Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 05/20/2018 in all areas

  1. 13 points
    Hey guys, I don't mind repeating this in a few forums, probably better to have it in more locations. The quick and dirty is that we took @ 6 years to get the IXEG to minimum release....and in the last year before release, things were difficult and we were unsure when we would make it because the team members still have to pay bills and do their other jobs. As it stands, I got involved in a space startup about 9 months before the 733 came out. I managed to 'stall' my participation in that startup for about 9 months and worked solely on the 733 with no income, living on savings during that time to get the 733 out. Wtihin 3 months of the release of the 733, the startup was in full swing and I was the prime designer for our deliverables to NASA. There was a lot riding on the line, many big groups involved, NASA, ESA, Airbus, Boeing, etc....and I could not back out. Because this project was deadline based, and i was already behind, I've been working at it solid for about 2 years to meet the deliverables...which I recently completed just last week by handing over our hardware to head to the ISS on SpX-15 here in about a month....which is why you've seen two whole posts in as many days from me as I can finally take a breath. My participation in this startup is relegated to this "deliverable phase", by my own volition as my passion is flight simulations.....and while I have loose ends to pick up....documentations and such, I am getting poised to get back into XP dev work. I will say, that the release of XP11 also contriubted to some of the 'wait and see'. It should not be hard to tell from the work we put into the 733 that we are passionate about the small details and its painfully clear to the team the features that are missings...and the good news is that we can't let that go, even if it SEEMS that way due to some lack of activity. I know Morten, Nils and I have been in XP Dev work for oh....maybe 14+ years? We very much appreciate you guys cheering for us and your support and while I apologize for this pause, you can be sure that the 733 will surge ahead in features. -tkyler
  2. 13 points
    I'm just now reading this and as a IXEG member and mod here, I have permissions to respond and will. Especially since I'm the one who programmed much of the features Shobhan is lamenting and also the one who has not worked on it in some time. First off, Shobhan complaints seem to be 100% focused on the FMC and indeed that is plausible enough as it it centric to airline operations and a big appeal for airliner sim enthusiasts. But there are also other aspects of a airliner simulation to consider that others find equally important as well and worthy of value. Other products, while having a more complete FMC implementation, might not have as good of visual or aural fidelity....and who's to say that "immersion of FMC accuracy" is more important to simmer A or B than "immersion of visual accuracy", or "immersion of aural accuracy", i.e. I myself enjoy the cockpit immersion, visual and aural more than the FMC usage. I know this is not the case for you here Shobahn. In the end, we want it all to be accurate no doubt. A thorough FMC with a cartoony or disproportionate 3D looking airplane is very disappointing to myself......BUT....I also know the FMC is the centerpiece for most customers and worth the discussion. At the end of the day, Shobahn is entitled to his opinion and I fully respect that....what I don't respect is his calling us lazy. Shobahn doesn't know me, Jan, Nils and Morten from Adam. He doesn't know my wife, my daughters, their trials and tribulations, my brothers, parents and all the things in our worlds that will be important and relevant long after X-Plane is gone from our worlds and sometimes there are things that need tending to at critical times in life that have no other options. Its just the way things can be in life. Now I certainly would not call Shobahn lazy because I don't know him, nor will I call him ignorant....I will say he's made some ignorant statements here in this forum though. IXEG is made up of very very good and talented individuals....so good that each is in demand and always candidates for promotions in their own professions and they honor those committments they made there before IXEG. I also realize there are committments to customers, especially when money changes hands, and I will continue to honor those over time as best I can. The whole team have a long history of longevity and committment to X-Plane. I myself am disappointed at the timing of updates too, but things are what they are for the moment. The alternative was to what? say, "well we won't make the 733 100% accurate for some years and some folks will be upset one day....so lets just not do it at all?" I do not subscribe to that strategy as i've learned that any good thing takes time and you have to start somewhere and always keep moving.... and listening to folks like Shobahn voice their criticisms and opinions along the way come with the territory. If things don't move at a pace to satisfy all, then thats just the way it is. In the meantime, Shobahns comments are very much noted and understood... I even agree with about 85% of them.... and myself, being the prime author behind the FMC....will return to working on it and improving it further quite soon enough. My situation is well documented elsewhere. If nothing else, IXEG have demonstrated tenacity and committment to this project over many years and it will not languish as is. If there's one group I trust to keep moving and improving the 733, even in the midst of the occasional update draughts, its Jan, Nils and Morten! -tkyler
  3. 3 points
