tkyler

@spreilly a bit of of background about this whole variant thing. The ability to upgrade our work and make variants is very much tied to both the toolchain we use to develop the IXEG, as well as our 'techniques'. Like anything else, we get better over time at what we do and how we do things and the tools we use evolve as well. In the beginning (2010), we used Blender 2.49, a software quite difficult to make changes in. Also, we wrote our own exporting scripts to leverage emerging X-Plane tech. So after some time, we have this enormous amount of data/assets in a software format that is aging (like every software title). Fast forward a bit in the future and Blender 2.8 releases.....that was such a major....really major paradigm shift in organization of 3D assets....that it changed everything and we set about converting all our work to that format. Blender 2.49 was being abandoned by all. That was a really really laborious and long process that you guys didn't see any change from from ..it was our own challenge to keep the IXEG poised for the future. Even thinking about variants at this point wasn't an option. Fast forward a bit more...we get everything into Blender 2.8, things settle down for a year or so, I work on the MU2, which handles...count em....6 variants... and then X-Plane 12 drops. *sigh...here we go again. and so for the better part of a year, we start this process of integrating everything into X-Plane 12 format. On top of that, I'm swapping out lots of code for more "template" code, getting ready to start some new products also and we've just been building this 'infrastructure' on top of Blender 2.8+ (now 3.6) and XP12 for quite a long time. So....we still have to catch up on all that FMS stuff, still have to make the swap to FMOD and redo the 3D exterioro to keep the IXEG 'up with the times'....and after ALL that, then we can think about variants. BUT....best we can tell, we are in a technical place to do so. Its not that we don't want to...we just have 'the priority list' based on many years of customer input. I know this stuff takes a while, but in my quiet moments, I remind myself that I've been flight simming since 1981...still do it, its a lifelong hobby, most of the 'IXEG type' customers are probably the same...and I should just keep on moving. I'd like the variants in at some point...even those old mechnical ADIs / HSIs. Fingers crossed we'll get there. -TomK

We can't say exactly. We wake up (GMT -5/-6), start our 'deploy checklist' and when everything is a go, its a go. Not unlike a rocket launch. Sometimes its earlier, sometimes its later. All I can tell you is I myself like to get these things out the door before it too late in the evening local time. Its a tiring process which requires recouperation before the release support, which of course is in demand immediately. So I like to try and get some sleep while folks expect us to be sleeping. Of course, this is always a bit rough on those waking up on the east side of the pond....waking up many hours before we do and having to wait a bit. Obviously my evening is close to their next day. I'm sorry about that in advance....darn global economy! The ultimate goal is to "...allow folks to have it as early as possible for the weekend"...which is why we commonly target Fridays, so the eastern hemisphere folks get it for the weekend. Folks just on the western side of the dateline will have it the roughest...might even go into Saturday for them. The whole 'Friday' context applies to our local time here in the US. That's the best I've got. -tkyler

Not for the forseeable future. This is simply a matter of time and logistics atm. I have 'X' number of plates I have to keep spinning, not only for this X-Plane work, but also life in general. I'm creeping up on that age where the less things I have to think about the better. I have given this some thought, but unable to work it in so don't think about it currently. -tkyler

We do appreciate your support Hermann, but your conclusion here is a subjective one. The product pages at XA are provided "for prospective customers consideration when evaluating a purchase", They are not policy pages, warranties or guarantees. Once one has made a purchase, that page, conceptually, goes out of context. I find this reasonable. I bought a Dell monitor a year ago. For me to keep an eye on Dell's "sales page" and try and argue that "current deals offered to prospective customers" on those pages should be retroactively applied to my purchase over a year ago is not reasonable in my opinion. I respect you have your perspective though mine is different. Certainly your perspective will be taken into consideration for future wordings so your points are noted. On a broader level though...you stated previously that you thought the IXEG was great and I thank you for that. If we didn't charge for this update, then I would have never started the update and we would have absolutely declared the IXEG end of life at Version 11 and I would have moved on from X-Plane development. As it stands, I hope to now support the IXEG for years to come and also develop new products. Your support, whether you agree with some elements of the effort or not, does play a part in that. If you choose to purchase the upgrade, I hope you still find the IXEG to your liking and we'll endeavor to keep at it making it better. -tkyler

