Interesting...

[CYUL900]

https://www.thresholdx.net/news/ixegup

[Shanwick]

Great news. This is still my favorite sim Boeing. Its flight model is unmatched by any other 737 available.

[CYUL900]

1 hour ago, Shanwick said:

Great news. This is still my favorite sim Boeing. Its flight model is unmatched by any other 737 available.

I agree the flight model is fantastic.  Have to love the immersion factor in the flightdeck also.

[Iain]

Guys, friends, Nasa boffins, I have flown every sim since 1985 (I'm 43), Tomahawk, DI Tornado, Gunship all FS series, FSX to death and now XP11 and DCS.  I switched to XP11 only because of the IXEG release.  I can say that this is the best aircraft out there for immersion, physics, atmosphere etc.  Those things are not easy to program, but they are there in abundance.  I will admit, I got interested in Zibo, tried it and can honestly say that it's a freeware plane with lots of bells and whistles, but the base is freeware, you feel that and you see it every time you look up at that overhead panel.  IXEG is payware, you feel it more than anything and you see it, obviously some bells and whistles are missing, and some VNAV things need improved, but we are flying a classic, things will be broken on classics that are flying today, the shortfalls in this model make you a better pilot in my opinion!  I look forward to future updates, free or paid, and wish the developers good luck,  and ask them kindly to checkin with any tiny bit of news to keep our heads up

 

 

Edited December 2, 2018 by Iain

[Hullu-poika]

Some thoughts about realism from my side. As far as I got this bird I have noticed that flight controls react on the joystick movement with a  delay. E.g. if I do a quick movement by joystick the control wheel will move much slowlier than the actual jojstick movement. Is it done for control forces simulation only? 

From my side I find it not as "real"as it could be. And if a simmer is not a really good pilot (like me) it would be easier to destabilaze the plane with quick and improper movements. Delay softens it. It creates impression of airctraft weight, stability and may be realism. But in fact it is not really correct because fast control wheel movements are possible on a real plane.

 

It would be interesting to hear different opinions about this topic.

[Litjan]

A good point - but one we have considered thoroughly!

The real flight-controls in a Boeing (and any airliner) will only move so fast - the hydraulics can´t move them as fast as a pilot could throw around the control wheel/sidestick. In Boeing aircraft (at least the ones I flew) the flight-control inputs are connected proportionally to the flight-control surfaces. This means that you can only move the wheel as fast as the controls move.

This is great, because the pilot always FEELS what the current displacement of the flight-controls is like - very important in windy/gusty situations where overcontrolling is a real threat.

Airbus does it differently - here you can throw around the sidestick pretty much as fast as you want, with the flight-controls lagging behind (and the computer in normal law also messing with you). Thats why Airbus aircraft are (in my humble and personal opinion) a nightmare to fly in gusty crosswinds. Sorry, Tolouse.

For the IXEG we have the same problem - the user can throw the joystick from side to side in 0.2 seconds, while the flight-controls take a lot longer. So we had a choice to make - but if we made the flight-controls stay in sync with the joystick (which leads to better control), we would have had unrealistic roll (and pitch) rates - which is a no-go!

So until we all get force-feedback hardware inputs, it´s just something we have to live with. But rest assured that the plane rolls as quick as in real life.

Cheers, Jan