Leaderboard

Definitely. We'll try. No promises. We really want to finish it as soon as possible, and the bug list is getting shorter by the day.

Finishing up the night lighting

yea..it's been debated endlessly but its a matter of perspective IMO. Take a car rolling backwards slowly next to another car. For an instant, a person questions whether he/she is rolling back or the other vehicle is moving forward...and for that instant, you don't know and have to look a little futher to make a final determination. Some folks would say the car is moving back, others would say the adjacent car is moving forward. The whole "perception" of too much torque is attributable to multiple factors and each person has a different perception of what the cause is (I know I'm resolute on my conclusions) and my whole point during the forum conversations was that the torque reaction is not the mathematical problem...but rather the lack of other factors fidelity that put torque in the spotlight. BUT.....of all factors, adjusting a torque effect in sim would be the easiest solution to compensate for other algorithmic limitations no doubt. So all this time, I just don't like the words "torque is wrong" or "torque is broke" or "fix the torque". Torque is one of the easiest and most fundamental quantities to calculate. Its right, but is the final motion of the aircraft "realistic" is the "effect" realistic? Definitely not always as Larry can attest with his experience......should torque be "tunable to compensate"? yea...I think so. Desktop simulation is a compromise in many areas and I like that fact that folks can fine tune things. It just so happens I prefer not to tune the torque, at least not on the Moo I'd tune it down on some other aircraft though, but I'd never say the torque was implemented wrong in x-plane. TomK

Hi jcomm. I do not subscribe to Dan's 'fix',...there is a reason BenS cautioned him and I would not make any recommendations or expend any effort to alter the torque in the MU2 as I've flown the darn thing and it simply has a ridiculously strong roll tendency; however, I fully understand the desire for users tweaking to their comfort level though, after all, it is your personal enjoyment you are seeking, but folks are on their own on this one. The torque in x-plane is fine, its real, and accurate and mathematically I can demonstrate it. What is not real and accurate though are a whole host of other factors that exacerbate the perception of the effect though so I can easily understand why some folks would want to "turn it down" to compensate....its just happens to be one of those areas, cognitively, that I find accurate and acceptable and therefore am not the one to expend time to investigate the 'fix' or the implementation. Do post any results you find though...I'm sure other folks are definitely interested. Certainly swapping one of the prop rotation directions is the fastest way to lose the MU2 roll...but perhaps you're only seeking to minimize it a bit. If you can't get it to work though.....then there is another tweak you can do and ironically, its what we do in the real MU2. Use aileron trim TomK

V9 still looks good...

Here is an early look at SkyMAXX Pro: Enjoy... John

I agree Tom, And, I can't forget how other aspects are so much more detailed in terms of simulation in X-Plane. It's nice to see things like the propwash being calculated ( only yesterday by Austin's suggestion did I enable it in the Data output in order to better tune a prop aircraft using one of the parameters that asks for cruise speed + 1/2 propwash), the control surfaces moving with the unstable air around them, even the effects of the asymmetric hit of different aircraft surfaces by the spiraling slipstream etc..., the myriad of hypothesis we have to edit the airfoils using Airfoil Maker, etc... It certainly is a different approach altogether, and the fact that I'd like to see some aspects done better doesn't mean I can't recognize the complexity and quality of the sim, as you know :-) Yesterday I got yet another aircraft into my X-Plane 10 hangar - the X-Aviation C400 was my latest acquisition, and I really like this model!

Then please ignore (as if I need to tell you that ) our request, and concentrate on pushing out the door this piece of work (preferably before my birthday next sep 11th). As soon as it is out, there will be lots of screenshots and videos by the happy customers flooding the web for undecided customers to see. I know that I will purchase my copy even blind folded based on the impeccable reputation of everyone involved in the project and what I have seen so far.

I know a video would delay things.. but could we perhaps, please, get a screenshot of the cockpit with the avionics switched on? I'd like to see what the panels look like in the 3D cockpit. I remember being very impressed with the detail in the one you guys posted a few months back, I'm assuming it's all nice and polished and put-together now

Ok, just bought it and the first flight was very rewarding! I am enjoying this airplane, and the G1000, not being exaustively modeled, appears very complete... Now the Manual.... Again, thank you for your oppinions!

Here is a nice render i got today when I was playing around in blender And here is another render showing how i got the lighting to look the way that it does also I should probably mention that there is a VERY good chance that this project will be becoming open source soon do to the fact that currently I barely put in 3 hours of work in a month on the B-29 and at this rate it will never be finished.

Flying the xpfr.org's DR400-140B in a modified livery near my home town:

how about this one:

A pilot helps his mate get over his fear of flying...