Leaderboard

I guess this whole 3000 feet thing serves to demonstrate one thing very well: There may be errors in the database, and finding and rectifying them is the duty of the pilot. In this case, nothing would really happen - this is an ILS approach, and you would capture the GS at the 7.9DME waypoint to follow it down to the runway. If you really fly an RNVAV GPS approach, regulations require you to check the approach for correct values before you fly it. The essence: Don´t trust your database. Don´t trust your airplane. Monitor and verify and take action if things don´t go as expected. Jan

We don't really have a final word on this for now. The only promise for the moment is the NavDataPro from Aerosoft. If things change we would certainly communicate that at the appropriate moment.

Another useful site is the gateway scenery map. Airports in the current release of XP appear in blue or orange, airports available for download at the gateway appear in red. you can also filter for 3D airports only (i.e. ones with buildings), water runways, helipads, etc. It's reassuring to see the number of blobs on the map when you apply the 3D filter now - and Germany is absolutely covered thanks to Jan and his friend. Vielen dank! http://x-plane.cleverest.eu/

They most certainly are - he is putting in crazy time and detail - and it shows! Just remember: If you download anything from the Gateway, make sure to delete that again when it becomes part of the regular X-Plane distribution. Otherwise you run the risk of being stuck with a stagnant airport that will never get improved (simply because your downloaded "custom" airport will always suppress the corresponding "global" airport). And even if Beda´s airports can hardly be improved much, he will most likely work them over when 10.50 is released, to include the new options for that update will bring. So you´d miss out on those improvements. Jan

If the recent video is one of the 6 tutorial videos, it will be release in 6 weeks lol Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

Hey Tom, looks like an error in the Level D format. I just compared the CRJ-200 dataset vs any of the Airbus X ones (all the airliners from Flight Factor, JARDesign, Rotate seem to use it) or the GNS430 one (same format?). I'm also using NavDataPro and checked both the latest and an older set from 2014. The Level D format has the wrong altitude no matter what. Airbus X Format: FINAL,I26,26,I,3 IF,COD79,51.88496389,11.62938056,ICOW,75.0,9.0,1,3000,0,0,0,0,0,0 CF,OM26,51.87275000,11.54009444,0,ICOW,75.0,5.6,255,3.40,1,1930,0,0,0,0,2,0 CF,RW26,51.85837500,11.43570556,0,ICOW,74.9,1.6,255,4.00,1,646,0,0,0,0,3,0 CA,0,255,2,2000,0,0,0,0,0,0 DF,MAG,51.99498889,11.79430556,2, ,0.0,0.0,1,4000,0,0,0,0,0,0 Level D (OM26 only): <Name>OM26</Name> <Type>Normal</Type> <Latitude>51.872750</Latitude> <Longitude>11.540094</Longitude> <Speed></Speed> <Altitude>3000</Altitude> <AltitudeCons></AltitudeCons> <AltitudeRestriction>at</AltitudeRestriction> <Flytype>Fly-by</Flytype> <BankLimit>25</BankLimit> <Sp_Turn>Auto</Sp_Turn> Bonus screenshot.

Rather remove the Saab Lua file only.

No, you should not assume that. There is an update for the Saab coming soon, which will take care of the engine torque.

Thanks. I am not scanning every post for all the detailed facts, as Laminar is known, not to announce a lot about what's going to be implemented for sure. Always subject to changes... Things may be dropped during developement, delayed or even implemented in a different solution. Maybe I should had asked if different like; is this a quoted official list?

Thanks for the credits - but quite the opposite is true! Since I tend to operate the plane the way it was intended, I don´t cover the way that 90% of our customers will use it. They don´t know or don´t care for the proper procedures, limitations and system behaviour. We have to get ready for a myriad of support questions like "you guys forgot the mixture lever!" and "wtf, I can´t find the ignition keys!" Few customers will really know or take the time to learn how to operate this plane, and we want to see where our model is showing faults. This is why this second round of beta-testers will focus on people with no real 737 experience. We already know that this plane behaves correctly when flown correctly - now we want to find out if it behaves correctly when flown by Kerbals! Cheers, Jan

As far as this version of MMMX fromTaxi2Gate is concerned, I'm not working on it anymore. The T2G developers have not provide me with many of the assets I requested, communication got broken and I got tired of chasing them. Working with conversions proved to be more labor intensive than making it from scratch to have optimal results. I'm not giving up on the airport but will make my own version. Sharing at 50-50 with original developers when they failed to comply to the original agreement is just not viable for me. I have a LOT of the airport already made with original models and textures but not enough to complete the full scenery. I Traveled to Mexico last summer and took a lot of photos of all the airport and city but have not restarted work on the project since my daytime work and family take most of my free time, plus I have other collaborative projects with other teams that are 100% focused on X-Plane. I continue work on many X-Plane related projects and MMMX will some day be finished, but for the time being is on stand by. Thanks for the interest and I am sorry for the disappointment, but my priorities have changed and I rather work on projects on my own or with others that are as committed to a project as I am, and not with people that show little or no interests and act as if they are do in me a favor.

If it's been uploaded and approved he said it was on the X-Plane gateway. https://gateway.x-plane.com

ETA?