Eddie
-
Posts
162 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Latest X-Plane & Community News
Calendar
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Eddie
-
-
All data loaded in Lua script vars is subject to Garbage Collector overheads. You know, those stutters you all hate?
Careful what you wish for.
Not sure why you took that as an attack on the program itself...I was referring to comparing the Global with the -300.
-
Thanks for the reply Litjan. Sounds ligit. However I will say there are real FMS's that do load the global database. The Honeywell FMZ 2000 found on the Global Express and Falcon 900EX for example.
It's a lot easier to hold a global database on 2010 technology than 1984.
-
2
-
-
This is not a joke.Dear developers. This is the most important issue. And a lot of people are very angry havent seen this in patch 1.1. I will stop flying till you do this. I dont want to fly on static object.
I think the myriad of fixes to things you'll actually use take precedence over wingflex.
-
Also, in the wake of many developers that seem content to charge full price for XP11 updates, having one that is reasonably priced (let alone free as with this) is a breath of fresh air. Thank you for being transparent about what is necessary and I look forward to 1.1.
-
So the pilot flying connects for example with a callsign like BAW27AT_OBS and turns his transponder off and the PNF sets his callsign as BAW27AT with transponder active?
Correct. As PNF will be handling communications, this would make the most sense from the controller's perspective.
-
We are striving to make an exact replica of the 737-300 variant, not some dream-aircraft [emoji14].
Too late.
-
PF connects with _OBS appended to their callsign and PNF is the only one to activate their transponder.
-
Don't try to use the CDU for tuning frequencies, it can't do the job.
Use the turn knobs instead to select the NAV1/2 frequencies. This is not a NG!
The FMC would have automatically tuned frequencies for DME/DME updating, at least in older variants. Don't think that's modeled here though.
-
Many unrecoverable deep stalls on takeoff in the FJS 727v2...
-
1
-
-
Above transition altitude or 15,000 feet in the climb, whichever is higher, and in the descent on profile STARs.
-
any additional item requires additional calculations and therefore performance.
you have a lot of calculations involved if you want a realistic model of flexing structures under dynamic forces. not sure the result justifies the investment. if you want just a bouncing wing, I think other examples have been cited that can satisfy that, but it's got few to do with reality. :-)
Strange that the much-lauded X-Plane flight model takes up barely any power on today's processors, then. I'm confident a wingflex simulation will be even less demanding.
-
1
-
-
I also have to say, though, that "the IXEG is an excellent plane" isn't really a rebuttal. We get that the plane is great (we all fly it, obviously) but saying things like "it's the best plane ever, it doesn't need wingflex" isn't helpful to anyone.
I do agree there are more pressing matters.
-
2
-
-
I think an "apples-to-apples" performance comparison between 3 and 4 would be nice, both to show what improvements we're getting for our money and to alleviate concerns about performance with the higher draw distance compared to v3. Do it and you have my money.
-
Possibly unanswerable at this point, but will XP11 be a paid upgrade for existing IXEG customers?
-
IXEG swaps GAUGES, which is low impact. When you swap a GPS, the hidden instrument(s) are simply not drawn but the sim still needs to run all the logic, which can be significant. That has the potential to create a performance issue. Considering our mission is to create high fidelity, study-level simulations, we need to conserve every frame that we can.
Thanks for the explanation.
Is there an actual incompatibility between Gizmo and SASL or do you just not want to use it?
-
I disagree, I think it makes a lot of sense. But it's your plane.
How does swapping instruments cause performance issues, though? The IXEG does it and it's one of the best performing aircraft out there for me. The FJS aircraft and 767 also have it and I haven't noticed any real deficiencies.
-
On this note, although it's extra work, I'd love to see swappable GPS options where you can choose between the KLN90, GNS and GTN units. I'd be willing to pay extra for such a feature, even.
-
Looked but didn't see this asked and answered....
IXEG 1.1 before, with, or after XP11 release? Or will IXEG 1.1 come out for XP10, and then any XP11 improvements/features will wait until a later upgrade? Couldn't help but wonder given Tyler's knowledge XP11 and that 1.1 is so visually similar to 11. :-)
Cheers,
Justin
I'd say it's pretty close to release and much closer than XP11.
On a side note, I find it hilarious that, while the ORG disparages Gizmo products because they're not "fully cross-platform" and are therefore "completely uninclusive", Laminar themselves featured two of them in the XP11 presentation.
-
3
-
-
Honestly doesn't surprise me coming from JAR.
-
I think it was released early with the thought they needed to get in before PMDG did.
Why would the DC-6 even be a factor? It's a completely different market. If anything, the x737 would be far more of a factor than an old propliner.
-
1
-
-
I'd also like to see a solution that doesn't solely work with ONE overpriced tablet released by ONE manufacturer. Having a universal program across Windows, Android, and iOS, as with FlightFactor, makes a lot more sense.
-
No disrespect to the developers on your list, but only one out of that three is bringing consistent decent quality to XPX, and only MisterX can claim to be on the level of FlyTampa in X-Plane 10.
Based on the screens coming from Attitude Simulations, if they get KDTW right, then they will probably be the best XPX scenery developer.
Standing by with great interest in Icarus's KORD. Their Manchester was good.
I like MisterX as much as the next guy, but let's be frank - his stuff is amazing for freeware. While excellent scenery, it's not close to the stuff coming out of FlyTampa or Taxi2Gate (although certainly better than a lot of the garbage that gets peddled as payware on the ORG)
-
1
-
-
We do not need FlyTampa, FlightBeam, FSDT or Taxi2Gate and others what live their dream of eternal FSX / P3D.
For Example: JustSim, PilotPlus, Drzewiecki Design and etc,etc.
http://store.x-plane.org/LOWI-Innsbruck-Airport_p_510.html
http://store.x-plane.org/Drzewiecki-Airports_c_157.html
There are perhaps two developers that have currently made available payware sceneries directly comparable to FlyTampa or FSDreamTeam. (Southwest Florida from Aerosoft and later Nimbus sceneries) We might have some other good payware, but FSX has several developers continually making top-quality payware sceneries to which we have no direct comparison.
-
I feel like adding a single powerful X-Plane flood light facing down the cabin from the cockpit door would do a decent job of illuminating the whole cabin and be relatively simple to mod in for users who want that. My only concerns are a) support for the modified plane and
how to turn on the light in the first place, since there's no pre-existing switch you can assign or 2D cockpit to modify a button into.
Issues with "below X, above Y" altitude constraints
in Bug Reports
Posted
Observed with version 1.2 of the 737-300, Navigraph AIRAC 1706, and X-Plane 11.02rc1. The FMC will interpret a "below X, above Y" altitude constraint as "above X", which will lead to a violation if not manually corrected. I observed this on the HYDRR1 arrival into Phoenix Sky Harbour (KPHX), and have attached both the procedure chart and the FMC's interpretation of the arrival on the CDU.
00322HYDRR_C.PDF