Litjan

This is correct. Our 737 will have only one FMS, just like most of the Classic 737´s out there. So it´s just one computer connected to two control-display-units (CDU´s). If the one FMS fails, you loose it all. Therefore this (our) model would not be allowed to fly in the North Atlantic MNPS airspace. That being said, I can guarantee that our FMS will not fail on you during the transatlantic flight, and I will not rat on you for taking the trip with just one FMS, either. If you want to take the trip "full realism" you have to take the detour out of MNPS airspace, maybe top off the fuel in Keflavik, then over to Iqaluit or Gander. Depending on the headwinds... The challenge is actually in getting this setup working. You can enter stuff on two different "keyboards", but need to keep tabs on each one, update information on both...its not trivial. You can have the LEGS page on both CDU´s, and both pilots *could* be editing away, that stuff makes a programmer drink too much coffee... Having two or more FMS computers is easy. You just say "we have 5 FMS computers". Thats it. They all share and sync information (kinda like a raid 1 harddisk system). All computers have the same information. Unless all 5 fail, nothing happens (except for the error message that they failed). Jan

Yes.

I agree about the offset - but in reality this is mostly handled with headings. This is not only easier for the pilots and ATC, it is also more efficient (to fly a detour it is less way to fly a "triangle" as opposed to joining an offset distance and then rejoining later). But this should be no excuse for not having an offset feature, just an explanation why we decided it is ok to ship the initial version without it. The RTA mode is supposed to "adjust" your speed so that you arrive at a specified fix at a specified time (RTA = required time of arrival). I have used it once on the 747-400 when we were supposed to not arrive "too early" over a fix to cross Afghanistan airspace. It didn´t work at all... Yes, wind prediction for navigational purposes will be available. It will influence time and fuel predictions, climb and descent path calculation. OPT CRZ altitude calculation is not dependent on wind per se, and the FMS doesn´t adjust OPT ALT, even if multiple wind levels are known and input. OPT ALT as suggested by the FMS is based on weight and cruise speed, only. In reality a different wind level can make a less "optimum" level more desirable, of course, but the FMS won´t help you making that call. Jan

The real FMS has OFFSET and also RTA. I am not sure if holding patterns are adjusted for wind correction, but the rest of the routing isn´t. Our FMS in the initial release version will have no OFFSET and no RTA. We plan to add those at a later time, but I think - except for the sake of completeness - these will not be missed for V1.0. These are features that are rarely if ever used (I haven´t done so for a single time in ca. 6000 hours of 737 flight). The manual says nothing about wind correction for holding patterns, and I think for most windspeeds it will be sufficient to calculate the holding pattern with 25 deg bank and then use up to 30 deg of bank to stay in the turn if the wind isn´t favourable. We will see when we fully implement holding patterns (they are not in the initial release, except for some standard holdings at the end of missed approaches). Jan

The whole speedtrim system isn´t very intuitive, unfortunately. It wasn´t designed to "help" the pilot, it is more of a safety system. Like Hotdawg said, it was added to "enhance" the speed stability of the aircraft. Especially in some situations can become hard to handle during large power change, and if the pilot isn´t very attentive, a dangerous situation (low speed, high pitch) can develop that - due to low elevator authority, it can be hard to recover from (full forward yoke is not enough). In practice the speedtrim system is often found working "against the pilot". If you want to fly faster, the speed trim wants you to fly slower! The plane will not start trimming unless you deviate from the "target speed", so if you fly with a wrong trim setting, but are at the correct speed, you still have to "push" on the yoke. It´s not an autotrim - and this plane is not an Airbus...fortunately . Jan

Sorry, I didnt read the original post carefully enough. You want to trim pretty much all the time to alleviate any forces on the yoke. It is possible to accelerate to a new speed without trimming, but the further you get away from the "in-trim" speed, the more force you have to exert on the yoke. This makes precise flying hard. If you accelerate a long time without trimming, and then "reset" the speed trim to the new speed by a very brief application of trim, then of course the speed-trim system will have to run for a while to achieve this new in-trim speed. Does this make sense? Cheers, Jan

Which Christmas?

