MU-2 progress towards update

[PWJT8D]

Thank you very much for the update Tom. I agree with your decision, the prop lock feature will not be one that I would miss for this update. As you mentioned, I get joy out of flying the aircraft, not starting it and shutting it down. I know that I'm not alone when I say I'm too lazy and I jump into X-Plane with "engines running" so I can get to the air faster.

[ktomais]

A very brave and smart decision, thank you for the update Tom. The new MU is highly anticipated.

[Emalice]

Hi Tom.

Thank you for the update.

I also believe you made a sound decision. However, I am probably a 1%, meaning I enjoy the whole flight preparation phase, pushing buttons, pulling levers, typing numbers and so on, and the best part is when you fire up the engines. But, as much as I would have loved to see the full featured engine in the update, releasing sooner rather than later is in my opinion a better strategy right now. Annoying people like me will cut you a lot of slack and you'll be more free to work on all your projects and keep the moo on the back burner for as long as you need.

Oh, and just to make sure, what you call the props lock, is it that feature where the props will feather on improper shutdown procedure and you then have to press the unfeather button at startup ? That sounds like the kind of feature made just for me, where you have to follow a procedure in the simulator not just for the sake of it but because otherwise it has consequences.

E.

[steven winslow]

The makings of a poll....who starts up X-Plane with engines running and who starts up cold and dark? The only time I start with engines running is when I'm beta testing a plane or a paint. When I am flying from point A to point B, whether online or offline, I always start cold and dark. Much more immersive to have to go through a checklist and a procedure. I've always enjoyed starting up the MU-2 and it would be cool to emulate the complete real world sequences and consequences, but I agree with your decision, Tom. Most of us won't miss the props lock feature. Thanks for all your work!

Edited May 10, 2012 by steven winslow

[tkyler]

E. yes, the prop locks are the feature where you have to put the power levers into reverse or else the props will feather. The code I wrote all those years ago were workarounds to the flight model...and at the time, my skills and experience wasn't as it is today (isn't that always the case). Anyhow....I pushed those techniques as far as I could and now they're just getting in my way. It's one of those things where I need to "go down to the studs" in order to do the remodel right....but for now, we'll throw on one more coat of paint.

[sierranev]

Hello Tom,

Is there any new information regarding the MU-2 update? As others have stated, I too am eager for the new release. When I purchased the file late last year, I was under the impression that the update was imminent based on the newsletter from X-Aviation.

Thanks

[tkyler]

I really apologize. I was under that same assumption. Here's what happened. I generally test my work very very thoroughly in just about every situation and my updating the MU2 happened during the V9/V10 transition. The V9 version, the basis of most of my work worked very well, but the V10 version did not work well at all. The data at both Laminar and X-Aviation show that people are moving to V10 such that most everyone wants a version that works for V10.

Saying that V10 "broke" my MU2 is not an accurate way to describe the situation. V10 improved areas of the engine model....areas that I had programmed around since V8. The engine model for V10, while improved, still does not simulate the MU2's Garretts exactly. So what this means is that I still need a custom solution for V10....and the one I used for V9 no longer works. So I have to basically "throw out" my old code and start over. This really wasn't known until I started V10 testing. Because the MU2 update was very close to release at the same time V10 was coming out, I didn't catch the problems until it was too late.

I have assessed the MU2 in V10 and made a determination about the best tactic to take to fix it. The problem right now is that the fix involves new areas of coding strategy for me and a reasonably significant investment in time. Because I promised a free update (which I will honor), the recoup on investment of time isn't worth it at the moment. This does not mean that I will abandon it.....what it means is that I am at a critical cross-road in X-Plane growth and opportunity and where my time goes now will have a huge impact on where I'll go with x-plane add-ons in the future.

Certainly I did not set out to deceive anyone on the MU2...it's just one of those things that happened as V10 came out. The MU2 is still my favorite aircraft and I will pursue it's development until it sits at the pinnacle of add-on quality..... and I will still honor the free update when I complete it. At this moment though, I must tend to other projects and priorities as my family is directly affected by these choices and they must come first.

As an aside....the problem is the engine model. I need to override several ares of the engine and prop model and take control of them directly. My work with IXEG has proved to be absolutely invaluable in this regard and when I get the time, I will apply this knowledge to the MU2. I do crack it open occasionally...did so last week and am still auditing the code like a surgeon to know what to cut out and what to add in so as to not break something else. The absolute minute I know what code I can cut out without breaking other stuff...then that's when things will move. Cutting out code and causing a bug somewhere else really drags out the time...so I am pretty cautious at the moment.

Tom

Edited June 7, 2012 by tkyler

[sierranev]

Thanks for the thorough reply. Personally, I still use V9 only, as V10 causes major stutter/hiccups ala FSX and is a step backwards on my current hardware. If the V9 version isn't broken, is there any reason it can't be released until the V10 version is ready? I would assume most V10 users also have V9 and would look at this opportunity as a nice preview of the V10 release. And for those of us on V9, the long wait would finally be over.