    Well, it may disappoint you to figure out that about 95% of the market developers are hobbyists. We don't really consider us that so much as being in a position where one of our core team members was pulled away from this project for a work obligation temporarily, and as he stated, is about to come back full time. I would say it's a strong indicator of what some of the customers are feeling, but not majority. Still to this day we are receiving a very large number of compliments on this product. It's very rare a complaint comes in. That said, for those that have "waited 2 years for a finished product and are losing faith in the IXEG team," I guess they're due to be surprised when they learn the team is still very much committed with more updates coming forward. Almost every update has been focused on stabilizing bugs. Literally hundreds of bugs have been fixed in a two year period. That was priority number one. If you flew the release day aircraft vs the current one it would be a night and day experience. Just because everything is not visual does not mean that each incremental update did not have a lot of work that went into it. But, because you have also said that the team is barely keeping up, I must refer you back to what @tkyler said: "My participation in this startup is relegated to this "deliverable phase", by my own volition as my passion is flight simulations.....and while I have loose ends to pick up....documentations and such, I am getting poised to get back into XP dev work. I will say, that the release of XP11 also contriubted to some of the 'wait and see'." In other words, more time is to be dedicated back to X-Plane after work was made an obligation long before IXEG was released. But, you're unfairly projecting experiences from other companies on to a group of guys who has stuck with X-Plane development since 1999. That's 19 years (minus Jan). And, @tkyler has had his MU-2 on the market since 2008, which to this day is still updated, supported, and has had numerous free updates along the way. You have no idea the financials of the product. At this point you're purely speculating. It would be safe to say that the entire team disagrees with you, and the customers deserved a free update. Our commitment to the price sold was for a solid and complete product. Until that time is reached, no forced payments for updates are going to happen. Again, I must provide you the real reasoning for delay by quoting @tkyler: As it stands, I got involved in a space startup about 9 months before the 733 came out. I managed to 'stall' my participation in that startup for about 9 months and worked solely on the 733 with no income, living on savings during that time to get the 733 out. Wtihin 3 months of the release of the 733, the startup was in full swing and I was the prime designer for our deliverables to NASA. There was a lot riding on the line, many big groups involved, NASA, ESA, Airbus, Boeing, etc....and I could not back out. Because this project was deadline based, and i was already behind, I've been working at it solid for about 2 years to meet the deliverables...which I recently completed just last week by handing over our hardware to head to the ISS on SpX-15 here in about a month....which is why you've seen two whole posts in as many days from me as I can finally take a breath. What does this even mean? LES had a free update to 11 as well. There was no charge. In other words, IXEG did the same thing as LES. We got in touch with xEnviro months ago. Ball is in their court, but the problem does not lie on our end. They're aware of the situation, and the developer was investigating. He has publicly acknowledged it, but I have zero clue on when he'll have a fix. All in all, this is a lot of huff and puff for nothing. And by nothing, I mean @tkyler took the time to reply and give real reasons for delays, and you basically dismissed every word he said to still write a response as if he had never said it. It's okay to still be disappointed, but to sit here and dictate to the world that the project will not go forward and you have mathematical calculations in your mind that put 2-3 years still at an abysmal point for the project is...silly. Relax. Fly. Enjoy. The team is still here, alive and well. That's the end of this thread. Happy flying!
  4. 2 points
    Friday. Jan
  5. 2 points
    And with those words, we close this topic and wish everyone a nice weekend. The aircraft will get further updates, we apologize for the delay which is mainly a result of us doing this a as a hobby besides our "real" jobs.
  6. 2 points
    @Shobhan Nandy Sorry dude, but the vast majority of customers don't agree with you. If this product doesn't fit your goals, I'm sorry. We get endless comments daily in e-mails and support tickets praising this product and the immersion. I'm not claiming perfection, nor is the rest of the team (though it's desired), but you're in a pretty small pool right now with these comments. You're sitting here saying you'll "ask a 733 pilot do do an FMC and navigation challenge and will submit a report." This is ridiculous. Truly. @Litjan was a rated captain up till retirement of the aircraft at a major airline. I'm quite certain we have all the pilot validation we need (never mind the fact more were involved in the actual testing of it), and where any shortcomings may be; all of which the team has been open and public of in a single topic. The rest of your reply is really hard to read without producing a headache. The words could be articulated a lot better, and the tone of you being the almighty payware God speaking to the days of half baked goods being done and asserting such an accusation here could be done without. Another example of you having no clue what you're talking about and throwing accusations. No, "the easy way out" was never taken. The simulation was based off the fleet of a particular airline who contributed the most help to the project. If you feel they had some form of simple systems then that's pure coincidence and nothing more. I have never heard a customer say something like this in all the time this product has been out. Hahahaha. Remind me. How many employees does Airbus have? You have no grasp on simulation content production if you're using an analogy like this. Consider the facts and budget of such a company before you try and compare it to an X-Plane project. ...for YOU. And so many already do. There's improvements that can be made in this project. This much is certain, and the team is very acknowledging of such. That said, I maintain what I said from the beginning. You have some very wrong perceptions. The bolded word in this quote is important. It's how I feel about quite a number of things in your post, including this very sentence quoted.
  7. 2 points
    Hardly, especially in the X-Plane world. There are many who are. There are many who are not, and it goes beyond just some opinion. He can have his, and I can have mine. We're humans in the end. Just because there's some saying that exists in the world does not make it true. People tend to become warriors behind a keyboard when they don't have to face you in the flesh, so perhaps that saying works better in a retail space environment, although Jan said how he feels about this saying of yours too. I believe Jan validated some of my points in his own assessment of not even knowing some of the items Shobahn was discussing. I did not tell him he was wrong for having an opinion, I stated I disagreed, and that I felt he had some wrong perceptions. But, on the same token, going around typing nonsense that some code must be non-optimized because he says so IS wrong, and I'll happily point that out. The customer is not always right.
  8. 2 points

