Leaderboard

So here's a small example of what we're doing and where our time is going. As we chip away on the last part of the FMS, that is the descent phase of the VNAV, we try and capture every scenario and represent it, but then when you begin flight testing as we are now, some sneak by you....like this one that took me half a day to find and fix because I noticed speed and altitude values for this cheeky little waypoint (DF644) didn't match up with common sense...so I knew I was on a bug hunt. Now when you cross the speed restriction altitude during descent and have to level off and slow down, this usually happens between waypoints....so most of the time, as you approach and pass a waypoint, you are either descending at a constant rate and speed, OR you level off and decelerate before the waypoint if a speed restriction is in effect at that waypoint. But what happens if you are decelerating at the speed restriction altitude and you just happen to cross a waypoint at that exact time? The speed at that waypoint (which you can see on the CDU) should reflect that deceleration and whose value should be somewhere south of the previous waypoints speed and somewhere north of the next waypoints speed. Well I just happen to come across such a situation....so lucky for you guys and gals ...as that's one less bug you have to find. -tkyler

I'm removing the inciteful posts here. Please keep it civil and on topic folks.

I would imagine that what's next from the teams perspective is a nice holiday, hopefully with plenty of spending money from sales.

It is Jan modeled in one of the seats. I have to say he's a lot uglier in real life though.

The MCP speed window is blanked whenever VNAV is engaged. The FMC will plan and fly the descent at the speed programmed into the DESCENT page except for legs where there is a speed or altitude restriction, in which case the currently applicable restriction is displayed on the DESCENT page. The pilot can delete any such restrictions if cleared by ATC and he can also enter a desired speed for a specific waypoint on the LEGS page if he knows in advance that a particular speed is required.

The specific aircraft that is modeled has no WAAS or GBAS.

IL-62 somewhere North of Madrid Carenado C90B South of Bella Coola, British Columbia

I asked another developer a few weeks ago about LPV approaches seeing that the plane he develops uses Honeywell Primus in most cases. I was also wondering whether it could be implemented in X-Plane seeing that, as Ben pointed out, GPS data in XPX is highly accurate and basically the plane has to follow the decent path from the chart. It's more of a novelty to be honest and maybe Jan can comment on LPV approaches in real life from a professional point of view?

The FMS will do as its told (through key entry only), so in this case, it will still slow down if you don't make a change. So...If you get a 'free pass' from ATC below the speed restriction altitude, then on the descent page, you simply delete the speed restriction entry per ATC's permission and a new route with new speeds are calculated. EXEC and be on your way speeding below 10000' like a kid in a Ferrari -tkyler

Ok, this may not be hardly linked to IXEG, but may give some ideas for the developers to earn some more money, make the community happier, relieving development of other developers, and finally increasing the quality for the major number of aircrafts for X-Plane. I guess this has already crossed IXEG:s mind, but I want to create a discussion of this. I recently scanned through the aircraft development section in this forum, and it came to my mind, as there are so many developers fighting to get their aircrafts released, and users are complaining about bad FMS systems and not able to flying RNAV approaches and so on. Why reinvent the wheel? Why not create a FMS module, which other developers may buy (or give shares for every sold aircraft), and which they can slightly modify to represent a more realistic FMS for their current aircraft? This would speed up the development considerably, and make the developers concentrate on other important parts of their aircraft, even if they would loose some part of the income every copy they sell (though this may be compensated by a higher prize, which I would gladly pay for to get a good simulation of my current aircraft). If IXEG:s FMS system is not too much integrated in the 737-300 they are making now, and it is more of a module-type build, would it possible to maybe sell this technology to other aircraft developers? Would it be hard to customize this module for their type aircraft?

Given the opportunity I would like to address everything about the chapter "Navigation Equipment" of this project: 1. This project is based on DC-9-30 series, more exactly DC-9-32. Since we are hunting accuracy, we have to focus to a very specific model to get it right. 2. As result of #1, the navigation equipment will be as it was on the original DC-9-32. No FMC/FMS/CIVA....LORAN-C, you name it! 3. But, this will be flown today (ok, not literally today...when it will be ready) and many people might want to fly with that bird over VATSIM/IVAO/Pilotedge networks and they would like to have either the ability to follow RNAV procedures, fly a route without making a ton of VOR intersections, or even have a kind of backup means to learn to fly with VOR-only without get lost. So, for the reasons above, we decided that will make available the default GNS430. We do not intent to develop any more complete GNS. It is out the scope of this aircraft's development. We think that the default GNSs are more than enough to fulfill the above. Regards

That's an oxymoron

I think he's asking will the FMS be capable of loading and flying WAAS-aided approaches, namely RNAV LPV with vertical guidance.

Let's call this day "Devil in the details" day Did you spot the difference?

I want the 737 classic was V1.0, V1.2 , V1.3 , ...

. One from today !

Disable SilverLining in the plugins admin menu.

