marlon445

Is that because of Beyond or the Fenix? The last time I flew it, the VNAV was completely useless, and I couldn't make a single descent without using speed brakes the entire way down. I actually have a nice screenshot where, on final approach with flaps 2 out and a 12-knot headwind, I’m gaining speed at 900 FPM instead of losing it. Needless to say, I’ll never fly that thing again. In the A350, at least, I haven’t had any issues with the descent anywhere; everything went smoothly in Frankfurt yesterday. And the new instruction to fly over a STAR point at a certain altitude and then continue descending makes it even easier. The only annoying thing is that Beyond always makes you fly through the entire transition instead of using sensible shortcuts.

I once asked on Discord why Beyond always uses approaches that don't seem to make sense. In Singapore and Bangkok, for example, it always uses RNAV approaches instead of ILS ones. The response I received was that Beyond prioritises approaches that connect to the final waypoint of the STAR, and that many of these are not ILS approaches. Of course, it still doesn't make sense for Beyond to rely on a visual approach in the US (the flawed logic you mentioned), but it would probably be a different matter if the STAR led to the final approach. At KSFO, a visual approach is always used, whereas when approaching from the east at KLAX, I always get the ILS.

For me, TC leaks memory like the Titanic at every airport. I'd love to use it because Beyond Traffic has a significant impact on performance and Live Traffic isn't suitable for me as I don't fly in real time in the simulator.

I tried it out at Narita this afternoon and was actually very satisfied, except that, unfortunately, there were cargo planes at the terminal and many of the 747s in the cargo area had the standard livery, with both AIG and FSTL installed. Might hive FS Hud a try. It uses AIG plans directly and it's vectoring and spacing is excellent. I immediately deleted AIG Traffic Controller because it uses an absurd amount of RAM, which I will never tolerate (in Narita it was 14 (!) GB).

It wouldn't surprise me at all if they had illegally accessed Flightradar's data. They were stealing the AIG models with impunity until AIG rightly put a stop to it.

I just had my first WASM crash in over 8 months with the A350. Five steps backwards, again.

Exactly! We had SODE (SimObject Display Engine) for that, which could handle multiple jetways. Unfortunately, the developer didn't see any added value for MSFS and has taken his site offline and made it password-protected. Frankly, I'm also frustrated by the fact that boarding an A380 can take up to an hour when there's only one jetway available.

The A350 is one of the easiest aircraft to fly. In a positive sense. Airbus has really thought about how to make the aircraft as intuitive and comfortable as possible for pilots, and once you get the hang of it, it's like riding a bike. Some of my procedures only have 2-3 steps, the entire engine start-up, for example. But you have to like it, it's definitely not for everyone.

Since 1.1.7, I haven't had any problems with the aircraft at all. Sometimes GSX acts up a bit by only letting a single passenger board, but a quick Simbrief reimport and boarding usually solves that. In terms of pure flight, I didn't notice any problems in over 1000 hours last year. Not a single WASM crash either, PMDG's 777 is the new king in this regard for me.

I agree completely. That's why I'm always extremely suspicious, even of Microsoft. If they lose interest and abandon the project, we'll be left looking pretty stupid. The fact that almost all flight planning centres on Simbrief doesn't make it any better. PFPX was better in that respect.

I don't have any problems in Munich or London, but KSFO is really bad, for example. I usually end up at 5,000 feet with an ILS intercept at AXMUL, which, of course, doesn't work at all. KEWR is also poor because you have to fly the entire STAR for 22R, and then they vector you back 30 miles before you can start the approach. As mentioned in this thread, the only way it works properly for me is if you go directly to the FAF via any available transition. Edit: Today I flew to VTBS, where he always wants the RNAV on the two outer runways instead of the ILS on the inner runways, which is also complete nonsense. I really wonder whether the developers have any expertise in this area, or whether he just takes whatever procedure fits into the flight plan loaded from Simbrief, regardless of how logical it is.

FS-Hud is much better than Beyond in many areas, including traffic, the map and the airport editor. However, everything from TOD onwards is completely inaccurate, particularly the way vectors are handled during ILS interception. Nothing is right. The vectoring in Beyond isn't any better — the altitudes are wrong there, too — but pretty much every available ATC has some deal-breaking issues for me. I only use Beyond to automatically set the frequencies for FS ATC Chatter; otherwise, I mute it and ignore all the nonsense it tells me.

Nothing has worked for me since the update. ATC keeps forgetting me everywhere. I get 'Expect radar vectors for...' without a specified runway. The vectors are completely wrong and the altitudes are incorrect too. Sometimes the controller forgets me completely. Today, I was supposed to intercept the localiser at 5,000 feet in KSFO at AXMUL. Yesterday, in KSEA, the approach controller forgot about me and sent me to the tower without providing any guidance. In the A350, my frequency constantly changes to ATIS without my intervention, handover to the tower only happens by chance, and taxiing to the gate after landing is impossible. Beyond is one of the worst-developed and most misguided programs I have ever experienced, and it is truly remarkable how, for months, one pointless feature after another has been prioritised while the core product is completely decaying.

I was also thinking about switching back to pure AIG traffic. However, Beyond ATC doesn't interact with the traffic - I think only the FS HUD does that - and RAM consumption of AIG traffic controller is extremely high. Therefore, I'd rather do without it.

There might be something to it! All my crashes happen with Beyond over Urumqi when travelling from Frankfurt to Shanghai. I just flew RCTP-KLAX with the A350 and had no problems at all. Beyond has also consistently deteriorated since the LLM update. 😕