The B737 Classic Project

[Morten]

Javier,

 

Making assumptions about the flightmodel of an aircraft you havnt even tried by looking at another one you know very little about in a sim

you also know little about is - well - very little scientific to put it that way .

 

- Have you verified and documented that the 727 has the correct spring constants which is the key factor here (not inertia)?

I don't know if it has, - but I can guarantee you that ours does.

 

- That you can't make tight turns in XP is a well documented groundmodel flaw in XP that I documented years ago.

Therefore we have made our own friction model which is much more accurate

 

If you are interested in the topic, it can be found here http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=31137&hl=%2Bground+%2Bmodel

 

M

Edited April 2, 2014 by Morten IXEG

[jettojig]

That was an interesting explanation, now I understand exactly why all the heavies I fly are so strongly affected by crosswinds... it's a very annoying 'feature'! Any idea if the folks at Laminar are trying to fix this?

[ktomais]

I noticed from the videos that in order to use the knobs of the autopilot one has to drag with the mouse. That is fine if you have TrackIR or something similar, but very annoying and slow if you're just using the mouse, or would like to remain in a specific view in the 3D cockpit. Is there a different option in place?

Edited April 2, 2014 by ktomais

[jettojig]

I'm pretty sure using Shift-8 doesn't leave the camera constantly moving with the mouse, which works very nicely I've found.

[ktomais]

I'm pretty sure using Shift-8 doesn't leave the camera constantly moving with the mouse, which works very nicely I've found.

 

My main concern is the speed of the adjustment, say to set a course from 033 to 210 left-hand turn, as well as when running out of screen space to have to go back with the cursor to continue the "correction". I've noticed the same thing with other purchased aircraft and it's hopelessly impractical and frustrating for me. Unless I'm doing something wrong and there's a way around it.

Edited April 2, 2014 by ktomais

[jettojig]

Fair enough. I actually think they've got things about right here for my suiting, in some aircraft (eg. JAR's A320) the speed/sensitivity is so high it takes a few adjustments to get it right where you want it, while this seems to be at a comfortable speed to me. I guess it is down to personal preference somewhat.

[Litjan]

My main concern is the speed of the adjustment, say to set a course from 033 to 210 left-hand turn, as well as when running out of screen space to have to go back with the cursor to continue the "correction". I've noticed the same thing with other purchased aircraft and it's hopelessly impractical and frustrating for me. Unless I'm doing something wrong and there's a way around it.

 

Hi,

 

I am not using TrackIR in my videos, and I find it perfectly ok to manipulate the MCP with my mouse. I am using mouse-look, so holding down the right button will move the view with the mouse, when I let it go, the mouse moves the cursor again and its easy to "grab" buttons that way.

 

The sensitivity of the knobs is tuned to the task, so more sensitive for larger selection range (like altitude), smaller for small ones (like VOR frequencies). Turning it one "unit" is fixed to a certain distance in space, so if you really want to finetune you can do so by "zooming in" with the mousewheel, then a certain on-screen-distance translates to a much smaller "distance in virtual space" to give you better resolution. Do the opposite when running out of space - move the viewpoint back, so a certain distance on your screen translates to a bigger distance in the virtual cockpit.

 

There is still some trouble with these grab and drag manipulators at certain strange angles, but we are working on that. On the whole I find this a much more realistic and practical way of adjusting values - escpecially when using a head-tracker, where the view will wobble slightly and move the mouse-cursor off the sensitive spot.

 

Also keep in mind that many knobs in the real airplane can not be turned through the whole range without doing a sommersault in the cockpit, either. Especially the FLT ALT selection knob is notorious for being a PITA to turn through the whole range, many grabs and turns... Usually it stays at typical cruising levels, only in the simulator we like to set it to 3000 or so, so we don´t get bothered by the OFF SCHED DESC so much. Thats when your wrist hurts from twisting that one (in realitiy you also have to push it in while turning...)

 

Jan

Edited April 2, 2014 by Litjan

[Hopkinsstevea]

Jan

Keep up the great work its looks like a fantastic product and I for one appreciate all of your effort

[tkyler]

Especially the FLT ALT selection knob is notorious for being a PITA to turn through the whole range, many grabs and turns

 

 

The interaction we have implemented is very much designed to mimic reality in a cognitive fashion as Jan describes above...it IS a PITA, no shortcuts here.  A real knob, you turn as far as your hands allow, then reset your hand, turn again, over and over and over.  In our sim, you grab-drag, reset, grab-drag, reset, over and over and over again...it is very much the same action to the brain.  There is no magic button in reality for these knobs so we've left it out.   I can guarantee it gets to be 2nd nature in no time...you can see in the videos how fluid Jan is with the controls.   We are interested in presenting what we believe is a more accurate and natural paradigm provided us by modern methods...and we think folks will like it.

Edited April 2, 2014 by tkyler

[ktomais]

Thank you for the clarifications, I'm happy to hear you have thought of the potential issues with this approach and you're taking steps towards it, as well as the variable sensitivities Jan mentioned. I am appreciative of the realism you try to bring, I just wanted to mention this practicality issue as balancing realism and practicality in a Sim can be a difficult task. 

