Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 05/26/2019 in all areas

  1. 4 points

    Version 1.0


    Delta_Who Liveries | HotStart TBM900 - Pure metal v1.0 | N422AZ To Install -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Simply place the folder "Delta Liveries - Pure Metal v1.0" into the liveries folder of your Flightfactor A320 Liveries folder 2. That's it...easy right? NOTES : I'd say for the first time ever for one of my liveries, PLEASE READ THIS! :Delta - A disclaimer on registration fonts. This livery comes pre-installed with a registration... which uses a different font than provided for accuracy. The reason why I cannot insert the exact font is due to licensing issues. I cannot distribute a commercial font. The version of Galactic Vanguardian provided... is the non-commercial variant and is appropiate for distribution. Please keep this in mind if you decide to apply your own livery. - This livery is based on a TBM 850 livery... and is technically fictional. You've been warned. The registration is already pre-made, but you can use the existing registration editor to tailor the livery to your liking! Version Notes --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + Special thanks to Cessnarox for the paintkit, and my congratulations to Totoritko and Goran for an amazing aircraft + This is a highly extensive and customised livery. + All chrome PBR application + Custom heat discolouration + Normals remade to make leading edges (de-ice boots) more glossy + Custom tinted windows + Custom dirt + Custom window trim Creative rights go to Delta_Who. Logos and branding are associated with their respective copyright holders. If you are a fan of my work and wish to support me, feel free to send me a donation here : https://bit.ly/2H4uGhZ. Donations are never mandatory or demanded, but are appreciated ❤️
  2. 4 points
    Hello again. I'd like to give another update. During our investigation into updating our NavData to the XP1100 format, it became apparent that this must be the way to go for long-term future compatibility and more reliable route calculations, including holds, but would require a significant rewrite of the FMS base architecture to do so. So over the last 4 weeks, we have done exactly that. We now have the beginnings of a 2nd FMS running in parallel with... but independently of.... our original FMS. We are running 'newFMS' on CDU1 and 'oldFMS' on CDU2. We will NOT be simulating dual FMCs though. This old/new arrangement only exists so we can compare the new with the old while developing the new. It is much like building a new bridge alongside an old bridge...and when the new one is ready, we will remove the old. Much of the challenges we have faced with regards to drawing routes / vnav have been related to the limited nature of the navData format we have used since we began the project. Moving to a format which have been designed expressly for "navigation processing" will go a long way towards easing our algorithm development. The image below shows the two CDUs, both on the "IDENT" page, but clearly displaying differing data as they use differing algorithms/databases....and for those curious, the pilot CDU displays 'odd' formatting simply because we were testing our new display drawing code. We are very excited moving to this new XP1100 format. We have, in 4 weeks, accomplished what took us over 24 months to accomplish originally. Of course we have the benefit of experience, but the elegance and efficiency of the new navData format and architecture allow us to focus on the FMS functionality by orders of magnitude more than before. With the new infrastructure complete, we will begin working on the route editing. The current navData set only supports about 8 different waypoint types. Arcs are not supported, as is common in today's RNAV procedures, but the new format contains all path/terminator types typical in today's procedures. As usual, we thank you for any patience you have managed to muster as we work to improve the IXEG 733. P.S. Jan and myself will be at Flight Sim Expo in Orlando, FL/USA in a few weeks if anyone wants to talk shop. -Tom Kyler
  3. 3 points

    Version 1.0.0


    Freely inspired by the Canada Search and Rescue liveries... Don't hesitate if you spot a glitch somewhere !
  4. 3 points
  5. 3 points
    Or you could just fly the plane like a normal human would do in the real world looking out the cockpit window? That is what we're simulating, after all.
  6. 3 points
    There is one more important thing to know about "crossfeeding": If you open the crossfeed but have BOTH sides pumps on, fuel will not get evenly burned from both tanks. You would think so - and inititally this was also how the big, official "Level D" simulators that we used for training had it. But they found out in the real aircraft that - since pressures are never EXACTLY the same, the "stronger" side will COMPLETELY "take over". So you yould see that fuel only gets used from one tank, even if all pumps are on and the crossfeed is open. So just like mmerelles said: If you have an imbalance, open crossfeed, turn off the pumps in the tank with less fuel. We used to say "less fuel, less pressure" to memorize this. THEN you need to set a reminder (I used to clip the tip of my tie to the card-holder clip on the yoke! ) because its easy to get distracted and then you suddently have reversed your imbalance. We used to call this "fuel yo-yo" . Cheers, Jan
  7. 2 points
    Do i really see rain falling from that cloud?
  8. 2 points

