The B737 Classic Project

[FloB]

What's the idea behind the different spaces between the gates? What are they related to? Obviously they do not match the ratio of the flaps settings.

 

Flo

[Litjan]

What's the idea behind the different spaces between the gates? What are they related to? Obviously they do not match the ratio of the flaps settings.

 

Flo

 

You mean why there are gates at 1 and 15?

[FloB]

Well, no (but add it to the list

What I meant was, why are the distances between flap positions different. Long distance between 1 and 2, 5 and 10...short distance between 2 and 5, 10 and 15...

 

Is it a random pattern that will (nonetheless) allow a pilot to determine the current (or next) flap position just by moving the lever to the next position?

 

Flo

[Litjan]

I have actually no idea why the distances are so different. I am sure there is a reason, but it´s probably technical. I always looked at the handle when setting flaps, and only set them wrong (2 instead of 5) once in my 10 years of flying the 737.

 

The gates at 1 and 15 are there to prevent inadvertent retraction of flaps too far in a go-around situation. During a normal approach (flaps 30 or 40) the go-around command is "go-around, flaps 15" and the pilot monitoring immediately raises the flaps to 15. The gate will stop him from raising them too far by accident, because you have to set the lever down into the 15 notch before you can lift it out and further up again.

 

The same principle applies to the single-engine go-around, where your approach will be with flaps 15, then on the go-around you will raise the flaps to 1.

 

Jan

[Tom Knudsen]

Mother of all X-plane aircrafts for sure, damn shame it isn't the NG version. But hey finally a 737 that does not look like crap, such as

some freeware that will remain nameless.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

[meshboy]

If the flap lever is this detailed as the video, one can image how the rest of the plane is!!!!!! Jesus-H-Christ, talk about settting the bar at a new level.

For me, one other thing that is most impressive is the dimming in lights on the glareshield announciators etc when using standby-power / backup battery as showned in the Electrics Demo 2 Video.

[tkyler]

damn shame it isn't the NG version

 

Why is that Tom?    don't take that the wrong way at all.....Consider it a marketing question...is the NG just "cooler" with the electronic displays?  winglets?  HUD?  I'm curious what exactly it is about the NG that folks like.   I myself like the NG's winglets and some of the VNAV info you get with the NG's EFIS system.....the cockpit is a bit "cleaner" looking too with some of the trim.....but the Classic has grown on me with its combo EFIS and steam gauges...more than I thought it would anyhow.

 

TK

[sqrt(-1)]

.....but the Classic has grown on me with its combo EFIS and steam gauges...

 

I love the steam gauges!  Classic all the way!

[KAPTEJNLN]

well i like the new avionic but i have to admit the evenig flight whit the gauges that ligh up it looks so nice. but im also a big fan of the 800 winglets version. not for v-nav as i use it some times but in general also like to manualy adjust to get a bit more work :-) 

[RojanTrojan]

On the subject of 'classic', I do miss the classic sound of the JT8D engines on the 100 & 200 variants. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52lyfGJDwxI

 

Such a beautiful 'whine'!

 

Rhydian

[Tom Knudsen]

Out with the old, in with the new is my philosophy.

I have spent the past 9 years of my life studying the bird so for me it is quite easy to say. Exept the upgraded cockpit, the new cabin, new engines, winglets, longer space between the gears and of course more aerodynamic wings. This means higher cruizaltitude, higher cruizspeeds and lower fuel consuption. In fact the only thing that is in any reference to the classic series is the fuselarge.

The the upgraded cockpit, just a pure sight for sore eyes, 6 mdfs that can show different or even combinations of parameters and at the same time function as backup to eachother, genious right.

And what about the CFM56-7 or even the new improved 7BE versions with 40% less NOx release. Note the disregard for the vibrations issue at lower rpm.

This is just small keyitems on why i love the 737NG.

At this point it is important to say that i do love the classic to, but more in a past sense feelings of nostalgia. I can still remember Braathens S.A.F.E was the launch customer for the 400 and 500 back in 83. But today it is just 16 planes left flying with Norwegian and SAS (my favorite and national companies) colors. Norwegian has 10 737-300s that are now on their way out. SAS has 1 400 and I believe 5 500s still in active duty.

So to summen up it all. i welcome the IXEG 737 with open arms due to the fact that this will be a fully working 737 for

X-Plane 10, and due to the fact that no one seems to want to make an NG series yet, purhaps will see a converted PMDG.

Anyway, i cannot express enough how much I look forward to the upcoming 737 MAX series that will be put into

Production in 2017 , maybe someone make that one for XP?

PS

Who does not love doing a CAT3 zero visibility on the HUD display

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

[clavel9]

There's no shortage of very modern airliners available or in development for X-Plane and while hardly "old", the addition of a "classic" 737 is welcome for that reason alone. Even more poorly represented are earlier airliners like the 707 family: the recent appearance of FJS's 727 is hugely welcome in that respect and I'll welcome Guy's Comet with open arms. My dream aircraft would be a VC10.

 

I'm sure a MAX will be developed at some stage although there's not much point until the real aircraft finishes its test programme and there's data available on real world performance and handling. Not as a payware project anyway.

