tkyler

we have a hotfix coming out soon Tom that will fix several of these. I can tell instantly your issue as its the same as many previous reports and it should be fixed in the next hotfix. -tkyler

Yes, but TNP is part of BOTH the SID transition and the STAR transition....so when these are entered, the FMS has to make a determination..."which one do I keep"? No we have a set of rules for these cases.... but they are 'growing' as we see new situations and this is a new one. In this particular case, TNP associated with the STAR has a restriction, whereas TNP associated with BOACH does not have any restrictions.....and so I'd think the one with the 'restriction' wins....and I will now add this to our "rules" when we encounter duplicate points. Now if BOTH had a restriction, that could get complicated. In such a case, we'd have to look for another rule to apply ...and things get a bit more sticky here in that we may generalize some rule that works for situation A, but not situation B. What happened here is my code chose TNP associated with the SID (with no restriction) when it should have chosen TNP associated wiht the STAR (because the restriction supercedes). This is on my todo list now. -tkyler

IT should Tom. this is why we need guys like you, nobody ever thought to try and delete a coroute. -tkyler

THX for this. The OAT temperature doesn't use a slash for its entry and that's what my code is choking on. I did test for "Characters", I simply never tried a slash Fixed -tkyler

I couldn't say for sure without a debug output (IXEG_debug.txt). The debug output (not GizmoLog.txt) contains all the route info that I use for route analysis. If you can repeat the error, pause the sim and generate the output (CDU key " . . . . ") then I can analyze the route "step by step". -tkyler

It was your post I quoted.... but I did not mean to imply you were the one punching...my post just kind of morphed into that; however, I have never taken anything you've said as punching at all, I quite view your comments are accurate and constructive, definitley noted! -tkyler

This is definitely one of the areas I was on the fence about. I have wavered back and forth over this, and totally see your point. I'll shed some light on why I went the other way. When I would get a description from Jan about how the FMS behaved....I would assess the workload to implement. I could "block off that feature", toss out some INVALID message" to the user when they tried it....and be done with it. NO gizmo crashes risked, etc. The problem was, that IF we wanted to implemented such a feature in the future, then it had to be wired into existing functionality....and the wiring generally proved to be extensive enough that you just could not leave the feature hanging or effectively block it off....it was either, "put it in now, or risk too much effort adding (motivational problems) it in". So, we really wanted to make this thing as real as we could....and so we just had to say, "lets go for it"....and we did that in so many areas, we just couldn't test all the permutations resulting from the extra options and functionality. THIS is what I refer to as the "rite of passage" or "pain of childbirth". ...and why I say this couldn't go any other way. IF we want a super accurate FMS, then we just have to put it out there, see what users do that we did not, and fix it. Take the punches....and one day, the bruises will heal and we'll have this wonderful thing we envisioned years ago...and it will be good. So keep punching, we'll keep fixing and get there.....but its Sunday, no fixing today Family time. -tkyler

Understood, but very few can develop software like this, so we don't get to pick and choose. I do have a 'theory' on this whole situation, I may blog on it shortly...but I don't back down nor feel any embarassment. We have endeavored to move to a new level of detail, not just in the subtleties of the FMS, but in a lot of other areas also. Every additional level brings exponential detail to tend to and the more you chase, the harder it is. Many programmers have said what you said; however, I would say, "But you are not doing this now are you, we are". Please understand that I don't mean that to be derogatory, but rather than until one has given this a try, really have no clue how difficult it is given this market we are in. What? Maybe 5 FMSs developed in the 30+ year history of flight simming? It is easy to sit on the other side and tell us how its supposed to be done, but at the end of the day, (or a few months from now), you will find that we..... not any other programmer.... are the ones who got it done, ergo, we figured out how to get it done...and Gizmo plays into that. I do not dismiss the complaints or bugs, I know they are there, they frustrate me too; however, it is my contention that this is the way it had to go for several reasons I won't get into cause they're my own opinions.....and though some disagree, I will re-iterate that here in a few months, this thing will be humming along, you will have paid no more money and you will get support for many years to come, in addition to new functionality, all for the original 74.95 price.,...no cost for new liveries or such. When the dust settles, IXEG will have produced a next level aircraft....and we will be quite proud of that achievement. In addition, we will continue to support you and every other customer to ensure you get your monies worth for many many years to come! -tkyler