    Version 1.0.0


    I hope you will like my first livery for IXEG 733. Dirty, old retro livery "Ceskoslovenske Aerolinie" (Czechoslovak Airlines)
  9. 2 points
    X-Plane 11.20 added an art control that lets me kill the background on the PFD. This has in turn allowed me to design a shader to pull some pixel removal tricks and finally sneak it under there:
  10. 2 points
    So I thought I might share some screenshots of a new feature that's being developed for the aircraft: terrain synthetic vision. This was always one of our aspirational goals, but we couldn't get it to show underneath the PFD symbology due to a lack of programming interfaces to the stock X-Plane G1000 to accomplish such a thing. So we've done the next best thing: we've added a tablet to the yoke (which you can hide/show separately) and modeled the synthetic vision system (SVS) modeled loosely on the SVS of ForeFlight: It is still a work in progress, but among the features are of course dynamic terrain display, with automatic mesh detail rescaling for terrain that's far away from the aircraft in order to keep the performance high, background terrain loading from X-Plane DSF files and also neat little things, like dynamic runway number rescaling on approach, so you can more easily identify close parallel runways: Part of the SVS is of course relative terrain height indication by dynamically coloring in any terrain that's close to our height, in this case yellow for terrain that's less than 1000 ft below the aircraft and red for terrain that's less than 100 ft below the aircraft. Terrain more than 1000 ft below the aircraft is colored in using the absolute height scale employed by the Garmin G1000 (basically, the lower to sea level, the greener and the higher the terrain, the browner). In the screenshot below, we're on approach to Aspen, so approximately 7000 ft above sea level. Notice that we have a 200m-scale north-south-east-west grid pattern overlaid on the terrain. This helps terrain shape recognition, make recognizing motion to the terrain easier and also gives the view a sense of scale. When high up, it's useful to know your gliding range in case of an engine out. We have range rings placed at 3, 5, 10, 20, 30 and 40 NM (the dark bands in the screenshots above and below). The range rings dynamically adjust to terrain contouring, helping both in terrain shape recognition as well as knowing how far the aircraft can reliably glide before running out of energy: The SVS includes an auto-declutter display mode, where the compass rose and VS indicator momentarily disappear during extreme bank & pitch angles, to help you recover from abnormal flight attitudes: As I anticipate a question about integrating a web browser, let me preemptively answer that so far we're not looking into this. And that's all for now folks.
  11. 1 point

