MU-2 progress towards update

[FloB]

A bit more explanation for those interested

As you noted, because of x-plane growth and community demands, there is plenty of work and I have a choice to get paid hourly populating airports or pursue my own work. Of course I'm going to choose pursue my own work where the return on investment is greater.....but I reap no revenue on until they're out for purchase. So on any given day, if I work for laminar...I put food in my mouth, but do not forward my future.....it's a dead end road.....so I partition my time working on my own projects and then on laminar's work.

Well that´s indeed a bad situation and probably not doing any good for all the projects and you. It´s a shame that a gifted and passionate developer has to work under those conditions. Ever thought about kind of "subscription" for your projects? I think a guy with a good reputation in the community should be able to create some income in advance (at the latest: as soon as he is able to show some eye-candy and some working systems)...

E.g. I guess the ixeg team would be able to sell a few hundred copies of the upcoming 737-classic right now if the allow a 20% discount on the final price.

However, fingers crossed for a mooday!

Regards

Flo

[Dozer]

I found some pictures of the Heinz corporate jet!

The livery changed sometime between 2003 and 2010.

http://www.pictaero.com/en/pictures/picture,77891

http://www.plane-mad.com/aviation-photos/view/h-j-heinz-company/gulfstream-iii-iv-v/london-luton/819.html

[Emalice]

I found some pictures of the Heinz corporate jet!

Hmmm, disapointing, i'd say. I'd imagined something more reminiscent of their products.

http://foodsmartworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Heinz_Baked_Beanz_425_gram.jpg

Maybe I will indulge in making a proper heinz livery, in a distant future though...

E.

[jagipson]

Hmmm, disapointing, i'd say. I'd imagined something more reminiscent of their products.

http://foodsmartworl...nz_425_gram.jpg

Maybe I will indulge in making a proper heinz livery, in a distant future though...

E.

Shouldn't there be 57 varieties of the livery?

[Emalice]

Shouldn't there be 57 varieties of the livery?

Well, at least 56 trials at it, the 57th would be the right one to hit the shelves...

[larjeet]

Hey tom any word on the update ?

[tkyler]

Sorry Larry but no. I worked on it a bit last week and came across several problems with the engine model related to version 10. ....enough to have to back up and do more tests and figure out why it's not working the same in 10 as it is in 9. People are moving to 10 frequently enough that I need to get it figured out.

[larjeet]

Ok Tom I only have XP10 now so I need it to run in Xplane 10

[jagipson]

Leading Edge decided to make a separate version of their DC-3 each for XP9 and XP10. I'm not sure why, you could ask Goran, but I suppose it may have something to do with the differences between the engine models.

Again, not a popular idea, but maybe the most practical; I don't mind purchasing a separate XP10 version of this craft.

[tkyler]

A report. Trying to get the Moo to work in V10 given my current plugin code...which you might recall is based on V8/V9 behavior, is proving to be a headache. Due to other work I'm involved in, which is time sensitive and thus demanding much of my time.... has LOTS of technology which I believe will address the shortcomings in the MU2 engine model and also be applicable to simulating the Moo to another level of accuracy. I am a REAL stickler for operating accuracy and I'm expending a lot of effort trying to get the last 5 percent of accuracy from a 4 year old approach...and I think the effort is becoming exponential. The thing is the "last 5%" of operation is operations that are very visible and common, so it's not some obscure functionality....it's behavior that is glaringly wrong. So, I am going to "back up" a bit....try to replace the old code with new code that uses overrides. By doing so, I can guarantee compatibility with future versions for a long time to come. I have spoke with Austin and Ben about overrides and where to allow hardcore custom developers to "tap into" the xplane model in a way that won't limit them or break stuff in the future. I'll be attending the x-plane conference in South Carolina in a week and meeting with Ben and Austin with a list of issues that have caused headaches for some time. My hope is that instead of beating my head against a wall in an effort to try and meet some timeframe with a nasty, patched up engine model, I can back up a short bit and put out a product that is "done right" and I can look back and tell customers...THIS is the way it is, it IS right and we can sit back and say, "ah..it just works and was worth the wait". I apologize, it's not just laziness, but a serious desire to make sure that all customers....in all the myriad of ways they'll interact with the Moo...it will just work for them. I'll probably expand on more details in about a week, after the x-plane developer conference.

