Quite right Paul.Where would Ferrari have got without a certain Mr Schummacher.

I just confirmed that I have 20fps with the mouse in the menu, and 12 with the mouse cursor in the cockpit.Any news on this?edit: just got a CTD with the ifly 737. I'm on a relatively clean FSX install (1 week old) Fault Module Name: StackHash_c5f5Sigh.....

Any news on this?

The best place to go is the official product forum.

This is what I like about their product, you can modify it, unlike Aerosoft's bus. I've even merged the IFly with the default 738 VC and used the Ifly main gauges in there. I'm getting much better FPS and it doesn't get slower when the mouse cursor is visible. I think the IFly VC is nice, but the cockpit windows seem a bit small and the space between glareshield and windows too small. But that's just my perception.

hi all i was reading a post on ivao spain and a real 737 pilot with 2200 hours has said there are missing and bugs. just read (this is the original post: http://es.forum.ivao.aero/index.php/topic,177700.15.html). hope a patch from ifly team or i stll have to wait pmdg :-(Hi to all, I am really surprised how you talk about which thing is better without any knowledge about the real plane. As Josean has said, you are not giving a correct point of view, you are just giving yours. I took the time some days ago to translate the review made by Agustin (he is just 400 hours away of being Captain of 737-800 series at this moment, whe are talking about almost 2200 hours as F/O at this moment). Ifly is newer and it takes some advantages of that, but when you begin to get deeper, you get this:From Agustin Contreras (121085)"Hello people:After almost two hours doing tests with the 738NG of iFly and more than 2,100 hours flown in the real I be willing to do a review of that iFly as I asked by our partner.I decided to make an AGP - VLC as usual parameters that we use for this route.In addition to the normal flight I made a VOR approach in VNAV mode with GO AROUND, dual channel approach with GO AROUND, dual channel approach with autoland and visual approach landing finally by hand.After that I am having almost 2 pages of notes with adjustments that should be made for the iFly to be a little more real.I start:- Selecting the knob of BARO / RAD in the PFD does not move realistically. In the iFly simulator moves in increments of 10 feet. The real thing would be increments of 1 foot rise in velocity as a function of time pushing the knob. It becomes impossible to select MFRA for takeoff as company procedures or later Minimum ILS as JAR procedures.- Similarly, it is impossible to make any selection of this parameter in the PFD before IRS finishes the alignmet. Nothing is further from the reality where you can select the desired value despite of the IRS.- If we go to the boxes of NAV, we see that the VOR frequency change in increments of 0.25 MHz. In real the VOR freq change to increases of 0.50 Mhz.- In the real aircraft when introduced in the FMC the aerodrome of origin automatically PEF is reflected INIT AT aerodrome in question. In this case there is 18,000 feet as the FSX default.- Continuing with the preparation of the FMC, we get to TAKEOFF. By validating the speeds we see that with a simple click and become active. In the real plane takes two clicks to be valid and represented on the PFD.- Paying attention to the APU, I am amazed by its power. With packs is capable of more than 40 PSIs in air pressure. The typical value without packs usually around 40 PSI of air pressure.- When cutting HYD PUMPS A due to the morphology of the hydraulic system of the NG, there is a master caution and FLT CONT HYD. The part of HYD by detecting a pressure drop in the pump hydraulic power system A (logical if we just turn them off). The remainder is produced by losing hydraulic pressure causing such PRESS LOW FLT CONT At the immediate and emerging seconds later FEEL DIFF PRESS. In iFly displayed immediately after cutting the A HYD PUMPS.- We had to start the engines and see that by passing N2 56% jump the starter motor in question but unlike real quickly turns off the display of START VALVE OPEN in the Upper Display Unit The reality we leave a couple of seconds from cutting the START SWITCH to the disappearance of the indication in the DU.- In the start sequence we see that after putting the packs in auto,isolation valve in auto and the APU bleed valve in close, the indication DUAL BLEED disappears inmediatly. Error, since the reality that indication would disappear within a few seconds. Time required for the valve to close.- When we start the taxi we make a TOCW check. This is to test the functionality of TakeOff Warning System Config. If everything is correct we should not get any warning when moving the throttles forward (engine 1 or 2) beyond the position of 70% N1. We see that in this case it is not simulated because the TOCW jumps at 70% of N1 despite the position of the levers of the engines. The real as I say, is linked to the position of the levers, not the rpm of N1.- Also when we begin the taxi we set on the TAXI and RWY TURNOFF lights. In this case TURNOFF lights are not simulated. But when you turn the LNDG FIXED LGTS or RETRACT LNDG LGHTS light all at once. In the NG, retractable lights are in the belly of the aircraft and the fixed landing lights are in the wings, nexto to the turnoff lights.- Once in the air we see that the AFDS (Auto Flight Director System) does things on its own. If we compare iFly with the real one, it seems like if the ifly is in slow motion. It is imposible to get to a desired speed in less than 30 secs and impossible too to get to a desired HDG with the bank angle requested and in what aviation can be considered an acceptable time. Basically, the FD is on one side and AP is on another and behind.- Something you have not fixed even in last version are the DCT routings with the FMC from LEGS page. If we make a DCT with the FMC we just put the desired fixed in the highest position in the first FMC LEGS page and execute. The plane will turn on the shorter side and proceed directly to fixe once with the wings leveled. The iFly create a route from the moment you press EXEC and rotate to align with a radial line or made up routing from that position by creating a kind of trajectory in S to the fix from the current position.- In the case that concerns me, take-off at 13 I have VLC AGP VIBAS1A to runway heading until mile 19 of MGA to fly the 19 DME arc of MGA vor, then intercept the 004 track to GDA and then fly to VIBAS. At the beginning of MGA arc the plane has gone until mile 20 and then back to 18.5 miles before finally settling at the desired arc of 19 miles. Conclusion: bad monitor of the SID in LNAV. We may as well fly it in HDG SEL.- If during the route we put a fix in LEGS to make a direct but before we execute we want to cancel that and continue the pre-established there is no "ERASE". Yo have to execute and then re-enter the original fix.- Preparing the descent to VLC I go to the DES page. I try to correct the restriction of 250 knots below FL 100. The standard Boeing is 240/F100. To do this in the real life is simple, you just introduce a 250 or 250 / and the FMC understands that we want to change the value of the IAS constraint below FL100. In iFly I have to enter the full value (25/100) to take effect.- We go to FORECAST page to enter values ??that help Nintendo to calculate a VNAV path as valid as possible. To do this we start with the transition level. iFly FMC does not support 70 as TRANS LVL. You have to put him 7000. In adition there is no option to put the destination destination, only IAS DEV.- On FORECAST too, when winds are introduced to certain flight levels produces no promt when pressing EXEC. Just accept them. In the real plane a new path is calculated (PMDG does it). On the other hand these winds must be set in the right order (in the ifly): first you have to put the level to which we refer to and after, its wind. Otherwise the computer will not understand what we are making. In the real one (even in the PMDG) no matter the order we write winds/level, the FMC ask for an EXEC and computes accordingly. Another curious thing is that the FMC does not know what is FL90. You have to put him FL090 so it knows what we are talking about.- When setting the LEGS page, I decided to introduce certain speed restrictions on the approach to rwy 12 of VLC. I discovered with surprise that FMC does not know what is 220B or 220A as to what speeds are concerned. Whe have to use an exact speed, A or B after a speed is not supported, far from reality.- I continue with the cockpit preparation for the approach and find that selecting the minimum on my side (FOR) also selected the ones from the captain side ... Odd, if you have simulated diferent buttons, why not making them independent?- During descent I mess around a bit with the ENG and APU Bleed selectors. I see that when you open the APU Bleed Valve it does not turn on DUAL BLEED warning. We would be at risk of increasing the air pressure of the APU from the engines.- On the real if we go to the FIX page and enter the selected track in DEP / ARR can create an arc around the track. In this case we can not select anything. It only accepts the airport. Giving INVALID ENTRY trying to set RW12.- On the real, once we begin the descend through the VNAV ALT INTV or because they reached the FMC TOD, it's no longer available the CRZ or CLIMB page. It should only display a CRZ ALT when entered a desired altitude. In iFly we still have CLIMB ??or CRZ values.- When passing the transition level we change the QNH watching that altitude is also changed in the STBY altimeter, it should be independent.- Flying on HDG SEL plane turns well at the begining, becoming extremely slow in the last 10-15 degrees of turn.- The GPWS (Ground Proximity Warning System) is the king of panic. We cannot be at final with a variometer of 700 to 800 feet per minute and the plane singing TERRAIN TERRAIN...- First approach in VNAV, well flown by the machine. At 500 feet AAL disconnect A / P and A / T, select the M / A Alt and recycle the F / D. About 100 feet off the ground and performed the TOGA pulse G / A following the directions of F / D entering G / A mode according to the FMA. FD vertical mode is giving me nose to accelerate but stops when I select Flap 5 ... should continue giving an indication until I select Flap Up. Then the MCP IAS window opens and becomes a manual speed control through the throttle until SPD an A/T are engaged again. On the other hand, this is not the same if we make the G / A after a CAT-II or III approach. If you fly a G / A in automatic, the G / A is flown perfectly by the AFDS until Flap Up, when the MCP SPD window is opened.- Another curious thing during the approach in Dual Channel is that having selected the minimums in RA (50 Ft) the plane is still singing "Approaching Minimums" and "Minimums" in the value BARO that had been previously selected. "Singing again" reaching the RA minimums. Conclusion: We have two calls in "Approaching Minimums' and 'Minimums' for a common approach.- If you fly in V / S, below 1000 feet per minute it should be possible to select vertical speed in increments of 50 feet per minute. IFly can only do 100 to 100 feet per minute. Not the real stuff.- When we arm the VOR / LOC to intercept the localizer on an ILS approach, we see that the window of HDG is changed by magic ... There should be no movement in the value of HDG in the MCP window excepting us doing it manually .- Finally it came to my mind to try a Cross Bleed Start. To do this I connected the group and the external air. I turned off the APU and the first thing that amazed me is the pressure given by the external air. Nearly 50 PSI. Crazy. After almost 3 years I have never seen a group that gives more than 30 PSI. Either way I'm going to take for good that we have a group able to launch the Discovery to the space. What I do not believe is that after you put the 1-up and disconnect the group, the engine 1 is able to give in idle about 30 PSI of air pressure. To reach this value in the real plane you must apply thrust at least 40% of N1. Moreover, in the iFly the value of PSI does not increase as we increase the thrust of the engine.So after almost 2 hours of test is what I can say about this plane. There are many things that are not important, like the last of the PSI during a Cross Bleed Start but others that should be reviewed to face PMDG.It is true that flying this plane by hand without the Flight Director or another help, what is purely by hand is a real pleasure. Doing normal operation of of company is not desired.To conclude: if you are able to refine the AFDS like you have don with the flight dynamics and the handflying sensations, then I will not know wich addon I would prefer.Greetings to everyone"I want to apologize if I have made some mistakes translating « Last Edit: May 02, 2011, 20:58:05 by Alvaro Duran »

