VirtualAviator

I'm not a developer so I'm out of my lane for asking this question. However, I am curious. If I were an aircraft developer looking for a channel for selling my products, why would I choose X-Aviation over some other sales channel? From what I've seen, it looks like this channel would make an excellent choice. I base this on Gizmo and the support I've seen as a customer.

Anyone know what's going on with HoneyComb Aeronautical? I ordered the Charlie Pedals last January (2023), got the message they missed their shipping deadline in June 23, got a single email from them and it's been crickets since. I'm wondering if I made a non-tax deductable donation to them.

As a flight simmer, I don't have thought exercises about how the under-the-hood stuff works or why. However, I love flight simming, and the more I sim, the more curious I become about how stuff works. Take the flight computer, for instance. The flight computer in a real airplane is super complicated in and of itself. If I allow myself to ponder this, I realize that the Flight Management System (FMS) or Flight Management Computer (FMC), - Laminar Research breaks down these terms in the documentation provided with default aircraft that incorporates flight computers - is a complex piece of programming and hardware. The program is complex enough to warrant the term computer or system. In the simulator, aircraft developers take one of two paths. They either adapt the work Laminar Research has done, in the case of X-Plane, or they develop an FMS from scratch. This is my understanding, so correct me if I'm wrong. Getting the FMS to perform the task correctly is a major lift. I believe people like Tom Kyler, Zibo, Totoritko, and a host of other developers are doing the hard work that folks like me often take for granted or want to bitch & moan about if it doesn't quite work right. Given the role of the FMS it's got to work correctly, right? However, reporting bugs is something that should be done with an eye on improving the experience and not berating the developer. I want them to know that I've grown to the point where I'm amazed and in awe of what they're accomplishing. When I look through the menu items of the FMS, I see that the work is ongoing. Many features that give the aircraft abilities or extra margins of safety are constantly coming online. Bugs are constantly being squashed - ooh, yuck. The work our developers put into high-quality aircraft is worth the money they charge. Given that we often derive utility from the system for years based on their willingness to toil through code that looks like the Mandarin language to many of us, how can one be an azzhole when something breaks? So, thanks, X-Plane developers (Aircraft, Scenery, and utilities) for what you do. Much appreciated.

Hi Adoreil. Welcome to the forums. I'm curious. Are you using X-Plane 11 or X-Plane 12? Also, you might want to note the freeware aircraft is almost 7 years old, without an update.

** SOLVED ** Once again, I'm providing feedback to my own issue. I have finally gotten Better Pushback (BP) to work. This is what was apparently going on and what I did to fix it. When it is time for the tow to disconnect a small windows pops up asking you to make a choice from one of two items. I was not seeing the window, therefore BP waited for an answer. The reason I wasn't seeing the window was because I changed my text size, from the graphics setting, from 100% to 150%. Text sized 150% is much easier to read on a 4K monitor. The window I wasn't seeing was apparently off-screen. Changing the text size to 100% allows me to select a choice and BP disconnects the tow. As an aside, I've read that XP12.0.8 also addressed some issues that affected BP.

That caught me off guard, hahaha..

They smacked me hard enough for me to get outta there...

Honestly, I miss participating in those forums, but not enough to go back. I often start conversations in the General Discussions area of this X-Pilot with the hope that people might wanna engage. Even without engagement, if I have something to say, I'll post there without hesitation. My observations in these forums are that the administrator stays busy assisting developers with various projects and, thus, over the past 15 years or so, has abandoned the idea of taking on the other forum, head-to-head. Since the other forum shares the name of the flight sim product, it has an inherent advantage. Nevertheless, we have an opportunity here, IMO. Another observation here is a lot of the regulars are also busy. This leaves them little time to be conversational, but they are super-happy to answer questions one has about products they support. Getting feedback on other products might be problematic; I have an issue with Better Pushback and have yet to get feedback to help figure out a resolution. Unfortunately, that compels me to go to the other forum, which I support ONLY for support. I'm long-winded this morning. Thanks for adding to this 10-year-old thread.

Welcome. You've landed (pun intended) at the right place. It's been my experience that most of the conversations center around support. Nevertheless, I am always ready and willing to be conversational about any and everything related to flight simming, and aviation in general. Technically, I am clueless. I do play around with python from time to time and have had several false starts trying to modify airports in WED. We have a resident airport developer here, who I believe worked with LR. @Litjan recently release a video tutorial series providing tips when working with WED in XP12. Anyway, whenever you have something on your mind that you wanna share, I'm constantly looking through the General Discussions forums.

