Things that are NOT going to be in V1.5

[Morten]

Hi Guys!

 

I know this is a cosmetic thing (not that important), but after V1.0 are you thinking about implementing the ability to see flap vortices? 

 

 

Cheers, Blake

 

 

 

 

It's there already (if the weather conditions are right)

 

M

[K4bel123]

Are you serious Morten?? Wow this is once again amazing news!

[Nils]

Are you serious Morten?? Wow this is once again amazing news!

 

You mean these? https://youtu.be/rxFKbppnw0U

[teban13]

Just watched it!!<br /><br />Great job guys! You rock!!<br /><br /><br />Teban13 - Live to fly! Fly to live!

[Morrigan]

You mean these? https://youtu.be/rxFKbppnw0U

 

I am not drooling, I swear.

[jcjimmy]

More outstanding signs of a dedicated team effort. The aircraft does indeed look like a tribute to a great machine.

 

Please keep the info coming and, hopefully, get this beauty out into the hands of the flight simulation community.

 

All I can say is Godspeed.

[beHaind]

I am really looking forward to the release. I remember, when the PMDG NGX came out, I was flying for days and days without a break. I am right now writing some exams at my university, but in three weeks I´ll be done and it would be so great if it would be out by then.

I read in this thread that wingflex won´t be included in the first release and that you might add it later. I personally really hope that you add it soon after release, since the external is already so stunningly beatiful and I think that without wingflex the plane looks a bit steril. For me a real wing just has to move, even if its just a tiny bit. For example, even the marvelous Majesitc Dash 8 for FSX/P3D has wingflex and even I never noticed that on the real plane, however it enhances the looks of that plane by so much...its crazy. 

I wish you happy programming and I really look forward to this release!

[fffirefly]

Every little bit adds to the realism, whether it's ice, water, vortices or flex.  I am not a programmer but could only imagine the complexity of adding even one of these.  There isn't just the visual images to be rendered but also the variables in which these conditions would occur and to what extent;  a daunting and time consuming task to say the least.  Let's get the base model working as near perfect as possible (as few bugs as possible) and then slowly add the nice-to-haves!

[papy.rabbit.08]

On 7/12/2015 at 11:00 AM, Litjan said:

• Automatic startup/shutdown "macros". Won´t add that. This plane is about realistic operation (it´s not hard!). If not desired, just select "ready to fly".

 

Hi!

I was a little bit disappointed when I saw that, because I though I had understood before that it would be in. But just a question, will it be possible to quit X-plane and save a "cockpit configuration state"?

Because if we talk about realism, I think I'm not the only one that had the problem with PMDG's 737: for what I remember, what take the most time, is the initial part of the cockpit preparation (preflight procedure if I remember well) that you only have to do for the first flight of the day. And that takes a very long time, if you want to make a flight with a minimum of realism.

But I think that there's something between the "ready to flight" (very unrealistic) and the total cold and dark (realistic, but takes a very long time), and that is the state when a pilot finish his day and you take over his plane (without the shutdown procedure) which would permit with realism to gain some time. And that would be possible if it is possible to save the cockpit configuration from time to time or with macros.

Thanks for reading and for your answer!

[Cameron]

Hi!

I was a little bit disappointed when I saw that, because I though I had understood before that it would be in. But just a question, will it be possible to quit X-plane and save a "cockpit configuration state"?

Because if we talk about realism, I think I'm not the only one that had the problem with PMDG's 737: for what I remember, what take the most time, is the initial part of the cockpit preparation (preflight procedure if I remember well) that you only have to do for the first flight of the day. And that takes a very long time, if you want to make a flight with a minimum of realism.

But I think that there's something between the "ready to flight" (very unrealistic) and the total cold and dark (realistic, but takes a very long time), and that is the state when a pilot finish his day and you take over his plane (without the shutdown procedure) which would permit with realism to gain some time. And that would be possible if it is possible to save the cockpit configuration from time to time or with macros.

Thanks for reading and for your answer!

All of this is no issue. The 737 has a selection window to select cold and dark, turn around, or engines on and irs aligned.

[papy.rabbit.08]

51 minutes ago, Cameron said:

All of this is no issue. The 737 has a selection window to select cold and dark, turn around, or engines on and irs aligned.

Ok perfect! Thanks for the answer.