It is interesting though how he wrote this on May 2nd, but the FSX version wasn't out until 3 weeks laterJust sayin

No doubt you will run into bugs the deeper you dig. That is why the PMDG will be the best addon released, because it will be deep in all aspects. But I am enjoying the iFly until then and would never ask for a refund. They do great work and I look forward to their next FSX release.

There are some valid points, but you know someone training to be a pilot on the real thing is going to wish it to be a portable Level D simulator in order to aid their studies, and if they want that, they're always going to be a bit disappointed, what with no radar, no ACARs, no fuses to pull, no walkaround to perform etc.It is doubtful that anyone who isn't a real 737 pilot would notice most of those points, which is not to say that iFly have an excuse to get details wrong, but really, a lot of it is of pretty minor significance for an entertainment sim. Let's face it, pretty much all of use who are flying the iFly 737 about are not going to be asked to pilot a real one tomorrow, and even if we were, I think we could probably figure out that if you have to press a button twice on the real thing to get it to execute a function, as opposed to once on the iFly, we'd probably press it twice when it didn't do it the first time.Be nice if iFly make the changes, just so it is more authentic, but none of that is a deal breaker, since we're not studying for a check ride on a real 737, and if we are, we should be hitting the books rather than using a PC-based aeroplane that cost ten quid.Al