[tkyler]

I could not say for sure. As a vendor, I see much more feedback than many on the forums here and sometimes it appears that many can be satisfied by taking a particular course of action when in reality, that is not the case. There are very large number of customers that very much want the MU2 to work with V10. Creating two separate versions is not very feasible unfortunately. I am truly sorry that the situation is the way it is, but also my experience shows that when it is done and done right, it will be worth the wait and also any criticisms endured then. Releasing a incomplete work will most assuredly cause many times the headaches than the current delay causes.

[TOBS]

I think the big problem was Cameron´s promise that the MU2 update comes out with XP10 release. So lot of people thought it will be for XP10 of course. And then Laminar changed important things so that all authors got in trouble with their work for XP10. Peter Hagers A321 also had a long delay of month maybe nearly a year. In my point of view it is the best not to promise anything and to concentrate on the work - it is ready when it is ready. PMDG never announce a release day, maybe if they are sure it will be next week. There is no reason to say sorry that he work has not finished yet. And no authors knows that there are so significant changes in XP10 cause Austin promised via a letter to all authors that all XP9 planes will work in XP10. Best thing is not to promise a release date till you are 100% that the release will be. The community will wait with passion - like the FSX community wait calm for PMDG.

Cheers Tom

[Cameron]

I think the big problem was Cameron´s promise that the MU2 update comes out with XP10 release.

I would love for you to back this statement up with evidence. It did not happen.

[tkyler]

A paradigm here that is usually overlooked is in the area of "customization". When Austin says that aircraft functionality are preserved between versions, what he means are "planes designed within the bounds of plane maker design"...and unfortunately, these are relatively simple behaviors when weighed against an in-depth simulation of a specific aircraft. When a aircraft author implements a plugin to customize and aircraft, all bets are off as far as Austin is concerned and claims of "austin breaking things" just does not hold true. It would be more proper to say the aircraft author broke things by overriding x-plane in areas and it's to the authors to fix these..and that is where I find myself. As to TOBS point about promises....I agree with TOBS that promises should not be made; however, the market is just that way. On the one hand...best not to say anything while on the other, we have guys asking for updates. It's just the nature of the beast. I can understand how users would worry bout whether an aircraft they really want are going to "make it through"...so it's nice to get reassurance as vaporware is always a threat. All I can say is that as long as I am able to work on my stuff, I will keep working on my stuff. Yes I shift my priorities a bit as a family man, but my commitments to my projects don't wane. My current commitments are to the IXEG 737, the MU2 and some scenery work, all other projects I've posted about are "off the table"....and what I work on any given day between those three changes based on several factors. But no more promises from me.

Tom Kyler

Laminar / IXEG

[Dozer]

The problem is, the worthwhile X-Plane aircraft are worthwhile precisely because they override default X-Plane behaviour with custom plugin-based stuff.

One solution: systematically replace the entirety of X-Plane's simulation with plugin code, except for the underlying flight model and the display code. I've made a start on this - I've written about 1/3rd of an ADF tuner...

[steven winslow]

The problem is, the worthwhile X-Plane aircraft are worthwhile precisely because they override default X-Plane behaviour with custom plugin-based stuff.

While I agree there are some great payware aircraft and even some freeware out there that utilize plugins, most of the planes I fly on a regular basis are plugin free. I guess I'm questioning your definition of "worthwhile" aircraft.

I don't mean to hijack the thread or misdirect it. I love the MU-2 and I patiently await the update. It gets here when it gets here. I think the one thing we can learn at X-Pilot is that nothing ever gets done fast, it never gets done by the first "promised" date and it never gets done when the masses want it to be done.

Edited June 20, 2012 by steven winslow

[tkyler]

I guess I'm questioning your definition of "worthwhile" aircraft.

Of course its impossible to question preferences. Some prefer blondes, some brunettes, some fast, some slow, etc...these are questions to which we can't really ask why.

I think the one thing we can learn at X-Pilot.....

X-Pilot really cannot take original credit for that Steven ....this lesson has been taught for generations at our beloved org by the dear leaders long before x-pilot came along. A whole new generation of x-plane users are getting schooled on this lesson this very moment in the 757 thread over there. This is a development universal for the most part....but one thing rings true and that is work is getting done...every year sees stuff not offered the previous year.

Edited June 20, 2012 by tkyler

[Ben Russell]

Imagine what the world would be like if every project was dominated by "fit for purpose" instead of "fit for marketing".

For instance, NASA managers claimed that there was a 1 in 100,000 chance of a catastrophic failure aboard the shuttle, but Feynman discovered that NASA's own engineers estimated the chance of a catastrophe at closer to 1 in 100. He concluded that the NASA management’s space shuttle reliability estimate was fantastically unrealistic, and was particularly angered that NASA used these figures to recruit Christa McAuliffe into the Teacher-in-Space program.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman

[steven winslow]

X-Pilot really cannot take original credit for that Steven ....this lesson has been taught for generations at our beloved org by the dear leaders long before x-pilot came along. A whole new generation of x-plane users are getting schooled on this lesson this very moment in the 757 thread over there. This is a development universal for the most part....but one thing rings true and that is work is getting done...every year sees stuff not offered the previous year.