The ones in the interface guide are just the "input" or "actuator" ones for the moment. There are indeed MANY more, but we need to audit as a lot of them are not useful to cockpit builders and we don't want to clutter the list, but only include relevant ones. After things settle down slightly, I'll set about compiling the list. -tkyler

Oliver, Mac is NOTORIOUS for hiding the true file extension. If you right click on the files you created and do a "Get Info", the true filename will be shown. Most of the time it will say something like: EHAMEDDL.fpl.txt even though in the Finder, you only see EHAMEDDL.fpl If you remove the .txt in the GetInfo dialog Box....you will then see a dialog asking you which file extension you would like to use. Select .fpl and then give it another go. -tkyler

Hi gents...welcome. I've been a bit too busy to come play with you guys but will at some point. Once we get a few more features in and this things stabilizes, then I'll poke my head in here and we can discuss if any extra datarefs are needed. Thanks for jumping in. -tkyler

That is not correct. I recommend you reload the aircraft. If you have a gizmo issue like a console window pop up, then we have seen cases where subsequent rebooting of the scripts (which the hotfix does) will not always "fix all". It depends on the nature of the gizmo soft crash...but as a 'safe precaution', we (the IXEG team) have taken to reloading the aircraft after a gizmo soft crash to make sure. Now...as to if the hotfix is installed at all. Bump the main menu on the left side of the screen and the Version will be shown. I should be V1.0.1. The third digit represents hotfixes...so a '1', means hotfix #1 of course. Hopefully with 1.0.1 and an aircraft reload, you will be running. -tkyler

Thanks...as will we. Working on the LNAV / VNAV refinement as we speak (or type) -tkyler

definitely let me know the routing and cruise alt, + logs and I'll jump all over this! We do give quite a few routes a try, but over the last two days, we are simply finding, "wow, I just don't enter things that way". Huge help to have you report these. THX! -tkyler

YES. purchases will always, automatically have the latest hotfix included. -tkyler

Certainly safe to "give it a go" and see what happens. With 300,000+ nav points, you never know......but I can tell you that there has hardly been a bug like this we could not patch in a day or two...then try it again, etc. The HOTFIX system is all about getting customers improvements to code as quickly as possible. We certainly don't stop trying to improve the code, we're on it every day....well...family gets weekends. -tkyler

I did note in one of the log files that the last gizmo command was a "sound.say" for the flap callouts. I think I'm going to disable it for our first quick patch and lets see where that goes to next. -tkyler

for grins, I couldn't help but wonder if other "big releases" deal with such issues.....so out of curiosity, I compiled a list of all the update items for PMDGs NGX since its release.....TEN pages long!...with one as recently as a year ago...ish. and the first patch repaired several CTD issues. We have defintiiely NOT seen an x-plane crash in I don't even know how long. Oh well, we keep improving, one foot in front, that's how we got here in the first place. Back to work for me! -tkyler

mmerelles has got you covered! We are still working on the fuel calculations and their display. Several additional FMS features should follow along within a few weeks as mmerelles said. -tkyler

The VVI doesn't animate in replay mode...which when shooting videos is the common way of doing it, so you can focus on those great camera angles!. I couldn't tell you why....but my curiosity will force me to look at it one day. -tkyler

half of it has been...and with any luck the next half will be before Saturday If not, then it will be within a short time after release. Our FMS improvements and feature implementations after release we expect to happen at a quick pace...the FMS and remaining features will be an area of heavy focus post release. We've been known to add entire pages of functionality in well less than a week; however, we are finding the volume of information the FMS provides is pretty substantial and we just have to keep moving. At the moment, we have the first 3 lines, with waypoint info implemented. I'll be looking into the rest of it tomorrow time permitting. -tkyler

No RAAS atm. Unsure if we'll add it as it is an "add on" for the most part. It did cross my mind though. When I wake up with nothing else of higher priority on my plate, I might do it as an option, I think it would be cool myself. -tkyler

You know what....I have to confess. I can't remember the version the Saab guys use. I did quite a bit of work on the sound engine for the 737 and may have added in the replay functionality during 737 development...and of course have had zero time to back-port it to the Saab team. ...after 6 years, I can't remember when I did anything...that at my advancing age. -tkyler

Um...new to me....and I wrote it! -tkyler

there will be a folder within the 737 root folder called, "fmc_data". Inside this is a folder "SidStar" and "NavData". ...but the installer will probably take care of those files. I'm guessing "fmc_data" is the one you'll point to. -tkyler