too high when he shouldn't: Flaps 1: 235 (A319/A320: 230) Flaps 2: 215 (A319/A320: 200) Flaps 3: 195 (A319/A320: 185) Flaps 4: 190 (A319/A320: 177) Regards!

Thanks for your replies. Soon having hundreds of shared user presets of mixed quality doesn't help for me. What I would like to see is a curated set of maybe a handful of professionally created "set-and-forget-presets" I can choose from once and then never have to look at the UI again. Just like with your Accuseason and Global Airport Textures products. Seems like I'm not alone so maybe you give this another thought.

Looks promising. But at the moment it rather looks like an experimental proof of concept version to me. When they come up with a set-and-forget-preset that automatically adapts to weather and lighting conditions in the sim, I will look at this again. For now, I rather spend my time flying.

Thanks for clarifying!

I am confused. So is there one (or several) preset(s) we can activate and never need to tune anything again (=set and forget)? Will presets be automatically adapted to the current conditions in the sim? If the user is expected to tweak every parameter in all kinds of combinations himself and even has to manually change presets according to the situation in the sim then this will be a hard pass for me. Can anybody please clarify?

Agreed, soberly giving personal opinions on what voices you like better and why (like you did) can be valuable feedback. Categorically stating certain voices are better than others (when this actually is highly subjective as for example can be seen by comments of several people who dislike the BATC voices because of their "dramatic" tone) or even calling an app out as sounding like from 20 years ago, not so much; that indeed is rather intending to incite division or hatred.

I never understood why threads about ATC apps always end up in discussions about the alleged quality of voices. It's totally pointless. First it's just subjective and more importantly it is just a minor aspect of ATC apps, there are so many other aspects that are far more important.

I made a flight with V1.3 and on the same day one with V2 and voices certainly have improved. As always voice quality is highly subjective. Good thing with FSHud is you can tweak the voices with sliders for speed and radio noise effect. So far I settled with speed 125 and noise 50 for ATC and 70 for AI aircraft.

That should not be a reason. FSHud controls AI traffic and it is possible to choose a STAR and runway; AI traffic will be separated from you even if using the opposite runway.

Still the same...