I concur! I didn't mean to infer it was just X-Pilot. In fact, I suppose it could be said of just about anything end users of any product are anxious to see. There are those who anxiously await news from Apple. Others look forward to announcements from Ford or Chevrolet. Or the kids in the back seat on family vacation yelling, "Are we there yet? Are we there yet?" It's not just an X-Plane thing. It just seems to be one of the common themes in many threads asking, "Is it done yet? Why isn't it done yet? When will it be done? What are you doing?" and so forth.....

[riccardo74]

Hi guys, only now I've seen this post about MU2. I purchased this great aircraft in may, 2010 for V9. Is there any update I have to apply for my older version or the version I purchase din that date is the latest available?

Many thanks in advance.

[Cameron]

Hi guys, only now I've seen this post about MU2. I purchased this great aircraft in may, 2010 for V9. Is there any update I have to apply for my older version or the version I purchase din that date is the latest available?

Many thanks in advance.

You have the latest version.

[Hal]

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.

I know these posts are a bit old, but I was amazed to read the entire thread just today. I might make some people unhappy with this, but I feel it needs to be said.

Promise for an upgrade actually starts on post 1 of the thread, sometime around 2009, so 3 years ago, for a product that is 3 1/2 years old. I personally remember discussions on another forum promising a number of small changes (including adding an ADF) from pretty much day 1, but then I can't prove it, those are gone.

I'm not sure how you can talk of commitment to a product when you have been teasing upgrades for the past 3 years and have nothing to show for it. Anyone who bought said product on the hope generated by the pictures and videos shown on this forum since 2009 must be feeling pretty bad right now. Don't get me wrong: I used to love the plane, I bought it for what is was back in '08, and had the good sense to stop expecting an update quite a while ago. But reading the entire thread today, 3 years of teasers and not a single release, and then all these talks of commitment and getting everything right feels more than a tad disingenuous. Personally, I applaud the patience and civility of all the buyers who have been posting here.

[tkyler]

Personally, I applaud the patience and civility of all the buyers who have been posting here

Me too Hal. Me too! But things happen that we can't fully foresee and it simply is what it is. I wish it were otherwise. As I've said in the past, the only thing I can do is make good when I have the opportunity. X-Plane add-on development is pure adolescent compared to the FSX and therefore in a state of change. As x-plane addon develop goes from hobby to business for folks like myself, I think there will be some "jockying for position"...."repositioning of strategies" and in the process some things will get shuffled and reprioritized......similar to MS Flight. One day it's there...the next day it isn't. The add-on developer scene in XP is still in a state of flux and does not have the maturity of the FSX developer scene yet where folks know what they do and what works for them. I think in the future as a "xp addon company" can count on the market to sustain its work financiall, you will see less and less fickle behavior....but to recap, the patience and civility of users here has been really something. I thank them all for their gracious disposition.

Best,

Tom

Edited August 21, 2012 by tkyler

[Emalice]

the patience and civility of users here has been really something. I thank them all for their gracious disposition.

Tom

Ha, you know, many users (including myself) are more than willing to forgive any delay on the Moo when they see what you are doing to the ixeg 737 in the mean time. Plus, when the 737 gets released (anytime now, i guess, right ;-) ) we will all be so busy playing around with it, flying it, crashing it and what not, that we may forget about the moo altogether until we receive notice of the update (anytime now, right ?).

Keep up the good work, Tom.

E.

[Cameron]

Promise for an upgrade actually starts on post 1 of the thread, sometime around 2009, so 3 years ago, for a product that is 3 1/2 years old. I personally remember discussions on another forum promising a number of small changes (including adding an ADF) from pretty much day 1, but then I can't prove it, those are gone.

You interpret things as you will, though I don't recall the word of "promise" being used. That said, full intention has and still does remain. Nothing has changed there.

The ADF update was released for those who needed it. If you missed that bandwagon you can still obtain it.

I'm not sure how you can talk of commitment to a product when you have been teasing upgrades for the past 3 years and have nothing to show for it.

I can think of many products that came to fruition after such time, one big one in particular. Time doesn't mean non-commitment. You do realize the product was sold and delivered as advertised, and anything Tom has done since is purely a FREE, major eye-candy upgrade that most would consider him crazy not to charge for, right? It's not like actual promises have not been kept (though we did make an honestly bad assumption that we were so close and announced such, only to realize major problems in the last 10%).

Personally, I applaud the patience and civility of all the buyers who have been posting here.

Amazing group of supporters we have, no doubt. To say we are thankful for the wonderful people in this hobby would be an understatement, and I can certainly sympathize. It doesn't mean we'll make bad on our word. We will prevail, though it obviously won't be on your timeline.

[tkyler]

Thanks E. I know my choice will upset a few in the short term, but the long term implications I think will mean better products more consistently. I think that if I asked for a show of hands for a PMDG level 737 or an updated Moo.....the Moo would get the boot! Fortunately, the 737 will allow me to improve that MU2 properly in the future. Imagine a PMDG level Moo...that's what I got in my head!

TK

[larjeet]

is there any way that you could do a quick update to gizmo so that DRM and registration are handled the same as the Falco ?