Jump to content

IXEG 737 Classic v1.0.6 Has Been Released!


Cameron
 Share

Recommended Posts

Captains,

X-Aviation and IXEG are pleased to provide you a free update to version 1.0.6 of the IXEG 737 Classic!

Just like with our previous update, we will use the HotFix upgrade system here. Rather than going and re-downloading an entire aircraft package, or having to go through a full re-install process, we will be offering more immediate code changes through this delivery method. In short, it's quick, easy, and kind of fun! Please read below how to install this update!

But first, here's what's in it...

Version 1.0.6 introduces the following new features:

  • Added FMC reset after landings for turn-around flights so you don’t have to reboot Gizmo.
  • Implemented fuel qty output on PROG page
  • Implemented ETA to T/C, T/D, and E/D on PROG page
  • Implemented Wind speed/dir on PROG page
  • Improved VNAV speed target functionality on VNAV descents
  • New datarefs for Pilotedge pilots. PE can now fail any electrical bus or your hydraulics remotely.
  • Allow use of VNAV for climb and cruise without requiring T/D to exist.


Version 1.0.6 introduces the following fixes:

  • Improved ETA values on the PROGRESS page to active and NEXT waypoints.
  • Fixed bug where on the PROGRESS PAGE, fuel used was displayed improperly.
  • Fixed bug where sometimes the magenta route would draw ‘backwards’ from the takeoff runway.
  • Four general fixes for gizmo soft-crashing related to LNAV/VNAV algorithms.
  • Now you can’t enter manual MCP SPD autothrust mode when on VNAV anymore
  • Bearing and distance on FIX INFO page now updates dynamically as you move.
  • Stopped the autopilot speed getting set to 001 in some circumstances
  • Added warning window if the aircraft is not installed into correct X-Plane folder/path.
  • Improved route drawing with conditional waypoints in Navigraph DB
  • Improved waypoint sequencing to be more reliable
  • More accurate Vref entry methods on APPROACH REF page.
  • Fixed lights being "blocky" when having 737 installed and using IVAO
  • Fixed FD MA lights to not turn off when autopilot is engaged
  • FLARE no longer lingering on FMA after autoland and both FDs and APs are off
  • Fixed one case that would lead to having a loop in the route before the missed approach HOLDING pattern
  • Hardened code against speed restriction altitude deletion
  • Improved import and wrong calculation of some altitude restrictions
  • Only show CDU message, ”CHECK ALTITUDE TARGET" when actually engaging the VNAV button.



To upgrade your aircraft to version 1.0.6 please follow the below steps:

  1. Open X-Plane and the 737 Classic as your aircraft
  2. In the X-Plane menu bar at top, select Plugins > Gizmo64 > Windows > HotFix
  3. You will be asked to enter in your HotFix ID. Copy and paste in the following: bdcfe7080ba333401e6953e3ab1a974b
  4. Click 'Update'
  5. Once it has downloaded and installed, click 'Reboot' and you'll be done!

Thank you for all of your support!

Blue Skies,
X-Aviation

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, dornier said:

Thanks for the update, but I'm having some issues.  The console window is popping with an error while the flaps are extending on the ground.  How can I share the error messages popping up in the console?

Please create a thread in the bug reporting section, and include the Gizmo Log file located in your X-Plane folder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All in all an excellent update, @Cameron; the ability to use VNAV without having a T/D is especially welcomed. However, this particular 'fix':

2 hours ago, Cameron said:
  • Added warning window if the aircraft is not installed into correct X-Plane folder/path

felt more like a regression - I have placed my IXEG 737 add-on in the 'Heavy Metal' folder so that all my tube-liners (default 747, FF 757-777 and the 787, A380 and this IXEG 737) are all together. Why is it now a requirement that the IXEG 737 alone has to be in the Aircraft/X-Aviation/ folder? The aircraft has worked entirely alright while it was in Heavy Metal, so I see no need to have this... Do you mind elaborating on why this new behaviour was included?

Thanks very much.

 

Edited by SRSR333
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SRSR333 said:

Why is it now a requirement that the IXEG 737 alone has to be in the Aircraft/X-Aviation/ folder? The aircraft has worked entirely alright while it was in Heavy Metal, so I see no need to have this... Could you elaborate?

I'm sorry you feel this way. This will not be changing, and we won't be having debates about it. I'll leave my brief explanation below and that's all I'll have to say about it. :)

While you may feel the aircraft works fine, it has potential not to. And, by moving it around you 100% guarantee yourself a miserable upgrade experience going forward. We are on the receiving end of thousands of customers, making our support situation even more miserable when things go wrong due to this. It was time we nip this habit.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cameron said:

While you may feel the aircraft works fine, it has potential not to.

I find it interesting that you mentioned this, since I supposed that X-Plane was completely agnostic about the location of aeroplanes, so long as they resided within the Aircraft folder. 

3 minutes ago, Cameron said:

It was time we nip this habit.