But that's what macros are in my mind, but anyway, that's perfect.

EDIT: thanks for your answer in the next post

Edited January 27, 2016 by papy.rabbit.08

[Cameron]

Ok perfect! Thanks for the answer.

But that's what macros are in my mind, but anyway, that's perfect.

A macro is something that goes and does a task for you. In this instance Jan speaks of a system where you would press a button and watch the plane go through the startup sequence. Something like this is not implemented.

What's implemented are user preferences to start immediately at a selected state. Not a macro.

[Tom Knudsen]

Hi everyone.

 

While it seems to be the economically "smart" thing to do to NOT talk about the shortcomings of your product (and then sometimes to just ignore the complaints after you cash in the money), we are trying to run things a bit differently here at IXEG.

 

I would therefore like to share a list of things that will NOT be in version 1.0, and also give a little background of why, and wether we are planning to add it later. I will try to make this list as encompassing as possible, if I forget something, please don´t sue me! I will add/remove from this list as warranted.

 

Aircraft visual 3D model

 

• Operating doors (passenger, service, cargo) - omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later
• Outboard landing lights moving lamps - omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later (the light effect itself is working)
• Ancilliary vehicles (catering, fuel truck, loading crew) - we have a basic push-back truck and a GPU, the rest will not be added since there is no easy way to make it look/move "realistic" (without knowing where buildings etc. are)
• Wingflex - not added because its a lot of effort and the real wings don´t flex much. Might be added at a later stage, dependent on user feedback
• 3D Pilots in Cockpit - not added because we don´t have a good model and its hard to get that right. Will the guy just sit there? Smile at you? Pick his nose? Very hard to get a realistic person. Not ruling out taking a stab at that later.
• Fully fleshed out galleys and cabin interior. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later. For now a basic, low-res placeholder 3D cabin is in place.
• Cockpit entry mechanism and moving cockpit door. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add moving cockpit door later, the security entry mechanism will not be added, due to security reasons.
• Opening cockpit windows. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later. The mechanism is in place, but we need to code the ensuing effects (pressurization, noise level, etc.)
• Deployable emergency slides.Omitted due to time constraints, planning to add later.
• Deploying oxygen masks. Omitted due to time constraints, planning to add later.
• Sound effects/visual model for passengers and their (assumed) behaviour. Too complex a simulation off it´s own, most likely won´t be added for fear of having something repetitive or cheesy.
• Cabin crew interaction. Omitted due to time constraints. Planning to have basic interaction, for opening doors, for example. Need to get sound-samples first, basic infrastructure in place, though.
• Spoiler state showing correctly during replay. Since our spoiler code is fully customized, the default X-Plane datarefs that get captured for replay won´t work. We need to find a way around that, but definitely planning to add later.
• "Eyebrow windows". We could possibly add those later, but they require a lot of effort (cut 3D model, add windows, etc.). Down on the priority list, but once we run out of things to fix, who knows ;-)

 

FMS

 

• Pilot entered HOLDS. While we have database-inherent holds (like at the end of a missed approach), we won´t feature the HOLD page where you could enter all sorts of HOLDS. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later.
• RTA feature. Omitted due to time constraints, planning to add later, but low priority.
• OFFSET feature. Omitted due to time constraints,planning to add later, but low priority.
• ABEAM points (after shortcutting route, for example). Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later. You CAN enter stuff in the FIX page, and "find" a PBD point that way (enter a fix, enter a radial and a distance to see the green radial and distance-circle)
• Entering user created waypoints (point-bearing-distance, for example) and using those in the flight-plan. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later.
• Entering descent wind forecast (normal wind entry on PERF INIT page possible).
• Display of "RTE DATA" on EHSI/map, i.e. showing ETA and restrictions next to waypoint. You can see that on the LEGS page, for now. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later.
• Automatic entry of performance data (weight, etc.). We might include that for the "ready to fly" scenario, not decided yet. For now it must be entered manually, if FMS performance assistance is desired (not mandatory).

 

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.
• 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).
• No way to output any CDU, EADI or EHSI onto an external device like iPad or such. Would like to have that (especially for cockpit builders), though.
• No pop-out 2D displays of flight instruments/CDU/EFIS to make reading or entering stuff easier, no hiding of yoke to not obscure view. We feel that the ergonomics (or lack of) an airliner cockpit is an important part of the experience, so we don´t want to "help" too much. We have "preview pop-ups" of the EHSI when making changes on the EFIS control panel to help you see if you have the right setup.
• No mousewheel scroll support for turning knobs. We are pretty happy with the click-hold and drag system, but if user demand is strong, we might add mousewheel scroll support later on.