    Version 1.0.2


    Bul Air LZ-BVL untitled
  12. 1 point
    Igor, thank you for your message. I'm glad you like it. I'm not aware of anyone doing mappings for the Saab 340 - haven't had any such request. If you want to develop that mapping, I'd be happy to provide any assistance you may need. Please check the docs at https://gitlab.bliesener.com/CPFlight/CPFlight_Mappings/wikis/home. Yours Jorg
  13. 1 point
    There's a lot more going on behind the scenes with that product and where code came from than you think.
  14. 1 point
    Hi Test1234. If you are talking about transparency, and it sounds like you are, I am not sure how IXEG could be more transparent. They acknowledge problems that they are working on and answer most enquiries very quickly in the forums. If you are talking about the slow progress, then you need to understand that this aircraft is a VERY complex machine in terms of coding. They seem determined to get it 100% right, and for that I am grateful. I can wait. Just check out the comments that confirm that the IXEG B737 is a "work of art", despite the current status of low priority work such as cabin textures for example. This is by far my best XP aircraft even though it has developmental requirements. But, it will get even better. Patience.
  15. 1 point
    Most of the issues which I have with your aircraft is related to the functionality, 75 USD is a high price to quote unless you think people are paying that money for eye candy. Let us do this in a structured manner shall we. First, the Frames are unbelievably jumpy that is an indication of unoptimized programming. The VNAV is still majorly buggy. VNAV SPEED and PATH can be selected but the integration is poor and doesn't follow the FCOM, there is no provision for STEP CLIMB. Apparently your FMC don't feature a CAPTURE mode. FMC functions by agility tuning which cannot be verified unless the NAV STATUS page is simulated. Speed restrictions cannot be set in the FMC using the DESCENT page, there is a way to do that dial in the speed you want and press ERASE yes you herd me right ERASE NOT EXECUTE. Sometimes VNAV wouldn't engage even when all the parameters are met. VNAV engagement without LNAV till the aircraft is maintained with in the RNP depending on the section of your leg is not simulated. IRS alignment 2nd pass test not done properly check the FCOM for further details. SPEED mode in MCP IS buggy takes a while before the plane realises it has slowed down too much, CUSTOM WAYPOINTS not simulated, OFFSETS and HOLD patterns are a known issue. Right now I am in the process of reading the FCOM just finished 100 pages in the NAVIGATION section and so many issues came up. Then did not mention which version, revision and update version no. of the FMC is simulated. FMC logic with the radios are okay but because of the primitive nature of the radio I cannot manually select the DMEs I want the FMC to use during alignment as reference. Progress page is just depressing quite honestly. Alternate destination has issues as well. VNAV speed and path cannot be interchangeably used if I do that it messes the VNAV path. During level change climb sometimes if I want to reengage VNAV it wont engage. I'm really sorry but the aircraft is not well done and don't use study level because its just not. I seriously regret spending the money. I'm certain in days to come I will find even more bugs as and when I learn about the systems. Every page in the FMC has something or the other missing. Your aircraft is quite frustrating. The ZIBO mod does a better job than you. I'm really sorry but its not even close to a pay ware and you are charging 75 USD.
  16. 1 point
    JohnMAXX,,, I agree with the self importance part I'll try to resolve that issue by being more considerate in future posts, it's just when a study simulation doesn't abide to the official book it kind of drives me insane. marpilot, I'll take your suggestion and fly more but it won't be this aircraft until the basic stuff is resolved. Thank you for your consideration and replies, hopefully we will have updates in the future which will unleash the full potential of the aircraft.
  17. 1 point
    Which contradicts your statement of appreciation. This product, even in its current state was a 6 year development time. There are numerous version of an FMC and even systems in 737s, so while I won't comment on everything you listed, I will leave it to @Litjan to do that. I could not disagree with you more about the price and value of the product. Jan specifically, as a longtime Captain in the 737 Classic worked tirelessly on the systems simulation, and from the FMC standpoint, crucial/vital parts to what were used in everyday flight were implemented. Accordingly, IXEG was also very candid in what was not simulated, and has always been (albeit, in our eyes non-crucial). VNAV is a debatable topic. I think we'll all agree that it's the sore point that needs to be worked out next for the team. That said, simulation enthusiasts tend to have this dependency on VNAV that is really not so present in the real world. That may be due to the fact we do one-man pilot operations (I'm making up excuses for why a simmer depends on it more that an real world pilot) in our cockpits, but in the real world, VNAV was not such a heavily used item for Jan. I'm sure he'll reply to your other points when he can. It sounded to me like you may have a wrong perception about how certain things are done, irrespective of the FCOM reading you're doing. Jan can further clarify that for you. This is an indication of you likely not knowing anything about "unoptimized programming". It has nothing to do with that at all. In Gizmo's tool tray menu you'll find a Garbage Collector icon. Utilize that and adjust some values to get a more favorable, smooth experience. I'd start with a value of something like 500.
  18. 1 point
    Actually NVM, looks like it's working with the release... my last test was still with a beta, i'll do a quick flight and report back
  19. 1 point
    If you upload X-Plane / Log.txt there might be a clue in there for us.
  20. 1 point
    New paint. Just messing with images to place on the tail. I have a few, but I'm starting with the lions head.
  21. 1 point
  22. 1 point
  23. 1 point
    As the title says, this will be the place where we will place all our work in progress screenshots and videos.
  24. 1 point

