Thanks DJ, I am fiddling around with the settings and got the FSX version (that's what I in flight with right now) A.P. to light up. Everybody's right...you have to keep fiddling around until iFly likes being on your system, I guess, LOL. I originally got the FS9 model, and if I generally liked it, would, and did pick up the FSX version for another $14.95. That was a no-brainer.Getting cozy with the all the manuals...is probably the ultimate 'fix', huh?The bird looks great on both platforms.Cheers,Mitch

I think both versions are outstanding - I've put about 15 hours on the FS9 and half that on the FSX and had very good results with them. I like them every bit as much as my old PMDG 737 that I've got many, many, hours on...DJ

I usually take off, adjust trim until the aircraft maintains v2+20 (or just accept whatever reasonable initial climb speed I stabilize at) without any stick pressure, then just push CMD A or B, boom - a/p engaged. I'm not the best sim hand flyer by far, I rely heavily on autoflight. so if anybody would have issues it's me, but I don't.edit - just to add: My Saitek stick is sensitive/noisy in it's initial ranges, so I have set null zones in Windows control panel for all axes to cover these noisy ranges.

Noted, and thanks :)

Well...what a fabulous piece of programming work the iFly 737NG is!After going step-by-step through the FMC programming tutorial, and setting all the operational parameters into the FMC.----I had a simply fabulous flight experience! "How did they program this simulated aircraft",(?!?!?!?) kept going through my mind as I watched the FMC. take me from 1,000 feet ASL up to FL320, and then down to the numbers at the end of the flight. This aircraft (after learning what it takes to fire up the CMD-A on the Autopilot and trimming out for it...) is a keeper like there is no tomorrow!I purchased both the FSX and the FS9 version---and have flown both for many hours now. It is my opinion that where this aircraft really shines, hand's down,...is with FS9 and a modern system to run it. The on-board systems react so fast and precise (auto throttle/over-speed at cruise), flight surface animation, flight instrument progression (digital or analog), that you simply do not get the full value of this bird, unless you see it all happening at a buttery smoothness of 60 FPS plus!Running around FSX at 12-30 FPS (depending on what you are viewing or flying over) does not do this aircraft any justice. At a constant 60 FPS (I have it locked down in FS9 at that figure) the iFly 737NG moves and flys as though in the real world. Nothing stuttering, nothing jerking, or slow to update. The animation from taxi, to takeoff, and then to landing is totally lifelike. The sounds of operation within and outside the aircraft are superb. The engines...spooling up and down to manage cruise speed is a treat to the ears. You guys have that 'whine' down pat!!!!Wonderful. Simply wonderful. My compliments to the programmers and producers. You have a true winner with this bird, and worth every dollar you asked for it.Was up all night flying both versions, and need to get some shut-eye. Thank you for offering it to the community!!! Mitch'er

Heh,after a morning providing support it is nice to read a comment like this :( I'm glad you are enjoying the thing as much as I do :( cheersJP.

It isn't finicky but just the real thing.If the real 737 is out of trim and the controls are thus under pressure, good luck on engaging the AP's.Same with the iFly 737.I honestly haven't had any trouble with it from day 1.But as I have read, we had a lot of "complaints" about it when the FS9 version was there too.It forces one to fly differently and we all know how humans react to change :( cheersJP.

I keep reading the same thing in the iFly support forum about this not being finicky but "just the real thing." I'm going to have to spout off now because this really isn't the real thing. This is a rudimentary simulation of the real thing and it is not the same as getting into the real Boeing 737 with real flight controls. With the various types of flight control hardware that the FS community uses, I think iFly could have tuned down the sensitivy of the A/P to accomodate those who might not have the perfect controls. You make it sound as if you sneeze in the real 737 the A/P will disengage. Having read the iFly support forum and finding out supposedly just how difficult it is for real 737 pilots to get the A/P to work as designed, I'll never get up in one again. God help us if one of the pilots itches his knee ever so slightly and bumps the controls - we'll be in completely vertical nose dive just like the iFly 737NG! I can understand if you have the aircraft a few hundred feet out of trim and not being able to engage the A/P but on my system, we're talking about what would amount to mere inches in the real world and I can't get it to link. Besides, if you want to tout off about how real this is, then tell me why the nav lights and strobes look like glowing gumballs instead of lights? I think they are disproportionate to the aircraft, stick out like a sore thumb, and look amateurish.C'mon guys admit you have some work to do, iron out the bugs, and quit dishing it off as being just like the real thing.

