Anyone mind posting the list of fixes due for SP1, it is in a restricted forum area for me (non-purchaser) I'm trying to make up my mind to buy it or not, and the fix list is a VERY important part of that decision (To Ifly dev team: why hide the fix list from potential purchasers? you should be shouting this info from the roof tops :( )CheersTim

Must admit that the placement of that list in the registered forum holds me back from quoting it here.I absolutely follow your argumentation, that list should go to the free section to allow future customers to take a glimpse. But as long as it isn't placed there, one has to respect the dev's intentions.Also, from reading the answers in the various threads over there, the list might even get expanded with this and that nice thing. I'm sensing a very busy and honest 'we're on it' mentality there. Nice thing so far.

Of course, I understand very well the support section is only for registered customers and rightly so, but it still would be nice to see the list, fixes only mean more-value-added-goodness You know I'm going to buy it anyway regardless as I'm fairly impressed with the reports I've read around the traps

The problem wasn't out of trim for the most part, it was that most joysticks by default don't have a big enough deadzone, and this airplane would refuse to engage the ap and would disengage just if your joystick was not set in the exact center.

You, me, we. Well a vast majority are not, so we think, professional pilots. There is only one of us at the controlls and work loads can get quite heavy at times. There must be a happy medium between realism and functionality for the average "simmer." Opinion of course.

I've had zero issues with this plane. I have an ancient Saitek X36F stick and X35T throttle assembly and no adjustments of any kind were required. With regard to piloting, this plane is no more or less difficult to fly than any other hi-grade sim on the market.DJ

Is there a fuel required/flight planning tool available for the iFly B73NG? Or are people using Top Cat or other flight/fuel planners for this? Given the realistic nature of the add-on, it would be great to fly with realistic fuel loads too. Thanks, Bruce.

I'm using TOPCAT and EFB. Probably would have been using FSBuild but it has gone haywire following the upgrade the other day LOLAl

I'm running this little freeware tool since the Ariane 737. For the sheer amount of fuel it's quite ok. http://www.metacraft.com/737NGFP/For the iFly, you have to enter the payload manually.

Is there a fuel required/flight planning tool available for the iFly B73NG? Or are people using Top Cat or other flight/fuel planners for this? Given the realistic nature of the add-on, it would be great to fly with realistic fuel loads too. Thanks, Bruce.

FSBuild and TopCat are both pretty good - you can find some new profiles for TopCat on the iFly forum.DJ

I am surprised that simmers are getting caught out with this one.Perhaps complacency in previous aircraft which were not as accurately and as truly modelled as the iFly may have set in,in that one could select AP without trimming first.The developers of this particular aircraft,IMHO,the finest in the flight simulation world,a true replication of a real-world aircraft,made it quite clear from the outset that this development was going to raise the simulation world benchmark.The only other aircraft I know that comes anywhere near it is the PMDG and Level-D outputs.So,the question I ask,is,do we blame the developer for making an aircraft so accurately modelled that we have to follow every facet of flight preparation to climb-out as per what the developer and the manufacturer designed,or do we blame our complacency?

Well I do not blame them at all... As I said, the reason I had no idea about it, is that I always get the plane ionto trim before enabling the A/P. As a result, I never have the problem of the A/P not connecting due to an out of trim plane. By the way, I would have to oppose the fact that the only planes that come close or LDS and PMDG planes. Let';s not forget the Leonardo Maddog! I'm absolutely sure that at this point in time, the Leonardo Maddog is still the most complete, most accurate plane that is available from a FDE/systems point of view. If it weren't such a framehog in FSX, I would still be flying it most of the time. Sadly, though, the FPS hit is severe. It's probably one of the worst performing aircraft I have for FSX... Luckily we have the Coolsky Super80Pro, too. While less accurate and having a completely flat VC (only the pedestal is 3D), it is my best performing FSX jetliner.

Well I do not blame them at all... As I said, the reason I had no idea about it, is that I always get the plane ionto trim before enabling the A/P. As a result, I never have the problem of the A/P not connecting due to an out of trim plane. By the way, I would have to oppose the fact that the only planes that come close or LDS and PMDG planes. Let';s not forget the Leonardo Maddog! I'm absolutely sure that at this point in time, the Leonardo Maddog is still the most complete, most accurate plane that is available from a FDE/systems point of view. If it weren't such a framehog in FSX, I would still be flying it most of the time. Sadly, though, the FPS hit is severe. It's probably one of the worst performing aircraft I have for FSX... Luckily we have the Coolsky Super80Pro, too. While less accurate and having a completely flat VC (only the pedestal is 3D), it is my best performing FSX jetliner.

Agree, right now the top of the heap is the PMDG MD-11 & 747, Leonardo MD, LDS 767, and the FSL Concorde-X. I would like to put the iFly on this list, but one thing that keeps it from being there for me is it appears to be using the default FSX engine startup/modeling. It spools up very quickly, and engine EGT values are always identical between the engines. In the case of the MD-11, 747, and the Concorde specifically, the engine modeling is custom coded and reflects the longer startup time of the real aircraft, and the EGT values vary between engines as they should.

FSBuild and TopCat are both pretty good - you can find some new profiles for TopCat on the iFly forum.DJ

Thanks Al and DJ

I would like to put the iFly on this list, but one thing that keeps it from being there for me is it appears to be using the default FSX engine startup/modeling. It spools up very quickly, and engine EGT values are always identical between the engines. In the case of the MD-11, 747, and the Concorde specifically, the engine modeling is custom coded and reflects the longer startup time of the real aircraft, and the EGT values vary between engines as they should.

I'm not seeing that startup behavior you describe...spool-up at start actually looks pretty good to me. Although not perfect (for example EGT starts climbing immediately when fuel flow starts rather than having a few seconds of delay before lightoff), it's certainly not doing the sort of crazy spiking I see on the default birds or add-ons that don't correct for the default behavior (i.e. the Eaglesoft Citation X).@brucek--I use FSBuild for fuel planning.

Although it is certainly nice to have tiny little bits of attention to detail such as slight variations in temps and stuff on the engine gauges, I don't think it is by any means a deal breaker to not have them when talking about modern jets where all that kind of thing is largely under the control of automatic systems anyway. For a sim, that kind of thing is far more important on older reciprocating water or air-cooled engines, and if I was going to say who was the top of the tree on that score, I'd suggest it would be A2A by a very long way.It'll be interesting to see how that pans out with the J79 they are currently working on simulating, where it genuinely will be sending temperature, flow and rpm data to the cockpit instruments from an actual simulation of the real engine.Al

Although it is certainly nice to have tiny little bits of attention to detail such as slight variations in temps and stuff on the engine gauges, I don't think it is by any means a deal breaker to not have them when talking about modern jets where all that kind of thing is largely under the control of automatic systems anyway. For a sim, that kind of thing is far more important on older reciprocating water or air-cooled engines, and if I was going to say who was the top of the tree on that score, I'd suggest it would be A2A by a very long way.It'll be interesting to see how that pans out with the J79 they are currently working on simulating, where it genuinely will be sending temperature, flow and rpm data to the cockpit instruments from an actual simulation of the real engine.Al

Oops, didn't mean to forget A2A (I have the Cub, Spitfire, and B-17, all w/ accusim). For the piston aircraft they are certainly the best, and I am really looking forward to the F4 they are working on. An "accusimed" J79, where do I sign?