Litjan

Yes, this is the way for the TCAS to show the correct vertical speed to fly in a RA situation. More modern aircraft depict a "keep out zone" like a trapezoid in the EADI, or a "green and red" zone in the vertical speed indicator on the EADI (Airbus). Jan

I couldn´t have said it better . And there are some weird design choices - like if I want to see the "lower part" of a flightplan, I have to click the "up-arrow"? Or "deleting" a discontinuity - just feels strange to "delete" something that isn´t there. And going to the "fix info" page is a hassle, there really should be a button for that, instead of the workaround - lateral revision page... I do like the colouring, though! Part of my problem is also that I was brought up on Boeing FMS´s, so thats what I am used to. Much easier for someone that only knows Airbus FMGC. Cheers, Jan

Not that anyone would want to buy FMGC code... No offense, just got burned a few times with that, Jan

No Zimbabwean Dollars!

I wish so, too! But I think the licensing fee would raise the price of each copy to at least a 5-figure sum . Any takers? Jan

For now you will always see them when in "outside view" and never see them when "inside the cockpit". Might do a user preference if that is not satisfactory to some folks (like they don´t want to see them from outside). We won´t show them when inside the cockpit, that dude and his brother are just too ugly... Jan

Not initially - one tutorial is finished with a visual approach, though. This is something beyond the realm of the "basic training" we try to accomplish with our tutorials - just to get everyone up and flying while using the basic features of this aircraft. I am pondering a series of more advanced training videos in the future. In the meantime we have description of how to fly a non-precision approach in the written documentation. Jan

Hehe, I love these arguments. I think it´s perfectly acceptable to have different priorities in a product, and ideally they would all be fulfilled 100%. It is also fair to argue in favour of a feature you value very much - and we do bow to the "mass market pressure" in some way, too (3D-Pilots,...) Now clearly every potential customer vies to get his favourite aspects furthered. Some want a nice cabin, some want a step-climb functionality, some want a different coloured frame of the CRT´s. All these items would count towards the "100%", and everytime we have to say: "Sorry, not in V1.0", there is negativity. But if we´d say :"Sure, we will put it in, but it´s going to push release another 3 weeks" there is also a lot of negativity. So we can´t win In the end it´s going to be like Cameron said: We will build the airplane that we want to build, we release it when we want to relase - and you buy it if you want to. Jan

Because I like it that way .

Oh no, I have a lot of money from Africa still coming my way, already! Believe it or not, I had this relative I didn´t know about, and he died recently. He left me A LOT of money, and I am in the process - with some helpful attorney from Nigeria - to reap all that dough in!

To tell you the truth, the FMS is the warpcore, the holy grail, the "Theory of everything" of this product. It´s the conditio sine qua non. You see a bunch of nice payware planes out there - but the FMS is what really sets a product of this scale apart from "other" airliners. Yes, it would be possible to license it out, but this would be akin to giving away the recipe for Coca-Cola - not going to happen. Unless you offer us: ONE MILLION DOLLARS! (Puts pinky on corner of mouth) Jan

Not really anything new to show... you have seen most of the visual progress in the "sights and sounds" video. The last weeks have been almost exclusively FMS work, and it will stay like that until we are ready to release (save for some minor visual bugfixes). Jan

Yes, it is possible to enter a step altitude on the CRZ page (in the real plane). The FMC will calculate the optimum step point (when to climb), allow entry of estimated wind at the new step altitude (for fuel penalty/benefit calculation) and also show the prospective savings as a percentage. It shouldn´t be hard to implement that, I can almost do the calculation in my head... but it will need some time that we don´t have right now . Jan

Not quite decided, yet. It depends on wether we can slip it in before release, but I don´t think we will delay release for it. Jan

Set the MCP to the new target. Then change the CRZ ALT on the CRZ page, execute. Plane starts climbing (or descending). Jan

That is the idea - Tom made an architecture for the FMS that is designed to take abuse without faltering. Now it´s not omniscent, and it´s still a computer - garbage in, garbage out. But at least we don´t want it to crash in those scenarios. We want you to be able to change your mind, edit, delete, enter again - all without folding up. This takes a very "robust" code, and that´s what we have been hammering at the last months. Jan

The aircraft we model does not have the altitude or speed intervention buttons, just like many of the real 737-300s out there. But you are correct, if it had, using it would clear the next limiting speed restriction, which is the same as erasing it manually on the LEGs page. Jan

