[ Closed ] a320neo JARDesign ver 2.7r1 WIN/MAC 64 bit (X-Plane 10) (Page 3 of 10)

Hi Mr Romanov and Jardesign team,

I really love the plane and enjoy it very much. I also appreciate the effort of continuous development, improving an already purchased product.
But I’m a little disappointed because no basic bugs or mistakes are corrected while developing other new fancy functionalities in the last couple of releases.
I already reported three of them, the lack of red overspeed strip in the speed bar over the ‘cross over’ altitude when the speed is limited by Mach, not IAS,

http://jardesign.org/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=9069#p9069

Also related to the speed bar the wrong variation of VLS, ValfaProt, ValfaMax, above FL200, noticeable decreasing instead of slight increasing

http://jardesign.org/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=7891#p7891

And probably the easiest to fix, the wrong behavior of flaps,  auto extending (on its own) from flaps 1 to flaps 1+F when going below 210 knots. This is not correct, The Airbus (I thing all of them, but certainly the A320) only auto retracts from flaps 1+F to flaps 1 when going above 210 knots but never auto-extends in the other way, this making approaches unrealistic. See here the details with the FCOM description:

http://jardesign.org/forum/viewtopic.ph … 882#p10882

So, understanding we all want to be flying a plane as close as the real one please, please, please take into consideration fixing at least the flaps bug in your next release, I’ll really would appreciate it.
Thank you so much in advance and congratulations for a great product.

Thank you Mr Romanov.

The next time it happens i send you all the files.

Is it ok, that I dont see logo light after take off? Nav&logo - ON. On the ground -- light presents.

Hi Joomie,

Completely agree with you

It's so nice to know that in comparison to a real full flight simulator, Xplane and the Jar aircrafts are fast similar.
Yes it's not perfect but Mr Romanov make all his possible with his team to publish regularly knew updates.
And with add ons such BSS 3.1 , Skymaxxpro 4.0 and so  on the realism is very far.

Would anybody please try this? I've tried tons of times but always the same result.
Start at LFPG, gate E17 or close to. Pushback and taxi to rwy 08L via taxiway R as per pic below.
There is a point passing which the plane goes crazy, "terrain" warning is called, A/T is engaged at full power and the FMC resets.
I eventually tried with a clean configuration of XP removing all addons and plugins but the plane is always behaving the same way.
I also tried with other addons Aircraft but the problem seems to be only of the A320 2.7 (previous versions never gave me any problem at LFPG where I always fly with the Bus for my VA).
Thanks.

+1 for me, well said !

After the years I have the JAR 320 and 330, they've matured very well, and with Eugeny and his teams further effort they will only get better.
They've become one of my favourite airliners in XP now... like a favourite jeans that is growing on you :-)

I somewhere agree with all that statements. The airplane visual was good from the start, but there were some bad bugs. After years the visuals and some other stuff were updated (for free) but many bugs and missing functionalities are still here, and now, with x-plane 11 we are coming to the point the customer will be charged for...what??? For graphical improvement? Really? New reflections? But same bugs are still here...
Mah... I really did not understand why the JarDesign developers focused on X-Life (now unuseful with XP 11) and on the GroundHandling plugin (again unuseful in X-Plane 11. I personally considered the effort only time consuming and I hate the way it is implemented in the A330 instead of the fast and easy way it is on the A320, but I cannot complain on a "function" added for free, that does not affect the plane itself).
Really. Please...stop updating the planes with new stuff but not focusing on the real problems and bugs of this aircrafts, otherwise I think you'll lose customers.
What is the point of adding something like the groundhandling or the reflections, when this kind of functions are used for a couple of minutes before the flight or are only annoying (the reflections...)??? I really do not understand.

By the way, those planes are quite nice and probably the most funny liners to fly in x-plane, expecially if a pilot does not have so much time to dedicate to the preflight, and even if they are quite easy and not close to reality in many aspects.

The fact is if a customer will be happy to pay again for the same planes, with the same bugs. At the moment this is not my case.

Hi joomie, amischkowitz (and TCA2050, pic)

I guess i don’t agree with donoscar tone (not yet at least), and I guess I would agree with you...months ago; though still a happy customer...

I don’t know if you noticed my post where I asked (I think nicely and gently) Jardesign about a couple of very basic (imho) malfunctions I already posted time ago:

The first and second are about the speed tape not marking low and high speed limits correctly at high altitudes. I’ve done some testing with other planes and even the default x-plane 747 does it right.
As Airbus fans sure you agree that this is more 'meaningful' in an Airbus than in a Boeing being Airbus all about envelope protection.

The other malfunction and actually the only one I asked to be fixed and I’m positive it couldn’t be easier to fix, would be to avoid (so already coded) the auto extension of flaps from 1 to 1+F when going below 210 KIAS; no Airbus does that.

