tkyler

I'm not seeing that in the code @daemotron, in other words, we haven't changed anything here since day 1 it looks like, so if it worked with switches previously..it would have probably been something XPlane changed. So you're wanting a "single event" command where it moves the lever to full mixture on / off? ...which is perfectly reasonable -tk

Indeed...I've been dealing with it for over a year....good thing its a relatively quick keystroke. -TK

that would be the internal air stairs...much more fun. I suppose external airstairs would be a good option too...hrm....yea, think I'll do both. External would be pretty quick...yea, I think I'll add "external stairs" to my near term todo list! Not everyone has a jetway! -tk

With regards to your observation of the exterior sounds...our sound engine makes no distinction between interior vs exterior with regards to the software...its simply a "sound" in all cases. All our sounds are effected only through: "play", "stop", "adjust volume", and "adjust pitch", nothing more. When you open the window from the inside view for example, we simply "ramp up the volume" of some sounds...they are already playing. Moving the camera around the interior has the same effect on other sounds...you get closer to the panel, the fan noise "ramps up" too...yet doesn't cause a crash. I think there's something more sinister going on; however, as Cameron mentioned......X-Plane and plugins is real chemistry. It only takes one unique combo to create a reaction and finding the catalyst can be a challenge. We are certainly dealing with that here in my opnion and getting Laminar to help find data points at this stage is a prudent step. Ceratainly we want to add this one to our knowledge base. -TK

@fortinworkaround....put two waypoints in the LEGS page at minimum before executing.....that should get you past the error.....then after you get airborne, you can put MIGLO into the first line and execute if that was your intended plan (one waypoint only). Looked like the crash happens when running a VNAV calc with only one waypoint in the legs page. Already fixed for next patch. TK

fixed. I had a '>' instead of a ">=" DOH...tk

...was able to reproduce. bug logged. Thx. -tk

A few missing points. That error is part of a VNAV calculation, which would only run if you had set a crusie altitude, which you didn't mention in your steps so I couldn't reproduce. For VNAV calc to run, you need your PERF info on the PERF INIT page, and then a cruise altitude and of course a route...(without a disco in the first line). When you execute with those "minimum requirements", then the VNAV calcs will run. Most of the other stuff doesn't matter. I'll try to reproduce give the general Departure airport and one waypoint...with the perf init/cruise alt, that should be enough for me to test. -tk

Thx for reporting and your patience. We've added it to the list. We won't cease working on the IXEG and will certainly endeavor to increase accuracy in all areas, including this one. Now that we have the 737 out....we have to stabilize a few super obvoius oversights...but after, we'll enter a quite long phase of tweaking all those perf issues while we tackle our other roadmap items as well. -TomK

Thx for rerporting. I put it on my list this morning to check.

the patch has been made and is being tested with select folks. Several testers have confirmed its fixed their issue thus far. It may still be a day or so as there are other precautions to be made.... and we don't want a 2nd occurrence to happen. Much better to take a day or two to make sure its good and get this one totally behind us. As to the unfortunate timing..see recommended post at top of this page if you haven't already. it explains the weekend thing. -TK

This isn't a workaround, its the very reason for that preference's existence. I discuss that in this link in the "new gui interface" section. As to your crash, I can't speak to that. VR is a bit of a black box to us devs, and I can't make heads or tales of that message. Might be one worth reporting to Laminar

The last entries in your log file give indications as to what is going on...and in all your log files that I've seen, its always during some "weather update" Do you have X-Plane's "Download Real Weather" option enabled? If so, try it with that set to "manual" -TK

As @Pils mentioned above, email/forum post from X-Aviation is the 'official' way. Soon though, we'll be putting up web based info, similar to the MU2...and the version listed at the top will be the most current version released. We won't change that version # until the actual release. Usually we synchronize updating the online info with the release itself, its part of our deploy checklist. So if you wake up one day, wondering if you've missed a release, you can check your version in X-Plane (use the 'Customize' button inside X-Plane to see the version)...and compare that against the version listed at the top of the (soon to be posted) docs. It will look like so when posted: So the current version listed inside X-Plane is now "1.5"....and that screenshot above shows what it will be when we make the next release and this info is put online. So just another way of checking versions. -Tom

@BulvaThis format should look familiar to you Number 2 on my list.

