Leaderboard

Hi gentlemen, I´m not sure, from where the strong wind against us (Navigraph) is coming from and I don´t know Mr. Cameron but here a few words from our side (Navigraph): I have nothing found in my personal mailbox about IXEG or X-Aviation. We are currently looking in the official Navigraph mailbox (https://www.navigraph.com/ContactInformation.aspx), if we have overseen something (which can be happened - for sure, we are humans too). Further, I haven´t found anything here in my mailbox of the forum. We can´t have our eyes everywhere to look for, which developer wants to use which format for which platform. Yesterday, a Navigraph customer had wrote us a PM in our forum and pointed us to this addon (thank you very much for that) - so the communication is possible, if wanted. This posting isn´t very objective and therefore here a list of our (Navigraph) addons, which we can provide & where we have the fully support from the developer: Aerosoft Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321Aerosoft Airbus X Extended v1.10 (and below)Aerosoft Airbus X Extended v1.15 (and above)aeroSystem 737 AvionicsAirSimmerAirSimTech / ASTAirTrack*AivlaSoft EFBAviograsf A340Blackbox Simulation (all products)Captain Sim 757/767/777Carenado (all products)CPS - Concorde Performance SystemDispatch Planner XDreamfleet & Eurowings ProfEADT KLN 90BEaglesoftEFASS - Electronic Flight AssistantFeelthere Embraer Regional Jets v2/Embraer E-Jets v2Flight1 ATR72Flight1 Aviation Technologies G1000 StudentFlight1 Aviation Technologies G1000 Student ProFlight1 BN2 IslanderFlight1 Cheyenne/Fokker/Mustang/Super 80 Professional/C182T/King Air B200Flightsim Commander 9.5.1 (and above)FlightSim SolutionsFS InstructorFS Instructor Panel 200XFSBuild 2.xFSiPanelFS-Navigator 4.xFSTrampFsXPand - FlywareGlobal Air Traffic ControliFLY 737NG 3.2 (and above)iFLY 747-400 2.0 (and above)iFMSIntegrated Simavionics (ISG)JARDesign A320neoJARDesign A330Jeehell A320 FMGSJet45 FMS - FlightDeckSoftJRollon Planes CRJ200JustFlight DC-8 JetlinerLevelD 767Majestic Dash8-Q400MilVizOnlineSim.org SFC YARCOpusFSIPFPX Professional Flight Planner XPMDG (all products)Pointsoft Pro ATC XProject Magenta Airbus/Boeing/RJ-Type Glass Cockpit, GA IFR PanelProject Magenta Airbus/Boeing-Type FMCProject Magenta General Aviation Glass CockpitProject Magenta Instructor StationProject Magenta QuickMap/Moving MapProsim 737PSS Airbus/Boeing/DashQualityWings (all addons)Sim-Avionics - Flightdeck AvionicsSimBriefSimcheck A300B4SimLauncherXSSG Boeing 748i FMCTOPCATTuneVNAV Descent Pro3Universal FMC (UFMC)vasFMC Flight ManagementWilco A320 PIC for FS2002Wilco CRJ Next GenerationWilco/Feelthere 737/777, Legacy, Airbus SeriesWilco/Feelthere CRJWorld Traffic 2.0 (and above)x737FMCX-FMC 2.5 (and above)X-Plane 10.30 (and above)X-Plane GNS430, 777 Worldliner (Ext/Prof), Flightfactor B757 Professional, VMAX B767, X-Crafts Embraer E-175 Ok, now back to the "issues" - again, I don´t know which format IXEG exactly use but it must me an existing one (because you have compared Aerosoft with Navigraph). Someone wrote here, that it exists a syntax difference between Aerosoft and Navigraph. For sure, because Navigraph uses Jeppesen as source and Aerosoft Lido. Jeppesen is a standard database - Lido codes the lines my yourself - but and that´s important to know: The result should be the same and several addons show this - look at the GNS430, look at the 777 Worldliner and there are several other addons (not only in the X-Plane world) - this addons can handle both provider without any issues. All procedures are there - no procedures are missing from the FMS as the poster here mentioned. So, it´s possible to make the addons compatible with both addons ... As I wrote, the coding is different yes but the result should be the same - just as an example: EDDF SID ANEK1D Jeppesen coding: SID,ANEK1D,07C,4CA,0,68.0,2,800,0,0,0,0,0,0DF,DF152,50.070553,8.708008,0, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1DF,DF150,50.010247,8.751739,2, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,1,220,0,0,0SID,ANEK1D,07R,4CA,0,68.0,2,800,0,0,0,0,0,0DF,DF152,50.070553,8.708008,0, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1DF,DF150,50.010247,8.751739,2, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,1,220,0,0,0SID,ANEK1D,ALL,5IF,DF150,50.010247,8.751739, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,1,220,0,0,0TF,DF157,49.791100,8.672295,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0TF,ANEKI,49.317272,8.480428,0, ,0.0,0.0,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0Here the LIDO coding: SID,ANEK1D,07C,4FA,RW07C,50.03261667,8.53463056,0,FFM,251.2,4.1,68,2,800,0,0,0,0,0,0DF,DF152,50.07055278,8.70800833,0, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1DF,DF150,50.01024722,8.75173889,0, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,1,220,0,0,0TF,DF157,49.79110000,8.67229444,0, ,0.0,0.0,0,0.00,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0TF,ANEKI,49.31727222,8.48042778,0, ,0.0,0.0,0,0.00,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0SID,ANEK1D,07R,4FA,RW07R,50.02754167,8.53417500,0,FFM,247.4,4.3,68,2,800,0,0,0,0,0,0DF,DF152,50.07055278,8.70800833,0, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1DF,DF150,50.01024722,8.75173889,0, ,0.0,0.0,0,0,0,1,220,0,0,0TF,DF157,49.79110000,8.67229444,0, ,0.0,0.0,0,0.00,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0TF,ANEKI,49.31727222,8.48042778,0, ,0.0,0.0,0,0.00,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0You see one and the same procedure, two different codings. Now whats the different between Jeppesen and Lido: Lido declare the SID as Runway "only" transitions (that´s the letter "4" in the SID line).Jeppesen split the SID into a runway transition (4) and a common part (5)This is a major difference between both provider. EDDF is only a simple example, but there are more complex example, where you have a runway-transition, common-part and enroute-transition. The result should be the same, because when I select ANEK1D for 07C, the FMS should merge the runway-transition with the common-part (+ when existing and selected the enroute part). Next difference is the FA and CA terminal path in the first lines Lido coded this as fix to an altitude (means from the RWxxx to altitude)Jeppesen coded this as course to an altitude (means from the current position to an altitude)The result, should be the same - or not? Again, I have looked for a very simple example, there are a lot of procedures, which are more complex like this one. All in all, I don´t see any reason, why an addon can´t handle different sources, when the FMS is developed clean and correct, according the specifications. A really good example is the "standard" GNS430 dataset, which will be used on all platforms. The GNS430 dataset is in real the Fokker/Cheyenne dataset and this dataset exists since many years. Currently, we have no reports about any issues with this dataset, so it would be helpful (if issues exist), to report this issues, that we can fix it. Thank you very much - again, we are ready for all, when something is wrong, let us know please. We will try to contact you outside this forum, to see how we can help and how we can provide you ... but please stop the foreclosure, there is no reason to do this.

