Things that are NOT going to be in V1.5

[sweetty365]

You're making no sense. You just showed me a video of a 767-300, and a 737 NG, both of which have much larger wings.

 

This is not a 737-300 you have shown me. Therefore, what you have shown me is also not a realistic representation.

 

I suggest you read what you search rather than tell me I should search. I've been a part of this discussion from the get-go.

 

I appreciate your personal thoughts here, but since at least one of the developers and real life pilots concur on the fact that the 737 has indeed flexing enough wings worth to be simulated, this alone makes me take his word for fact rather than yours. You may very well be interested in airplanes as a hobby but looking at the facts, the 737, no matter the configuration, has stiff - but flexing wings.

[Cameron]

I appreciate your personal thoughts here, but since at least one of the developers and real life pilots concur on the fact that the 737 has indeed flexing enough wings worth to be simulated, this alone makes me take his word for fact rather than yours. You may very well be interested in airplanes as a hobby but looking at the facts, the 737, no matter the configuration, has stiff - but flexing wings.

 

You're not really helping the case here. I've asked you to help out. Jan, whom you are referring to, also agreed with my followup post on lack of wing flex.

 

A wing will naturally have some sort of flex. That flex is POINTLESS to model if it can essentially not be easily seen. So, again, I ask you to please find us a video of a 737-300 showing the amount of wing flex you're looking to have modeled.

 

I couldn't find any on YouTube. Plenty of 737-300 wing videos out there, just none with flex, even in turbulence, so I'm asking you to now help out in understanding what you feel is worth modeling from a real video of the real aircraft which you find.

[sizziano]

I appreciate your personal thoughts here, but since at least one of the developers and real life pilots concur on the fact that the 737 has indeed flexing enough wings worth to be simulated, this alone makes me take his word for fact rather than yours. You may very well be interested in airplanes as a hobby but looking at the facts, the 737, no matter the configuration, has stiff - but flexing wings.

Winglex IMHO should never be a priority. There are other features that could be added that would be better than wing fkex.

[Charles 1]

wingflex is for passager flying looking outside the window,

Pilots flying with the seat of there pants couldn't care less about wingflex

Edited December 17, 2015 by charleslee201

[teban13]

wingflex is for passager flying looking outside the window,

Pilots flying with the seat of there pants couldn't care less about wingflex

Exactly! And I think this is what this plane is about. Wing flex is a nice eye candy but this product is more beyond just being nice to look, it will actually be GREAT TO FLY AS A PILOT!

So wing flex is not a priority for me either, I will be too busy in the cockpit to look at it.

[Ben Russell]

As a beta tester... I don't even know if this thing has a passenger deck in it. Haven't wanted to look. Too many other things to enjoy.

[K4bel123]

I luckily had the chance to be on 3 flights with 737 Classics (2 737-300s and 1 737-500; all in Southamerica) in the last few weeks and I noticed that there is wing flex but very little. You mainly notice it in turbulence (and I think this is not so easy to implement in the sim). I'm gonna have a look tomorrow if you can see the wing flex on the videos I took and - if so - I'm gonna post them.

Anyway I don't care much about that wing flex since it's not very much flex like in a B787. Take your time guys and concentrate on the more important things first.

Greetings,

K4bel123

[cmbaviator]

I think the most realist way to implement wing flex is to calculate the eigen value of the wing and view it's deformed modal shape with a finite element software. Then we need to know at which frequencies can the wings be exited. I think that the wing is exited close to the first eigen value

CMB

Sent from Tapatalk

Edited December 17, 2015 by cmbaviator

[ONDR4.cz]

Well, here's a link to a video where you can observe some wing-flex on B733: https://youtu.be/B0eihNQqafw?t=2m35s

But it's very subtle indeed and I'm not sure it's even possible to tranfer such fine flex movements into X-Plane without it looking too cheesy.

[simeg]

Hi Community,

 

so i think also, whe need a Wingfelx. is really awesome, and a MUST HAVE for a Long Long Wait AirPlane 733CL from IXEG

[Cameron]

But it's very subtle indeed and I'm not sure it's even possible to tranfer such fine flex movements into X-Plane without it looking too cheesy.

My point exactly. For that video alone they even had to zoom just to show it!

Anyways, thanks for actually posting a video rather than going on about nonsense.

I'm sure the team as a whole will do as Jan said and asess the necessity of this after release.

[donoscar]

My point exactly. For that video alone they even had to zoom just to show it!

Anyways, thanks for actually posting a video rather than going on about nonsense.

I'm sure the team as a whole will do as Jan said and asess the necessity of this after release.

