Leaderboard

Yes, you can also deliberately duck under the glideslope and crash the plane into some forest. That will also get you out of APP mode! Jan

Version 2.0 beta 2 is out, available on the Github project releases page. Changes: Fixed assertion failure when an invalid runway ID is detected in an apt.dat. Hardened parsers to perform much more validation of the scenery database. Bumped X-RAAS cache version number to force cache rebuild using new algorithm. Implemented auto-translation of US runway numbers in scenery database. Implemented stripping of 'T' from earth_nav.dat files referencing runways using true heading numbers (e.g. "08T" at BGTL).

Hi WR269, you're absolutely right. The A310 is equipped with an alpha-floor-protection and also some other means of overstress protection such as a thrust limit protection. When I read 'Airbus fbw laws' I was thinking of features such as constant pitch and constant role, which don't apply to the classic Airbus fleet. Cheers, Martin

Can we have this?? Thank you very much!!

Hi Lissy, I'm also using the exact same profile as you with IXEG 737, 2.20.3.11642,, and 1.0.7. VA said the same thing to me about it working, but I don't see how that's possible unless they're using a different version of X-Plane or they have a bad 1.0.7 install. Maybe we have a bad install, but in either case I asked them if they could change the datarefs to match what they should be, then send me a beta of the interface software to see if it works. You might want to ask them for the same thing to see if they will fix this soon. Silly question, is it possible to change the IXEG 737 dataref to match VA's hardware? I haven't tried the EADT 737 yet. I've been busy trying to figure out how to get the Opencockpits 737 FMC v3 working with FSX and after that how to make it work with IXEG 737. I have the FMC working with iFLY 737, but that's it for now. It's not a plug and play system for sure! Did you get the the VA MCP and EFIS to work with the newest version of FF 757? I can get for a discount for being a previous user, but having extensive experience on the 757/767, the previous version was a disappointment. How's the new version? What doesn't work with the VA hardware? As a side note, are you using a USB hub to connect your hardware? Even though I have a good powerful power supply in my PC, I think I'm working it too hard. Yesterday, the EFIS panel would turn on and off as if I was cycling the USB plug in and out. I closed the VA software and restarted and it didn't happen again, but now I have an EFIS, MCP, Navcomm, Transponder, Saitek yoke and throtlle, and an FMC connected. I think I need a hub and decided to order a Pluggable USB 2.0 7 port hub with 4A. The specs state that it supplies the full USB 2.0 500ma to each port, so I guess it's ok. Any suggestions from the group? Thanks, George

We have now received the files for distribution as of this morning. We'll be working on a new installer and getting this packaged up to distribute as soon as possible.

'X-Life' Teaser Hello everyone. Check out the new teaser of DFW for X-Plane 10 & 11. This video showcases how the X-Life plugin by JARDesign works with the scenery to achieve spectacular AI traffic. The integration supports accurate placement of AI aircraft according to their size, a complete taxiway network and also parallel runway operations. The video is shot completely in X-Plane 11's beautiful new rendering engine. Check it out in 1080p:

I am totally relaxed and don't really understand your reaction to my comment, as I tried to be polite and calm. Of course I am focused on the visuals. I am not involved in the development of the product so why should I care much about the technical aspects? After all the outcome of your efforts will be a visual representation of the weather. This will solely be judged by it's visuals and performance, and not by the algorithms used. I'm neither debating nor arguing about stuff that I don't even have yet. I just put your published numbers into a different perspective and gave you my opinion that 86nm cloud draw distance isn't exactly what I would call "increase to an insane degree". If you don't agree than that is fine. The comment in the latter half of my post was based on my experience with SMP v3, a product which I do have for quite some time now. And as I said I do appreciate the previews you gave us. Don't you appreciate constructive and questioning user/customer feedback? As a customer I just wanted to make clear what problems I'm facing with SMP v3, since you are not going into much detail in your announcements whether these problems will be fixed I just kindly asked for a video.

Frank, Then I'll be very straightforward. This customer uses both and would dearly love it if your product were as good as, or better than, the competition. The Saab is. The IXEG, within their own stated limitations, is close. SkyMaxx, in my view, and with all due respect to your hard work and good intentions, simply is not. Perhaps not yet. Perhaps not ever. That's your riddle to solve. Best, Marshall

Cameron, You misunderstand. I wasn't asking whether you're interested in the platform. I was asking whether you, or the rest of the SkyMaxx people, look at a competing product, one that is widely seen as being state-of-the-art, and benchmark against it. Do you look at it, see how it renders a given METAR, how it draws and manages transitions, how it depicts clouds? It's like Mercedes buying BMWs, Lexuses, Cadillacs, etc., tearing them down, and using the knowledge to make better Benzes. They do it all the time. I guess I'm a little surprised that you don't. I was happy to help you fix a problem with low clouds and fog recently. Had you been benchmarking other weather apps that do it right, you wouldn't have needed me to bring it to your attention, and you'd probably have a better shot of finding other shortcomings sooner, fixing them and delighting your customers. Best, Marshall

Yes, our current asessment of the porting process is: Fairly quick (with a bit of Laminar´s assistance in getting some dataref´s straightened out) making it "work" in XP11. A little bit longer to really take advantage of XP11´s new shaders. We need to update the material´s properties, shaders, etc. Here is a quick view of how things CAN look in XP11 (varying levels of "shinyness"): Jan

Progress Update Hello everyone. I'd like to thank you all for waiting patiently for the release of this product. I am pleased to announce that the scenery will be released for both X-Plane 10 and 11. The product is 95% complete and the only tasks left to do are adding taxi routes, static and animated apron vehicles, parked vehicles, volumetric grass and X-Life compatibility. I expect to complete the scenery and submit it to Aerosoft for beta testing in the beginning of December. Please note that it will take some time for Aerosoft to test the scenery, fix any bugs and distribute it to the different stores. Meanwhile, please enjoy the following screenshots captured in X-Plane 11's beautiful new rendering engine. -- Click on each screenshot below to view the full detail of the scenery in gorgeous 1920 x 1080 pixels --

Really? Wow. You don't care about frame rates? That's a technical aspect, and I substantiated where I'm coming from by giving the 3D aspect as part of that argument. That goes hand in hand with performance. You seem to want to ignore this. You absolutely are! You're worked up trying to correct me about your interpretation that a 86nm cloud draw extension is not a huge improvement. Give me a break, man. There comes a threshold that further extension doesn't even make sense, so yes, again, I maintain this is an insane draw distance increase for a not so hefty performance impact. Compare that to the v3 performance impact with the slider basically half the distance and my response again is the same.