Norway Pro scenery has been released recently (freeware, go grab it!) and so i thought it'll be good opportunity to dust off the excellent Reality Enhancement Pack for C210 Centurion while exploring. Started off at Skagen [ENSK] and did a short hop to Narvik [ENNK] just to get a glimpse of the scenery and refresh my skills flying REP Cessna (with manual at hand). Haven't seen much of the Norway Pro scenery on this route i decided to make 180 on the runway and head for Bodø [ENBO]. Casual VFR at 5500 feet using Google Maps + AIP Norway (i rarely do VFR in the sim) Unbelievable how easy this REP/Carenado masterpiece trims out. I did not touch the autopilot once during 2hr+ flight. Once i got to Bodø i realized landing this thing on a 2800m long runway is not best of what Norway has to offer. Why not head further south to a mysteriously named airport of Mo i Rana [ENRA] ? After having a quick look at Mo i Rana charts i started tracking inbound Strømmen [sTM, 345 kHz] NDB. Surprisingly i did not kill the engine yet. Nor did i destroy flaps, gear or anything else. The LOC-B approach looks very tempting. Why not switch IFR and see if i can handfly non-RNAV approach today? Soon enough i was climbing to Minimum Sector Altitude (6300 feet - when arriving from the north sector). Still tracking Strømmen NDB as it is our Initial Approach Fix (IAF). The closer i got to Strømmen, the more turbulent air i had to fight. Focused entirely on the instruments i was able to maintain 6300 feet +/- 50 feet all the time, but i was out of time to do a full approach briefing. Turning right on outbound leg after passing Strømmen. Descending 5000 feet according to procedure. Established on the localizer inbound. Strømmen NDB is being used once again, this time as Intermediate Fix (IF). Next, Final Approach Fix (FAF) is 6.6 nm DME RA at 3000 feet. Reaching Minimum Descend Altitude of 1310 feet. The funny thing is you won't be able to see the airport until reaching Missed Approach Point (MAPt) - the DME station itself. Then the airport becomes barely visible on your 9 o'clock (!!!). If you wonder why i didn't take any shots on short final, grab Norway Pro + UHD Mesh Scandinavia and try shooting approach into Mo i Rana yourself