 

In varietate voluptas.

[Simmo W]

STEAMGAUGES RULZ

[Litjan]

Out with the old, in with the new is my philosophy.

I have spent the past 9 years of my life studying the bird so for me it is quite easy to say. Exept the upgraded cockpit, the new cabin, new engines, winglets, longer space between the gears and of course more aerodynamic wings. This means higher cruizaltitude, higher cruizspeeds and lower fuel consuption. In fact the only thing that is in any reference to the classic series is the fuselarge.

The the upgraded cockpit, just a pure sight for sore eyes, 6 mdfs that can show different or even combinations of parameters and at the same time function as backup to eachother, genious right.

And what about the CFM56-7 or even the new improved 7BE versions with 40% less NOx release. Note the disregard for the vibrations issue at lower rpm.

This is just small keyitems on why i love the 737NG.

At this point it is important to say that i do love the classic to, but more in a past sense feelings of nostalgia. I can still remember Braathens S.A.F.E was the launch customer for the 400 and 500 back in 83. But today it is just 16 planes left flying with Norwegian and SAS (my favorite and national companies) colors. Norwegian has 10 737-300s that are now on their way out. SAS has 1 400 and I believe 5 500s still in active duty.

So to summen up it all. i welcome the IXEG 737 with open arms due to the fact that this will be a fully working 737 for

X-Plane 10, and due to the fact that no one seems to want to make an NG series yet, purhaps will see a converted PMDG.

Anyway, i cannot express enough how much I look forward to the upcoming 737 MAX series that will be put into

Production in 2017 , maybe someone make that one for XP?

PS

Who does not love doing a CAT3 zero visibility on the HUD display

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

 

I am with you in welcoming new technology. I think the NG is a great aircraft, and the MAX will be even better. Thats just the way advancement in technology goes.

 

For us the choice of simulating the "classic" came about with the availability of data for it, and the "iconic" nature of this aircraft. Plus the cool hybrid cockpit that seems to combine the best of two worlds (can´t beat big round mechanical airspeed indicators and altimeters for readability, even if you install a 50" plasma screen!).

 

And don´t forget that in the last two years while we were developing this bird the real classics use was declining, at least with the major airlines. But I am sure the classics will keep flying in some parts of the world for many years to come.

 

As an airline, the desire to operate new aircraft is paramount - less fuel and operating costs. As a simulation pilot you don´t have to worry about that (hmm, do I sense a great business model here?), so the option of operating newer or older aircraft is a matter of choice.

 

I personally think that flying older or even vintage aircraft is a great way to experience different stages in aviation history, and I think that operating an older aircraft can be far more interesting than just watching a modern aircraft go through it´s automation steps.

 

Jan

[Nils]

I have a pet theory that we are approaching a limit to how much of a modern airliner we can realistically model on a 'study sim' level with justifiable efforts and that in the future, we will mostly be flying ridiculously detailed models of old aircraft. This is because the aircraft industry is quickly closing the gap (or already closed it) between the amount of software development that goes into the real aircraft versus the simulator models provided for entertainment. Coding up a model of the 733 systems (like we are in IXEG) or even the NG is one thing because the real aircrafts are still very much based on 1980-1990's hardware and computing power (think 386 CPU's...) and this severly limits the range of functionality. And this still takes years and years! If you look at something like the Gulfstream PlaneView cockpit or, I assume, the latest gen Boeings and Airbuses, you have probably 10-50 times the software functionality to reproduce if you want a near-complete simulation. And if you manage to code it all, I doubt that our Macs and PCs are equipped to run the simulated cockpit software in parallell with X-Plane at acceptable framerate since the real aircraft probably has similar computing power to run the avionics software ONLY.

 

I may be underestimating the capability of tomorrows simulator modellers a bit but I still think those of us who are into 'classics' with steam gauge or CRT/steam combo avionics are going to be way more satisfied in the future than those who crave latest gen cockpits. Now back to topic.

Edited October 4, 2013 by Nils

[frankbyte]

So to summen up it all. i welcome the IXEG 737 with open arms due to the fact that this will be a fully working 737 for

X-Plane 10, and due to the fact that no one seems to want to make an NG series yet, purhaps will see a converted PMDG.

I like the 737-NG as well very much but it looks like good aircrafts are more for nostalgy-people (B727, Saab340, soon 733 and 757...). Whatever the 733 is very nice too. There is in fact the x737 who will soon be out with a 3d-cockpit, even it isn't of course of same quality as this one. But as a freeware i am sure the next version of the x737 will be very good.

 

And as Jan said, i think that the B733 is a very good combination of both worlds: the old and the modern one. So i am sure it will be very interesting to handle & fly. In the same category of old/modern i would also see the A310 for example (if someone is interested in doing it.. ).

Edited October 4, 2013 by frankbyte

[Tom Knudsen]

 

And don´t forget that in the last two years while we were developing this bird the real classics use was declining, at least with the major airlines. But I am sure the classics will keep flying in some parts of the world for many years to come.

 

Couldn't agree more, lets hope we can fly the IXEG 737 for a long time too..