Potato / Pa-tah-to it seems..... I recall one reviewer on Youtube once said, "The sounds of the IXEG are mediocre"...and recommended a "sound-pak" which was much better. He probably had tinitus Having used FMOD on the MU2, I have a reasonable feel for it and while it is powerful, It does take 2-3x the work in FMOD than it did in code only. That being said, it does open the door for more immersive sound implementations and certainly ensures future compatibility, which after this V11 / V12 transition work, has taken on a new level of importance for us. But reset assured, we'll make sure the sound immersion holds up. Its a major part of the experience for sure. -TomK

A year ago, a friend bought his son (now 14) a copy of the IXEG. Before, his son was not in a life place to desire/enjoy the 737 but has recently become interested in Aviation and flight simulation. Is he undedicated because he purchased within the last year? There are 'new' flight sim enthusiasts every day. They do not deserve to be called undedicated. For the rest of you folks who understand economics and the software dev cycle....and value your time / work and also respect the value/time of others work, I thank you and appreciate you. I know there's a of you out there. This update is intended to be a foundation from which to continue improvements on the IXEG. XP12 broke a lot of stuff and "band-aids" weren't going to get it done. Towards that end, some answers to recurring questions..which will be regurgitated elsewhere at release. Operational functionality is the same as V11 currently. (i.e. no change to FMS) Last 9 months were spent in 'repair' of areas broken in V12 and getting back to baseline. Plan going forward is to focus on 4 areas (in no particular order). FMS/vnav FMOD sounds New 3D exterior. Mac ARM suppport The above items will take a while. We'll begin work on this immediately, indeed already in process. Any cargo, 400/500 variants takes a back seat to the items above, if at all. Minimal demand. Unsure the time frame for ARM support. I myself deal with this and run Rosetta currently. we understand many MAC users may not find this acceptable until ARM support. We're on it. A new 3D exterior will be provided one day. When so, the old liveries won't work; however, folks can still use the old 3D exterior if desired. Again, I thank those who understand the economics! -TomK

OK OK. I don't agree, but OK...you've given nothing else to go on. That's a RXP "in-sim" setting on the user end. Not part of the INI file which I provide. I have no control over that. ...see below. RXP chose to limit the power to a small subset of default XP choices, which precludes really customized bus configs. For example, the Moo has a left/right radio bus, essentially TWO avionics busses. X-Plane doesn't even simulate that. IMO, RXP should have provided a custom dataref option in the INI file for power.

@meierzwo I'm super sorry about that. I answered that while 'on the road' visiting my elderly mom and wasn't really paying close attention. Thank you for responding to the original poster! -tk

in your first screenshot, your "auto-stop power levers at detent" is not checked and the ghost throttles will not show in that situation. In the second screenshot series, you do have this checked; but your visibility is set to 'lift zone and below" with upper limit at 0.6...and your torque meters indicate that you're probably not in that zone. So both of your screenshots are configurations where i would not expect the ghost throttles to show.. Check the box "auto-stop power levers at dentent and then set the visibility to 'always' and see if they show for you then. TK

You're correct, the right brake has a hard coded delay that's longer than the left one. When hardware is attached, I set the delay to 0.1s...which should be fast enough to follow your brake pedal application...and this is the case on the left pedal only atm. The brake rate set in the prefs applies to when no hardware is attached, so that's why its not getting affected. I was probably playing with the values way back when and only set one (because I don't have pedals and was using one throttle lever to test)....and forgot to set the other. Its on my todo list now. Thx again. -tkyler

Thx @daemotron The new V12 lighting requires some changes all around to light stuffs and seems I missed the tail beacon. Its on the list for a next update.....speaking of which isn't too far down the line. The IXEG port is almost ready to go and on a 'NASA style hold' while other logistics are being tended to...and I have some windows of time to chip on the Moo over the next 2 weeks. Again, thx for pointing out. -tkyler

I'll ping Laminar on this, I think that error is coming from them and is Windows related, I'm not seeing this from the few Mac users I've ping'd. Flooding the log with a message like that, presumably from some flight loop is bad practice. Thx for reporting. -tk