Hi, best wishes for a happy new year. We are pleased to inform you that we have released on X-Plane.org the "Antarctica4XPlane" and dozens of Research Base Station sceneries. This first part covers substantially the Antarctic Peninsula from the South Orkney Islands down to -73 ° S and many other areas will follow: those interested can download it for free starting from our website (we recommend to follow our website to stay up to date on the release of the mesh and sceneries of the Bases). https://maps2xplane.wordpress.com We began issuing the first Bases you can find Marambio here: http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=29744and Rothera here: http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?app=downloads&showfile=29746You can always find an updated information on the Bases of research carried out or are being realized from our website: https://maps2xplane.wordpress.com/our-sceneries/You can find SS here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/1rd7ggyv2h9oslo/AACcVrTiaqCUkzAGyo-jV-oHa?dl=0 Good flights. Matthias, Nino and Paolo

1. It's not my product. I'm taking time out to help you. 2. We are all people here. Yelling at us will NOT get you a quicker response. 3. You waited for DAYS? So you sent 3 to 4 support requests within a few days? You are not the only customer at X-Aviation. All customers are treated fairly, and in order of support requested. There is no cutting in line and no special treatment. 4. If you want to contact your bank to put a hold on funds, that's your business. Not ours. 5. The only bull crap that has been put out is your demands to be seen to. Demanding things and throwing out aggressive attitudes will get you nowhere. I stand by my suggestion. Submit a support ticket and be patient. Getting agitated will not make things any easier for you.

Hi YD . no to transfer hyd fluid from A to B. We discussed and tabled it to "possible after V1.0". Its a super special technique almost never used (but the speed brake pump trick is a really cool thing we'd like to simulate eventually). We'll see after the fact. (pressure drops with rapid control input IS simulated)...of course this would be tough in reality....but not like joysticks have feedback pressure. . Yes to flap transit speeds affected by hyd pressure (flow rate actually)....and reversers too (shown in one of Jans videos), no to air pressure effects (but now that you mention it, probably easily implemented . Yes to auto-slat extension (and retraction) in high-alpha regime . Yes to different behavior during reversion (controls get sluggish as best we can with a sim) . Unsure on AP autoland...Jan/Nils to answer. . no on abuse simulation for V1.0. We do not intend to abandon development after release and anticipate some type of failure / MTBF / abuse model after the fact. As with many things, time is the great enemy. Once we are rolling, then it is a point of pride to get these more advanced systems working properly. Our generator heating for example...its simple at the moment, but will eventually take into account proper heat transfer with conduction / convection and Q (internal heat generation)....BUT we really do have to cater to the 99% percentile first -tkyler

