Cameron

Huh? This topic is the IXEG 737...

Sounds to me like MSFS X is your sim!

Engineering

Thanks for the response, Tom. This is a bit more what I was hoping to hear.

I didn't question your honesty. I questioned whether you read subsequent posts; something you declined to quote. As for association and your caring about it, it seems to me that you have some form of care as you tried to roll up your argument with labeling X-Aviation customers being conditioned to patience. This is why you received the response you got with regards to association, and furthermore, it's unfair of you to roll anyone other than yourself in as an X-Aviation customer based on assumption. I would easily assume you to not know who is or is not such a customer at all times. This forums' reach often times extends beyond that of XA customers. I do find it ridiculous that Tom Knudsen would decline to purchase a product over something like nav data which is far more advanced and very capable compared to what already exists in X-Plane. There's no contradiction going on. I'm not questioning patience, I'm questioning whether Tom Knudsen would really follow through with not purchasing something if Aerosoft data never comes to fruition. Quite probable, and valid. You're in here blabbering your dismay on me, and likewise I'm in here questioning an individual's response with what I honestly feel is rather ridiculous and have no problem saying as my own opinion. I'm truly interested in still hearing Tom Knudsen's response to this. As for the personal chatter you and I have going, it's really not fair to IXEG and I suggest that should you wish to further discuss it we take it to PM. Until then, back on topic, and congratulations to IXEG for another awesome demonstration in video 2!

I, in no way shape or form, represent IXEG. I have no clue where this product is bound for release or distribution. Tom is one of many individuals working on this project, which I have nothing to do with. Being patient is not what's in question, and if you took the time to read what I said, I would hope you would realize that I question one's choice to not purchase an add-on they clearly think is so good solely based on the premise that it contains one navigation dataset (which is leap years ahead that of XP, and is used by tons of MSFS products) over another like Aerosoft (which happens to be really quite new). Considering my non-association to this product, I am simply stating my opinion. Perhaps you need to read my followup response.

Tom K. is neither committing nor denying implementing Aerosoft. All he is committing to is looking into the feasibility of it. That said, I'm genuinely curious...if it never gets implemented and remains Navigraph, will you really never buy it?

X-Plane data sucks. Anything more and you're just being ridiculous at that point. Aerosoft is no doubt better than Navigraph, but to prevent yourself from purchasing quite literally the most advanced simulation I have seen for any sim over *that* is ridiculous.

Hueyman, Your images suggest that perhaps your CPU is "bored" and constantly waiting for your GPU to catch up, thus you are in some form or fashion GPU bound. This could be for various reasons, chief among them resolution. The data that X-Plane shows in the rendering settings menu for VRAM is not a good indicator at all as to how your card is performing or if it's even struggling. What is your monitor resolution here?

Elements should be fine. Gimp is also a great alternative!

You can assign to buttons. Go into the Joystick Menu and click on Buttons: Adv. From here in the upper right you will see 'custom cmds from plugins' with an empty grey box next to it. Clicking this will bring up a menu, where you will find 'LES' and a list of commands you can assign to your joystick buttons.

Indeed. Looks like Sprint has invested a lot of money in aftermarket hardware for their 'A' variants. It's quite clear in those images that the center pedestal was re-configured quite a bit in order to accommodate that setup.

Peter, I cannot vouch for Sprint. I have never been in their aircraft. What I can tell you is I have sat in the jumpseat of many Saab 340s over the years and have never seen an FMC in any of them except for the B variant. Some A's had added GPS (like a 530), but that's as far as it went. You can certainly look up images on the Internet. Out of the factory, Saab never sold an A with such hardware, and that's a fact.

Can you please post your log.txt file?

Peter, LRN1 is a function of RNAV, which just as in real life, the Saab 340A is not equipped with. Since the real aircraft does not have this we do not simulate it. I do not have any experience with the FMC plugin you are using, so I'm not sure what alternative measures you can take here. Perhaps setting a button on your joystick to X-Plane's command dataref for this will work, but I honestly have no clue.

Peter, Everything you have made in bold is true and accurate per our marketing presented to you. This aircraft is simulated just as the one in real life, so given that, no, a refund is not in order and I am confused as to how you could possibly feel cheated. Thanks for mentioning page 202. This looks to be an oversight on my part after late nights of writing the manual and distinguishing the A vs B variant. This will be corrected. In the meantime the flight tutorial manual perfectly illustrates how to fly this aircraft just as they do in the real world.

If you're looking to clarify that, then your assessment is correct. As usual, when we have more to post we will.

Peter, There's no knob for this because there isn't supposed to be one. Please read the included manuals on how to properly interact with the autopilot system on this aircraft.

Running the standard installer will uninstall your previous version.

Nothing of that nature. That may have been a bit easier to deal with.

I know, believe me. Been battling some health issues, but on the mend. This will be the first place I come back to.

The wait is over, and VATSIM users may now fly under 64-bit! This has been a long time coming and we have really been placing pressure on this as we have dropped 32-bit support in our products at X-Aviation. I'm happy to finally see this public and able to be downloaded. Enjoy! http://www.xsquawkbox.net/xsb/2013/11/xsquawkbox-64-bit-windows-and-mac/

You can do this in whole DSF tiles only, and not in small areas. It's not necessarily an easy task either, and would require you to re-generate the entire mesh from the ground up with your own data. The tool in question is provided by Laminar as MeshTool. You'll likely need to also do some smoothing work in some form of GIS software to ensure the correct areas are smooth around any airports, as MeshTool is a "best guess" tool when it comes to points and where to use them within a particular DSF file.

New purchases are always shipped with the latest.

Goran is entitled to his opinion just as much as you are. You don't have to agree with him for his opinion to be valid, and likewise of your own. To me, the difference is that the tactic appears rather shady. This is my opinion. Liveries should be value added, I think, and help to sell the product itself rather than to drive up the cost of your product. The way these liveries are packaged force individuals into getting multiple packs if they only want two specific liveries spread across two packs. The next thing you know, the customer just paid $20 extra for two liveries...or didn't buy at all because they feel this is a rip off (the beauty of voting with your wallet). I applaud the efforts of those like McPhat and any other third party who wishes to create liveries that make otherwise bland liveries look much better, but to essentially sell 'default' liveries (and to pack your product with four liveries that few people would honestly want) is not exactly consumer friendly. If it works for them, then that's great. It doesn't work for Goran and I, and that's why the Saab was released with over 30 liveries for no additional charge. Is there even a paintkit made available right now for the 757 to get around this?