Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Litjan last won the day on September 1

Litjan had the most liked content!

About Litjan

  • Birthday January 1

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Litjan's Achievements


Contributor (5/14)

  • Well Followed Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • First Post Rare

Recent Badges



  1. Hi Daniel. there is some variation between airlines, but most common use for takeoff would be: 1st bug to 80kts, second bug to V1, third bug Vr, set speed cursor to V2, fourth bug to V2+15 (this is the speed that is minimum for going over 15 deg bank), fifth bug to 170 (for flaps 5 and 15 takeoffs), this is the speed to retract 5 to 1. For landing we set 1st bug to Vref, speed cursor to target speed, second bug to Vref + 15 (min speed for going over 15 deg bank) and i often set another bug right next to the second one if planning a flaps40 approach (as a reminder). Cheers, Jan
  2. Did you see the "descent helper" sheet that is available for the avitab?
  3. Hi Daniel, I did not check your calculation step by step, but it sounds about right. Naturally if you change your remaining distance to the airport you also need to change your angle of descent - the best way to do that is using FL CHG mode. VNAV will have a hard time regaining the path - as it descend steep to get back onto the path, it will overspeed and then pitch up - that is the "wavy" descent that you observe. VNAV descent will ONLY work well if you fly exactly on the planned path and never get too high - otherwise you need to revert to a more basic mode and do the math in your head (remaining distance x 3.3 is a good approximation). Viele Grüße in den Hunsrück, Jan
  4. Interesting! And you are correct, there should not be a CWS indication with FD as the commanded mode - just a blank channel. I will try to recreate and fix this for the next update, thanks!
  5. No, the reason for this happening were never discovered or reproduced.
  6. I am inclined to go with your suggestion - it is true that we often had the left pack running because it was not only safer (and a bit more quiet) for the baggage handling personell, it would also cool the cockpit a bit better (at the expense of the cabin cooling ). So I noted your suggestion and will try to remember to implement it for the next update.
  7. It has not been decided, but I don´t think so. I have to spend so much time here answering useless questions that I have to reap in the rewards for that somehow .
  8. I have not started upgrading the 737 for XP12, but it already "runs" in it. The other variants are not going to be part of the version 1 run, but we are not ruling out doing a V2 at a later time with greatly enhanced extra functionality and variants.
  9. There will be no change to the rain effects on the windows in XP11. The XP12 version will incorporate default rain effects on the windows.
  10. 1.) Not yet (MU2 project is not finished) 2.) The 737 project is done about 95%, I would say. Most notably some FMS work (VNAV, Holds) and 3D work remains. 3.) It is unknown how long it will all take. 4..) That is unknown, but I hope so for you!
  11. Thanks for the follow up - even if it wasn´t satisfactory. I don´t see anything else I or we could offer - especially since this kind of incompatibility does not seem to be widespread (you are the only one to report it, in fact)...which makes troubleshooting even more difficult :-(
  12. I think the latest does not work. This user: reported working - so maybe does as well. The XPUIPC program is not being actively developed anymore and if I understand correctly does some things that are not correct by X-Plane API coding standards - hence the interaction problems with Gizmo. Ben Russel - the developer of Gizmo - is aware of these problems but says that XPUIPC needs to fix it. I know that some hardware relies on XPUIPC to work correctly - but if you use an unsupported freeware program...there is always the possibility that things go wrong and there is really no one accountable to fix it. Good luck, Jan
  13. Hi Chris, thanks for letting us know! We are aware that the IXEG 737 does not work with the newest version of XPUPIC - so if you use that to drive your hardware throttle there can be problems with the throttle not working on the 737. However we have not received a single report about incompatibility with any SASL driven aircraft...and the 757 is a popular add-on, I think we would have more reports if this was a problem for all people that have both aircraft installed. Do you use XPUIPC? Cheers, Jan
  • Create New...