When literally every other plane for X-Plane can be wherever the user wants it to be, I honestly saw (and still see) no real reason why the 737, absolutely has to reside within a single, particular directory. I apologise for being somewhat impertinent, but being directory-agnostic (as well as payware planes/scenery being bundled in .zips) is one of X-Plane's strengths and the lack of it, the competition's weakness. I already mentioned this when the IXEG 737 was released as an installer, but I resigned to having to use the installer to download the plane and install it, admitting that it was but a small thorn to bear. I feel that when freeware products such as 7-Zip, HWMonitor and similar products can have two different versions (an .exe/.pkg installer and a .zip for more advanced users), why the makers of the 737 can't do that... I also see no reason why the complex IXEG 737 needs to place its Gizmo64 within a separate folder when a similarly complex B767 from the competition comes as an all-in-one archive to be extracted at will by the user. 

How hard is it to code an extra dozen lines or so to scan the entire Aircraft directory for the B733.acf file, and for good measure, throw in an MD5/SHA1 check-sum check? Do we need hard-coded file paths in this day and age? Is the 737 Classic add-on so fragile that a different parent directory will break functionality? 

Take it just one step further and we might even see a future add-on requiring to be installed in C:\Program Files\ on Windows or /Applications/ on OS X, or else it wouldn't work. I hope you understand where I'm coming from.

Regards.

  • Downvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SRSR333 said:

How hard is it to code an extra dozen lines or so to scan the entire Aircraft directory for the B733.acf file, and for good measure, throw in an MD5/SHA1 check-sum check? Do we need hard-coded file paths in this day and age? Is the 737 Classic add-on so fragile that a different parent directory will break functionality?

Just stop. I gave you an answer. It's not changing. I'm absolutely disinterested in getting into a debate with a man who has a problem moving his mouse to a sub folder to select an aircraft. There ARE reasons for this. They ARE very valid. You are NOT the one providing support, and you do NOT have a clue as to why this is necessary. That is OKAY.

6 minutes ago, SRSR333 said:

 I also see no reason why the complex IXEG 737 needs to place its Gizmo64 within a separate folder when a similarly complex B767 from the competition comes as an all-in-one archive to be extracted at will by the user. 

And that's precisely why you're not the one programming this project or taking lead for us. Your lack of knowledge to the reasons and ways of how these things work is enough for me to not continue this discussion with you. It's an absolute waste of time. 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Cameron said:

Just stop. I gave you an answer. It's not changing. I'm absolutely disinterested in getting into a debate with a man who has a problem moving his mouse to a sub folder to select an aircraft.

I'm really, really sorry, but this comes across as incredibly rude to a customer who has asked a valid question. I wasn't debating - I asked a question, and it was brushed aside with your response - quite literally, you just said: 'we know more than you, so shut up and use what you bought.' I've enjoyed the product so far, given it raving reviews on several other forums, and when I come here with a single question - it's deleted/locked without an explanation given, or rudely shot down like this.

8 minutes ago, Cameron said:

There ARE reasons for this. They ARE very valid. You are NOT the one providing support, and you do NOT have a clue as to why this is necessary.

Why not elaborate on why we need hard-coded directories for the plane to work? In fact, I'm genuinely curious as to why this requirement is so singular to the 737, as well as the technicalities behind it. Honestly. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SRSR333 said:

I'm really, really sorry, but this comes across as incredibly rude to a customer who has asked a valid question. I wasn't debating - I asked a question, and it was brushed aside with your response - quite literally, you just said: 'we know more than you, so shut up and use what you bought.'

Sorry, but you have a history here of loving to debate things. Zip files vs installer, location of a plugin vs others, where a product is installed vs others. 

I said it twice, I'll say it again: we're not doing this discussion. Your  answer was here.

4 minutes ago, SRSR333 said:

I'm genuinely curious as to why this requirement is so singular to the 737, as well as the technicalities behind it. Honestly. 

It's not. It is a necessary for all of our products.

Further attempt to derail and implore over something that will not change will result in your suspension from the topic. Let's please move along.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hiya's,

Thankyou to All the Team for the hotfix

:)

And as to having to have a seperate folder for the plane, i'll chirp in from a laymans pov

As to having to install a product into a differing plane folder/location, so be it .............

If you put yourself in the position of a team working to create a great product with actual years of their time being input, then having to recoup that time via sales, how the hell would you feel when many try to get that product for free !! and at the same time wanting to evolve it to make it better

FFS i was into my 1st or 2nd livestreaming viewing of Catstrator very shortly after the release of the plane, some young scrote pm'ed me asking if i would give him a dl link to the plane !

Would anyone here expect to work for free and be able to live especially with living costs these days, of course you wouldn't

If having a seperate install folder/location protects their interests and keeps the coffers filled so more fixes can come out, i for one couldn't give a damn where it installs as long as it's working (do not add bugs as not working, i mean if fails to open etc)

Sheesh

Rant Over lol

Have Fun

Tony

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Cameron unpinned and locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...