Hi there, Please contact me over PM if you're truly willing to discuss. This issue of non-response from your side sadly goes back all the way to 2010 for me when the CRJ first came out and it took forever to get responses. We finally got such a response after plenty of panic and non responded to emails back then towards the end of the project. Sadly, the same has happened with this project not only for me, but IXEG attempting to contact you. It's highly frustrating to say the least. This will be a good stopping place for this topic for people to have context. No more debate. The chips will fall where they may depending on your cooperation from this point forward, so I'm locking this topic.

Absolutely correct. And this override is simulated with our 737. No effect on AP until you pass the control-deflection threshhold, then the AP reverts to CWS mode (in the axis that was moved), together with the flashing yellow AP P/RST warning light. Thereafter yoke deflection will affect the CWS target value (i.e. fly the plane with an attitude-hold mode). Jan

Thanks for the continued updates. It's very much appreciated for those of us that are waiting with anticipation.

Taking a break, here are some shots of the McNamara terminal in progress. Hope you like!

It doesn't seem to be saying much at all, unfortunately (or maybe your silence on the answering of the question signifies it does say something ). But, all in all I'll put it another way... For $0.77 per WEEK in your currency ($0.54 for Americans) for an entire year, that's some cheap entertainment value. Go to a nice dinner and you've already spent more. Fill up your gas tank and you've spent more. Take your significant other to the movies twice a year and you've spent the same with no popcorn purchase. You're acting like a small boat trying to make big waves right now. It's not really worth the stress, Pete. Best of all, you can (as you have so awesomely pointed out) utilize Aerosoft data on all of your other add-ons! At that point it'll be up to you to decide to keep one, both, or none of these subscription services. In the end, you will either buy the 737 or you won't, and you'll use it as it was designed and agreed to be used should you choose to purchase it. If 77 cents per week (which is not even mandatory, by the way) is your breaking point to say "I'm sticking my foot in cement and not taking it out" then I respect that and wish you all the best going forward. We're focused on getting this product out. Navigraph's lack of reply is not going to stop us. Sorry.

We will try to also make Navigraph data compatible with the IXEG 737, just like Cameron said. If we can´t get this into version 1.0 you have two options: a.) Fly the 737 with the enclosed database and get an extra paper route to get Aerosoft nav-data when you feel the original database is too outdated for you. b.) Don´t fly the 737 at all. No one likes to spend money again for something they feel they have already bought. But I - for example - have one and the same movie on VHS, DVD and now blue-ray. Same exact show on every single one. Hmm. Why? Because I can´t watch the VHS tape on my current hardware, which I think is superior to my old tape player. See the analogy? Have a fantastic day, Jan

View on the eastern Spanish coastline after departure from Valencia Sunset over France at FL360 End of the day at Belgrade, Serbia Today's route: LEVC-EHAM-LOWS-LYBE

This is getting a bit ahead, but I can answer anyhow: 1. We don't believe in selling liveries. This is, in my opinion, deceptive and unfair to the customer. 2. A paintkit will be provided.

Maybe it would be an option (at least for a future update) to use an already existing format, so the user can freely choose the source for updates. There are some payware addons out there that use an existing format for their FMCs. For example the Leonardo MD-80 uses PMDG data, others use the Aerosoft Airbus format. You can get a charts-only subscription from Navigraph. It's €65,33 for the first year and €59,38 for a renewal.

And you just wasted 20 seconds of all of our time. Read the forums and then you will find out the release date (which doesn't exist anymore)

no no go ,,,,,,,,,,,,, i tryed that it your guyes serve,,ot my damn pc im pissed off i payed 60$ for this stuff,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,