Cameron

Jason, Of the documentation I have, all docs state that the CRJ was only configured in 2x2 configuration. A 3x1 configuration in a CRJ would make it very hard to walk through, so I'd be curious to know what airline you speak of, and if you're getting the CRJ mixed up with another aircraft. So, if you don't mind, please share this information to verify.

Hi, Mike, We are waiting on a new special "feature" we haven't announced yet to be completed and then we'll have more info for everyone then.

Because it's not that simple, Jason. This is not your standard, regular acf model that you can just go into PlaneMaker with. If you want to read up and understand why, please see the following post (#10): http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?topic=371.msg2370#msg2370 as well as further discussion here: http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?topic=390.0 One day this aircraft will have an integrated ADF. For now, we thought we would be nice to people who love the aircraft but have no means of ADF and release a plug-in like the above here. The other alternative was to make everyone wait months until we have the re-do finished. Would you have preferred that instead?

It would be pointless to simulate an aircraft like we are and not simulate one of the most essential components of it (FMS). So, to answer your questions, yes, I can assure you that the FMS will do most everything the real one does. This also means we have a different FMS than X-Plane uses, and it is functional and NOT for looks. As long as you're willing to read a manual or understand the CRJ systems already, you should have no issues programming in routes.

The FMS will be that like you see for the real CRJ. It is NOT a universal FMC, but one specifically designed after the real CRJ-200's in the skies today.

$40 is hardly steep for a product that fully simulates an aircraft in almost its entirety. Not even the FMS is X-Plane technology, but custom plug-in, as well as the autopilot system and all displays. The aircraft cannot be started just by jumping in the cockpit and going, but by reading the manual and checklists and doing it just like the real thing. It is, in itself, a simulator within a sim! PMDG makes products that are $79+. Go figure there, right? Somehow, they are still about the most popular around for MSFS. I do believe that costs need to be justified, and I DO believe there is a threshold for costs of products ($79 is certainly pushing it quite a bit), but when you consider the man hours invested to do this stuff, it's insignificant. You'll get hours of enjoyment at your own disposal for the cost of a nice dinner at Olive Garden for two. Of course, if you can't manage that cost at this time it's understandable given the state of economies, but maybe it'll be something to gift yourself or save up for down the line should you want it that bad and are serious enough about how much you want to simulate in your X-Plane flights. The choice is yours...that's the beauty of it all!

Jason, The texture is only a minimal portion of a moving window. Textures are not hooked to datarefs, objects are. This translates to more polygons per window, which ends up being wasted space for non-essential items.

These probably will not be implemented simply because they are a waste of polygons, which in turn can affect frame rates.

Tom, You can expect the quality of this package and manuals to be that of the MU-2 documentation.

Mike, Those shots weren't posted simply because I did a VATSIM flight with the intention of not doing low-city fly by's. I'm sure we'll get some low altitude shots up here sometime, and our bay area imagery as it stands is pretty hi-res. We WILL have add-on hi-res packages available for those that wish to take it a step further the same day, or right around, release day. They will be in the similar fashion of the Arizona HR series seen here: http://www.x-aviation.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=24&products_id=48 and here: http://www.x-aviation.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=24&products_id=47 SOCAL will see the light of day...soon. Thanks for your interest!

Some more previews of Norcal can be seen in the following topic: http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?topic=392.0

Hi, all, here are some shots of a flight I did from San Francisco-Denver. The scenery is the soon to be release Northern California (Objects are FlyTampa SFO conversion) scenery by RealScenery, and the aircraft is the still in development XP Jets 777. Enjoy!

That's precisely what I said, Jason. CTRL+(plus/and) .

Don't forget that you can also just press CTRL+. in sim and it will save a screenshot to your X-Plane folder!

Daniel, I'm sure Tom may elaborate a little more on this, however, not all (most) MU-2's have an ADF active. With that said, it is planned to be implemented. This is a very common question, and was just answered a little more throughly the other day here: http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?topic=371.msg2370#msg2370

This has been added.

Donald, Your account is already activated.

Hi, John, American doesn't fly the CRJ-200, only the 700 series. Because of this reason, it is not in the list.

Looks like a fun little plane, and I think it's a good one to start with! It's typically never a problem, though I have seen it happen once when it came to a bird in development by Cessna. In most cases you can sell in public domain with no problems at all, and no licensing attached. In the instance I've heard it came with a cease and desist, or to pay a ridiculous royalty fee that made the project pretty much scrap worthy.

Looking good, Reuben! I'm looking forward to seeing screenshots from within the simulator!

Hi, there, Try deleting your preferences in the output folder. Don't delete the key preferences file if you want to retain joystick info, but usually this fixes weird quirks like this!

RealScenery packs don't carry any airport buildings in them. Instead, they are statewide coverage packages of aerial imagery. Due to the size of California, it will be split between both the north and south, but should you buy both then you'll have the complete state of California to fly over.

This topic has been moved to Mitsubishi MU-2 Support. [iurl]http://forums.x-pilot.com/index.php?topic=366.0[/iurl]

As someone who works with XPFW, I can tell you the A320 project over there is on hold for various reasons, primarily the fact that XP Jets is tied up in other work. Additionally, when the A320 from XPFW does get released, it will not have all the programming of systems like the one here. This will allow people to have options to decide how serious they want their simulation experience to be!

Howdy, This is just a note to let everyone know I have fixed this issue. Cameron