Whilst I agree that it is a bit prone to disconnect the AP on any minor stick movement until you alter sensitivity settings, all it really requires is to play around a bit with either (or both) the iFly control sensitivity option in the Config utility, and the sensitivity settings for ailerons and elevator in FS itself and then it is fine. so although iFly could 'have some work to do', you can easily do that work yourself, and it takes all of about a minute do it (honestly, it really is that quick), so it's not really that hard to sort it.Of course the appearance of nav lights are a matter of taste to some degree, and what FS is capable of, personally I prefer the light effects in FS Environmental, and so the way the lights look is sorted out for me by having that installed for FS2004. The default appearance of FS nav lights is garbage, those things are visible from 20 miles away in real life and FS doesn't come anywhere near to depicting that.Al

With the various types of flight control hardware that the FS community uses, I think iFly could have tuned down the sensitivy of the A/P to accomodate those who might not have the perfect controls.

HelloWhich is exactly why i-Fly have provided a means to tune the sensitivity in the Config tool.This works very well and anyone buying the i-Fly and reading through the documentation will be able to set up their controls properly.

"This is a rudimentary simulation of the real thing and it is not the same as getting into the real Boeing 737 with real flight controls."Overstated, I'd say. A "rudimentary simulation" the iFly is not. As to the flight controls, if someone can show me a airliner simulator which feels like the real thing and is affordable for an average person, my credit card is ready.Now I've never flown a 737, my experience having been in rather smaller machines. However, iFly test team members who go through their daily work routine in the front end of these things say trim, trim, trim if you want to engage the autopilot. Any casual viewing of a 737 flight deck DVD during takeoff will clearly show the pilot flying engaging in trim, trim, trim.What really is rudimentary is a sim which allows the user to free play without regard to proper procedures. If that's what someone wants, then by all means avoid the iFly 737 or any other advanced aircraft simulation.This just to add some perspective.Jim Harnes

I found what really solves this issue once and for all is to calibrate your yoke/joystick in FSUIPC (requires a registered version).You get precise info and control of your input/output data and you can very easily define the null zones for each axis.This can surely also be accomplished with FS9/FSX own joystick null zones settings, but with FSUIPC you actually see the numbers plus you get so many more useful options.

"This is a rudimentary simulation of the real thing and it is not the same as getting into the real Boeing 737 with real flight controls."Overstated, I'd say. A "rudimentary simulation" the iFly is not. As to the flight controls, if someone can show me a airliner simulator which feels like the real thing and is affordable for an average person, my credit card is ready.Now I've never flown a 737, my experience having been in rather smaller machines. However, iFly test team members who go through their daily work routine in the front end of these things say trim, trim, trim if you want to engage the autopilot. Any casual viewing of a 737 flight deck DVD during takeoff will clearly show the pilot flying engaging in trim, trim, trim.What really is rudimentary is a sim which allows the user to free play without regard to proper procedures. If that's what someone wants, then by all means avoid the iFly 737 or any other advanced aircraft simulation.This just to add some perspective.Jim Harnes

Perhaps "rudimentary" was not a good word choice. All I meant was it is a piece of software for a PC and not a true flight simulator sitting on top of hydraulics. Therefore, it is almost impossible to replicate the true feeling of the aircraft. I have to disagree with you or anyone who claims it "feels" like the real thing. If you have ever flown a real airplane you would understand what I mean. I agree with you 100% in that the iFly 737 is truly amazing as far as having to follow proper procedures. But with the vast number of users who all experience the same problems using flight yokes, I question why iFly refuses to address it. Until Saitek or CH Products can create the flight yoke that is devoid of any imperfections, my wish is that iFly would create a fix. However, the attitude I get is "too bad, we don't need or want your business anyway." For example, if GM or Ford manufactured the greatest vehicle ever known to mankind but it had one problem - they discovered nobody under 5'8" could drive it because they couldn't reach the gas pedal, I guarantee they would create a workaround. I'm quite sure they wouldn't snub their noses to all the short people and tell them they don't need their business - which they don't. But it is good business practice to keep and build a good customer base for future products. Right now, iFly is operating under a poor business model.

