Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
stringden

Wingflex

67 posts in this topic

Really odd that some of the users are so bothered by those desiring yet another realistic and immersive looking effect such as 'wingflex'. 

I guess I could bothered by turbulence, and other weather conditions that affect how a plane feels and flies. 

I was stunned to see that an addon like this has no wingflex. It's a bit of a deal breaker for me. Heck, even some default aircraft have wingflex. EADT has wingflex and so does JARDesigns A320. 

IXEG should as well. It may be minimal but it is still noticeable and therefore deserves to be included in the product. 

 

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

To us at the IXEG team having "some wing flex" is a deal breaker!  We rather have no wing flex than unrealistic flex which is what you get in most cases.  As an engineer, I can tell you it is very tricky to do correct.  It is on the the list of to-do's and we'll do it properly when we do.

M

Edited by Morten
3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a potential customer and now owner of the plane, I will admit I was disappointed when I read wing flex wasn't modelled.  I did in the end buy it, but it did make me seriously think twice, and I sure hope it is added.

I get "wing flex" is an easy (and now common) joke in our FS world, but also to simulate the plane to such a nice detail and ignore that a 95 foot wide slab of relatively thin metal doesn't flex is silly too. The simple gauges flounder about, so to me so should the wings a bit.  With no wing flex, I feel like I am simply flying one of the static library objects honestly.  I enjoy realistic procedures, but also watching outside or passenger views etc., particularly at this price point.  Static wings are simply disappointing and show the dev is either lazy or ran out of time or resources.  Obviously in this case, you haven't had the time yet, as you did a lot so well.

I bought the plane despite not having wing flex, but I did hesitate once reading this feature was lacking.  I don't think I'm alone.  Please add them :-)

Take care all!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your thoughts are noted - and I can assure you that we did not omit that out of ignorance or being lazy.

I do would like to know how you fly one of the static library objects, though - I would love to try that myself and have dreamt of flying one of the big hangars across the Pacific single-handedly for a long time!

Cheers, Jan ;)

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, stringden said:

This is not a joke.Dear developers. This is the most important issue. And a lot of people are very angry havent seen this in patch 1.1. I will stop flying till you do this. I dont want to fly on static object.

I am very sorry that you are so angry to not find this in our list for patch 1.1. We realize that it is the single most important feature in a virtual aircraft for some users, and I fully respect your descision not to fly our plane anymore until this is added, but I will miss you in the virtual skies, though!

Cheers, Jan

 

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is not a joke.Dear developers. This is the most important issue. And a lot of people are very angry havent seen this in patch 1.1. I will stop flying till you do this. I dont want to fly on static object.

I think the myriad of fixes to things you'll actually use take precedence over wingflex.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Litjan said:

Your thoughts are noted - and I can assure you that we did not omit that out of ignorance or being lazy.

I do would like to know how you fly one of the static library objects, though - I would love to try that myself and have dreamt of flying one of the big hangars across the Pacific single-handedly for a long time!

Cheers, Jan ;)

 

Ha, see any of my sad plane maker concoctions over the years lol... that hanger would fly much better I bet, and sure don't take my comment as a knock, just a request.

Thanks for noting and responding, and congrats on an awesome creation!  Great aircraft, I have many great memories of the 737 in the early years when my dad flew them for Piedmont/USAir.  Many standby flights on these ha, just hoping to get a seat, and ecstatic when it was a window :-)

He's now flying the A330 for American after the merger, but this is the plane I flew on the most.  Great memories!  Glad to see such an epic simulation of it!

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, stringden said:

I am glad, about your father, but the topic is about wingflex. And I am sure , that on that plane, from your childhood, you had wingflex. Ask your father about it.

I am beginning to suspect you hold the record for the most negative votes. I have certainly done my bit to help you with that record. Congratulations.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stringden said:

I am glad, about your father, but the topic is about wingflex. And I am sure , that on that plane, from your childhood, you had wingflex. Ask your father about it.

Perhaps you could just shake your monitor up and down to simulate the experience you seem to be after?

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stringden, why can't you accept that things don't work the way you want it? You want wingflex, but

it won't be implemented too soon. You asked about it, you nagged about it, you got a lot of attention,

but still: no wingflex. Whats next, you're waiting for a moderator to take care of the issue, so you

can pretend being a victim (that's called reflexive control, you should know about it). Заткнись!

 

Now how about contributing something useful? There are hundreds of other features to enjoy, if

you only want.

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, frumpy said:

Stringden, why can't you accept that things don't work the way you want it? You want wingflex...

...you only want.

 

I'm starting to think he is a troll :angry:

Edited by TheFriedchicken
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about the wingflex. It should be a great addition. When flying through turbulent weather, some little wingflex (whether the classic wing is stiff or not) is always great to see. It provides some additional realism feeling. But if it is hard to implement a good realistic simulation for the wingflex, we have to take that into account and wait for it a little bit longer :)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came across this video on YouTube of Lufthansa's last 737-300 flight and noticed that there was near to no significant noticeable wingflex. The weather was great, that's possibly why. Maybe in turbulent conditions there's more.


3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Most of the wing flax on 737-300 you can see during taxi, takeoff roll, rotation and in unstable air.

This is the effect everyone here is talking about.

You can clearly see this in the video:

 

Edited by XPlanePort
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that there definitely is a noticable difference in the amount of wingflex between the 737 Classic winglet or non-winglet variant. I think that the wing of the 737 Classic is quite stiff because it is rather short. Therefore you can hardly see any winglex without the winglets. With winglets on the other hand a noticable momentum is created because they are placed at the very end of the wing. The wing is the lever arm of both the gravitational force (extra weight with the winglets)  - seen especially during taxi and takeoff - and the lift: Here you get extra lift because the winglets do not only reduce drag but also increase lift.

I´m not sure though how much difference there is but I think that modelling the variants correctly is not a trivial task at all if IXEG want to do it properly. And I guess you guys know that IXEG luckily are developers who don´t like releasing half-baked things. They take their time to do it properly.

This means we probably need to wait longer for this nice-to-have feature but I´m happy with that :).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, K4bel123 said:

I think that there definitely is a noticable difference in the amount of wingflex between the 737 Classic winglet or non-winglet variant. I think that the wing of the 737 Classic is quite stiff because it is rather short. Therefore you can hardly see any winglex without the winglets. With winglets on the other hand a noticable momentum is created because they are placed at the very end of the wing. The wing is the lever arm of both the gravitational force (extra weight with the winglets)  - seen especially during taxi and takeoff - and the lift: Here you get extra lift because the winglets do not only reduce drag but also increase lift.

I´m not sure though how much difference there is but I think that modelling the variants correctly is not a trivial task at all if IXEG want to do it properly. And I guess you guys know that IXEG luckily are developers who don´t like releasing half-baked things. They take their time to do it properly.

This means we probably need to wait longer for this nice-to-have feature but I´m happy with that :).

You are correct. On top of everything you mentioned, it is also easier to see the flex in the videos with winglets. Point of reference against background.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.