Cameron

Hi, Donald, Thanks for the update! Glad to hear you've got yourself up and running like previously said.

Haha. Oy vey. This coming from a moderator who works alongside Nicolas at the org? Not surprised. Thanks for your contributions to the thread, Will.

Sorry, man. Truth hurts, sometimes. I think you mean XPFW and not XPFR, of which I have no affiliation to. Either way, sorry to hear you acknoweledge you get scared off easily. Don't be silly, Will. Read between the lines. If you don't get it still, it only proves my point further.

Do you have a hard time reading sarcasm? It appears so. So if it was something you saw later in the post, why "moan" about it, Will? No prob, Will! I got ya covered: http://www.peopleschoice.com/pca/ No, definitely not a big deal...depending who you are, I suppose. For someone like you, me, or others who have been in the community and stuck by X-Plane long enough, we know what the poll really is about. To those just coming in (especially from the MSFS world)?...Not so much. They get the wrong impression. We can argue this all day long. I know better than to know you'll change your mind anyhow. You've demonstrated that portion of your thick thoughts in the rants section all too much. A compliment from Will! I'll take it! Thanks for acknowledging the hard work gone into the payware here. All the same, I love contributions of freeware (as the founder of XPFW, and still as a member there), as well as the fact that it is KEY and CRUCIAL to growth in this type of community. Perhaps you've thought wrong, eh? You get my vote.

You appear to be missing the point. Yes, Tom's posts were far from genuine...it doesn't take much thought to figure that out, nor does it take much to figure out why. He's simply stating that "Best Of" should more or less be named "People's Choice" or similar. See it how you want, Will, but aside from being said here, it's been said on other forums as well: The "Best Of" titles are perceived by those who are new to XP really as the BEST that X-Plane sees. We both know this is not the case. There is nicer freeware out there. Craftsmanship doesn't always win in those votes, and as such, "Best Of" is just a bad title for the poll. Yet again, it's the name being mocked, not the idea of the poll itself. Popular vote...people's choice. Yes and no. I, personally, would rather see the expansion of the sim through community sites and more 3rd party developers coming over.

Hi, Kesomir, Unfortunately without doing a whole lot of work (more than I even know right off the bat), you won't be able to accomplish this. I assume you've got the 'terrain follows contours' option unchecked in rendering settings since you're saying other objects aren't floating, but just for giggles, I would double check that. If it's checked, then deselect it and restart the sim. I'll see if I can't look more into this...a screenshot may make it a little easier for me to understand exactly what's up. Can you post something from ground level and a little above?

Most everything is simulated. As time gets closer we'll release a list of things that are and aren't simulated. The manual will also explain features that are or are not simulated, but exist in the aircraft as modeled 3D parts (not many of them). At this time we don't want to get much into this, as it's not release time and we don't want to make promises for things that are already simulated but we choose to strip out should something go wrong. We're doing our best. Hope you've enjoyed the videos!

Navigraph

Done! For those of you that have not seen, a new video of the CRJ systems has just been posted here: http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?topic=47.msg3041#msg3041

Maxime, When there's news, this will be the place to see it.

Dan, The book will definitely be of use. While the GUI has changed, that's no biggie. I would suggest learning the techniques with the book in the version of Blender prior to the GUI upgrade, and then once you've learned everything, upgrade to the new GUI. You'll find the transition quite easy this way, believe it or not!

I'm embarrassed to admit it, but you pretty much summed up why I haven't been able to grasp blender yet... But after having played with the new version for five minutes I've gotten a lot further in understanding the new GUI and tool set than ever before; the old one unfortunately did not make any sense to me... Dan, Have you ever checked out the book in stores titled "Essential Blender?" It's a very good read. I had some trouble grasping Blender as well until reading that book. It's very good for teaching.

It's being used on the CRJ, Javelin, and the BK117 at the org from Nils (he did a nice job on it). Check out some of his screenshots over there if you'd like to see the result in XP, or you can also see it in the latest CRJ video as the camera walks up the stairs into the cabin.

Yes, X-Plane is capable of this with Normal Maps as of X-Plane 9.4.

