Cameron

It's actually 210.

This would be a whole other product on its own.

We are working on this, but no timeline of release for now. It shouldn't be long.

Thanks for your kind comments! Please considering writing a mini review here: http://www.x-aviation.com/catalog/take-command-saab-340a-p-100.html#reviews

This manipulator is set to work similar to how it is in real life. In short, grab the manipulator, and pull up or down and HOLD it in that position until the number you are looking for is set. This is NOT a manipulator that you drag over and over, and if you're doing it that way...you're doing it wrong.

Well, the screenshots very clearly show a GPS, but I don't know what we'll end up with here. For now the 430 is more realistic in terms of what most had in the Citation II, but it's just too early to tell. The 430, however, does not allow for a full fledged flightplan, no.

Hi, Bill, We've see the same and are looking into it. No need to further waste your time unless you find something extremely "aha" going forward. We'll do the dirty work from here.

If it's an FMC you speak of, the answer is no.

Thanks for sharing, igorland.

I read EVERY word you said. You're missing the point entirely. The way you put it makes it as though to say the products' complexity will be its own downfall. You try to back this up with proposing an easy mode for dummies. Regardless of whether the general market will or will not utilize every feature (I have no idea if your stats are right, but I doubt it) is really irrelevant, and this is where you are not understanding me. Plain and simple: who cares if some people don't do it right? That is their choice. If they're having fun that's all that matters. There's a reason PMDG and their product type is so successful, and they don't cater to "dummies" just to get their dollar. As many times as a product has been released by that company, I think the message is quite clear on what people enjoy. With IXEG, they can do the same. Now back to your regularly scheduled 737 chatter.

Because your comments were logically silly. You said 80% of people won't be able to operate (how do you even know that) it, and that IXEG will frustrate "sunday simmers". My point of post is quite clear: The number of customers developers like IXEG are targeting far outweigh that of "sunday simmers" (a group of individuals that IXEG is surely NOT targeting). PMDG has been around for a very, very long time. I don't think those people keep returning for every product they churn out with frustration in their mind. Obviously they're doing something right, and as we have seen, complexity sells.

Quick, someone call PMDG and tell them they're doing it wrong!

Thanks!

The only person who brought any mention about perfect is you. Not developers. You may say the Saab is not perfect (somehow HDR is more important than an accurate simulation and design aspect to you). You may say PMDG is not perfect. That's your right, but the important factor in this is: neither of these projects released as you suggest this to. Maybe perfection is not the goal. Completion is, and that's not for you to decide. I think it's time to give this a rest and let the topic do what it's intended to.

It's not happening, and that's the final answer.

As someone who deals with more customers and users than most anyone in the market, I know you're wrong. I'll give you my take on JAR: it was a disaster. It's probably the one release I saw consistent user dissatisfaction with. Thankfully the developer has stuck with it and improved. The Saab is a perfect example of doing it right wins. There was lots of praise and appreciation when we announced delays in order to not sell customers short. If people go back to MSFS that's okay. They can always come back, and often times they do!

I don't think it's Tom's job to argue JAR's reputation. Whether you agree or not, Tom gave you an answer, and one I entirely agree with. First impression is everything, and what they are doing appears nothing short of amazing. Hats off to IXEG!

Doing this becomes rather complicated due to each person having different screen resolutions. It would require code that would be not only complex, but wasteful because it would run every flight loop. In short, the answer is 'no' for now. No, there is not.

AF, Jim's point is valid but my automatic assumption is that you used HDR. Is that not the case?

Just to let you know, these have not been forgotten. I know this topic has sat here for a bit!

That's not reason to reply at all. It's childish in fact, and you contributed absolutely nothing constructive in here. Don't do it again. As a grown man, I'm sure you're capable of leaving that childish baggage at the door. You're the only one in here with a locked thread in the entire Saab forum; go figure. Hopefully that starts now. Don't bother replying to this.

No I'm talking about assigning the condition levers to my joystick. Didn't want to start a new post because this problem has been reported already.The assigning function to the 2 condition levers is done successfully ( the plugin says ASSIGNED) but one of the lever doesn't move when I move the lever on my throttle quadrant. Ah, yes, then this is no worry as it is already fixed for the upcoming update.

I read elsewhere (I think Avsim) that he actually suggests the NOAA plugin for this product over the standard X-Plane weather configuration for a number of reasons. I really ought to try that NOAA script out. Heard a lot of good things on it.

Was this topic ever about other aircraft? Go start another thread in another forum if you want to truly discuss such a thing.

John's answered this one before. The answer is yes.