Edited April 15, 2012 by tkyler

[Emalice]

Hmmm, so this is both very good news and very bad news, I suppose. We just have to wait another year but by then we will get a more than awesome aircraft.

2 issues though : in the mean time we still have to squint our eyes to set the barometric pressure, and in a year (or whatever how long it takes) XP will have evolved and more adjustments will be required to make this the perfect aircraft, and a longer wait for us.

I understand how reluctant you may be to release a product that does not meet your standards, but you do need to draw a line and decide when and what to release. Your dedication sure honors you, it is the proof that you don't do that just for money, but a lot of people out there are growing more and more frustrated with the promise of a release that never comes true.

Why don't you release that 95% aircraft as it is, as version V1.5 for our enjoyment and add the extra 5% plus benefits in a future release (like pay-for-upgrade V2). It will still be an improvement over the current version and will keep us busy flying instead of nagging you on this forum, while you peacefully work on V2.

E.

[Cameron]

Emalice,

1. No one said it would take one year.

2. We do not release incomplete products. The Moo has issues, and as Tom stated these issues are so fundamentally visible that they pose greater problems than what is currently available.

3. Technically, the MU-2 is a three year old product that never had mention or promise for an upgrade until recently, and that still has not changed. Our commitment to this product is not any different than it ever was, but it must be done right, just like it was for the version of X-Plane it was created for.

Simply put: we will not be releasing this product in its current state.

[tkyler]

E.

It will not take a year. As I mentioned, I will elaborate more in about a week. There are very good reasons why the MU2 has sat on the back burner and these reasons are not just good for me, they're good for you, xplane and everybody. As mentioned, the 5% left on the Moo in V10 is very glaring....you would start the Mu2 and the engines would rev to about 200% among other things, make all sorts of noise and you would be writing back to me in short order saying what the heck was I doing. My experience shows that life goes on and it will be as fun when it becomes available as it would be today.

The X-Plane market is in a huge climate shift.... and these days are very special and important days for making good impression to the new MSFS users and developers and also establishing a strong foothold in a rapidly competitive market so as to be able to make better products faster in the future. I find it "unprudent" to just work on the MU2 while other opportunites need to be capitalized on immediately. It is important that the work I'm doing get done so that I can make not only the MU2 better, but future products as well. The flight sim market is 30 years old....I've seen the same folks here for 10 years and it's not going anywhere. These are exciting times in my opinion. This is what we've asked for and some times, when a crowd shows up on your doorstep, you have to stop what you're doing and address the opportunity.

[FloB]

Wise decision. Damn!

Flo

[Emalice]

Emalice,

2. We do not release incomplete products. The Moo has issues, and as Tom stated these issues are so fundamentally visible that they pose greater problems than what is currently available.

3. Technically, the MU-2 is a three year old product that never had mention or promise for an upgrade until recently, and that still has not changed. Our commitment to this product is not any different than it ever was, but it must be done right, just like it was for the version of X-Plane it was created for.

Simply put: we will not be releasing this product in its current state.

Hi Cameron.

I get your point absolutely. just understand my position : not so long ago, all that needed to be done left was writing the manual. Now all of a sudden it has blatant issues. Some time ago this was developed as an update for a XP9 aircraft, nearing completion, all of a sudden it is held back because it became an XP10 product with issues.

All that is great, it all happens for good reasons, but it is still very frustrating and I wish you'd understand that. I am not complaining here. Still, a separate release of XP9 and XP10 seems a viable option to consider.

Sincerely yours,

E.

[Cameron]

Emalice,

This does not pertain to X-Plane 10 only. The plug-in is utilized in both versions, and while the engine model is not as glaringly bad in 9, there are still plug-in issues.

Rather than ever give updates we also could have opted to stay mum on the entire update process and you would have never known a FREE one was coming, however, we believe it is both good and fun to keep people informed. If it's caused you to become upset instead then we apologize.

There was no lie that came about when Tom stated he was working on the manual and had thought he was done. However, as he was putting the manual itself through "the paces," there were evident issues becoming apparent in the plug-in for both 9 AND 10.

Releasing a product separately is just not going to happen.

[Emalice]

Emalice,

[...]

Rather than ever give updates we also could have opted to stay mum on the entire update process and you would have never known a FREE one was coming, however, we believe it is both good and fun to keep people informed. If it's caused you to become upset instead then we apologize.