But to show you I understand your point of view, I haven’t ask for many other things, like not having differential thrust, not having MaxContinuousThrust, not having the thrust limit mode in the E/WD (upper ECAM), not having sometimes the correct thrust mode in the FMA… etc etc

joomie, I also took into consideration the SID/STAR selection when purchased Jardesign Airbus, but sure you know the say, ‘aviate, navigate, communicate’… I feel we are losing the aviate part here…

So let me ask you something, if you don’t mind.
Are you an Airbus aircraft lovers or a nice fancy aircraft that resembles an Airbus lovers?
There’s no right or wrong answer, I just want to state that I’m within the first ones.

And understanding that somehow this is still a Jardesign work in progress (even if it’s only to extend their business, while retaining their current customers and attracting new ones) I just ask the flaps issue to be fixed because I understand that is the most significant glitch that keeps the plane to resembling a basic normal operation (no need of overspeed tape or MCT for that…)

No answer yet from Jardesign.

So as a paying customer I ask to Jardesign again, here, in a supposed to be a customer support forum, that please take into consideration fixing this.

From a business point of view, trying to put into Jardesign shoes, I wonder if Jardesign are more interested in Airbus kind of hardcore lover’s customers or nice fancy aircraft resembling Airbus lover’s ones. Whatever I think would be better for them I’m ok if it’s the second one, I just would like to know.

I would just hate to agree with donoscar about not getting answers at all.

So looking forward to know about them, thank you all and Salute!

Good afternoon all, good afternoon JAR,
Let me express some opinions and ideas and maybe make everybody understand that the truth always lays in the middle. Like you all do I love x-plane and I love the way things are mannered and this includes all the fantastic addons which, by the way most of them are free. I'm also aware that the majority of developers have their own jobs and try to do their best in their free time and this is why I'm convinced that we cannot sometimes pretend the same dedication and possibilities that for example, Aerosoft can afford or PMDG can handle. I'm in the SIM world since 1995 and I have probably spent more money in add-ons in the last 15 years than the cost of my brand new Volkswagen. This is to say that I don't think that anyone is expecting from the 320 Neo the same experience of a 140$ PMDG 777 since JAR and PMDG have probably two compeltely different philosophies and possibiliti to spend time/invest money. What I think everybody is trying to say is that one thing is coding a perfect simulation experience another is share problems and trying to answer users questions in order to make them understand where JAR simulation is going to. I'm not a programmer but I believe that a lot of bugs can be corrected easily and do not require further experiences or knowledge but, reading this forum, I can see that there are a lot of questions or advices that remain not-answered for no specific reason and this is what users are mostly complaining about. We all know this is your hobby and nobody pretends perfection right away but you also have to keep in mind that users have paid for your products and they deserve answers. I would suggest to go back in the forum and try to at least give a simple answer to the most common bugs and simple improvements the user are requesting:

1 Flaps 1+F bug
2 Simple possibility to insert Waypoint/bearing/distance fix
3 A way to change the managed speed in the climb profile (340Knots it is oviously to high)
4 Indication on on the PFD of the end on descent for the selected rate of descent (shoul be an arrow indicated the target decent like the altitude green arc in the boings)
5 altidude constraint shown on the ND

These are just examples that have never been answered in time and you would make a lot of costumers happy if you only could answer these simple question even if the answer is "No, we will not implement it for the time beeing"
I own the 330 and the 320 neo and I'm super super happy about them and I will buy version 3,4,5 etccc for sure. Just try to understand that users are also costumers and like all costumers the want to be as satisfied ad possible.
Thanks for your job and keep up the good work JAR!!! You guys are great

You're right in many, but does not consider the one important. Do you remember how much criticism was about 320 PFD and ND indication? There was a long-long-long list of deficiencies. As you remember, we did not correct them one by one. We redesigned the entire system and (wirst was build for a330) installed a new module in its entirety. Sure long time period was from ver 1 to ver 2. But This is the right way. Unfortunately, sometimes it's better to remake the system, because the new architecture improves all at once.

Good evening to everyone here from my side as well!

I am very pleased to say thank you JARdesign for taking your free time on developing an aircraft for X plane. It must be quite hard to read and answer all the feedback you get, however, I am hoping this message is to be read. From the time I have bought this plane till now I changed my opinion on almost everything. I think you are doing a great job developing and improving this aircraft. There are of course some bugs left and some will always be present, I understand that. I would like to point out some that bother me:
1. Gear compression: I can see that it has been implemented in the last update and is almost realistic. However, I still think that landing gear doesn't compress when spoilers are deployed (when drag is added), but when the nose is lowered. I don't know if that is possible to add, but it would be great if it is. Also, main landing gear compression is just about a few inches from perfect, I will add a picture of Air Berlin a320 when on the ground.
2. Wing flex: I can see that wing flex is present, but I think that wings don't flex enough yet. I will also add a picture of a320 wing.
3. some other bugs other people have already mentioned, such as flap problem etc.

That is all I would point out for now. I hope that I don't request too much.

P.S.: How is the development of new cockpit going as I think someone is making one, if you know? ;P

Best regards,

Matevž Kramar