 

Warning systems

• TCAS. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later. This is a VERY complex system, and to get it right (including all the modes, synchronized avoiding behaviour of both TCAS systems involved in the conflict, multiplayer aircraft, correct EADI display) will take a long time. You can hear the basic X-Plane audio warning, but no symbology or resolution advisory for now. The system is also very rarely used in real flight (fortunately), so the return on investment (development time) is very low.
• EGPWS look-ahead feature (sheer-cliff protection). We do depict the terrain on the map, with correct colour shading. But the "Terrain ahead" and "Obstacle" warnings won´t be given for "look-ahead" scenarios. All other (conventional) modes are there, so you will get the "Terrain, Terrain", but later than the look-ahead warning would be issued. Omitted due to time constraints, possibly planning to add later.

 

Other systems

 

• Wxr radar returns can only be displayed on the left EHSI/map. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later.
• Terrain colour display can only be shown on the left EHSI(map. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later.
• Flight attendant panel 1L. Including cabin light switches, ground service switch. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later. The ground service switch can be "moved" through a sidebar menu.
• Operating CB´s. We decided that most CB´s will never be moved in normal operation. We will add moveable CBs with the yellow collar later (to be used in abnormal situations), and possibly some others as well (standby altimeter vibrator!).
• Automatic startup/shutdown "macros". Won´t add that. This plane is about realistic operation (it´s not hard!). If not desired, just select "ready to fly".
• IRS using "false" position. It is not possible to deliberately enter a "false" position and have the IRS align to that. The entry will be rejected unless reasonably close to the real position. In the real plane the GPS would also "correct" your wrong entry (if close enough) or warn you. A position far from the old "shutdown" position would be rejected once. A wrong latitude would be detected during the alignment process...It would be a lot of coding effort to maintain a "wrong" position with the corresponding effects (map-shift, etc.)
• A dedicated way to fly the same plane together in multiplayer. Something like smart-copilot, for example. Not added yet due to time constraints, but we are very eager to make something like this work. No promises, though, as getting this right for such a complex system with all of our internal variables and dataref is most likely very hard to accomplish.
• Dedicated support for more advanced hardware like multiple thrust levers, flap levers, speed-brake levers and other cockpit hardware. Very eager and interested to make it work eventually, but nothing tested (might work, might not) for V1.0.

 

 

We are trying to be as upfront about the shortcomings of our model as possible. I have myself bought many aircraft for flight-simulations boasting great things, only to be disappointed. I want to avoid that for everyone, so if you find a "must have" feature on this list, I encourage you to hold off on purchase until we added your feature in a later patch.

 

I could make a feature list of things we have that would take you hours to read, but instead you can assume that our plane can do everything that the real one does, except for the things noted above.

 

Cheers, Jan

Thanks for warning us to buy version 1. I for one will wait and see what the next versions will bring to the table, especially regarding the system simulation shortcomings...

[Ben Russell]

22 minutes ago, Tom Knudsen said:

Thanks for warning us to buy version 1. I for one will wait and see what the next versions will bring to the table, especially regarding the system simulation shortcomings...

Tom;

With all due respect, I'm pretty sure the only product that will ever live up to your unique individual quality expectations is your Dash8-100.

We look forward to seeing what you can do to advance the state of the art when it comes to flight simulation.

[jimbim]

I think you can remove that point from you list:

Quote

• Opening cockpit windows. Omitted due to time constraints, definitely planning to add later. The mechanism is in place, but we need to code the ensuing effects (pressurization, noise level, etc.)

I am not sure about pressurization but noise level is definitely there :-)

 

Greetings,

Sebastian

[Tom Knudsen]

Tom;

With all due respect, I'm pretty sure the only product that will ever live up to your unique individual quality expectations is your Dash8-100.

We look forward to seeing what you can do to advance the state of the art when it comes to flight simulation.

With all due respect Ben, do the busses go where you live? My reason for asking is that you clearly cannot see the difference between a product made by amatures and product made by professionals? And oh, in case you did not fully understood, the professional one being IXEG 737 and not the Dash8.