I keep reading the same thing in the iFly support forum about this not being finicky but "just the real thing." I'm going to have to spout off now because this really isn't the real thing.

Sharp observation, then again, the real thing does set you back about 55 million dollars.

This is a rudimentary simulation of the real thing and it is not the same as getting into the real Boeing 737 with real flight controls.

I'm nowhere claiming it is anything less but a simulation of a 737,although I do believe calling it rudimentary is a stretch.

With the various types of flight control hardware that the FS community uses, I think iFly could have tuned down the sensitivy of the A/P to accomodate those who might not have the perfect controls.

iFly provided the tools needed to adjust the sensitivity.If your controls are set up correctly you will have NO issues.If you DO have issues, you should check calibration and use the method of finetuning provided in the configtool.

You make it sound as if you sneeze in the real 737 the A/P will disengage.

Don't put words in my mouth I never used.What I am saying is that when you do NOT trim out a real 737the AP will not engage.It will also not engage if you maintain pressure on the control surfaces.I can't help the fact that your 737 AP disengages when you sneeze, but the reason for thatcan be found above.

Having read the iFly support forum and finding out supposedly just how difficult it is for real 737 pilots to get the A/P to work as designed, I'll never get up in one again.

Good for you.

God help us if one of the pilots itches his knee ever so slightly and bumps the controls - we'll be in completely vertical nose dive just like the iFly 737NG!

Then explain to me why, with a standard calibrated X52 without any fancy programming andwithout any extra measures I cán fly the plane, engage AP and sneeze without the result that you have?Am I just a lucky person, or what?

I can understand if you have the aircraft a few hundred feet out of trim and not being able to engage the A/P but on my system, we're talking about what would amount to mere inches in the real world and I can't get it to link.

Ah, after a rant of 30 lines we finally come to the important part :On YOUR sytem it does that.Why do you then say it does so on ALL systems ?As I said above, you háve to have properly set controls, and you háve to trim the aircraft,and only engage the AP when you are not maintaining pressure on your flight controls.

Besides, if you want to tout off about how real this i,

I am not touting anything :Fact : the 737NG AP does not enage if out of control limits.Fact : the iFly 737NG behaves the same.How is that not realistic?I don't get it, people are literally screaming for realism, and now that they have it,they're screaming for less.Make up your minds, folks.

then tell me why the nav lights and strobes look like glowing gumballs instead of lights? I think they are disproportionate to the aircraft, stick out like a sore thumb, and look amateurish.C'mon guys admit you have some work to do, iron out the bugs, and quit dishing it off as being just like the real thing.

They look like that in FS9 because they are embedded in the model, and that in turn is becauseeffects do not follow the wingflex.While effects look nice, they did not particularly look forward toa multitude of posts asking them why nav and strobe lights were beneath or above the wings.I believe they are revisiting the lighting for the Feature Pack, althoughthey are not to sure it can be improved, due to it being an FS9 limitation.If they find a way they'll probably improve it, though.cheersJP.

Perhaps "rudimentary" was not a good word choice. All I meant was it is a piece of software for a PC and not a true flight simulator sitting on top of hydraulics. Therefore, it is almost impossible to replicate the true feeling of the aircraft. I have to disagree with you or anyone who claims it "feels" like the real thing. If you have ever flown a real airplane you would understand what I mean. I agree with you 100% in that the iFly 737 is truly amazing as far as having to follow proper procedures. But with the vast number of users who all experience the same problems using flight yokes, I question why iFly refuses to address it. Until Saitek or CH Products can create the flight yoke that is devoid of any imperfections, my wish is that iFly would create a fix. However, the attitude I get is "too bad, we don't need or want your business anyway." For example, if GM or Ford manufactured the greatest vehicle ever known to mankind but it had one problem - they discovered nobody under 5'8" could drive it because they couldn't reach the gas pedal, I guarantee they would create a workaround. I'm quite sure they wouldn't snub their noses to all the short people and tell them they don't need their business - which they don't. But it is good business practice to keep and build a good customer base for future products. Right now, iFly is operating under a poor business model.

