Jump to content

wiloghby

Members
  • Posts

    12
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

1,910 profile views

wiloghby's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In Rare

Recent Badges

12

Reputation

  1. Yes, this is the normal and correct modeling. The APU receives fuel from the left tanks. If you can still operate the pumps from the hot battery bus, you can open the crossfeed valves and pump fuel from the center to the left tank to get the APU started In your case where the situation has unfolded while unmonitored, your best bet is to look for a good spot to put the plane down Please read this page at the very least before proceeding: http://www.b737.org.uk/fuel.htm
  2. With some limited experience in development, this approach makes perfect sense...and also explains why you have a legacy of best-in-class X-Plane products attached to your name going back longer than most of us have been old enough to buy beer. If I could offer your newest outfit, IXEG, one constructive suggestion, it would be to have a larger and longer beta period. I know the population of users who know the plane well enough to avoid giving spurious bug reports, while at the same time deviate from normal operating procedures enough to find new ways to break your plane, is not huge. But certainly it could have been bigger or longer to compensate for going for complex and complete implementation from day 1. That seems like the natural adjustment to make in the development plan, I would think. Of course I also know there are unique financial and other strategic pressures involved in picking a release date. Certainly the product is better for prioritizing fidelity over expediency. The ideal scenario of a best in class simulation with no major bugs on release would likely have required months more time that perhaps you did not have because of these pressures. Of all possible alternatives to that ideal, you chose the absolute next best thing...which is releasing a product with the best simulation (and potential for nearly complete fidelity in the future) with a few bugs. Further still the team has demonstrated a commitment to fixing issues quickly.
  3. At least regarding the above item: This may not be the solution you want, but you can set the maximum bank angle by clicking the square/diamond shaped knob directly behind the heading knob. Full right is 30 degees maximum, Full left is 10 degrees I believe. And the lines each demarcate 5 degree increments between those two extremes. So if you want a smooth turn, you can pull back the max bank from 30 degrees to 20 degrees or so and you should notice a real difference.
  4. Amazing! I might have to steal your flight plan instead of my original one. I'll definitely be doing a lot of SWA and Alaska Airlines though......it's so frustrating I can never fly any of their routes in X-Plane! The IXEG 733 will change all of that...
  5. This has been done with UFMC and X-FMC. And anyone who relies on using these implementations instead of the appropriate, specific flight management system for whatever plane they are flying knows how unsatisfying it is. At the end of the day, someone has to put in the work to model the automation in each plane accurately if they want to charge $50 or $60 for a plane. BUT, if you are a developer, your best bet to cash in is to pick a plane that is so old it doesn't have an FMS in the first place so you don't have to bother, and then claim a perfect systems simulation just 1 or 2 years later and release it. AND charge the same $50 or $60 that fools who picked the "hard planes" to develop happen to be charging. Developers who don't have the capacity or desire to do the FMS work that IXEG is doing at this time will just keep releasing old school models without any modern FMS. It's not a coincidence that the 727 and 737-200 were modeled pretty accurately, but that FJS has stated "no intention" of doing an aircraft with an FMS anytime soon. He saves a lot of time and money, and certainly it's his prerogative to develop whatever planes he wants or doesn't want to. He's one guy. He can only do so much. It's not a coincidence that PMDG's first product for X-Plane is the DC-6 either. All the modern planes with GOOD implementations of FMS involve the work of the *SAME* 1 or 2 people at this time... one cracked it for Airbus, one cracked it for non-Airbus. Think about how difficult and valuable a good FMS must be if only 1 or 2 people in our community TOTAL thusfar have cracked the code. Instead, for the benefit of the most accurate models and for an incentive to develop the deepest systems, I think there should be a much bigger retail price gap between the devs who go the extra mile to simulate a fully working, airplane-specific FMS and those who don't. Say, $80 vs $40. Or $30 vs $60. The FMS programming is the part of the project with the potential to add the most value. It's no coincidence that, up until this IXEG 737 is released, only 2 other people have coded what even resembles an accurate FMS for a modern plane. We should all be thankful IXEG is going the path less traveled, and we should be thrilled to pay a premium for that on this and future projects of similar scope and ambition.
