Litjan

Hi, I just checked and the VOR is getting tuned just fine on my installation (XP11) Make sure that you don´t have any custom nav data files interfering on your installation of X-Plane (in the Custom Data folder). Also make sure that your nav-radio is not "failed" (this can happen if you enable random failures). Otherwise I have no idea why you can´t receive the VOR, everything you set up seems correct. Cheers, Jan

Yep! Grüße nach München, Jan

Oops, I missed that - sorry. You can just move the pilots viewpoint in planemaker. Open up the 733.acf file in planemaker, go to "standard" then "viewpoint" and adjust the "lat arm pilot´s viewpoint" (change the negative number to positive). That should work. Cheers, Jan

We will investigate if the artifact is still there with the upcoming Beta 11.20. If so, we need to report it to Laminar Research. We have had similiar reports, usually related to other plugins that affect the shaders/colouring etc. in X-Plane. To isolate that possibility, it would be necessary to run the IXEG 737 as a standalone plugin with the latest graphics drivers. As for nitpicking the 3D model, I think Cameron has good advice in not getting too obsessive. We (I) like to hear about obvious omissions (like the pitot tubes for the elevator feel system), but on the whole it will never be possible to get to 100% accuracy, especially with subjective assessments (that looks just a tad too slim...) and it is easy to forget to see "what is there" vs. "what is not right". I experience a similiar effect myself when a game or add-on I use is slated for an update. I tend to not play it at all anymore, because I think: "well, its getting an update, so it must be faulty, so I am not wasting my time with something faulty..." I understand the desire to help making a good project even better, but there is a fine line between constructive criticism and "counting peas", as we say in german . I am married to a perfectionist, and trust me, I learned about the downside of perfectionism... Thanks, Jan

Hi Amirello, so far we have not started to adapt our model to the new VR possibilities in X-Plane. VR is not even in beta yet, we will start adapting the model once VR is final. I am not sure what is needed to move the default view in VR to the First Officer - it can be done for sure, as one can see on the default aircraft in X-Plane . I think for now you can maybe start the plane sitting far left, then move your chair over to the right side? Cheers, Jan

I have no idea, I am not a programmer. As far as I understand, the Lua Garbage Collector running is a necessity. Ben has added a way to tweak the values for that in the Gizmo preferences, so you can go for either short, frequent, or longer, infrequent burst of GC activity. Cheers, Jan

Thats a good video, thank you! We had to add the capability to do successive trips later and it turned out surprisingly difficult! Lots of internal variables that need to be reset, and I think you may have found some of those. Added to bug base! I guess a workaround would be a reboot or reloading the aircraft before the second trip, but I think it should work ok without doing that. Thanks, Jan

The latest version is 1.21 - you should see that on the FMS INIT REF page in the plane. The latest version of X-Plane is 11.10 - but running on a VR alpha or soon 11.20 beta version should not affect the FMS calculation. If you just recently (after February, 8th) purchased the plane, you should be running the latest version. And roger on the video, looking forward to seeing it and getting the bug stomped. Cheers, Jan

Yeah, its still a major nuisance and I am sorry that you experience these crashes. I am not quite sure why you get hit so hard, for the most part these crashes have dwindled down to almost zero, it seems. I will try to recreate the crash you reported and then we can fix it for the next update. In the meantime you may be able to avoid this issue by going a slightly different way about entering the alteration, maybe changing the runway first, then the STAR/transition or the other way around. If there is a way you can determine which exact sequence causes the crash, that would be helpful, too. Since it seems to happen to you basically on every flight, maybe you can catch the occurance (with the keys you are pressing) on a short video, these are usually priceless in hunting the problem down. Are you using Navigraph or Aerosoft nav-data? Sorry for the trouble, Jan

Hi Fesi, to avoid this happening: Don´t load the aircraft in a setting with really cold ambient temperature or really cold temperature in the cabin - the AUTO mode may overshoot the temperature limit. If you get the warning, set the temperature controller to full cold (auto), then press the trip reset switch If you get the warning again, set the pack mix valves to full cold (manual mode), then press the trip reset switch. Now set the temp indicator to DUCT, then slowly feed in more warm air (to avoid overheating the duct again). Check PASS temperature from time to time and once the temp is >5C you can go back to AUTO For what its worth, I never get the pack trip warning when flying - so there may be something unusual about the way you operate the pack controls. Cheers, Jan

Hmm, ok - at least we figured out what the conflicting add-on is. Just wish that they would both run together without problems...for what its worth I haven´t seen the "leaking decals" before, so maybe this is just of temporary nature... Cheers, Jan

Hi Antares, you are right, the TACAN (DME) and VOR should also be displayed at ranges 10-40. At 80 and up only "high altitude navaids" are being displayed. This is with the EFIS NAVAID switch being on (tuned navaids are green, unused cyan). When the switch is off, only the used navaids are shown in green. Try to "tune" SY on the VFH radio and see if it displays in green then. I am unable to verify this right this second... I will add the bug you found to our database. Edit: I just checked and ALF isn´t showing when tuned, either :-( Cheers, Jan