    Version 1.0.0


    Mustang Sally:
  9. 2 points
    LOL! I never take anything personally and I find all this "stuff" interesting. I do appreciate your timely and informative responses. I am a SMP fan...
  10. 2 points
    Ah, I see. For cumulus clouds (ie, "broken") we only pay attention to the base altitude of the layer, and allow our physical model of cloud growth to take care of the thickness of it. But we do model in some variation to the bases of the clouds as well - and the clouds themselves vary quite a bit in size and shape. So it's not really possible to position a cumulus cloud layer at a precise altitude and still have it look realistic. It's just the trade-offs we chose to make there. However I do suspect this may be worse with ASXP, because I believe they limit themselves to 3 layers. So if they really want multiple cumulus layers close together at similar altitudes, they don't have a way to convey that information to us. FSGRW, and RWC used alone with X-Plane's default weather system, can both represent unlimited numbers of layers and so this is less of an issue in those scenarios. Be forewarned you're likely to encounter a lot of tribalism around weather add-ons on the org. But if you learn anything useful there please let me know. I stay off the org for my own mental health!
  11. 2 points
    This is probably gonna be met with some nasty remarks, but this is my opinion.... I own the IXEG 737, I enjoy it very much, my frustrations comes to the lack of updates. It has been a couple years (yes years , not days , not months) Hold is still not there and cabin doors yet to open. Fair to critique? Yes I believe so. Yes I know the cabin doors are eye candy, but is something that others have been able to accomplish and virtually all payware at comparable price certainly have this. The FMC Hold is a long time coming and not something , in my opinion , should take this long. We are speaking years , ladies and gentleman. Aside from the above remarks, I have nothing but admiration for the plane. It is a real joy to fly and has given me hours and hours of enjoyment. Sad that I don't fly it as much I once did. I have purchased many, many payware items. To the fine folks that have made this plane available, I say , time to get some stronger coffee, get off your duff, and address these two issues please. Yes, my avatar is listed as "NEWBIE", no I normally don't comment on message boards. I do use them to seek information. I am not a real pilot and therefore don't think I have much to offer that would be helpful, I leave that to the other fine folks who know what they are talking about. I have owned the IXEG for a considerable amount of time, and flight simming has been a hobby for many , many , years. Thought I would address this, before any bashing about status should begin.
  12. 2 points
    Because IXEG was not about trying to sell you a product with gimmicks to make up for something else it couldn't do. Realistic cockpit simulation is and was the primary concern. To this date there are still essentially no airliners that come close to simulating the actual systems in the way IXEG does. Wing flex is so minimal on a 737-300 it's pretty much not noticeable. Yet another reason why it was senseless to put that as something to focus on rather than the incredible systems simulation that it is.
  13. 1 point
  14. 1 point
    N449MA Hot Start TBM "sandy blue" View File Here is a livery I am very familiar with. I deal with this aircraft at my airport a few times a month. N449MA. Enjoy! Submitter Attitude Submitted 10/25/2018 Category General Aviation Livery For http://www.x-aviation.com/catalog/product_info.php/take-command-hot-start-tbm-900-p-158?osCsid=20d43cf99c669d4273528e465564e9d7 X-Plane Version(s) X-Plane 11  
  15. 1 point
    Me too...it would be nice to know if this is proper behavior for the Hot Start sim TBM or if this is a bug.
  16. 1 point
    To me I am captivated and immersed as soon as I load this plane up. I much rather realistic systems and flight dynamics over eye candy any day and this delivers. I have done loads of flights in it having only had one problem the other day flying into LOWI, I had to go around and all of a sudden the flaps appeared to not work, the lever wouldnt move but they visually moved, still I couldn't get to approach speed without stalling :/ .. Other than that this is my go to plane. There are, I'm sure some things that need to be ironed out system and navigational equipment wise (FMC) but I can wait for that.. Really would love to hear some FMOD sounds in this bird as well. Just tested the auto land and it works a treat I love it when stuff works.. I usually land manually but It's nice to know that in an occasion where visibility is horrible, I feel I can trust this bird to get me down safely.
  17. 1 point
    Well that's odd - your METAR.rwx file is actually empty of any data at all! I think maybe ASXP wiped it out before you were able to grab a copy of it. However, I just now tried KPDX with ASXP and fortunately similar conditions still existed there. I think I might know what's going on. Do you have your overcast representation in SMP set to solid or broken procedural? If so, cumulus (broken) cloud layers that intersect the overcast layer are suppressed in SMP, because having these two different representations of cloud types overlapping each other looks weird. The issue isn't that the broken layer is low, it's that it's too close to the overcast layer. If you change your overcast representation to something else, like "Soft HD", you should see both layers appear. Although, they are close enough that they can be difficult to distinguish - but they are there. Our clouds tend to be larger and taller than default clouds, so visualizing distinct layers that are close together can be tricky at times. Anyhow, I hope you just had overcast set to a procedural setting and that's all it is.
  18. 1 point
    The only thing I can think of is a hardware calibration issue. The feedback we've received on the steering for this latest update has been extremely positive with regards to the steering, so the fact you get this "ice skate" type of steering is a bit of a mystery.
  19. 1 point
    Can you confirm you definitely have 1.1.9. Everyone is reporting vastly improved ground handling. Not sure why you’re getting this.
  20. 1 point
    I reached the same conclusion. The option will be back in our 4.8.1 release (coming soon!)
  21. 1 point
    Thanks, it does work. Now let’s go and fly.
  22. 1 point
    We're working on it. Still a few things to take care of. All moveable parts in the cockpit have been re-animated with new datarefs. Some code still needs to be fixed. Have to run a few tests and check lighting. We're getting there.
  23. 1 point

    Version 1.0.0


    Hello there, This is the PP-VOE from VARIG to be used with IXEG 737-300 v1.21 Here you will find: - Gray Color correction - Oil in Flaps - Brighter window frames - New interior matching the old VARIG - Corrected baremetal surfaces - Dirty engines Hope you like. have good flights!
  24. 1 point
    Hi Mirlo, I"m doing a bit of "multi-threading" at the moment, bouncing around between the Moo, the IXEG and NASA work. That being said, I need some access to an MU2 to move forward with some more 3D and a owner about 1.5 hrs away have invited me to come see his, but I've been a bit busy preparing for SpX16 launch, which is in 2 weeks. Things get VERY hectic in the 6-8 weeks preceding a launch. BUT.....the good part.....I have NO more space missions on the calendar for 2019....and will be making arrnagments to meet this MU2 owner asap and get what I need and will then continue on with this guy. It hasn't all been on pause though, duing my coding efforts for the IXEG, I have written a great deal of code that will also go in to the MU2, to bring it to a point of "serious systems simulation" like the IXEG. I have been working on that nearly every day in the evenings....so we're moving right along and I am definitely ready for this SpaceX mission to end so I can really dig into this thing. TomK
  25. 1 point
    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.