  6. This is really incredible! I would love to see a daytime flight just to get a better idea of what your setup looks like. I wish I had the space, time, and money to make something like this happen.
  7. Somewhat off topic, but the latest beta (2.6b4) for the jar a320 and the last update to the jar a330 do direct waypoints quite well, without totally wonking out like they used to. JAR kept his word about using the a330 development to fix the a320. They ultimately went the other route vs IXEG...released a half-baked product in 2 years and spent 2 years fixing it. I fly both planes now with great regularity without issues... But that's ONLY because I don't have the IXEG 737 to fly yet. Once it is released, I won't even remember who or what a JAR is. FBW is a lot better on both models than it used to be...but by no means are we talking IXEG level of attention to detail. I have already picked out my first flight plan for the IXEG 733... I am more excited about its release than anything else to date for X-Plane. That is mostly due to Jan's extremely impressive videos. I also find them to be very informative for those without real-world commercial jetliner experience. Certainly by spending 5 years to release it, I think IXEG will be one of the few developers that is not inundated with complaints about bugs shortly after release. It's a calculated risk, to be sure...especially since many of them have left their jobs. But if they manage to remain financially solvent and release this plane with the level of detail we have been told to expect, then I think their customers, blown away by the quality of v1.0, will follow them to the ends of the earth and purchase anything else they might wish to develop in the future. :] Brand loyalty is hard to overvalue. BY THE WAY, are you guys issuing stock to potential investors??? j/k
  8. For a team's first product that is now at least 5 years in development? If they take pre-orders it might NEVER be released. For the consumer, this sounds like a nightmare scenario for taking pre-orders. I think a way more prudent thing to do, given that the plane is clearly in a state which is functional and better than most planes in their released v1.0 form, is to set an internal "latest possible" deadline to release the plane such that the project stays within its latest budget, with the understanding that the sale proceeds would allow them to continue developing and releasing updates. EDIT: I didn't realize Tom quit his job for IXEG so I took out my last paragraph.
  9. As I've said in previous posts... your attention to detail is unparalleled in X-Plane sim development! In particular I love how exacting Jan has been in requiring the plane to feel right...the image you posted of the aircraft ground lighting looks SO fantastic in terms of the angle and intensity of each of the lights. I can see why it takes a while to develop.
  10. Based on the in-flight demos, this product looks like it was produced with an obsessive attention to detail... ...and as such it should come as a surprise to no one that we now celebrate 1 month since the announcement of "release is getting close" You may be feeling anxious. Just take deep breaths and remind yourself that release must now be getting "REALLY close". In the mean time: What route/plan (aside from any tutorial flight in the documentation/videos) are you going to attempt first once the 737 Classic is released? For me, I'm going to try to program in 2 routes from the get go: SWA944 MMMX->KHOU SWA205 KHOU->KSAN Weather permitting, a visual approach on runway 27 coming into KSAN would be really beautiful.
  11. Awesome... I would love a study sim quality Airbus in X-Plane...certainly we do not have that now despite some very good offerings that are almost there. The IXEG 737 Classic is the hands down best candidate to be the first study level modern airliner sim in X-Plane, IMHO. And trust me...I own all of the other contenders that have already been released. Much of the FBW and flight characteristics you would expect to take over near the edge of the flight envelope just aren't there in many of these sims... of course FBW is not really applicable to the Boeing 733, but otherwise from the blog posts and videos thusfar, I am fairly confident that my hope and dream of the first plane that is simulated throughout the entirety of the flight envelope may finally be here. This product (the 737 classic) can't be released soon enough for me :] And the FMS looks incredible! It's modern automation with all the joy that comes with controlling the plane directly...a great, well-considered entry. I am so glad they never gave up over these 5 years; the community will support this product and the developers' mindset regardless.
×
×
  • Create New...