Hi, Simon, The Orbx line of products are nice, however, they are in a different line of product. Their products are similar to that of what FS World is (landclass), with added imagery, objects, revised default textures, and a revised autogen system. As it stands right now, X-Plane is not as capable to do this with ease given the current tools. This will improve over time (I have discussed ideas with Laminar), but for now autogen isn't exactly easily customisable. As such, to produce any kind of a package like you speak of would require hand done object placement over an entire state. It would not run in an efficient manner, and revised default textures may appear out of place with scenery not covered by RealScenery. Yes, it would be cool. No, it's not easily done and probably won't be for some time. Thanks for sharing your ideas though!

It's possible as an added product upgrade, but definitely not as part of this package for release. The models are different in many fashions, including the systems that drive the aircraft. The -700 and -900 are much closer in cockpit systems than that of the -200. That aside, as you know, the 3D model would be quite different as well. Your analogy works well with aircraft that have the same systems. The NG series of 737s would fall into this scenario (the -400 is not an NG and the systems would be drastically different, so to even call or sell it as the same aircraft series would be a little crazy).

Turn off the runway following terrain contours in the rendering settings, restart X-Plane, and check out the scenery again.

Hi, Nova, As a developer investing time in the systems and model, our best bet for a good return of income vs time invested is to cater to the majority. As such, we go the extra mile to get a nice aircraft with good FPS, but caters to the pilots AND the people that enjoy the eye candy. To be quite honest with you, even if the back portion of the cabin and doors/signs were stripped out, I don't think our final cost would be much different. The systems, textures, 3D cockpit modeling, and documentation take a lot of time to do, and are the primary reason the addon's are so pricey. While I can't say for sure, I think this goes for LVL-D and most PMDG products on the MSFS side. Majority of their products do NOT have the 3D cabins and all that jazz inside, yet the systems modeling is their justification of cost. All that said, I respect your opinion and reasonings for reservation! Hopefully you'll find the CRJ something that deserves to be in your hangar one day.

Hi, Donald, I figured that was it. Glad it's better for you now. My experience with X-Plane is that graphic setting programs that are meant to take over the app do not do so when the app is really launched. Happy flying!

Donald, I didn't particularly mean the resolution in size. I more or less meant the settings within the resolution screen of X-Plane that Nhancer should be taking over. I'm curious to know if the AA and Anisotropic settings, etc are correlating correctly to what you have set in Nhancer.

Hi, Donald, Have you tried ensuring that the settings are the same within your resolution settings of X-Plane? This is under the Settings menu when in sim.

Joe, There's no need to tell one another what to say. You were given that response for the pure fact that you may not have seen that part of this topic, as well as others that may be wondering similar. If you're someone who has been following this thread, then the answer is: We don't have a price and won't be really thinking about it until we have all the work completed and assessed. We want to be fair and justified, and as such, the price may decrease or increase from what we would say today when compared to what actually gets put or not put into the final version.

This was discussed earlier in the thread around reply #21: http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?topic=378.msg2439#msg2439

As has been answered above, yes, a very realistic start and shut down sequence is coded in.

Thanks for the compliment! I'm sure Javier and Anton share the same sentiment. We have tried very hard to get airfoils and numbers accurate according to real world manuals, including the FCOM. At the moment we are working out fuel consumption numbers to be more in line with the real deal (so you can expect that in the end), as well as down to how much fuel the APU even takes up when running. The engines will not use plugins. Our auto thrust is controlled by plug-in, but we depend on X-Plane's engine model for quite a bit. It actually is quite accurate if you do it right. A lot of people tend to just rely on "quick numbers" and assume that that's all that's needed to get a plane to be modeled correctly in flight. As you're aware, this is not always the case. This question goes hand in hand with the answers to the previous questions. We are not just depending on geometry, but a number of real world values to give us the best simulation within reason that is possible. The systems simulation will be the "deepest" experience for X-Plane to this date. This is, of course, with the assumption we follow the path we're headed on and don't make changes that will compromise this statement. You can expect a release of more details concerning systems and failures soon, but at this time we're not fully willing to "unleash" all we have accomplished with this great aircraft. The flight instruments will be realistic and as true as possible to the real aircraft. They are all plug-in driven, so it will not be like any default aircraft you've ever seen for X-Plane. It's quite advanced, and very pretty to look at. This product shouldn't be far off (if at all) from what you would expect from Level-D or PMDG quality works.