We have in the cockpit a rough 3D object, to get the "feeling" how it will look, where to put it, etc. All the options are still on the table. We might just have a click spot for the 2D pop up and nothing more. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Alaskan has a lot of flights to Hawaii, so there's a good connection for ya :-) And while I can't speak for someone else, I read Leen's remarks as, "You did a great job, it's unfortunate that the paintkit doesn't reward such effort as well it should if it wasn't horizontally compressed." I.E. you got a great compliment from one of the most well-known texture artists in the X-Plane community.

That would be so cool, personally the -400 is my favourite 737

I think the next logical step would be an expansion pack with the -400 & -500 variants and maybe the -300F. But of course I don't know what IXEG's plans are or if they even have any at this point.

Dudes im like a hungry kid watching a chicken cook in the oven, really looking forwards to this now xD. It's going to be quite interesting to see the difference in characterisics between this and the old 200 model in X-plane, I'm wondering if I will see a difference in fule consumption and costs on the VA I am with :D.

Not sure I understand the question.. You mean like if you exit VNAV mode and use some other vertical AP mode that violates the speed restriction set in the box? My guess is this is one of the reasons real pilots don't use VNAV alot since ATC will mess up your plans sooner or later anyway

No no, do not misunderstand my words. ( In duglish ) I did not say YOU cropped. I said the texture IS cropped, by the modeller who made the plane. You did an excellent paintjob. What I ment to say is that, such excellent paintwork should better be spent on models of wich the textures are no so badly mapped. I really do not acccuse you of cropping. The makers of the model are to blaim , IF we want to blaim someone, wich is not my intention. I started my comment with "very well done" Thats a compliment wich I certainly would not have given when I knew you were to blaim for the cropping. Best regards Leen de Jager Apart from that I said cropped I probably shoulds better have said horizontally compressed texture wich gets stretched on the model. I wrote as a matter of fact earlier on this topic Cropped means in this case horizontally compressed

Hi poodster, Ive just seen there YouTube video, looks nice Regards

I think so, too

Not even in the same league. Sorry to those who made the aircraft, and also sorry (kind of) for even saying it when I probably shouldn't...but I just did. Uncalled for, Tom. SkyMaxx is easily the most successful and used add on in the X-Plane payware market to date. The fact they gave version 1 to 2 free of charge , and version 3 two years later at 50% discount was more than generous. Don't even bother replying to this in here. You're on an edge that will eventually lead to suspension if you keep it up, and I'm very serious about that. This is your one and only warning. Behave.

Fair enough, for me it will, because I don't care to study manual holds. Is manual holding required for 'study level sim' status? I know that the NGX was called study level without having weather radar and without proper manually extending gear and with a faulty brake accumulator model.....But maybe those items are not required to get the study level sim merit badge. I'm still looking for the official governing body who bequeaths study level sim certification status so we have something to go by. Being serious, I get it, what study level means to you....we don't qualify yet given your personal definition, but you can't put your interpretation on everybody else because as illustrated above, there are areas of ambiguity and relevance based on what one wants to study....so when I used the term in the video, given what I know we've put into the FMS and systems, its pretty darn 'study level' to me. We fully understand that we have your support, indeed most everybody's and we are extremely grateful for that and we will keep plodding along and hopefully get those things in for you. -tkyler

I would assume IXEG will be busy for much, muuuch longer with supporting and developing their 737 even further.

Zurich so rainy today

Looking at this cute little Saab, one might wonder where it's been to today? First it went to Frankfurt-Hahn, Germany (EDFH) Then it flew to Salzburg, Austria (LOWS) Before calling it a day at Warsaw, Poland (EPWA)

Hopping to Lisbon. (Livery by me, grab it at the org)

Todays flight consisted of a LFPG-KSFO (Paris-San Fransisco) flight, using a United Airlines 767-300ER with Winglets. This is a real flight, and is one of the longest 767 routes currently in service! Takeoff from Paris! A nice cockpit shot over the North Atlantic Coming into SanFran, note the skyline in the background On the ground, seconds away from being at the gate, with her bigger brothers and sisters

Enhanced my Delta Livery by adding the logo on the belly. Delta Air Lines is slowly adding belly logos to their aircraft! Showing off my Swissair Livery, grab it on the org! And two nice cockpit shots for you!

Thanks! Got another one for you then

Random slides out of my todays online flights. 14:20 zulu over Ukraine, just reached cruising FL340 "Orange four-one-three, Pulkovo tower, winds 290 at 7 gusting 13 meters per second, continue approach, number two" Following 737 to the apron as the aircraft on final is instructed to go around due traffic on the runway City of lights at Amsterdam Schiphol airport Gate E4

Flew just south of Mt. Everest today in my flight from New Delhi to Guangzhou

Leaving coast of Scotland

It's lovely weather here in Northern Virginia...one you get about the cloud layer, that is

Not so much "what did I fly today" as "where did I fly today"

Approaching Darrington in the C400 with RealScenery: