Cameron

While Gizmo 12 has been in development many ideas have been entertained and sharing will definitely reach the masses in a much better way than was previously offered or shown. We won't be entirely shunning the org, and projects can be shared there. I'm sure Ben will have more on this as time rolls on with announcements and finalization of the Gizmo 12 plug-in. It's leaps and bounds better than we've ever had before!

IXEG uses Gizmo, not SASL. Gizmo is very powerful and can do anything (so for that I have seen) that you can do in C, and very efficiently. In all honesty, the 737 is the most advanced aircraft for X-Plane in production to date, and given it's LUA driven that in itself is all you need as a testament. Because of the JIT (Just In Time) compiler used in Gizmo the performance "hit" is practically negligible in comparison to C...you honestly wouldn't notice it in my experience. Any calculation or desire you have can be done with Gizmo so long as it's within the realm of the X-Plane SDK and you know your syntax. And, as you've mentioned, it's very fast to develop in. SASL does well from what I have witnessed, but has limitations against it that Gizmo does not. The major reason for this is due to the way the plug-ins were architected. At this time SASL works well in some areas, but lacks in many others. It works for those who use it within its limitations, and may do the same for you. I don't want to make this a Gizmo vs SASL war, so I'll leave it at that. Yes, LUA can handle your math.

To a degree, correct. I don't discount it THAT much because I actually think it is quite good at what it does knowing what it was intended to do, but I won't sugar coat! Roads, etc are accurate. Buildings are not. More info is in the other topic we have been discussing in. You can, of course, enhance your scenery with add-ons: http://www.x-aviation.com/catalog/xplane-scenery-c-24.html

X-Plane is relatively good in its resolution of mesh, but not quite the good you and I would like. Long story short, the way mesh is created in X-Plane it would be cost and space prohibitive to ship hi-res mesh. It would also likely not perform very well. So I have had a look at the video you speak of. Everything in there is without a doubt default and what ships with X-Plane. Most of the video is taken around the KSEA region. X-Plane scenery is only as good as the data it is built with. The streets, mesh, etc come from free sources. The mesh has an algorithm which determines the best plausible texture set to apply to a region given the topology. Sometimes this is accurate, sometimes it's not. For Austin, plausible means just that, but not LITERAL...not exact. If I told you about a city you had never been to and you try to imagine it in your head, that's essentially what Austin would mean. You know what cars look like, you know what buildings look like. X-Plane does NOT accurately place autogen buildings (hence the reason you see no landmark buildings or wharf), but it does accurately place roads, power lines, railroads, etc. That said, this data comes from OpenStreetMap, and if not all roads are in there then so too will the roads not be there in X-Plane. Laminar is also aware of some problem areas in the default scenery and, as far as I am aware, does have plans to re-cut some scenery to look better. Perhaps I don't understand you on this one. In my experience, Laminar has done quite well on the airport lighting. It's important to remember that unless you are at just the right angle (even in real life) you will not see airport lights. Usually it is just a black patch in a city. That said, to really get the best experience that one sees in the videos from Laminar, you need to enable HDR mode at night. Everything I have mentioned above. From Austin's video I believe he has pretty much delivered on what he stated would be there. Cars, tail lights, night lights, etc...it's all there. HDR is key in this though! These objects use "real lights" and are really only rendered in HDR mode. Without it on...say hello to darkness.

http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php/topic/4554-in-progress-a-few-103-questionsissues/

No.

The Jetstream 32, Mentor, SeaMax, Blackshape Prime, Cessna 152, Duchess, and Sundowner at X-Aviation. Soon the CRJ. I believe on the org, the CRJ and 727. Not sure if there are others. Anything non-plugin related of course, so I'm sure there are.

This would be the .acf files. In X-Plane, the geometry in most cases defines the actual flight model, unlike MSFS which uses tables. That said, you would use the Plane Maker program located in your X-Plane directory to open an aircraft and edit the parameters for it. I believe the promo video used some add-on aircraft, but don't recall on scenery. It certainly can look as is seen so long as your specs are bumped up! It's also important that you keep updated with X-Plane updates. It's come a very long way since version 10.0.0.

Hi, there, Thanks for sharing your story and telling it in a mature manner. I respect it very much. ...and welcome to X-Pilot! Yes, we are a lot different here. You won't have a hammer come down on you for sharing your opinion. X-Plane has its weaknesses and strengths. The nice thing is having Laminar continuously develop to make it better in the end. That doesn't take away from what we have right now. I think most of this behavior comes from the fact that people are behind a computer screen...it's almost a cloak. Bets have it that in person a majority of these people would never even consider treating people in the same manner (in fact, I'm willing to bet many would appear shy). This aside, I also think this weird divide has been created between FS X and X-Plane so much so that some take their stance very passionately (similar to Apple vs PC). In the end, we all love flight simming and should keep that core concept in mind. I've seen good and bad on both sides and take it for what it is. Enjoy the community here. It's a great place to hangout!

Ask them.

Not without the source code.

I understand you have doubts, but both Phil and I have been around the block more than a thousand times (literally) with memory issues. X-Plane 10 is a hungry application and leaves little room for add-ons. This is why 64-bit is so important. 1.5.2 incorporates plenty of differences to the extent that your issue has been proven memory related many times. To obtain 1.4.5 please shoot off a message using the contact form on X-Aviation requesting such. We'll be happy to get you sorted!

Hi, AJ, No worries at all. So long as you're enjoying yourself in the end that is all that matters and puts a smile on our face. I wouldn't read to much into the PM issue. Over the last month Javier has been on the road a lot with his family on a much deserved vacation. Chances are you caught him while he too was using his phone to access the forums, but even if not, I think his time "away" was most important. Have pleasant flights!

Please stop posting about it, Papy. It's really getting old. Emalice is spot on. There is much more to the whole process than you are aware. Nothing is stopping you from launching 32-bit X-Plane other than your own free will. You have posted about this countless times, and further emailed about it even more. Give it a break.

Javier and Cameron. Not too hard to confuse since my forum name is my real name. Why would you need me to send you a PS file when it's already included with your purchase? There is a Paint Kit folder in your aircraft folder. Other than these files I cannot provide you with anything else on a per livery level. Javier can decide whether he would like that distributed or not (I do not have them).

I think you have the wrong person. I don't delete PM convos, and I don't appear to have a single one from you in a sea of over 1,000. That aside, PM is not a good way to get a hold of me. I often times am on the road and will read the forums/answer topics on my phone. Once a PM is marked read it's easy to forget. X-Aviation customer support will always yield you a very fast response. Again, though, I don't have any PM from you, so not sure what you're talking about.

Speak your mind freely, AJ. That's fine. Aside from this very topic, the last time I heard a single question about this was version 1.0. It's not as big a nag to others as you perceive it (and trust me, our customers are very vocal). Perhaps I do not follow you, since you say you are following procedure. Are you telling me that even if you follow the manual when it comes to exiting a sim session that you are still experiencing issues? To me, ensuring that the lock is not enabled prior to exiting sim is pretty straightforward...

I'm with Philipp on this one. Out of mem issue and 64-bit will fix. In the meantime you may want to downgrade to 1.4.5.

Nice job, Steve! Thanks for your efforts in boosting the community!

Have you seen this?: http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php/topic/4561-how-do-i-restart-engine-in-flight/?p=47163

No offense, but perhaps following a checklist similar to reality would avoid this? No one used "dummy" or "computer illiterate." Let's keep it real.

Not the same issue.

You're doing something wrong if you're having to go through this many steps or restarts.

Please ensure you are following the manual. As it states, "Door won’t open when the difference between cabin and exterior pressure is bigger than 0.1 psi."

He said he unplugged all USB devices, Javier.