The B737 Classic Project

[79carboy]

They have done such a nice job that money is no limit (ok, how about $100 or less?)Seriously though, that is what the developers deserve. Think about doing this amazing work, and balancing your personal and social life. Hats off to those developers.

[coltsr2]

WOW!!!...Unbelievable details.....looks stunning!.......Goodbye FSX..hello X-plane!

[mike10]

Tuning the flightmodel in XP to the level we are at requires;

- Very good understanding of how XP works

- Very good understanding of how the real world works

- Access to very hard to get information of the aircraft and engine.

- Have the knowledge to understand the documents and information you have

- Access to the real aircraft and a full motion simulator

- Programming skills, to make up for some of XP's inaccuracy's

 

When you have all this it's time to start calibrating.  You now know where you are, where you want to be, and have the

tools to get there.  Then it's basically a matter of callibrating everything IN THE RIGHT ORDER.  If you don't, you

will be running around in circles, like someone lost in the forrest.  The key word here is reverse engineering and in sim testing.

 

Offcourse, the average designer will enter ballpark numbers into PlaneMaker and airfoils etc, and the end result will in best case

be a ballpark flightmodel.  Garbage in = garbage out.  Getting the 3D right is offcourse important, but then maybe 10% of the work is done.

 

We offcourse expect some people to pick apart our planemaker model and airfoils etc and analyze them and maybe find some "strange" stuff there,

but that will not get you very far unless you also have our code.  It's the combination of the two that make up our flightmodel in the sim, so you

will have to judge the aircraft from within the sim. 

 

M

 

 

That is why I am so excited for this add-on.   We don't have ANYTHING like this for x-plane 

[pryoski]

I think the IXEG 737 will be the level of aircraft/systems fidelity against which all future planes will be compared ... the pièce de résistance ... for those who hunger  for hi-fidelity (and I definitely do!).

 

I'm really looking forward to experiencing how the IXEG 737 flies. Even though it's a totally different type of aircraft (and I know it's a team effort), but Tom has such a solid pedigree in how his aircraft feel IMO; the Moo and the default C90B ... simply the best feeling of flight ... they're just so bloomin' fluid!

Edited July 15, 2013 by Kris Pryo

[mike10]

I think the IXEG 737 will be the level of aircraft fidelity against which all future planes will be compared to ... for those who like hi-fidelity (and I definitely do!).

 

I'm really looking forward to experiencing how the IXEG 737 flies. Even though it's a totally different type of aircraft (and I know it's a team effort), but Tom has such a solid pedigree in how his aircraft feel IMO; the Moo and the default C90B ... simply the best feeling of flight ... they're just so bloomin' fluid!

 

Agreed. I am more excited about the IXEG project than the FSlabs airbus and the PMDG 777,   I think this will set the standard for any sim.   I think I have posted this before but I fly mostly FSX right now because of the lack of HI-FI  planes in X-plane. I don't own the MOO maybe I should buy that plane since I have heard it's really good.  

[tkyler]

Thanks Kris/mike....but I don't have my thumbprint on this flight model, its all Morten and the rest of the team and I have to say, it really is winning me over.  I've never been much of a "heavy" enthusiast, but  this thing does kind of feel "uncanny" in its flying qualities...very surreal, which is the whole point.  The goal for us is to just go after reality period...not any one thing the like the systems, visuals, flight model etc, but whatever your eyes and ears take in (sorry, no smells, touch or taste yet) whatever you take it with your eyes and ears...how a needle moves, how something sounds, what the light looks like, etc and of course the systems and physics dictates all that stuff so if we wanted to achieve it at the sensory level, we had to start at the lowest level....all we really want is to simply feel like we're at the controls of a real 737-300....as much as we practically can anyhow.  Reality is a tough hombre to catch though and a never ending chase so there will always be something more to chase. 

 

TomK

[mike10]

Thanks Kris/mike....but I don't have my thumbprint on this flight model, its all Morten and the rest of the team and I have to say, it really is winning me over.  I've never been much of a "heavy" enthusiast, but  this thing does kind of feel "uncanny" in its flying qualities...very surreal, which is the whole point.  The goal for us is to just go after reality period...not any one thing the like the systems, visuals, flight model etc, but whatever your eyes and ears take in (sorry, no smells, touch or taste yet) whatever you take it with your eyes and ears...how a needle moves, how something sounds, what the light looks like, etc and of course the systems and physics dictates all that stuff so if we wanted to achieve it at the sensory level, we had to start at the lowest level....all we really want is to simply feel like we're at the controls of a real 737-300....as much as we practically can anyhow.  Reality is a tough hombre to catch though and a never ending chase so there will always be something more to chase. 

 

TomK

 

I am glad IXEG team is putting that kind of time and effort into this product instead of the AHHHH close enough approach many other developers have taken so far. 

[Jonas 15]

any News

[tkyler]

still working away!   Details towards the end can drag out a bit making "the end" not so much "the end".  We are finishing up 3D little stuffs and working full force on the documentation.  We have a '5 document' documentation package (actually a little more, but 2 of those so called "documents' are really a series of documents)... and we're not simply cutting and pasting the real POH.  The sim market, while wanting a high degrees of accuracy is still not reality and a lot of what's in those manuals just don't apply to sim users (though a lot does) and we do not feel the need to burden users down with extraneous information for the sake of trying to imply that having a real manual means you have a more accurate simulation or to simply save time.  In addition to the POH, we also want to provide training materials as many sim users will be stepping up to this level for the first time and will want to learn how to operate the aircraft in a more training oriented way...its not just for experienced users and so we have documents with these users in mind also.  So we are writing from scratch for the most part and this will take a few months while we clean up the simulation in parallel.  So we are still moving!