 

 

I couldn't care less about a missing feature... i prefer time is invested in other smaller items that are really visible and have an impact on your interaction rather than in such a complex modelling. I would probably look at the wing-flex three times short after purchase but then forget about it, as it adds nothing to the experience of flying. Apart from a nice visual, I am not sure the actual flexing and vibrations have any impact on the flight model, and if so, it would probably require a lot of modelling and months of testing to validate such effects. anyway....

 

get the bird right on its model/systems/basic functions and then investigate more fancy things, I am fully ok with the announced non-working-list. but for me, having made the conversion from FSX recently, definitely

 

1. mouse wheel support will be a highly appreciated 
2. a connection to FMC to display on remote tablet through an explorer would be awesome, but please don't limit it to android or mac version. I use it through a common networked windows 10 touch notebook with FSX.
3. Flight plan export features for PFPX instead of creating your own planning and performance calculation software

 

btw, the bird looks awesome

[FloB]

Stare at a wing? Bores me after one sec.

Passenger cabin? Until it comes with real drinks I will not miss it. 

No offence.

 

Flo

[donoscar]

Stare at a wing? Bores me after one sec.

Passenger cabin? Until it comes with real drinks I will not miss it. 

No offence.

 

Flo

 

I have my private flight attendant at home, and if I fly during acceptable hours I get the first class service

[sweetty365]

Stare at a wing? Bores me after one sec.

Passenger cabin? Until it comes with real drinks I will not miss it. 

No offence.

 

Flo

 

For an average x-plane aircraft one buys and tries out for a month or two? Yes. For probably the most advanced simulated aircraft for x-plane ever, developed during half a decade, modelling virtually every possible instrument and behaviour of the plane and where extreme precision have been taken to visually mimic every aspect of the physical plane? No.

 

High quality modelling of wing flex for an aircraft in the highest rang, as I see it, should be one of the top priorities when it comes to visuals. Just because some simmers may be 100% interested in the instruments does not automatically mean we do not at all need a 3d model. Visuals, as well as physics and instrumentation all sums up and makes a good simulation. As more stuff is cut off from the model, the model itself becomes less equivalent to the real-to-life aircraft. IXEG have already modelled details in the simulation that most probably will not be seen/experienced by 99,95% of simmers. But they do this to make the perfect simulation. Having this in mind, I see no logical argument to - when the time is right and all other coding-critical aspects have been addressed - make an as immerse simulation of wing flex, to add to the already 99,9% complete simulated aircraft.

[Yidahoo]

For an average x-plane aircraft one buys and tries out for a month or two? Yes. For probably the most advanced simulated aircraft for x-plane ever, developed during half a decade, modelling virtually every possible instrument and behaviour of the plane and where extreme precision have been taken to visually mimic every aspect of the physical plane? No.

 

High quality modelling of wing flex for an aircraft in the highest rang, as I see it, should be one of the top priorities when it comes to visuals. Just because some simmers may be 100% interested in the instruments does not automatically mean we do not at all need a 3d model. Visuals, as well as physics and instrumentation all sums up and makes a good simulation. As more stuff is cut off from the model, the model itself becomes less equivalent to the real-to-life aircraft. IXEG have already modelled details in the simulation that most probably will not be seen/experienced by 99,95% of simmers. But they do this to make the perfect simulation. Having this in mind, I see no logical argument to - when the time is right and all other coding-critical aspects have been addressed - make an as immerse simulation of wing flex, to add to the already 99,9% complete simulated aircraft.

 

Personally, I fly the plane from the cockpit, not from seat 10a staring at a wing that might occasionally flex. If I made money from Youtube or Twitch videos it might be different, but I want a totally immersive cockpit, jumping out of that to watch the wings totally breaks that immersion.

[EDDTlex]

I think every native FSX guy who is missing the scroll wheel support should try out a X-Plane addon with a good grab 'n drag mouse interface. Dreamfoils Bell 407 is a good example and I personally never use their implemented scroll wheel interface. Why? Firstly, it interferes with the zoom function of X-Plane if your are not precisely point the mouse over the appropriate clickspot or the viewing direction moves during maneuvers. And secondly, I found it to be more "realistic", since the dragging movement is detentless when dialing up analogue instruments (barometer setting for example). I grew up with MS Flightsim and really don't miss the scroll wheel for that matter. However, the interface of most default planes in X-Plane is a PITA.

 

On a side note, wing flex is obsolete for my taste...

Edited December 18, 2015 by EDDTlex

[Cameron]

For an average x-plane aircraft one buys and tries out for a month or two? Yes. For probably the most advanced simulated aircraft for x-plane ever, developed during half a decade, modelling virtually every possible instrument and behaviour of the plane and where extreme precision have been taken to visually mimic every aspect of the physical plane? No.