It's been over a month since I posted the question of which winds to use. My own research has led me to this conclusion. I should use TOC winds for long-range flights. I suspect that I would be able to import winds along the route, or import the wind information tables provided by Simbrief (I know that the ZIBO 737 now supports this feature). Otherwise, I should use the average winds for short-range flights. A new question arises. What constitutes a short-range flight? A flight less that 1 or 2 hours? If I'm off the mark, let me know.

I guess tangentially, the installer is a part of the IXEG 733. However, I considered this thread to be directly about the add-on. Nevertheless, the guys here are great, and I sure they would not have minded the slight tangent without my apology.

I love the installer X-Aviation employs (apologies for the off topic comment).

Welcome to the X-Pilot forums. Are you referring to the default Cessna 172SP and the Baron?

I would be the one to post on a 10-year-old conversation. I have shared my opinion in other posts regarding the way I was treated on the other website. However, I found Tom's explanation of the division from the .org site to be very interesting; it was an enlighting read. Even 10 years later, I can't refrain from saying this: When I first came across .org, I made a common mistake - I thought it was the official website of X-Plane.com. At that time, I was not familiar with Laminar Research or Austin Meyers. All I wanted was to improve my simulator experience. The website's name "X-Plane" gave it an inherent advantage, but it's not the official site. Nevertheless, I still use it for add-ons and support, albeit with reluctance. Although I miss the conversational atmosphere of the other site, I'm not inclined to go back.

Anyone have an issue getting Better PushBack to complete its mission? Mines seems to hang after the pushback stops and before this script removes the virtual steering pin. I have to stop the program from running to taxi and resume steering. I've tried downloading the latest version(v0.52); setting the brakes with the keyboard and mouse multiple times. No joy. It doesn't matter the aircraft. Same results. Thanks!

Welcome to the X-Pilot forums.

Yup. There was a time when I felt a sense of entitlement. When I purchased an add-on, the developer owed it to me to be at my beck and call, to answer my every whim. After all, I demonstrated my trust in your product by giving you my hard-earned money while at the same time having a distrust of you. In my mind, you were some big software development company, making millions. Additionally, software development has virtually no overhead, so it's all profit for you. You, Microsoft, and Google have the same agenda - to make as much money as God. I engaged in YouTube, poked around flight sim forums, and learned that most flight sim developers are me. They are someone who's grown to love aviation and flight simulation. The difference is that they have software development skills. Many don't earn a profit and suffer abuse from the entitled me. Those that do earn profit have often spent years developing its add-on. I've learned that aircraft add-ons development has become almost too complex and complicated for a single person to make a high-end airplane. It often requires some collaboration and contributions from devs with strong skills in special areas. I can see how this collaboration can slow down development and even introduce beetles and roaches that have to be squashed. Even with some inclination of what devs go through, buggy releases are frustrating. I'd rather wait for a decent release that an aircraft that simply sits in my virtual hanger. Hot Start, AFAIK, builds highly customized add-ons. The systems go deeper than average and given how radically different parts of X-Pane 12 is from X-Plane 11, a lot of stuff apparently has to be changed in the TBM900. Exactly what, is above my pay grade but I believe Cameron, Pils and the developer when they say it's being worked on. Again, patience is a virtue.

Patience is a virgin.. ah-hem.. I meant virtue.

I flew a corporate run for a fractional owner

I don't know you, but welcome back. Whatcha flying for DAL (confirming it's the 747)?

Rob Hammer, a real world Challenger 650 pilot, and an advisor to HS on flight modeling says the flight dynamics are pretty realistic.

"I'm sure it's me. It usually always is". Also, I thought I was in lbs. Otherwise, I would have been able to figure this out. I have no problem admitting you guys are smarter then I am . Never the less, this thread is here in case anyone else needs it.

I debated whether to post this in help or General Discussion. Discussions won. I figured out how to program the FMS primarily watching YouTube videos. I noticed that some sim pilots use AVG WIND (Average winds) and some use the TOC winds (Top of Climb winds). I haven't be able to get a definitive answer of which one to use and why. While I have my suspicions on which one is correct, I wanted to hear from someone who knows. SIMBRIEF -- PERF INIT: AVG WIND or TOC Wind? What that they say about always learning?

Talk about brain farts... I reset the permissions to unlisted. Anywhoo, there's nothing there that would have helped you figure out the cause so you didn't missing anything. Thanks, Jan and blue skies...