This is what it looks like on my end:

The "engine age" should not affect climb rates and cruise performance at all. You would see different EGT and N2 for the same N1 in a differently "aged" engine, but the certified performance will not change. If you find a regime where the plane does not perform as you would expect, I would ask you to specify that, including a screenshot with a stabilized climb, showing dataref output of: weights temperature altitude airspeed engine thrust so I can take a look at that. Thanks, Jan

Hi, yes, I can see that in your pictures. Can you make sure that you run the latest graphics-card drivers, please? I don´t see this on my end - not sure what could be causing it. Are you using any third-party programs that could affect this (changing/enhancing textures, colouration, etc.)? Let me know if those two suggestions helped any! Cheers, Jan

The high oil temperature is a known issue - we don´t model the oil temp ourselves (using standard X-Plane) and something must have changed. It is purely cosmetic, though - it should not cause an engine fire. To avoid getting "failures" you can switch those off in the failure menu. If you have failures enabled, they are totally random, X-Plane does not model failures do to engine exceedance. The only failures you would get due to exceeding a limitiation would be flaps torn off at high speeds (there is an extra option for that) and tires blown for overstressing them laterally. Cheers, Jan

I think that we have a fix in 1.21 to make the "other way" also work. So go ahead and try that and please let me know if it doesn´t work! Cheers, Jan

Hmm, I don´t think we changed anything regarding the brakes. If you have an axis assigned to brakes, I would expect that to override any brake value you assign via dataref. The whole braking system is pretty much "standard X-Plane". Note that there are some "system states" where we "fail" the brake to emulate no hydraulic pressure being available. Cheers, Jan

Yeah, that vibes with what I heard about the -200. When I started flying the -300/400/500s in early 96 we still had some -200s (or "Bs", as they were called at our company). I didn´t get the conversion required to fly them, as we were phasing them out at that time. But the Captains really love them, and didn´t hold much regard for all that "modern electronic gadgetry" that the "Classic" entailed then . Regarding the trim wheel - it should not sound in manual flight UNLESS the speed trim function is active (high power settings, flaps not up). Please let me know if the trim runs at other times. We model the "mach trim" effect, but without actually moving the wheel. You can switch to outside view and do your walkaround (hit C) - or at least pretend to. We don´t model the gauges on the hydraulic reservoirs, brake wear pins or other things you might pick up on a real walkaround... Cheers, Jan

Glad to hear that you like it! Especially coming from someone who flew the real aircraft. There are many many different configurations of the 737-300. Everything from instrument panel configuration, different avionics, airline specific setups - heck, at Lufthansa we even had the switches on the overhead work "reversed". Naturally we developed the aircraft according to the aircraft we had access to. We have some user preference (steam gauges, eyebrow windows), but mostly the aircraft is "just the way it is" . I remember when we got aircraft in our fleet with different audio-selector-panels or the new MCP with buttons for the AP, instead of the engagement paddles. First you think "well, this is total crap" - but eventually you get used to it. I think I was spoiled with how much commonality we had in our fleet, I am sure there are operators where every aircraft has it´s own little "character" and setup. I fly the A320 family now, and the range of configurations from our old A319s to the new NEO 320s is staggering... Cheers, Jan

Thanks for reporting back. The "many monitors" feature that X-Plane 11 brought has indeed some pitfalls - and they seem hard to troubleshoot, since the results vary from monitor to monitor... The thing I hate most is that there is no way to exactly specify the size of the window I want to run (i.e. exactly 1920x1080). Sure, you can set that up in some preference menu, but you must use a calculator to specify the start and end pixels... really? Cheers, Jan

Hi Vitaly, as Cameron said, try the new "garbage collector" setting in gizmo, it works great for me. I run a similiar processor and have a very smooth experience, also in VR. The stutter when "changing flightplan" is due to your antivirus software interfering, please create an exception for the X-Plane folder and it will be perfectly smooth. Cheers, Jan

Hi CptIceman, I have added the 1000 foot chime to the list of requests. Shouldn´t be that hard to implement, but it will definitely create some puzzled looks when people view the preferences . There is currently only a chime when you approach your altitude at an excessive rate. And of course the regular altitude deviation warning. Cheers, Jan

Hi Popcorn, happy to hear that things work out better now! For initial descent you can use VNAV, but keep a close eye on it and it´s calculations. For the final approach you must use MCP SPD and either LOC/GS (for ILS) or V/S for NON-PREC or RNAV approaches (using LNAV or HDG SEL). VNAV is not certified for approaches in the 737-300...and while it would work on the real one, it does not (yet) in ours. Cheers, Jan

Hi Chad, as a first measure, increase your "Autopilot CWS deadband" in the preferences menu, please. I think that your joystick isn´t centered properly or "spiking" and this will kick the autopilot out of CMD. Cheers, Jan