• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

About SRSR333

  • Rank
  • Birthday 07/09/1997

Profile Information

  • Gender Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,469 profile views
  1. Great! I look forward to the patch, thank you.
  2. Hello IXEG, I was flying the Heathrow Overload event on VATSIM yesterday with the 733 and took the below route: VEBIT3W/28 VEBIT T51 LASUN UT10 RLP UL613 DIDOR UT10 ALESO BIG3B I didn't program in the final BIG3B STAR as I knew it was out of date, and waited for LON_CTR to give me an approach instead, and I was given the BIG4B arrival. I descended through the arrival and passed the BIG VOR, and immediately, Gizmo crashed with red text appearing in the log. For some reason, though, it didn't really appear to affect my flight as I could subsequently program the runway 27L ILS approach and land successfully. However, I believe this error is worth looking at. Attached are my logs. GizmoLog.txt Log.txt
  3. FMC button press animations

    As long as it's on the list, that's good! I can hope to see this someday, then, even if it's not so soon One more question, though, also relevant to the FMC: when inputting a route by hand on the B777 FMC (at least, the one by Flightfactor), we need only insert the VIA airways on the left and the FMC automatically calculates the intersection fix and adds it into the TO field. This makes adding flight plans by hand fairly fast, even for relatively long ones. On the IXEG 733, however, we need to manually insert both VIA and TO airways and way-points respectively, which is quite time consuming. I haven't flown the B733 in real life (nor any other plane, for that matter... ), so I'm assuming the simulated behaviour is the real thing. Despite this... is it possible to include the Triple Seven™ behaviour to the 733? I frequently fly plans that reach the very edge of the 733's range which can turn out to be quite long, and Simbrief doesn't have a way to export generated flight plans to the IXEG required formatting, so I find that entering plans by hand is simpler. But it still takes a significant amount of time.
  4. Hello everyone. The IXEG is as always, a great plane to fly (notwithstanding bugs that crop up occasionally), but there's one niggling issue that could greatly help those who wish to record their flights without the cursor—the FMC buttons, when clicked on, could be animated to depress instead of them being fixed in place as they currently are, so that viewers of the recorded video can see which keys are being pressed. Understandably each FMC has some sixty to seventy-odd buttons, so animating all of them would be quite tedious; but I hope this is considered for a future update (perhaps not 1.1, since I suppose that is nearing completion, but maybe 1.2 or so?) Thanks much, and keep developing, guys.
  5. Thanks for that! However, genuine question: what does Windows Defender have to do with GPU usage and the FMC? How was the fix narrowed down to this?
  6. Hi guys, I was making a flight from LFMN (Nice Cote d'Azur) to LOWI (Innsbruck), and I took off, relatively smoothly and attained cruise. When I wanted to change my mach number, I entered digits (.600) into the scratchpad, and the EXEC key was illuminated. Then I noticed X-Plane was stuttering like crazy. The framerate dipped to the single digits, then quickly climbed back to 40+, dipped again, climbed again, so and so. When I went to check the GPU usage in GPU-Z, the usage also correspondingly dropped to zero percent. So what was a continuous red bar at 100% was now resembling a bar code, with red lines indicating wildly fluctuating usage. I'm not sure if the GPU usage dropped because the FMC made X-Plane lag, or the FMC lagged because the GPU usage went down. Either way, it is quite clear that once I confirm my action (press the EXEC key), the usage returns to normal. Is this a known issue to be fixed in V1.1?
  7. Hi IXEG, A short while ago I was (as of this writing, am still on) a flight in VATSIM, climbing out of EGKK, when I engaged LNAV, then the 'A' autopilot, and Gizmo crashed. LNAV was completely inoperative after that, but VNAV worked fine, oddly enough. I had just updated to v1.0.6. Attached is the current GizmoLog.txt; I attemped to fix the FMC by rebooting Gizmo several times to no avail. This error message especially caught my eye: error: 10877.192: Callback_Dref_Hooked_setDataf: cdu1_lsk_1R_OnWrite: [string "ixeg.733.fmc.route.lua.aes"]:2158: attempt to index a nil value Hope this is fixed soon. GizmoLog.txt EDIT: I just noticed several other topics mentioning this very issue, and that the developer would issue an 'emergency patch' shortly - please ignore this additional bug report.
  8. Happy to have helped made a great product better, Captain Jan!
  9. Hi IXEG, I was about to fly the 733 from Zurich when it was lit up in VATSIM, and I wanted to set up my frequencies, when I noticed this occur on the forward pedestal: There's a thin line of sunlight from the outside peeking in, beginning at the EXP VOR/ILS label, going just beyond the NAV1 display, turning a right angle to the right, and going into the CARGO DETECTION SUPPRESSION panel. This gives me a feeling that there's an error with the 3D mesh of the aircraft - or is this behaviour normal? For further information, I was at gate E 19 at LSZH, at approximately 1321 Z time, facing heading 280.
  10. 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. 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.
  11. 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. 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.
  12. All in all an excellent update, @Cameron; the ability to use VNAV without having a T/D is especially welcomed. However, this particular 'fix': 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.
  13. Support ticket hasn't been replied to yet

    Oddly enough, I live in an extremely well-connected city with a 1 Gbps connection. In that case I might be experiencing connection throttling. At any rate, I need a downloads reset for my install of SkyMaxx Pro v3 - could the admins help me do it?
  14. Hi guys, I sent in a support ticket requesting for a downloads reset or an alternative link to download SkyMaxx Pro v3.2 more than a week ago, but I still haven't received a reply yet. The issue was that the downloads would slow to 10 KB/s, and then stop altogether, leaving a corrupt archive file that I could not decompress. Could the admins please help me look into this? Thanks very much.
  15. IXEG 737 Classic Release Announcement

    They're approximately an hour behind - probably uploading. Hope to download it and fly the IXEG 737 soon. This will soon replace the FF 777 as the most-flown plane in my hangar, as soon as I can study the manuals properly and get the proper procedures done, since I prefer short-haul VATSIM flights.