 

Tom K

Edited July 23, 2013 by tkyler

[clavel9]

The sim market, while wanting a high degrees of accuracy is still not reality and a lot of what's in those manuals just don't apply to sim users (though a lot does) and we do not feel the need to burden users down with extraneous information for the sake of trying to imply that having a real manual means you have a more accurate simulation or to simply save time.

Indeed. I've done some work on real life FCOMs, POH documents and OPS-C documents and I don't think a sim user needs to know about carrying livestock and such like!

[IAmOldGregg224]

How about rough 'inprogress' cabin shots.   Don't bother pointing out any inaccuracies, this is all development stuff

 

 

cant see any inaccuracies 

[Nicola_M]

Uh, yeah.  I think I might have spotted a bit of wayward fluff on the top of seat 12A

[meshboy]

Now when all parts are almost connected, what part of the development has been the hardest?

My Guess is VNAV and all the analog gauges. =)

[tkyler]

what part of the development has been the hardest?

 

 

"Difficult" comes in many flavors and is different for each team member, so I can only give my own perspectives.  There has been difficulty with the 'tediousness' of the work, difficulty with maintaining motivation, difficulty with team dynamics, difficulty with algorithm concepts etc....but in a more tangible sense, the most difficult part...conceptually... for myself was developing the lnav route calculation algorithm.   Its done in spherical trig and attempts to be 'smart'.   If you have a right turn over a waypoint for example..but decide to make it a left turn, we re-run the algorithm with the new data, considering aircraft performance and draw the new route...and if its doable (i.e. next waypoint not inside the turn radius)...then the plane will follow it (see screenshot below).   This is an ongoing 'difficult' problem though and we still have several issues to solve...but I think the fact that the FMS route calculations, both lnav and vnav...being the last thing we have to tackle pretty much sums up that it's one difficult challenge.

 

TomK

 

 

Edited August 5, 2013 by tkyler

[mike10]

 

"Difficult" comes in many flavors and is different for each team member, so I can only give my own perspectives.  There has been difficulty with the 'tediousness' of the work, difficulty with maintaining motivation, difficulty with team dynamics, difficulty with algorithm concepts etc....but in a more tangible sense, the most difficult part...conceptually... for myself was developing the lnav route calculation algorithm.   Its done in spherical trig and attempts to be 'smart'.   If you have a right turn over a waypoint for example..but decide to make it a left turn, we re-run the algorithm with the new data, considering aircraft performance and draw the new route...and if its doable (i.e. next waypoint not inside the turn radius)...then the plane will follow it (see screenshot below).   This is an ongoing 'difficult' problem though and we still have several issues to solve...but I think the fact that the FMS route calculations, both lnav and vnav...being the last thing we have to tackle pretty much sums up that it's one difficult challenge.

 

TomK

 

 

 

 

 

Next time somebody posts " why is it not out yet" I think I will refer them to this post. Another example of what sets this product apart from anything we have seen for x-plane or quite possibly any sim.  

[meshboy]

Next time somebody posts " why is it not out yet" I think I will refer them to this post. Another example of what sets this product apart from anything we have seen for x-plane or quite possibly any sim.  

+1

[Emalice]

So, why is it not out yet ?

 

E.

[tkyler]

The moon is in retrograde....we don't work when the moon is in retrograde.....or on 2nd Saturdays of odd months or if the Saturday falls on a Tuesday...but we'll get there.

 

TomK

Edited August 19, 2013 by tkyler

[Cameron]

So, why is it not out yet ?

E.

Because it's not ready. That's generally not rocket science.

I'm sure these guys will update when they're ready to.

[Emalice]

Because it's not ready. That's generally not rocket science.

I'm sure these guys will update when they're ready to.

 

Oh, Cameron, come on... Don't tell me you didn't read the two posts preceding mine ??? (mike10 and meshboy)

 

By the humourous tone of Tom's reply, I can tell he did :-)

Edited August 20, 2013 by Emalice

[tkyler]

think its been a long week for Cam

[Emalice]

think its been a long week for Cam

 

Gee, and it's only Monday... Poor guy. He has my unconditional admiration.

Edited August 20, 2013 by Emalice

[Cameron]

LOL...damn.

Party on.

[pryoski]

I assume it can get a wee bit taxing juggling user perceptions and 'demands' (that are often unrealistic ... not to mention sometimes down right rude)! 

 

Hats off to X-Aviation et-al!

[tkyler]

As for a bona-fide report....We are most definitely working on it, doing small 3D bits and details, texturing the other parts of the cockpit, the gallies, specular map work, etc...doing mechanisms on the flaps and gear...small areas you don't normally see in screenshots.  We expect to wrap up the 3D fairly soon and then will turn our focus to unfinished programming tasks, gui and documentation to round it all out.   We're moving along fine.

 

TomK

Edited August 20, 2013 by tkyler