    Version 1.10


    The DC-10 is uploaded here upon popular request, and that the dropbox link is suspended for having too many downloads. Aerobridge Studios- Douglas DC-10 Developed and designed by : Peter Tram, Pierre Lavaux, Jeffrey Chen Manual : Peter Tram Version 1.1 The McDonnell Douglas DC-10 is a three-engine wide-body jet airliner manufactured by McDonnell Douglas. The DC-10 has range for medium- to long-haul flights, capable of carrying a maximum of 380 passengers. Its most distinguishing feature is the two turbofan engines mounted on underwing pylons and a third engine at the base of the vertical stabilizer. The model was a successor to McDonnell Douglas's DC-8 for long-range operations, and competed in the same markets as the Lockheed L-1011 TriStar, which has a similar layout. From Wikipedia Features: - Custom 3D Modelling based on the default KC-10 - Customised soundset - Refined flight modelling - Refined animations - Real-world airport lighting shades - Basic Custom Panel Support: Please contact us by emailing to aerobridge1nfo@gmail.com or by questioning us here on X-Pilot LICENSE AGREEMENT: Aerobridge Studios reserves all rights. Educational use, business use or commercial use, without a proper license is prohibited. Please contact us for license arrangements.Copying content for personal or other use not covered by the license is prohibited.
  25. 1 point

    Version 1.0


    Questions and requests are welcome!