High quality modelling of wing flex for an aircraft in the highest rang, as I see it, should be one of the top priorities when it comes to visuals. Just because some simmers may be 100% interested in the instruments does not automatically mean we do not at all need a 3d model. Visuals, as well as physics and instrumentation all sums up and makes a good simulation. As more stuff is cut off from the model, the model itself becomes less equivalent to the real-to-life aircraft. IXEG have already modelled details in the simulation that most probably will not be seen/experienced by 99,95% of simmers. But they do this to make the perfect simulation. Having this in mind, I see no logical argument to - when the time is right and all other coding-critical aspects have been addressed - make an as immerse simulation of wing flex, to add to the already 99,9% complete simulated aircraft.

You're back! Got that video yet?

You're busy talking about ultra realism, all the while you previously showed me a 767 wing to model after.

I've got the 3d modeler open just itching to put this in for you! I need your 737-300 video from seat 14D stat!

[teban13]

I don't get the point of this conversation. How do you want to fly? As a pilot or a passenger? If wing flex is so important, there are some add-on aircrafts out there with it but without the cockpit immersion this will offer... I won't care to sit and stare at the window while there is so much to do: the FMC is awesome and very complete, the panels, checklists, monitor radios, pressurization, electrical info... Ufff so much to do!

If they want to add it later, it will be a nice detail, but personally I will rarely look at it. I think the 0,04% you think is missing is what we say in spanish: te estas ahogando en un vaso de agua.

(You are drowning in a glass of water)

Enjoy the product as it will be released, I think this will be THE BENCHMARK for future experiences in X-Plane, so take command, call V1, ROTATE and enjoy your flight!

[Litjan]

Good points all around. Again - there is wing flex on the real 737 (although less than on other aircraft). We might add it later as development resources become available, it´s just not the highest priority for us (and this is clearly a point where opinions vary ).

 

 Cheers, Jan

[dr_nerdrage]

Good points all around. Again - there is wing flex on the real 737 (although less than on other aircraft). We might add it later as development resources become available, it´s just not the highest priority for us (and this is clearly a point where opinions vary ).

 

 Cheers, Jan

 

Then again, the opinions are never against it. They only vary from "I don't care" to "Herp Derp I need muh wing flex", so I guess you can only win by implementing it (eventually).

 

I personally like replaying landings over and over (and over and over...), and it's nice to see a little flex.

[Vantskruv]

Concentrate on the most important features, which in my case is the cockpit functionality and atmosphere. Then, if resources exist, it is a bonus with exterior fidelity as wingflex, aircraft services, cabin and interactive doors, though no requirement. I confess I get satisfaction while watching a replay sitting in the cabin while experience a turbulent landing, but I prefer if main resources are concentrated as I wrote above, and resource excess may be added for less important features as discussed above.

[Eddie]

•  
• Complex and visually appealing load+trim software. We feel that clicking empty seats to fill them and pulling sliders to load cargo is fun for a few times - but really all you get is a weight and a center of gravity. And you might just as well set those directly in the gui. We have simple sliders and click-buttons for that (or you can use the default X-Plane menus).

I disagree. Individually calculating the weight of each passenger and their baggage and coming up with an overall CG value is much more difficult than merely being able to set a passenger and cargo percentage and having it calculated for you based on the aircraft in question.

[Rodeo]

GUI

 

• Dedicated flight-planning software. We feel that this is not necessarily within the scope of our add-on. We model the plane like you get it after delivery from Seattle (+ free lifetime fuel!). There are plenty of flight-planning solutions out there, we include a basic "ballpark" fuel calculator.

 

I assume that in order to implement features such as FMC performance assistance and cost index support, you do have access to the data required for much more precise fuel calculations?

 

If it's possible, it might be nice to share it with e.g. SimBrief, since they don't have the data to create a detailed profile for the B733 yet:

 

http://www.simbrief.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=42

[McBlemmen]

First of all thank you for being up front about this , none of these shortcomings really bother me, but i do hope you're being honest when you say you plan to add stuff later.

 

Secondly i'm in the minority probably but thank you for not adding scrollwheel support , planes with scrollwheel support are a pain in the ass to fly since you always mess a knob up when looking around , and dragging the mouse works just as well. If you do end up adding it i really hope there will be an option to choose to disable it.

 

Cannot wait for this , day-1 buy. I don't think i'll ever need to buy another airliner after this. Well , atleast not untill the next IXEG plane comes out

 

Counting the days ( weeks , months ? :S) untill release! Good luck.

Edited December 21, 2015 by McBlemmen