Leaderboard

Can we therefore agree that it would be mutually beneficial if the IXEG team posted status updates from time to time? So that customers don't conclude that the aircraft has become "abandonware" and so there is awareness that issues are being worked on? It's not unreasonable to provide an update every 6 months or so - "Hi guys, the work on version 1.6 is proceeding steadily, our priorities are recoding of the FMS and recording of engine sounds. Lots of work still remains with FMS rework, we've tackled 10000 lines but there is still 600000 to go. This will address some of the VNAV issues of previous versions. We've rerecorded some of the auxilliary sounds. We're hoping to work on some improvements to the cockpit texturing but that's aimed at future updates". The amount of time it takes for a post like that to be collated and written and it'll reduce the backwards and forwards, misunderstandings, wrong assumptions, arguments and offence. People will no doubt say "is there any update" - quote the latest update and say "Our last update remains accurate - work is still ongoing. There is not much else to say"

I have programmed to release the update in a few weeks.

I've flown the B733 a few times since this conversation started back up. Even without any updates, I found the Vnav and Lnav to be incredibly stable. The aircraft, even in its current state, is a lot of fun to fly. There's no harm in giving the developer a gentle nudge requesting the status of updates. The harm here is accusing the dev of completely abandoning the project, which, in my understanding, is not true. In my years of living, and trust me, I've got many years under my belt, I've found that I can generally catch more bees with honey, rather than vinegar.