Leaderboard

It all started in Bristol, UK [EGGD] today ... Crossing DER (departure end of runway) PETEN1C transition into Linz, Austria [LOWL] Linz apron in the evening Inside Praha FIR, 19:21Z Short final runway 33 at Warsaw, Poland [EPWA}

@ltbatower Great shots! Here are two of mine first is during the approach into Innsbruck. The second shot is taken during the departure back to Italy .

Father and Child

only for 737 lovers

Some airlines (e.g. Qantas) only operated the -400s, so it' normal for people to want the -400 in order to simulate operations of their favorite airline. Also the -400s are very popular as converted freighters, and this is how many of the surviving 737 classics will serve out the rest of their useful lives. I'm quite happy to pay more for the -400/500/Cargo variants, with the -300 as the base package. PMDG split the NGX into 2 packages.

As Jan would probably say: Works as designed.

Just for the record, I believe this great blog was written in 2013 and posted at Avsim ( before the IXEG 737 was released). So we hope that Rick will be more pleased with the crosswind performance and the "wing low" technique now than he was with "the other sim" M

I've been flight simming since 1998 mainly FS98 & FSX (which is been uninstalled for 6 months now) and I have never been so immersed, this plane is just unbelievable, I'm not bothered if nobody did another plane for X plane ever again, I will fly ixeg 737 now for a good number of years for sure, I love it, incredible incredible simulation. Thank you guys. Regards Paul EGCC

What we hope is that we now have shown other developers what really can be done in XP, and that this will bring more designers over. With PMDG around the corner I'm sure more will follow As for us, we have no idea atm, as you know we need to finish this bird first. Cheers, M

Thanks Rick, you just ruined my fantasy!

Engines spooling down.. Preparing for our flight back to Leeds

Flight from EFTP to LEGE

Taking a short break from heavy metal (read: IXEG) Linz, Austria [LOWL] to Portoroz, Slovenia [LJPZ]

Hi all, a new vid!

looks like it was the ai traffic. thanks anyone who helped <3

... (preferably with Winair livery *) but can't find any here in the downloads or in one of the available libraries. Anyone knows where to find one? Of course I know the Sketchup 3D warehouse, but if there was already a Twotter as .obj - would be great (repainting it wouldn't be a big issue). * As an inducement to help me and knowing which airport to expect, see below a detail of the scenery ...

As per you log file. 1. You are still loading plugins like Flywithlua, XGS. Please note disabling plugins is not the same than removing plugins. The only safe way not to load plugins for testing is removing them from the "/xplane 10/resources/plugins/" folder. That being said, the plugins you are loading doesn't look to be the problem to me. 2. It seems you have AI traffic enabled on xplane, and xplane is also trying to load the IXEG_737 as AI traffic and putting several alarms on the log file. Due to the IXEG bird complexity it could be the problem. I would suggest you to set AI traffic to 1 on xplane, just you! to test if the CTDs clears. hope this helps

I agree to disagree.... It does teach us to not forget to turn on IRS first so you don't have to wait for it... And if you forgot anyway, it will teach you patience... ;-) in French we have a saying "quand on n'a pas de tête, on a des jambes" (When you have no head, you have legs), meaning literally : if you forgot something you'll have to walk back to fetch it. Meaning : plan in advance, you won't have to go back.

I hear you, the G550 must really be a "floater" However, it is a common misconception (also amongst pilots) that there is only one type of ground effect and that the floating is related to span. In fact there are atleast 2 types of ground effect. 1. Chord dominated 2. Span dominated There are several reasons why the G550 is such a "floater" compared to many other aircraft; -> The main wing has a very long root chord (relatively speaking) -> It has very little dihedral which places more of the wing in Chord GE. -> low aspect ratio (long chords) -> It has (relatively) short landingear. (chords gets close to ground) All this means that a very high % of the wing will be in well inside chord dominated GE close to ground (lift increase). And this is what the FSX/P3D (default flightmodel) has misunderstood, they only have one GE effect and have mixed up the two. So I can understand the designers there are having a hard time getting that right. Took me a while to convince Austin about this many years ago as well M

