Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 05/23/2018 in Posts

  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
    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:
  9. 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.
  10. 1 point
    The calculated TD by the FMC must not be blindly trusted in any plane, sim or real world aircaft . Sometimes it's spot on and sometimes the FMC is far off. One has to double check even in a real 737. The accuracy also depends on the waypoints and if they have above, below or at altitudes restrictions. Use whatever mode you like in order to keep your speed and profile within the box and/or ATC instructions. Level change and V/S mode, both have their advantages and disadvantages in a given situation. I like using both and there are many things one should know about these modes. What and how the speed is controlled, what the throttles do, kicking in of speed protections and so much more. There is plenty of quality info about these mode available on the web. Here is some quick info on how to quickly calculate your TD. Every pilot should know this anyway. Even if you have VNAV. http://thinkaviation.net/top-of-descent-calculation/
  11. 1 point
    Thanks tkyler for your comment. I understand the difficulties your team faced in developing the IXEG before release and I'm glad that at least we get to fly the 737 in somewhat decent form. However I believe that Shobhan's complaints are a strong indicator of what the customers are now feeling right now with regards to the current state of the 737, with loads of promises but no substantial updates, no future update timeline and no light at the end of the tunnel. Some customers have waited for 2 years for a finished product and are losing faith in the IXEG team. By looking at previous updates from the past year it seems as if the IXEG team is barely keeping up with Laminar's XP11 updates, and that bodes ill for the future of the addon as the FMS, as well as visual updates and other stuff like FO instruments, desperately require bug fixes. And I'm concerned enough that I'm satisfied with ninja fixes, if you can't spare the effort for substantial systems programming. This is because I've seen this downward trajectory before from other addon developers, as well as many early access games in Steam. You have developers release buggy alpha software with unfinished features and bugs, they get a big rush of money from customers, and then they lose motivation and abandon the project once sales have slowed to a trickle. That was what happened with Airsimmer, and is happening right now with Black Box Simulations. Coming from FSX/P3D it seems that this method of addon development is common in X-Plane, because AFAIK the PMDG DC-6 for XP10 is the only complex aircraft addon that is fully feature complete on release day, without the need for any substantial updates. I'm sure you guys will keep saying that updates are coming and that the 737 will be finished in due time, but my confidence in your statements is falling every single day without a substantial patch that isn't just about fixing what Laminar broke. At the current rate of updates I do not believe that the 737 will be finished (if it ever does) before XP12 releases, in around 2-3 years time. In a way I think that IXEG's decision not to charge for the XP11 upgrade probably compounded problems, as I think the team needed more money to finish the project. Maybe if IXEG went the same route as LES it might have gone a bit better, but then the Saab was pretty much complete by the time XP11 came along. Also IXEG should've planned the -400/500 extensions as a way to make a bit more money to keep development going, as bug fixing gets a bit better when combined with developing something that has a monetary payoff. I paid $140 for the FSLabs A320 for P3D and I just brought the Aerowinx 747 PSX for $450 (w/ shipping & tax) so I'm happy to pay up to $150 for a fully feature complete 737-300 and $40 for the -400/-500 extension. But right now I simply can't recommend this addon to others even at $75, because I do not see this addon will ever be fully patched and feature complete in a timely manner. Now with regards to the ninja fixes, for the FMS I'm somewhat OK with inaccuracies, what I don't want to see is really weird numbers like estimated time to ToD as 2500 UTC, or estimated fuel figures that are completely out of whack. And the buggy vertical deviation indicator which becomes hugely distracting during descent. All I want are numbers and indicators that look somewhat reasonable, and a PROG page that doesn't crash the sim. I would love to see stuff like fully working VNAV, holding and enroute winds, but you guys really need to fix the bugs first. Even if you guys can't fix the FMS programming, at least fix the visual model. Fix the cabin lighting bleeding through the cockpit door (just like the FlyJSim 732) and have the cabin doors open. I know you guys want to make a new cabin model but if you guys can't do it in 3-6 months then forget about it, just fix the lighting and make the doors open. And finally, please get in touch with XEnviro and fix the constant crashes. XEnviro is another $70 addon that I'm about to throw into the bin because the recent 1.08 rewrite introduced so many more bugs it's becoming unusable, especially with addons that uses Gizmo like the IXEG and the LES Saab.
  12. 1 point
    I posted some thoughts and screens...the updated package is very nice. It really appeals to this old school pilot and I know I'll spend a lot of time in it... LINK - First flight in the Saab 340A BeachAV8R
  13. 1 point
    Again and again. A recent Morten post: 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. A recent Tkyler post: 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
  14. 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.