I think so, too

Vantskruv put it nicely, and I want to put my above post a bit into perspective. We at IXEG welcome our future customers voicing their wishes and opinions, this is what makes us strive to get as good as we can and also helps to steer our development (a little). What we don´t like is people turning our words around in our mouths, with thinly veiled attempt at slandering us or our product. Things like "You promised to release in 2015! You didn´t, so obviously you are henchmen from hell!" or "You said it would be a realistic simulation, but now you say the wheels don´t wear after many landings! You *=$§% liars!". If you don´t communicate along commonly accepted customs and protocols, don´t expect the communication to work well. If you are married, you know what I mean . I try to stay professional and just take into account that not everyone is bringing the same assets and social skills to the table - but I think you are still accountable for the things you say - and need to weigh your words a bit, even on the internet. It is really easy to make a fool out of yourself, been there, done that! Jan

Edited first post to reflect current state of development a bit more accurately. Jan

Please, please, please, please, please: READ my post again. Slowly. A third time. Ask if you don´t understand a word. I know English might not be your first language (it´s not mine either, so maybe I used a wrong word?), so please don´t jump to any assumption on a casual glance of what I wrote. Entertain the possibility that for the first time in your life you might be wrong or have made a mistake. I refrain from quoting my own post, because if you can´t comprehend what I wrote the first time, you will most likely not be able to if I just post it again. I never said we "drop" anything because it is not important or not used. I only said it won´t be in 1.0, and stated reasons why we picked feature X over Y to omit FOR THIS INITIAL RELEASE ONLY! So all your posts and bickering about this are just meaninlgless hot air and I refer back to Tom Knudsens initial commentary that still holds true: If you NEED a feature that we omit for 1.0, don´t buy it yet. Otherwise please don´t make me feel sorry for you and your lack of reading comprehension ability, every day I am mad or sad or sorry I can´t help Tom to finish the FMS and next thing we know we just might drop LNAV for 1.0. How about that? Jan

Hi there, I agree with you - the goal is a fully functional FMS, and no feature is so "unimportant" that we will simply leave it out "forever". But - as I said before - we need to omit some stuff for 1.0, or delay release even further. We opted to omit things that you can probably do without the easiest. Custom Holds: I have never, ever flown a custom hold AFTER I got away from that pesky instructor in the glaring Arizona sun in1993. Maybe a "hold at present position" (can´t remember, though), but if ATC asks an airline pilot to "hold at the R-155 at 35DME to LBE with 267 deg inbound, right turns" I would LOVE to hear the reply on the radio. Regular holds :I fly about every two months or less. Of course that depends on the destination/weather/time of day. If I had to fly a holding and my FMS couldn´t fly it, it wouldn´t even raise my heartbeat - I probably wouldn´t even have to put down my coffee! Just push HDG SEL as you come up on the fix, turn the heading bug in the direction of the hold to the outbound bearing (you can use a calculator, if you have to), push the stopwatch as you complete the turn. Maybe adjust a bit for wind. ATC won´t berate you if your inbound timing is 0:55 instead of one minute, they have other problems to worry about if they stick you in the hold... Offset: I think I said that before, only really used on Oceanic/African Ops. If you really have to, you can also do that with HDG SEL as a substitute. User created points in flightplan: This is something I do about once a year in real flying. If I am bored. Display of RTE data on EHSI: This is one I actually miss, as it greatly enhances situational awareness. Restrictions to meet, speeds to fly. I think we will have that fairly quick. Of course you can just look at the LEGS page to see the data... If you let 90% of your flight be completed by the FMS, you are either lazy, a bad pilot, or need to get an Airbus! Jan

Again, I can totally understand your stance and it is the reason why I made the post in the first place. I try to not be an "early adopter" on many things myself - especially in software development these days most software will get better and get cheaper - so it´s win win...if you can muster the patience and stand the fact that everyone else is already playing that cool new game, and you are still on Battlefield 2 . Your choice is perfectly valid and I am not going to convince anyone to buy this unless you believe that you are getting your money´s worth. Of course you can already play with 1.0 while we work on 1.1 - or you wait until 1.1. The money spent is the same, but you gain a few weeks of fun. Then again, we might bail to Mexico or the Carribean with the first week´s income and never fix this, that is your risk with a day one purchase! We will still be here when you finally cave in . Cheers, Jan

Da, da

Excellent, then my post served it´s purpose. Thank you for not berating us on missing feature "X", but to do what you feel is right for you and to wait until the project has reached a level of completeness that you feel appropriate. All the best, Jan