Do you have the G500 plugin in the MU2 plugins folder? Have you tried moving that out of the folder temporarily for debugging? What does the log.txt look like if that's the case etc? -tk

Definitely not. I know this, I wrote the code and have all the old versions. That is an older version, 1.21 to be exact (which was pirated way back when). Your solution? Download the latest version available to you (1.33) as a customer from X-Aviation. -tk

I am at a bit of a loss atm. The last version, 1.33 for XP11.....the loadcoroute function is not on line 662 as your error shows. The coroute loader handles both .flp and .fpl types. What version of the 733 are you on? That seems like it may be some error from very early versions of the 733. The coroute system was rewritten quite a bit for the later versions. ..indeed, we haven't seen a 'coroute bug' report in several years. Have you installed the latest 1.33 version (for XP11) from X-Aviation? -tk

The battery key position is a custom dataref. I'll have to add a command to make that available for you. I've put it in my issues list. Thx -tkyler

TBH I have not, for a few reasons. The engine (as opposed to prop) sounds totally dominate when on the ground, so I haven't distinguished much of a difference. I haven't found a really good 'side by side' comparison of the differences between the two MU2 are rare enough birds, that we get our perception of sound mostly through YouTube Videos and in those cases, the wind direction can have an effect on how the sound hits the camera microphone....so REALLY figuring out how a 5-blade vs a 4-blade really sounds across the entire operating range has been a challenge. Usually you just get some "taxiing" videos. Most folks absolutely focus on the loud whine/howl of the engine...that's their recollection of the Garretts sound. If I had a really goood 'sound data' of both where I could hear the distinction across the operating range....and was sure the distinction was due to the 5-blade prop itself (rather than other, recording or environmental factors like echo/reflection/wind), then ceratinly I'd consider it. -tk

I don't think so! i've put an entry in the Moo issues list so this will get revisited after the IXEG goes out. -tk

that's kinda correct Frank... though 'sometime later' is actually to begin asap after the bug-fix phase following release. The term "major lift" is probably somewhat relative to each individual though. This is more evolution than revolution. The plan is to prioritize the FMS/VNAV improvements first, then in parallel as able, swap the sounds over to FMOD and begin a new 3D exterior model. So for folks who spend 95% of their time enjoying the cockpit and don't care about the rest much....then elements of a "major lift" may not seem so major. For folks who live for VNAV descents, then they may see the VNAV work as a major lift etc. Either/or, the plan is to continue on those elements listed above after release for sure and we'll evaluate other features along the way. -tk

Been quiet here a while. Sorry for that. Yes, still on this every day We have slapped a release date on our own calendars finally, but of course we're not tossing that date out because our crystal ball isn't the latest model. To at least be able to see a firm date is encouraging. The delay since wrapping up the 3D/visual work is mostly due to my reworking of my code infrastructure to be more 'decoupled' and "libraryish", such that it can more easily be reused and applied to future work. Because we're wanting to do new projects while improving the 737 also, I needed my old code to be a bit more flexible and it was just easier to begin that process now. So hopefully the benefit of this phase of work will be seen with more rapid development down the line. I hope that's the case . Sorry for delay in reporting, I'm still happy to be doing this and ensuring I can continue to do so. -tkyler

Surely yes much more, and more than coding, hence the decision. ...indeed you have staying with XP11..... and I truly know how you feel, being that XP12 abandoned the IXEG and I've spent nearly a year chasing after it trying to catch up, but that was the only path. -tk

Unfortunately no. The XP11 version "is what it is".... too much has changed since XP11 and we have to move with majority to keep at this. -tkyler

There are elements of PBR in the cockpit already, though not to the extent of the cabin for sure. I will make a pass over that at some point to determine how to best thandle this. Our techniques at the time didn't have the 'power' we do today with Substance Painter. So yea, I'll give it a look, but it will be gradual process after other things are handled first. -tk

unsure, I haven't examined closely as it has been (historically), a simple system that traditionally has just worked, but easily it could be X-Plane has made a change I didn't catch. Noted to check this before next release. -tkyler

There is not currently; however, I have made a note to add a command to do this for the upcoming V12 port+ patch....something like "ixeg/733/connect_gpu_to_aircraft, etc. -tkyler