I did not do the original openGL...and I have never, not once, touched the code for the EFIS displays. Certainly I will investigate. We are seeing openGL funnies we haven't seen in the past. I believe Laminar have "tightened up" some of their requirements for us devs using openGL and this could have some influence. Now a little "insider info" for those here. For a while now, I've been setting myself up to work on XP full time and its' been a long road to get to this point, getting everything up date and redone for XP12.....BUT there's still a little bit further to go with regards to code infrastructure. I liken where we are now to a remodeling project in a crowded downtown.....so for example, you may work in some building that's getting remodeled and there is scaffolding all over the place, but the building continues to "operate". We want to make that operation as normal as possible of course, but while folks use the IXEG...we're changing lots of stuff under the hood to be more lean and "future proof". This whole "Level-2" activation issue folks are seeing is part of an interim technology..much like scaffoling...and won't be around forever. We are trying to make this rework as transparent to the end users as possible while we demolish / cut / retool / remodel code under the hood. A big part of this work will be the graphics code. With the 717 waiting in the wings....with six EFIS displays...EFIS graphics are a big deal now. SO...I'll just say that we're knocking heads with folks from Real Sim Gear and also Saso/Totoriko, to make sure we have modern tech/methods and we can move all these products well into the future. As far as this HSI thing....I'll be looking at it for sure. -TomK

Not yet. Some of the team are currently traveling home today. For those wondering why they're out of town on a release weekend, please see the follow....and accept our apologies while we work to correct this asap.

@rafalec I'm responding since you've singled out IXEG in this case. As Cameron pointed out through my previous posting, there were extenuating circumstances here that were not the norm......and we ourselves join you in the frustration. We will work diligently to restore your disposition towards us and hopefuly get you back simming in the IXEG as rapidly as possible. -TomK

So....good example of why this port to XP12 is a pain. ..and this is just one of a lot. Went over this for a long while yesterday and just had trouble trying to code around it. Took it directly to Laminar and sure enough, the acceleration ramp between lightoff and idle is simply inaccurate. The acceleration curve shape between lightoff and idle is hard coded and not tweakable via PM. Below is the N2 ramp for the default 738 (which has the same problem). This is Laminar's own data of N2 vs. time (but my overlay comments). You can see the very rapid rise of N2 after lightoff...getting to within 80% of idle in a few seconds. So you may ask, "well why don't you custom code it"...and we do to some extent, but there is a limit. Some parameters, if we decide to override, means its all or nothing. So if we "override the engines" for example..then we have to write the entire engine model for all regimes and that is almost a product in and of itself. Besides, Laminar's model is mature and pretty good...no need to reinvent the wheel.....to me this is simply a "plane-maker design issue" oversight. A 'coefficient' should have been provided (and is what I'm lobbying for) to shape this curve...like a lot of curves in PM can be shaped. The good news is its official, we're filing a ticket to Austin. Also good news (but not perfect) is I've coded a workaround for the next patch to get us through.....because I'm sure it'll be some time before the next update to XP comes out with this fix. The limitation on my patch will be "don't mess with a running engine while the other one is starting". If you do, then the starting engine will exhibit this "rapid rise" behavior somewhat. ...but many folks may not notice it. and these kinds of sweeping modeling changes are all over the place, and have really wreaked havoc with the accuracy of our performance. BUT....we're working on that too now. TK

Given evernthing else no...but I've added it to my list of things to look at. We'll be migrating to a documentation format similar to my MU2. In that, I keep a section of bugs, todos, wanted things and such. Some items stay on that list a long time, but at least you'll know whats in our heads. It will look like so (see MU2 example link below)...and when deployed, you'll see your request reflected on that list. http://www.togasim.com/mu2docs/supplements/bug_tracker_201.html

I can not WAIT to get there! Me and the wife used to live in a seaside town with lots of "snowbirds", folks who'd come down for the winter and drive horribly slow. I said then, " I can't wait till I can do that and enjoy it" TK

You're welcome. we wanted to have this up and running prior....but in the heat of battle, it slipped through. Hopefully when this 'infrastructure remodel" thing is done, information will be more cohesive and intuitive to find. Eventually we'll have a more comprehensive docs section for the IXEG similar to the MU2 (example below) http://www.togasim.com/mu2docs/ -TomK

Yes it will, though we will probably continue to provide the one avail now in parallel. So you'd have two ACF files...where the only difference will be the exterior objects. I expect we'll paint up the same liveries we do now, in high rez form, but of course new ones will have to be created for other liveries. This is probably annoying for "livery consumers" and great news for "livery painters" -Tom

Thx for posting. Sorry that happend to you! I've logged this. These errors get the highest priority so I'll be looking at it quick. We're going to be working towards a quick first patch. TomK

Indeed! Thx for sharing. Tom