 

There comes to no supprise to anyone that there are many excellent aircrafts out there including one of my favorites (CRJ200, ATR 72-500, Airbus A320NEO and of course the tripple 777 from Ramzess). As a 3D designer I tend to favorise airplanes that are genuine well made, where estetics shows the developers effort. To that i must say, the IXEG as far as I have seen are looking extreemly beautiful.

 

 

There is in fact the x737 who will soon be out with a 3d-cockpit, even it isn't of course of same quality as this one. But as a freeware i am sure the next version of the x737 will be very good.

 

I doubt it! What version is it now, 4.2 or something and they have not managed to correct the fuselarge   I have seen pictures of the 3d cockpit and it sure looks good so it may have a future as a freeware!

 

Anyway, I may come out as non-appreciated or even harsh in my critic and statements, but I am a true fan and will allways aim for more realism and spot on dedication to the community.

That said, I do want to send a thanks to all developers freeware and payware for making the slightest effort in making any type of aircraft and scenery to X-Plane.

 

You all have my gratitude for sure!

[RojanTrojan]

I have a pet theory that we are approaching a limit to how much of a modern airliner we can realistically model on a 'study sim' level with justifiable efforts and that in the future, we will mostly be flying ridiculously detailed models of old aircraft. This is because the aircraft industry is quickly closing the gap (or already closed it) between the amount of software development that goes into the real aircraft versus the simulator models provided for entertainment. Coding up a model of the 733 systems (like we are in IXEG) or even the NG is one thing because the real aircrafts are still very much based on 1980-1990's hardware and computing power (think 386 CPU's...) and this severly limits the range of functionality. And this still takes years and years! If you look at something like the Gulfstream PlaneView cockpit or, I assume, the latest gen Boeings and Airbuses, you have probably 10-50 times the software functionality to reproduce if you want a near-complete simulation. And if you manage to code it all, I doubt that our Macs and PCs are equipped to run the simulated cockpit software in parallell with X-Plane at acceptable framerate since the real aircraft probably has similar computing power to run the avionics software ONLY.

 

I may be underestimating the capability of tomorrows simulator modellers a bit but I still think those of us who are into 'classics' with steam gauge or CRT/steam combo avionics are going to be way more satisfied in the future than those who crave latest gen cockpits. Now back to topic.

 

Gosh I never thought about that. That's a very good point.

 

Rhydian

[Liner45]

in what stage are you in the development process

[tkyler]

We cannot really put a label on it that would mean anything.  The 3D is nearing completion and the sounds are just amazing.  it quite feels the most immersive thing I've ever experienced on the desktop in a flight simulator.   I honestly believe this is something special.   There are some unknowns that keep us from putting a label on the stage.  I don't think we'll make it this year, we'll be close then, but not done.  I think by years end though the product will be visually complete and look like a finished product and we will be in the last phase of tidying up the FMS system, unsure of how long that will take.  Once that is done, we'll enter beta testing....but with the grand-daddy of all beta testers on our team, I don't think that might be terribly long.  He beta-tests as we go.  That's the best I have.  We are closing up some holes in the work though in preparation for Jan to do some more movies showing the progress.  I'd like to see that in the next few weeks.  I'd say we're in the final phases for sure...but the final phase tends to be an unknown time-wise.

 

TomK

[sqrt(-1)]

I'd say we're in the final phases for sure...but the final phase tends to be an unknown time-wise.

 

 

As with any significant project, one may easily spend 80% of their time completing the last 20% of it.

[Tom Knudsen]

it quite feels the most immersive thing I've ever experienced on the desktop in a flight simulator. I honestly believe this is something special.

TomK

And I do believe you, i'm druling like an old geezer

PS, you are aware the you will do bugfixing for months purhaps years after release anyway Tom? First it is the child like symptoms, then childsickness, then it grows and only gets sick once a while

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

[Nicola_M]

And I do believe you, i'm druling like an old geezer

PS, you are aware the you will do bugfixing for months purhaps years after release anyway Tom?

 

That is soooo right.  The more complicated the acf, the bigger the bugfile list.  Visions of Morten & crew busy swatting before release....

[tkyler]

The more complicated the acf, the bigger the bugfile list.

 

mabye.....but catching bugs "pre-customer" is something we specialize in     I very much try to do things most customers won't even try....ever and put my code through a pretty hard wringer.   We do expect hardware related bugs, possibly sound or graphics related....usability bugs,  but as far as aircraft complexity or systems bugs....of course we will get a few, but not as many as folks my think IMO.   Jan knows how to break stuff like nobody I've ever seen. 

 

TomK

[Tom Knudsen]

The more complicated the acf, the bigger the bugfile list.

mabye.....but catching bugs "pre-customer" is something we specialize in I very much try to do things most customers won't even try....ever and put my code through a pretty hard wringer. We do expect hardware related bugs, possibly sound or graphics related....usability bugs, but as far as aircraft complexity or systems bugs....of course we will get a few, but not as many as folks my think IMO. Jan knows how to break stuff like nobody I've ever seen.

TomK

As I told Morten, I would easly do my best to find them

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free