I hope he has found some positive points too. ^_^While there are some valid points (e. g. terrain warnings, rwy turnoff lights), some stuff doesn't take into account flight sim limitations (nav freqs and fsx engine modelling for example) and also leaves out the fact that more than one "bug" is present on some of the darlings in the business too (minimum settings for example).How come that especially FOs tend to post such things in flight sim forums, giving the wannabe force another spin up? I think that's a side-effect of this strange 'can you please tell me if I may like that addon?' mentality among some simmers.I can read quite some of his points as a welcome input for the devs, while others are "interesting" but not something to be worried about or a thing to say 'wow, what a bug!'. I know, we're all shocked about PSI values now, rendering the sim to be mediocre only .. are we?I'm more up to say that for the price given, it's a blast that you even have to grab that "bug" because you don't find much more severe ones on the 50 Dollar title. How much of a compliment is that?Alan is right, most of us, if not all, will not even notice such things. 2 hours of testing from that FO, listing all the negative parts only. That's grist for the mill of the 'I'm so darn real in the sim people while others just ask if a list with negative points only does this product justice at all.So if the only big points of him are FL90 or FL090 together with some maybe too high PSI values on the APU, I'm more than convinced that iFly already kicked out a fine ship in version 1.0 in FSX, at an affordable price and together with a 30 day money-back guarantee.If that doesn't compliment a good product, I don't know what else ever could.

The comments from Agustin are based on the FS9 version and not FSX. I was approached by Agustin offering his skills to modify the aircraft, as we have a team with a lot of experienced NG type rated crews we his offer was kindly turned down as our test team at the stage was complete and most of the team had flown he aircraft in FS9 and FSX considerably longer than a couple of hours. I did explain that a lot of issues had be resovled for FSX and fixes for FS9 would follow in the Feature Pack for both aircraft. A quick look at the crossbleed start on the FSX aircraft will verify this. We alway welocme feed back from our users real world or otherwise as there is a lot of FS pilots who have taken the time to read in detail the FCOM's and other sources of information available. No one person has all the good ideas and this has been shown by the way the iFly pilots have contributed to the development of current and future enhancements that will be added to the Feature Packs for both platforms.

Thx Steve!!! this is a great news!! The Ifly Team will also solve the mouse cursor that hit the performance? coz i have captain sim 757 and 767 and the fps never drop down, same with default planes and pmdg md11.

The comments from Agustin are based on the FS9 version and not FSX. I was approached by Agustin offering his skills to modify the aircraft, as we have a team with a lot of experienced NG type rated crews we his offer was kindly turned down as our test team at the stage was complete and most of the team had flown he aircraft in FS9 and FSX considerably longer than a couple of hours. I did explain that a lot of issues had be resovled for FSX and fixes for FS9 would follow in the Feature Pack for both aircraft. A quick look at the crossbleed start on the FSX aircraft will verify this. We alway welocme feed back from our users real world or otherwise as there is a lot of FS pilots who have taken the time to read in detail the FCOM's and other sources of information available. No one person has all the good ideas and this has been shown by the way the iFly pilots have contributed to the development of current and future enhancements that will be added to the Feature Packs for both platforms.

Thx Steve!!! this is a great news!! The Ifly Team will also solve the mouse cursor that hit the performance? coz i have captain sim 757 and 767 and the fps never drop down, same with default planes and pmdg md11.

We are working on this as posted on our support forum and full details of whats happening and when it is available can be found there by our licensed users. We will be offering a Service Pack in the near future also fixing some other minor issue.

Be nice if iFly make the changes, just so it is more authentic, but none of that is a deal breaker, since we're not studying for a check ride on a real 737, and if we are, we should be hitting the books rather than using a PC-based aeroplane that cost ten quid.

It is actually a huge compliment to this very nice plane that a real-world pilot has to go to that level of detail before finding faults :(

It is actually a huge compliment to this very nice plane that a real-world pilot has to go to that level of detail before finding faults :(

Indeed! Might I also add that I admire your way of looking at this? Instead of saying that iFly ought to do something about it, you turn it around and you say "if that's the stuff he finds, then iFly did a good job!". Seriously, if the forums would be populated with your way of looking at things, developers like PMDg would not be so hesitant as to show off their work more frequently.

I think that this positive aspect of looking at things is much more common and present than one may think. :rolleyes:It's just that all negative biased things gain more attraction, which is a known thing too. Every newspaper tells that story.