Huh?!!? :( Are we talking about the same iFly support? They've bent over backwards for their customers since day one, and done it all with politeness and the patience of Job. I have NEVER seen the kind of attitude you describe, not a iFly. Elsewhere yes, and I've been around a loooong time.

as Mark said, you falcon stating a bad business model is as far a truth could be, in fact you really should retract that from your post, an absolute lie. Trust me, if it were a "we dont care about customer"'type of business, i would have no problem with someone saying so here and in fact would agrss, but this is just not the case here at all.

Sharp observation, then again, the real thing does set you back about 55 million dollars.I'm nowhere claiming it is anything less but a simulation of a 737,although I do believe calling it rudimentary is a stretch.iFly provided the tools needed to adjust the sensitivity.If your controls are set up correctly you will have NO issues.If you DO have issues, you should check calibration and use the method of finetuning provided in the configtool.Don't put words in my mouth I never used.What I am saying is that when you do NOT trim out a real 737the AP will not engage.It will also not engage if you maintain pressure on the control surfaces.I can't help the fact that your 737 AP disengages when you sneeze, but the reason for thatcan be found above.Good for you.Then explain to me why, with a standard calibrated X52 without any fancy programming andwithout any extra measures I cán fly the plane, engage AP and sneeze without the result that you have?Am I just a lucky person, or what?Ah, after a rant of 30 lines we finally come to the important part :On YOUR sytem it does that.Why do you then say it does so on ALL systems ?As I said above, you háve to have properly set controls, and you háve to trim the aircraft,and only engage the AP when you are not maintaining pressure on your flight controls.I am not touting anything :Fact : the 737NG AP does not enage if out of control limits.Fact : the iFly 737NG behaves the same.How is that not realistic?I don't get it, people are literally screaming for realism, and now that they have it,they're screaming for less.Make up your minds, folks.They look like that in FS9 because they are embedded in the model, and that in turn is becauseeffects do not follow the wingflex.While effects look nice, they did not particularly look forward toa multitude of posts asking them why nav and strobe lights were beneath or above the wings.I believe they are revisiting the lighting for the Feature Pack, althoughthey are not to sure it can be improved, due to it being an FS9 limitation.If they find a way they'll probably improve it, though.cheersJP.

I appreciate your professional sarcasm but what it boils down to is I doubt you're qualified to even speak about the real 737NG systems. Furthermore, nowhere did I say that the problems I experienced are true with ALL systems. Don't try to belittle me and suggest I am the only person with issues related to A/P and system hardware. Try to keep the conversation on an adult level otherwise try to refrain from posting. One more thing, a lot of payware aircraft won't engage the A/P when out of control limits. This isn't new to the flight sim world. Other quality payware products aren't as sensitive but all together just as "real."

as Mark said, you falcon stating a bad business model is as far a truth could be, in fact you really should retract that from your post, an absolute lie. Trust me, if it were a "we dont care about customer"'type of business, i would have no problem with someone saying so here and in fact would agrss, but this is just not the case here at all.

I stand by my statement. It's not a lie, it's an opinion. I'm not talking about the support that is offered - which is nice - but pretty much standard operating procedure with most if not all quality add-ons. I'm referring to the numerous posts by iFly support that they "will not dumb-down" the aircraft by applying a fix to the A/P sensitivity for the sake of realism. Yet, they have no problem with the dumb-downed visual aspect of the model with the goofy looking nav lights and strobes. I've requested a refund and therefore I have no vested interest in this aircraft or topic again. Time to move on.