Litjan

This is the way it works: With HDR off, you only get two "illumination beams". Inside the cockpit those are used for the "dome light" and for the "pedestal flood light". Outside the cockpit we use one for "landing lights" and one for "other lights". The other lights will switch and swap dynamically to give you the best possible experience. So in the cockpit you can still use and adjust most of the cockpit panel lighting (they dont use illumination beams), but you will loose map lights, emergency flood lights, emergency exit lighting. Outside you can see most lightbulbs shining, but the visual lighting effect is limited to two beams at the most. One is reserved for the "landing lights", so you will always see those and they light up terrain and stuff. The other one is reserved for other lights, and will be displayed as best possible. If you have one runway turnoff light on, only then that lightbeam is used. If you turn on both, then the lightbeam lights up a broad area in front. If you have only the winglight on, then it will illuminate the wing, but only one side (only one beam, remember?) Now before you start complaining - this is not something we invented to save us work, it is just a limitation of X-Plane. If you want to run a contemporary flight-simulator with an adequate appearance, you need to have the hardware. Buy, beg, borrow or steal. It´s been like that for the last 35 years. I feel sympathetic to anyone pursuing this hobby with a limited supply of resources (been there myself for the first 15 years of my computer gaming), but if we could make this simulation run full bore with 50+ FPS on your 20 year old Pentium 5, then we would be guilty of sorcery and burn at the stake... Jan

The function of the plane is the same, but you would loose some lighting options in the cockpit (like map lights, for example), and on the outside lights (like logo-lights, for example). Jan

The effect on performance would be great, because your framerate will actually increase if you don´t have HDR on. But you will miss out on a lot of internal and external lights, non-HDR is really limited in that regard and there is nothing we developers can do about it :-( Jan

Interesting. I don´t know much about the 737-200, I never flew it. But it might be possible, in that configuration you would not need a gear-transfer-valve as there would always be one engine-driven-pump to raise the gear, even after an engine failure. But with a total loss of electric, you would also loose system B (and the stby system), so you´d have to land without flaps... Jan

I don´t know, but we used to have the A hydraulic unpressurized for pushback a few years ago. The reason was that there were no adequate steering-bypass-pins available at all destinations, so for commonality reasons the pushback was done with all A pumps off. That way the nosewheel steering won´t try to snap the towbar... Jan

I think it´s mostly because it takes time to implement that I would rather spend playing computer - or implementing wingflex! If we could snip our fingers and - whoop, there it is - you bet we´d have it (as an option for the weak and lazy only, of course ). Jan

Ha, I think you are just trying to get a new video with the 737! Seriously, thanks for the detailed explanation, I will definitely try that. The truth is that I am old and don´t adopt well to new things . Every new software takes me out of my comfort zone, and I don´t even use TrackIR during my testing of our 737, because it takes too much time to start the software, put on the hat, get everything centered... Jan

Hi Vespa, good to have you here! We are emerging on the other side of Christmas right now, expect more progress reports shortly! Jan

Rest assured that we are not rolling the dice to set a price. We are trying to hit the sweet spot, as in maximizing our benefit: "copies sold x profit per copy" With that we have to be aware of what will be perceived as a "fair price" by the potential customer. It always takes at least two parties to complete a transaction. It is part of the process called "trading" to come to a conclusion about wether the trade is beneficial to you, or not. If this conclusion is "no" to either party, then the trade will not be made. What is not going to happen here is the process of "bartering" or "dealing". It usually involves telling the other party why you think his part in the deal is more beneficial than yours, and threatening that the trade will not be completed unless the balance of benefit is shifted to your side. Common phrases heard are: "I have X hungry children at home..." or "that other product is better and cheaper than yours...". IXEG will announce a price. You will decide if you pay it or not (or wait for a sale pre-Xmas 2016). Hopefully both sides walk away from the deal with a smile on their face, thinking they made a good deal. Jan

Couldn´t find the "Agree 150%" button...

Guys, get some rest. I said that we will release the 6 tutorial videos before release... Jan

Thats totally awesome - I just don´t understand, since you seem to have real mechanical instruments in your cockpit, why would you need us to do virtual ones? Isn´t it more about providing interface to drive the real ones? Cheers, Jan

Good points all around. Again - there is wing flex on the real 737 (although less than on other aircraft). We might add it later as development resources become available, it´s just not the highest priority for us (and this is clearly a point where opinions vary ). Cheers, Jan

Look at this store to find the payment options. http://www.x-aviation.com/catalog/ You might even stop by the Camerons house and pay by mowing his lawn, washing the car, or helping in the kitchen, but you have to check with him on that... Jan

Well, you learn something new every day! Thanks for the information! Jan

Hi Torsten, I did not include this in the list, because I don´t think this is "common practice" for add-on aircraft these days. Am I wrong? That being said, Tom is very big on homecockpit building and has said several times that we will publish a list for ixeg datarefs later on. I am not a programmer, but afaik you could probably get those with dataref editor, right? Cheers, Jan

My apologies, I am the one that is old and crumbly! I didn´t read your intial post carefully enough - no, the primary flightinstruments are - to my knowledge - always CRT displays on the 737-300. They were mechanical on the 737-100 and -200, but not any more after that. Cheers, Jan

Boy, you are late to the party, aren´t you?

Boeing likes it...the pilots don´t always. There are times when VNAV is great, other times when VNAV isn´t. Nowadays it is about the OPTIMUM use of automation, not the MAXIMUM use (anymore...). Jan

This is not a discussion forum for other add-ons, as great as they may be . Jan

We are in favor of adding pilots to see from the external view (at a later time). It´s not so up close and personal, so you can get away with guys (or gals) that just sit there. Thanks for the offer, we might pick you up on that! Jan

Not a silly question at all. I would say that every hardware that you can get working with X-Plane in the "primary" flightcontrols will work. Anything that tries to access other stuff, like assigning an axis to the speedbrake or the flaps, will likely not work, or only with limitations. Same goes for the engine start levers. We provide many controls that can be mapped to buttons, so if the hardware supports that, then it might work. Again, nothing tested beyond the primary flightcontrols and the thrustlever (just a single one, not dual ones) for V1.0 Jan

The trick is to dial in the new altitude on the MCP ALT window and punch FL CHG! No one really uses VNAV, we just put it in for the flight-simulator crowd. Jan

Alright, looks like I will have to look into using X-Camera myself, then! After we get this plane done... Thanks for everyone´s input, Jan

Well, you will get the "TRAFFIC, TRAFFIC" warning sound when in proximity, so I guess you can´t say it´s missing 100% . Jan