[...]

Cameron.

Point taken. I was so certain that the update was due any week now that I lost my temper with Tom's latest post.

I just want to clarify a few things : I do love that thread about the state of things, as you can tell from all the posts I made, that are most of the time very supportive of Tom's work and efforts. That's the side-effects of communicating to a crowd of human beings : you get human emotions in return, laughter, support, praises but also sometimes anger or frustration.

However, what you say (cf. quote) is not true, it was not following this topic that I learned about the free update, it was by reading your announcement (advertisement) for the Moo, end of last year. True, I've been wanting the MU-2 for a long time, and when you gave it out with a 50% discount it was the right time for me to buy it. But, the other reason I bought it was the promise of the great update to come. That is when I started to follow the topic.

So, sure, the update is FREE as you say, but you also used that free update as a commercial argument to have people buy a payware aircraft. Therefore the implicit argument "it is free so don't complain" is not valid here.

But well, let's close this argument, I will keep supporting Tom, I will still talk highly of his aircraft on other forums whenever I have the occasion, and I will still tell potential msfs refugees that to the XP community they are more than customers.

Keep up the good work, Tom and Cameron, and thank you.

E.

[tkyler]

You are right E, no arguement there....and I fully understand your frustration, indeed share it on many levels. All I can say is that we didn't intentionally set out to deceive anyone. We are just having to make some adjustments given the current climate. I will get the udpate out at first opportunity.

Tom

Edited April 16, 2012 by tkyler

[Emalice]

You are right E, no arguement there....and I fully understand your frustration, indeed share it on many levels. All I can say is that we didn't intentionally set out to deceive anyone. We are just having to make some adjustments given the current climate. I will get the udpate out at first opportunity.

Tom

Thanks Tom.

You know, I will not share my frustration for not flying MU2-V1.5, I will share my joy of flying V1.1.1. I love your aircraft, that's the problem, because I so want to enjoy an even better version of it.

I know you are doing your best in an awkward environment.

I realize that deploying a red carpet for msfs customers is a great way to increase your customer base and allow you to develop some great projects with the assurance of bringing home the bacon. I just hope this will not be done at the expense of current supporting customers and XP enthusiasts. But I will gladly trust you on this one.

What can I say, I guess I will give msflight a good try in the mean time (ok, ok, just kidding here :-) )

E.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Emalice

[tkyler]

I just hope this will not be done at the expense of current supporting customers and XP enthusiasts. But I will gladly trust you on this one.

I'd definitely never just abandon customers on this one. Barring some medical or other major catastrophy, the MU2 shoud live a long life and steadily move towards the absolute top level of quality and accuracy in flight simming. Though not as "operationally full featured" as a 737 like PMDG, it is still a complex simulation and I will certainly be endeavoring to make it the most accurate in it's class. I've put so much into the flight model and systems, and am almost there...that once done using override methods, I should not have to deal with it for a very long time....and then I just redo the 3D model and textures to bring them up to modern standards and I forsee the Moo being a very stable product for many years.

Edited April 17, 2012 by tkyler

[sichars1968]

Hi Tom

Now X-Plane 10 is so much more stable I have been doing a lot of flying in various third party aircraft of late, and I appreciate that these aircraft all need updating to version 10, but I must say the MU-2 never disappoints. I have been into flight simming since ATP all through MSFS platforms and laterly X-Plane, and this aircraft is simply head and shoulders above any add-on aircraft I have flown before, and there is plenty of competition(LES products for X-Plane and RealAir for FSX). I think X-Plane 10 really has the potential to become 'the' simulator of choice, and this is bourne out by the excellent aircraft that are in developement now.

I still feel that these new creations will have to go some to beat the MU-2. To this end I would just say that this new update, although eagerly awaited, people should really cut you some slack and realise that this is firstly, a free update, and at the end of the day you want to release something that as the developer you know is absolutely the best you can do. We the customers are in a win-win situation as far as I am concerned. I think it is excellent the way you take the time to keep us informed of the progress you are making, you would never get this from MSFS developers.

Keep up the good work and I look forward to flying the new version whenever it should be released.