 

In no way I want to sound unappreciative. The project looks magnificent overall, and one obsessing about a detail like this might seem wrong. I just think that "God is in the details" and from your answers it seems that that's the way the team thinks of it too. A community member that is passionate about a project sometimes might go too far, or be overly expressive, but I for one meant it well. Please continue your beautiful work. 

Edited April 2, 2014 by ktomais

[Tom Knudsen]

The interaction we have implemented is very much designed to mimic reality in a cognitive fashion as Jan describes above...it IS a PITA, no shortcuts here. A real knob, you turn as far as your hands allow, then reset your hand, turn again, over and over and over. In our sim, you grab-drag, reset, grab-drag, reset, over and over and over again...it is very much the same action to the brain. There is no magic button in reality for these knobs so we've left it out. I can guarantee it gets to be 2nd nature in no time...you can see in the videos how fluid Jan is with the controls. We are interested in presenting what we believe is a more accurate and natural paradigm provided us by modern methods...and we think folks will like it.

Why not enable scrolling with mousewheel, that is if it not already in place?

[Litjan]

Why not enable scrolling with mousewheel, that is if it not already in place?

 

Afaik that is not possible with X-Plane....yet.

 

Jan

[Tom Knudsen]

Ok thx, too bad

[tkyler]

We have put up a somewhat different kind of video.  This one is a more candid "over the shoulder" look at a developer testing the overall simulation experience during a crosswind landing.   These types of flights are usually performed dozens of times over, each time looking for anything out of place, a light, a sound, a movement or aircraft handling issues that might need to be addressed.  We thought perhaps users might like the honest nature of the video as its not planned out or edited and is therefore a great example of seeing exactly the way the aircraft is operated by normal x-plane users with a regular joystick and mouse.  After a small bit of practice, you can get around the aircraft cockpit very well with little effort.

 

Edited April 8, 2014 by tkyler

[RojanTrojan]

Excellent work! Love that IXEG livery at the end of the video too.

 

Rhydian

[ayarov]

Very nice video! 

 

I have a question. When you do such test like in the video, do you start loaded in the air and land or do you first do the whole start up and take off procedure and then prepare for land? Since you said you are repeating certain situations dozens of times I suppose you have come up with a way to spare yourself needless iterations of systems you have already checked.

 

Keep up the great work. Very much looking forward to seeing this acf released!

[tkyler]

For the most part, we have structured our code to run in such a way that if you start "mid-air", then everything will work; however, there is usually some type of "glitch" because at the instant a aircraft loads, it loads with several default x-plane values and THEN our code begins to run and that tiny little gap between x-plane's code and ours running causes some seconds of hiccups.  It's like if someone were to push you over, you'd take a second to recover and stabilize.  

 

Regarding full start ups...we do not really do that a lot at this stage, we have a mode where we start with everything ready to go.  For a lot of systems stuff, we don't need to be in the air so all the testing is done on the ground.  For flight testing though, it depends on what we're testing as to how far we'll go.

 

For myself, testing some type of landing scenario...like auto-spoilers or such, yea, we just set x-plane to 3 miles out repeatedly....and get the airplane enough under control after loading the scenario to make the landing and test the systems.

 

TomK

[ayarov]

Tom,

 

I am very glad to hear that the option with starting in the air is tested and possible. Thank you for the explanation!

[Morten]

In retro mode

(click on pic for higher res)

 

Edited April 12, 2014 by Morten IXEG

[Peter T.]

Great work on both the exterior and interior! That is some quality texturing you guys have got there! I can't wait!

Is it possible that you guys could you offer two versions please? One is a "Lite" version with minimal systems, and perhaps at a reduced price, and the "professional" variant that includes all the systems you're working on? The reason I'm requesting this is because, unlike other simmers, I spent most of my time enjoying the exterior detail, and I develop sceneries so I don't understand and know how to fly a plane properly. 

Edited April 12, 2014 by Peter T.

[joandreas]

Great work on both the exterior and interior! That is some quality texturing you guys have got there! I can't wait!

Is it possible that you guys could you offer two versions please? One is a "Lite" version with minimal systems, and perhaps at a reduced price, and the "professional" variant that includes all the systems you're working on? The reason I'm requesting this is because, unlike other simmers, I spent most of my time enjoying the exterior detail, and I develop sceneries so I don't understand and know how to fly a plane properly. 

Could have a lite version. or pre release. will be quite popular.

[Darius Alexander]

Could have a lite version. or pre release. will be quite popular.

.

Edited April 12, 2014 by Darius Alexander

[Ben Russell]

If you want a lite version you can choose from either the FREE x737 or the FJS 732.... plenty of options already.

 

My views and opinions do not reflect those of IXEG. Just pointing out the freaking obvious.

 

 

 

 

*Edit: Minor typo. 373 -> 737

Edited April 12, 2014 by Ben Russell

[joandreas]

Well can really explain that in my definition as it is. Not discussing x737 model or aircraft 10-20 year older.

[Morten]

Our main and overall focus is make the aircraft as realistic as possible.

Then release a basic fully functional v1.0 as soon as possible and in a good state so that you all can enjoy it from day one.

 

Then, we will start adding more "gaming" features, consider other variants/options and so on.

 

In many ways we think like the real Boeing does.  There are many good reasons why they don't introduce alot of new

variants of the same aircraft at the same time.  It has to do with quality assurance, production capacity, and so on.

 

M