Jump to content

Take Command! IXEG 737 Classic v1.31 Update Released!


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Seamaster said:

The route was GCRR/03 LARY1M LARYS LARY1L GCXO 30 

 

GCRR/03 is not a valid format.  PBD means "Place Bearing /  Distance, i.e. "text number / number".  You have Text / Number

The error message, unfortunately arose from a debug message I use.  When I test for 'invalid formats', I want the console to pop up, but I should display "invalid format"  or "not found" on the CDU for you guys and suppress the message so you can keep using the CDU.  I'll make that adjustment for next release, my debug code is in the "wrong spot" for final users  and causing this error when a Waypoint isn't found or a user created waypoint is wrong format.  

-tkyler

Edited by tkyler
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hello All, This will serve as a formal forum announcement that we have released the version 1.31 update for the Take Command! IXEG 737 Classic. All customers who have purchased the IXEG 737 Classic

Jan is right, we have not touched the AP or VNAV code at all since 1.21, so if something is worse, we need to know exactly what it is that "makes it worse".  Debugging is quite tough business,  not so

Definitely on the short list.  I'm working on the remaining user waypoint code even now, to include the fix page. -TomK

Posted Images

7 hours ago, alexcolka said:

Yes, the external APU sound is too loud (that's just my case), 1.30 was ok, not a biggie.

Editing: Its more like an additional very loud pneumatic/air sound that wasn't present in 1.30 or was less noticeable, external APU and engines sounds are fine.

Probably the right pack now running in "turnaround mode" - more realistic.

Cheers, Jan

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Javier said:

Had same issue when trying to make a direct to SOPET waypoint. Attached log.  Also notice that lights arent working as the should. They seem a bit dark (backlights). I thought it was fixed.

Log.txt 396.69 kB · 0 downloads

I checked the log.txt of all people reporting that a LSK did not work anymore, and they all contained a crash in the underlying code. Thanks for all reports, hopefully Tom can glean something from this!

Cheers, Jan

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Litjan said:

hopefully Tom can glean something from this!

I need to organize my error checking messages better and also supress them better for sure.  i apologize.  I'll be working on this straightaway along with the other user created WPs, which are part of the whole process anyhow.

-tkyler

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

tkyler hello,

I know GCRR/03 it is not a waypoint, only to indicated Airport and rwy used for that fly also airport arrived GCXO rwy 30. That route was indicated if Litjan made the same fly to try the check.

This afternoon I tried the same fly but in Vulkan and Gizmo beta and the final was the same, impossible to put CANDE on TFN.

I don't know what is the problem.

NB. That route is used in commercial fly in Canary Island from Lanzarote to Tenerife North.

Log.txt

Edited by Seamaster
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Seamaster said:

This afternoon I tried the same fly but in Vulkan and Gizmo beta and the final was the same, impossible to put CANDE on TFN.

 

Certainly we'll look into this.  FMS work is ramping up and focusing on these things is "front and center" for us.  Thanks for your report

-Tom

Edited by tkyler
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, asmmag said:

 

I wonder if this update works normally with 11.50 beta 9? I ask because I noticed that I can't use the landing lights, flaps, trim and position on bat with the mouse.

Yes, it works normally with beta 9. To use those things you need to click on them to "hold" them, then drag the mouse in the direction you want to switch.

Cheers, Jan

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Veace said:

Will we get soon as well runway in fix page?

Definitely on the short list.  I'm working on the remaining user waypoint code even now, to include the fix page.

-TomK

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Also....those who have the Gizmo Error when entering a PBD waypoint....FWIW, that message results when entering a PBD and the reference waypoint isn't in the Database for whatever reason.  I have since fixed that for the next patch.

Being as we're now dedicating development time to the FMS again, we will be endeavoring to organize our error handling much more gracefully.

-tkyler

Edited by tkyler
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Litjan said:

I can not find any gizmo errors in your log. I can find two other plugins reporting problems, though. I suggest you follow this:

 

Cheers, Jan

 

Thats strange Jan, but my work around this problem was to enter rwy and SID first then i was able to enter the route. But that was intresting, i will have a look at that and also look at what those other two problems are on my end. Thanks for your reply! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic update guys. This plane has become EXTREMELY good, thanks so much for your support. And it's so framefriendly, it's incredible!

It's so great to have guys like you with deep knowledge and high goals, after having so much other addons of low quality. So THANKS again to the whole team for bringing this high quality addon to the XP-world :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cameron said:

That's correct!

Is that flight not a kind of moving target, and will need tweaking as Laminar make their own tweaks?  Just wondering out of curiosity.  I don't have it ticked, and I presume that's the reason for my fairly firm landings with 1.3 :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The flightmodel is always a moving target with X-Plane :lol:. We try to stay on top of that, though - and thats why the "experimental flight model" is what we tune for.

In the (near) future this experimental flight model will become the "normal flight model" - then all you guys have to do is UNTICK that box.

If we waited with the tuning until they make that change it would still take us a day or two to release a patch and everyone would need to download and install and whatnot.

I expect no sweeping changes to the modeling in the future - the flightmodel is moving towards "reality" in an asymptotic way, so any futher changes are bound to be even smaller than this one. And the difference between "standard" and "experimental" right now is so small that most pilots won´t even notice.

Cheers, Jan

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Litjan said:

And the difference between "standard" and "experimental" right now is so small that most pilots won´t even notice.

Offtopic, but oddly enough for some reason there is a huge difference with the JustFlight Piper Turbo Arrow here. It happens when after flying the IXEG 733, I load the PA28R and upon rotation I find out the aircraft is basically uncontrollable because I forgot to uncheck the experimental flight model...

Link to post
Share on other sites

How excited I was for the 1.31 update, hoping the plane would become flyable. How disappointed I am once again. The plane goes back into the hangar where it was the last 2 years. Because it is not usable

Honestly, this update does not change anything. Same old issues as in V1. I've had the airplane since 1.0 and it's just as a joke as it was then. FMC crashing, the airplane crashing. Some call it the best Add-On for X-Plane. I can't enter the SEA VOR into the FMC without it crashing. I saw a post that you can't use certain letters in the FMC. That's quality. The CLR button on the FMC does not have a click sound. This is a $75 product and has been in development for years, literally. It's a constant fixing, always something not working and especially crashing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the part I agree, I also really looked forward to update 1.31, but it disappointed me. Something got better, but something worse.Visualization, sounds - no doubt.  The experimental flight model - is doubtful. But the worst part is VNAV. It has become much worse than in version 1.21. I'm not just in love with this model, I love it, but flying on version 1.31 does not give me as much pleasure as on version 1.21. No doubt in the near future there should be version 1.32 correcting this terrible behavior of the autopilot.  And finally, please let us return to version 1.21 until all the shortcomings are resolved.  The installer no longer works with version 1.21.  I don’t want to offend the IXEG team, I just expressed my feelings. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, disidd said:

 It has become much worse than in version 1.21.

This really surprised me - because there was no change to the VNAV calculation at all in 1.3 or 1.31. But hey, if you say so...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Cameron locked and unpinned this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...