To my knowledge all of Lufthansa´s 737 Classics (-300, - 400, -500) only used the analog mechanical instruments. I can confirm this from 1996 to present day, and I don´t think they had any EIS versions before that... Jan

That is what we are looking at, and have been in contact with those people. We will see how that works out after the plane is finished. Jan

Personally I would love that as well, but again the answer would be: For V1.0 no. For later we won´t rule it out, but it would be very far down on the list (mostly because of the very unfavourable relation between ease of implementation and customer demand). In addition I think that the number of actually in-service aircraft with that configuration will be in the single digits very soon. Cheers, Jan

Without going into details I can tell you that the whole development team did already have their share of strange german food.... Cheers, Jan

"Wo ein Wille ist, ist auch ein Weg". Paypal is really easy to set up - or maybe you know someone with a credit-card. I am sure you can figure something out. The options available are very much the standard for international online transactions. Good luck!

As long as the judge leaves the computer with you, I don´t see a problem with that. Jan

Yeah, you can buy one - but then the trouble starts. Where do you put it? Do you have a licence to fly it? Maintenance costs, fuel, landing fees, flight attendants you need to keep entertained during their time off duty... It just never stops. Not so with our IXEG 737! Install, fly whenever and wherever you want (as long as it is within the approved latitudes) - it parks on your harddrive, no follow-up costs... That can´t be beat . Cheers, Jan

For 76 million dollars you can have a beta tomorrow morning . Cheers, Jan

But you forgot that we are moving in fits and starts....

I see your point. It is one of those decisions between ultra-realism and ease of access. I think, however, that restricting the choice is a bit too harsh. It is not like either gauge form is "easy" and the other one "hard", so there is no unfair advantage of one over the other. Yes, switching gauges or winglets while at 37.000 feet is not realistic, but neither is changing the weather, weight or time of day (and X-Plane lets you do that). And changing gauges and winglets is just "optical" change, no functionality change. We don´t allow access to the "ground services" menu while the plane is in motion, I think that would be too unrealistic. But for ultrarealism regarding changing of aircraft equipment during flight: Don´t do it! Cheers, Jan

Yes, the FMS is the last "big block" that needs to be finished for our initial release version tentatively dubbed V1.0. There will be many versions following up on that one, including many things that we would like to have on the airplane, but won´t have on the initial release due to time constraints. One example is animated cabin doors. We have the gui in place to operate them, but it takes a lot of time to model the animation correctly, and this won´t happen for the initial release, most likely. So if you plan to buy this plane that took 5 years to make to mostly sit and watch the doors open and close - hold off on your initial purchase . Jan

Except for the "historical coolness" factor I see no reason why you would want to use CIVA if you have a modern FMS. Even if you totally dislike putting in "full routes" you can just hack a few waypoints into the LEGS page, and off you go. Of course you can get out your VFR chart and use the stopwatch for some good old-fashioned dead-reckoning as well . We don´t have a skyport for shooting a fix on the sun or stars at night, Omega or Loran C either, though . Jan

Just a little headsup from the development front: This is a copy+paste from our internal Skype-chat, written by me this morning: [09:30:47] Jan Vogel: ok everyone - I am just testing the latest revision, Tom has implemented a change of DEST "on the fly". I am flying over Los Angeles, changing my mind ALL THE TIME - entering new destinations (Van Nuys, LAX, Burbank, Santa Monica, etc...). The FMS is holding up beautifully - this is the way the FMS is supposed to help the pilot, being flexible, easy to use, no "kinks" to avoid... [09:31:01] Jan Vogel: (^) big one for Tom! [09:31:20] Jan Vogel: I am still finding some odd bugs, totally expected, I am really doing some stupid stuff :-) Just so you know we are not sitting on our thumbs, watching you squirm for a release date . Cheers, Jan

Yep, if I didn´t have some special connections, then both my kids would be on the list already so they are elligible for the 737 when they are 21. And if they don´t want it then, we could always trade it in for something else...

Here are two comparison shots, the first one from the cockpit of the IXEG 737, the second one from the cockpit of the default 747-400. Location is EDDM. As Cameron said, your mileage will vary, according to system properties, but this should give you an idea... Cheers, Jan

What, you are not on the list yet??? How do you expect to receive your plane in 2016 then, we have a backlog of many hundreds of planes, and we can only manufacture like 10 a month! Viele Grüße, Jan

We are at exactly 93.77% completion.