Well its up to you if you want to fly it or not, but come on, this beautiful bird is fresh out of the nest, give the devs time to fix some of the issues, you can't expect a perfect product on first release. Some just do not realize the complexity of the coding involved, thousands and thousands lines of code that the devs have to revise and go through every time someone reports a bug, also the programmer has to be sure that when fixing part of the code, the fix is not actually breaking something else. Believe me when I tell you, it's a very very complex process. Give it some time, after all It's only v1.03.

I Find SMP good for non airliner business, but when you are up in the sky, I prefer to have clouds as far as possible (if the weather dictates it) and not only a little square around me…

You make an interesting point. This post wasn't designed to pit the differing opinions against each other, but to take an in-depth analysis. I say flying airplanes is 90% procedure and 10% feel. In type training, you spend all of your time on procedure. Automation, normal and emergency procedures. The first sim you will do some stalls and steep turns for feel and recognition, but the rest is procedure based. Lets look at critical emergency procedures. These procedures are designed in a way that they will come naturally. The hope is that naturally you will revert back to those procedures with little thought. Believe it or not, it's been proven to easily shut down the wrong engine or apply the wrong procedures with engine failure to the wrong engine. In the AirForce, we taught guys to just step on the ball. That's much easier than looking down and trying to decipher which engine. That becomes a natural inherent procedure. If you have a guy/gal who flies the sim proceduraly correct, chances are he could possibly do it in the real aircraft. We learn in flying that feel and sensory are not everything and can be deceiving. Lets look at upset recovery. In recurrents, the flying pilot will relax his hands in his lap and close his eyes. The non flying pilot takes the aircraft and puts it in an unusual attitude and gives the jet back. The flying pilot then open his eyes, analyze the instruments and apply the appropriate procedure for recovery. That exercise teaches you that you can't rely on seat of pants senses to correct the problem. If a guy is procedurally sound for a particular aircraft, he could probably get by with normal things. I had flown flight sim for years and during flight training, my instructors were shocked.They would constantly ask if i had flight flight experience and my answer would be no. Basic flying and navigation was easy for me. It was the procedures I had to spend time learning. My instructors considered me a natural, but that was all due to flight sim flying.

Yes Sir!, I made that post almost 2 years ago and now xplane is my go to. You guys have made an excellent representation with the 737. I flew the other 737 in FSX and I immediately contacted them about the ground effect and approach pitch it had. Finally they posted the unreliable airspeed chart, which carries extra speed for safety. After that they adjusted it to the real approach numbers but it still has a tad much ground effect. Guys were constantly posting how slippery and realistic the ground effect was lol. Your model along with xplanes ground effect is perfect. I probably fly the most slippery jet out there. With 41,300 pounds fuel, the GV has a 6500 mile range. At the 50ft call out, you have to go to idle and start a 2 degree flare at the 20ft call out. This puts you down around 1000ft. Any extra speed or more than 2 degrees puts you 2000ft down, now that's slippery. The G550 has the same tube and wings, but cockpit upgrade with the Honeywell plane view system. By adding vortex generators above the cockpit , extending vortex generators on top of the wing up to the winglets, adding a 2 piece flat panel outflow valve and making the trailing edge of the flaps and inboard wing section 2 inches thick...they extended the range an extra 250 miles(6750). In the G550, you have to go to idle at 100ft. The 737 has used the same tube for years and isn't as slippery as the other guys claim it to be. I'm excited to see what other aircraft you guys will pursue.

Thanks! Bedankt!

@niebieski Great shots mate!