All the best

Simon

[tkyler]

well thank you Simon...I'm happy you feel that way. I have no issue with the ribbing I get. Customers should be demanding and I did seem to just "fall out a bit". I did; however, say I'd elaborate a bit more once the xplane dev conference is over and that's exactly what I'll do.

The primary reason for the MU-2 delay that I haven't said is that I have diverted to work on a prominent airliner project in addition to a scenery project and of course, laminar work. I'm a developer on said airliner team with a demanding workload....having recently wrapped up a hydraulics simulation *cough *cough. Internal situations on this project towards Dec/Jan caused me to expedite my work and the MU-2 moved to the back-burner.

I'm also putting my scenery experience with XP10 to good use with another talented 3D developer to put out a "designed for V10" scenery product and not just a modified conversion. The fact that the code I used 3 years ago on the MU2 doesn't work as well with XP10 features I have available to me now that I did not then doesn't help. If the Moo was the only project I was working on, sure I'd be making progress, but at the end of the day, I'd have a marginally known aircraft with a free update and little cash in my pocket. I found it imperative, in order to stay in this market and continue to make good add-ons, to basically pause the work and sprint to some more profitable add-ons during this critical time when MSFS users would start looking our way. Discussion from the conference shows that was a good decision. I showed our work to some folks at the x-plane dev conference and several PMDG owners indicated we very easily kept pace. The work done on this project will find it's way back into the MU2 and the code base for the electrical system will allow "per circuit breaker" simulation on the MU2.....not sure I'll do that, but it can. Also, I've learned quite a bit more during this dev process that should allow me to pretty much perfect the MU2's operation. I probably will hold off on MU2 work until the scenery comes out though as that should be out first and give me some breathing room. With no add-ons for a while and part-time laminar work....money ain't exactly knocking on my doorstep.....yet I feel this is the prudent move as once this work is done later this year, I will be in a position to continue to develop higher quality add-ons for x-plane. It's a very promising time for XP and by the end of 2012, we (at Laminar) hope to incorporate some nice things that will endear XP to more MSFS users.

So that's what's up. I work 10-12 hours between laminar, the airliner and the scenery....and well, the MU2 gets leftover hours depending on my mood. It was only recently though that I identified some V10 issues that finally made me say, "OK, I have to back up a bit on my code" and on a day or two, here and there, that is exactly what I'll do and with any luck, it won't take as long as I might think and I could just go...."hrm...that works" and put something out. But for now, I find it imperative to work on the airliner and some custom scenery. So if nothing else...the MU2 waits a bit, but the time is not wasted on things that won't benefit end users. I'll keep reporting as usual when work gets done, even if its not visible.

Tom K

[PWJT8D]

Soooooooo... what your saying is it won't be done tomorrow?

[FloB]

Wait, where did I watch a hydraulics system demo video recently?

I was already looking forward to that airliner project and now that I know you're involved I'm even more excited and more than willing to forgive the delay on the moo.

But I think it would be good not to spark hopes for a "early" moo update any more - until you're REALLY done with it. After weeks and month of delay it´s a little bit annoying to read "with any luck, it won't take as long as I might think and I could just go...."hrm...that works" and put something out." We all should drop that release-talk for now and relax.

Cheers

Flo

[tkyler]

I did some comprehensive testing the other day and have come up with a conclusion. I am going to remove some of the new engine features I put in for the update....these new feautures are what is causing the problems I am having. The thing is....these new features are ones that are not in the current MU2 and therefore, will not be missed. I am speaking of the prop locks. The prop locks are an integral part of real MU2 operation, pertaining to engine start and shut down procedures....however, given that 99% of one's time in X-Plane is probably NOT startup and shutdown, I can't see the logic in not releasing based on a feature nobody has ever used thus far anyhow...only because I want to be anal retentive. I will still have to rewrite some code, but not a comprehensive rewrite as would be required to implement the prop feature. In this way, folks can get the new 3D and a few other features like the ADF and such without having to wait for a little known feature. On another day in the future, I will rewrite the engine code to make it more realistic.

As usual, no date on release; however, before the other day, I honestly didn't see it happening till late in the year...and that was unacceptable...so hence the decision to remove a very small feature in order to get this thing moving. I still think the quality level is 10 orders of magnitude higher than what is out there currrently and that is more than enough. I'll keep posting here as I work on it.

Tom K

Edited May 10, 2012 by tkyler