  15. 1 point
  16. 1 point
    http://carsfov.moritzlawitschka.de/
  17. 1 point
    Hello Captains! In some crevices of my free time, I'm pushing a few improvements for the upcoming Avanti update. As an example, there is now a fully working PREFS page on the PFD, where you can set the various V-speeds, which will be displayed next to speed tape (need some work here in graphical department), and also baro/radar altitude minimums. On the MFD, when FMS is selected as HSI source, then a PROGRESS-like page will be displayed, showing the previous waypoint with distance and time we passed it), then next 2 waypoints, with distances, ETE (time to reach the waypoint), and ETA (what time will be on the waypoint), and the final destination with distance, ETE, ETA, fuel quantity at landing, and gross weight at landing. Just keep in mind that currently those calculations are base on instant values (speed, fuel flow, etc), which might show some strange results (like during climb you might see negative fuel quantity because of high fuel flow on climb). I'm planning to implement a "typical" flight profile to have better prediction values, but I'm not sure if I will have it ready for the next update. Enjoy!
  18. 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.
  19. 1 point
    RealScenery Arizona and Phoenix is really nice... Unfortunately I have to leave it behind as we are heading for Antarctica... BeachAV8R
  20. 1 point
    Wow! Thanks! Yessir. Everything will be done to the best of my ability.
  21. 1 point
    Feature update for you good people. We've implemented the G1000 Emergency Descent Mode. That means no more setting up the simulator and walking away to take a nap. A brief demonstration: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/253395611?t=02h40m35s Now the avionics is watching for pilot alertness. The allowable time interval for pilot interaction is altitude dependent, but varies from 20 minutes at 15,000 ft down to around 8 minutes at FL310 (decreasing exponentially, so only about 10 minutes at FL250). If pilot inactivity is detected for the aforementioned period if time (no buttons pushed or knobs actuated on the G1000 avionics), the avionics will start a graduated process of alertness checks: First it issues an advisory CAS caution + one aural chime:"ARE YOU ALERT?". The pilot has one minute to respond by pushing any button or clearing the caution via the attention getters. After 1 minute passes and the pilot hasn't responded, the system issues a non-advisory caution saying "HYPOXIA ALERT". Non-advisory CAS cautions different from advisory ones in that the message stays blinking and the yellow "MASTER CAUTION" button stays illuminated. The pilot again has 1 minute to respond. Final call, the system issues an "AUTO DESCENT" master warning CAS message, illuminates the red MASTER WARNING button and a continuous aural chime is heard. If the pilot doesn't respond for one more minute, the red "EDM" AFCS mode is annunciated on the PFD, the autopilot preselects 15,000 ft altitude, switches to the FLC pitch mode to initiate a descent and selects maximum airspeed. On descent the engine will over-torque without the pilot making power adjustments, but the torque limiter can hold the engine at 108% safely for several hours, so it's a small price to pay for regaining consciousness. During descent, the system ignores pilot input. The only way to disable EDM mode at this point is to disengage the autopilot. Upon leveling off at 15,000 ft, the system resumes monitoring for pilot input for 4 minutes. If during those 4 minutes the pilot touches the avionics, EDM mode is canceled. If not, a second descent to 12,500 ft is initiated after the 4 minute timeout. The system now ignores pilot input and descends down to 12,500 ft remains there. At this point, the only way to disable EDM mode is to disengage the autopilot. That's all for now folks!
  22. 1 point
    The algorithms for wear estimation are based on a mixture of real world performance data, operational procedures and an approach "from first physical principles" where we don't have exact behavioral data available. So for example, the engine's ITT behavior is tuned from real ETM data, as is the behavior of the oil temperature at the main oil pump outlet (what you'd see as "oil temperature" in the cockpit). Other parts of engine heating are based on a bit of physical simulation and a healthy dose of hand-tuning to get it to be have sensibly. The "from first principles" approach was used extensively while designing the ECS logic. We know the overall compressor pressure ratio of the PT6 (~14), which the aircraft simulation then feeds as an input to compute adiabatic compression heating of the compressor discharge air. Then we follow that up with energy computations for air heating/cooling and cabin volume pressurization. These are then fed to the simulated air system controller, which takes these sensor inputs and adjusts the various ECS valve positions. So when you are seeing the valve positions change on the displays, it's not just a simulated bunch of "feel good" animations, it really is the air system controller "fighting" in real time with the physics simulation to try and keep the cabin at a sensible temperature and pressure, much like the controller logic in the real airplane does. However, we make no claims that this is a physics simulation package, nor that all the behaviors are perfectly accurate or that the model is in any way suitable for real world training.
  23. 1 point
    Seriously? I'm sorry, but for your first post you've just gone completely out of line here. When something is in development, it's in development. Got it?
  24. 1 point
    This may be a case of erronous axis setup and alignment in X-Plane. Cheers, Jan
  25. 1 point
    Nose cargo area. Some cockpit and cabin stuff coming shortly.
×