[Ben Russell]

4 minutes ago, Tom Knudsen said:

With all due respect Ben, do the busses go where you live? My reason for asking is that you clearly cannot see the difference between a product made by amatures and product made by professionals? And oh, in case you did not fully understood, the professional one being IXEG 737 and not the Dash8.

I'm sorry. I guess the way you inject your professional expert opinion into every topic had me confused. My bad. Please excuse.. 

[Tom Knudsen]

I am mearly an amature enjoying the art of flight simulation Ben, so you are excused

[KDN77RUS]

How long on low ?

1 month, 2 months, 3 months ...

To tell the date you are not profitable ?

[Nils]

2 hours ago, jimbim said:

I think you can remove that point from you list:

I am not sure about pressurization but noise level is definitely there :-)

 

Greetings,

Sebastian

(De-)pressurization is also in. But you can only open the windows if the PSI delta is < 0.1.

[Litjan]

5 hours ago, Tom Knudsen said:

Thanks for warning us to buy version 1. I for one will wait and see what the next versions will bring to the table, especially regarding the system simulation shortcomings...

Excellent, then my post served it´s purpose. Thank you for not berating us on missing feature "X", but to do what you feel is right for you and to wait until the project has reached a level of completeness that you feel appropriate.

All the best, Jan

 

[Litjan]

2 hours ago, KDN77RUS said:

How long on low ?

1 month, 2 months, 3 months ...

To tell the date you are not profitable ?

 

Da, da

[frumpy]

Seriously Tom, no one forces you to do anything. Someone is making a product and you either
like it or not. It's like a carmaker not offering a rain sensor for a specific model. Would you write them a complaint?

If you are into the most tiny bit of system depth, check out PSX (guess what, there is no rendered window view).

Chill, man!

[Tom Knudsen]

2 hours ago, frumpy said:

Seriously Tom, no one forces you to do anything. Someone is making a product and you either
like it or not. It's like a carmaker not offering a rain sensor for a specific model. Would you write them a complaint?

If you are into the most tiny bit of system depth, check out PSX (guess what, there is no rendered window view).

Chill, man!

 

Chilled as one can be I am said the curious fellow in the blue jumpsuit with pink elephants on it..  Regardless of your little effort grumpy I am actually looking forward to this airplane and have been since the very beginning. But I must say I am in no hurry to buy either. To me it does not even begin to matter if I buy version 1 or 3 thinking Its actully better to wait a while. Why your curious mind screams? Well sir, my humble opinion is that all good things comes to those that wait. And perhaps some of the "child sickness" bugs are out of the way.. Take the JARDesign A320Neo as an example, which aircraft do you think is the better one, version 2.6 public beta or version 1.0?

So most of you might add, but you can enjoy the aircraft while you wait for an update or "what if everybody think like you, they no body would have bought they plane", heck some might say that I do not support the community by not paying or "helping the developers". Well yes you are all right, but its my choice and whilst I do welcome any new airplane, its not obligated to purchase. To parafrase you frumpy, I for one car not to buy a car when the dealer says to me "It does not come with ABS, navigation system or even adaptive cruiz control, but we are most likely fitting this later on for sure". 

Of course its a un-fair comparison a 3D plane and something you depend your life on, but the essence is there and I do belive you understand what I am coming from sir.

I for one can say for sure that I will buy this airplane, even if it cost me 300 dollars down the line. That said, as a paying customer I do belive I have the right to state publically when or why I want to buy or pospone to buy this airplane without being asked to chill out, catch my drift sir?

 

 

[Litjan]

Again, I can totally understand your stance and it is the reason why I made the post in the first place. I try to not be an "early adopter" on many things myself - especially in software development these days most software will get better and get cheaper - so it´s win win...if you can muster the patience and stand the fact that everyone else is already playing that cool new game, and you are still on Battlefield 2 .

Your choice is perfectly valid and I am not going to convince anyone to buy this unless you believe that you are getting your money´s worth. Of course you can already play with 1.0 while we work on 1.1 - or you wait until 1.1. The money spent is the same, but you gain a few weeks of fun. Then again, we might bail to Mexico or the Carribean with the first week´s income and never fix this, that is your risk with a day one purchase!

We will still be here when you finally cave in .

Cheers, Jan