DIGITAL RADIO ALTITUDE AND DECISION HEIGHT Radio altitude appears in the lower right corner of the EADIs when RA is 2500 feet or less. When an altitude is selected on the EADI section of the EFIS control panel, DH and selected altitude appear above the RA indication. Descents below 1,000 feet AGL cause a round RA indicator to appear and a magenta pointer replaces the DH readout. When descending through selected DH, the indicator and DH pointer change to flashing yellow, then steady yellow as descent continues. The DH alert is reset when the DH reset switch on the EFIS control panel is pressed, RA increases to DH + 75 feet or zero RA at touchdown. Electrical power interruption causes DH default to 200 feet. source: http://air.felisnox.com/view.php?name=737.pdf

If the issue might be related to FMC selections this wouldn't apply to my stutter every 2-3 seconds. I know it is sacrilege, but I rarely use the FMC. I mainly fly VFR using the map display and or VOR. So, I tried a flight or two using the FMC thinking that maybe when I select EXEC before takeoff it would solve the stutter, but it had no effect. I have not tried it since the last two updates came out so I will try it again.

I would love to see the Pacific Western design done that's in the background the airlines no longer exists but great livery

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/31568-gol-ixeg-b737-300/ You're welcome

I've coded it up as an option that's on by default, so you can choose to have it work either way. It's clear there's no "right answer" to how this should behave.

The -500 would be cool, never seen one in x-plane. Somehow, the proportion of that aircraft makes it look interesting to fly.

Way too soon indeed. I feel that as amazing as the launch version of this plane is, we are going to be blown away by the complete version. That in itself seems like another project. With that done though, I would love to see the -400. Why? because even more airlines fly it.

Great idea, but the big problem would be parsing NOTAMs correctly. While METARs are well standarized in their form, NOTAMs are not so. Sure there are some standard abbrevations, but you could possibly redact NOTAM about runway closure in 10 different ways (words). Not to mention typos made by the person posting NOTAM...

Now THAT is an excellent hint, Tom! I was able to confirm this behaviour, and we will fix ASAP. Jan

I've got this logged as a bug to tidy up in the next Gizmo release..

I think it's more driven by those who have that dream of flying real world, but never had the opportunity to do so. What's interesting is when you actually take a close analysis to judge if it's actually possible. This question sims to come up a lot. This one and max speed below 10,000ft

Just arrived in Amsterdam after a short flight from Leeds

Interestingly, it seems to have been modelled differently at some point in time:

Sometime last year 2015 I was flying home from Oshkosh as a simulated flight back to KWJF. And on my flight path I witnessed this and I got excited because at first I did not know what it was first hand, then it hit me. So I looked it up and I was more excited and how this got into X-Plane. So I thought it was cool and I thought I would share with you all. So share your pictures that X-Plane got you by surprise. This surely did and was definitely not expecting that. Cheers Dion Markgraf AKA: Dionsol https://skyvector.com/?ll=35.02819710736435,-111.05419921449561&chart=301&zoom=1&fpl=N0262A175%20KWJF%20ETHER%20V12%20HOXOL%20KINW

Ready to depart for a charter towards Corfu (LGKR)

Departing Dublin

We are not over-writing any of those settings, so it should not be a problem with our plane. Make sure to never close X-plane with the little "X" in the corner, always use the "close" dialog - or it will not save your settings. For recommended control settings, read the documentation, it is also discussed in "Quickflight #1". We recommend 0 artificial stability and 25% non-linear, iirc. Jan

Of course there is NOT! What are you thinking this is?? Jan

Meanwhile I found 2 guys who helped me. Nevertheless some screenshots:

If a topic is deemed irrelevant based on when it was started then maybe it should be deleted so nobody else can post to it. Otherwise, shouldn't any thread be fair game to post in? While I think it's bad form to dredge up old topics, I find no harm in doing so. He's an X-Pilot newbie and, as such, he's just catching up on the tons of stuff already posted. This thread apparently struck a chord with him and prompted a response. No harm. No foul.