Yes, I am aware of that. However judging by the fact it feels very similar to their 727 is where the disappointment comes from. I don't know if they will fix it to fly better or not, but as of right now it feels overly "heavy" and underpowered. I am going to switch .air files and modify the .cfg, it is what I had to do with the 727. The other disappointment with CS is that that coded some gauge to recognize their external model, so VC swapping is out.

 

Respectfully, I couldn't disagree with you more.

You may be right. I was getting my information from b737.org.uk. According to them aircraft number 135 onward beginning in March of 69' incorporated the redesign. The Advanced began in 1971 with line number 400.

 

The information on b737.org is correct, however you are misinterpreting it. See my earlier post (number 335) which lists the main ADV differences; the improvements to the basic 200 series are not the same thing as the design changes which were what constituted the ADV. These basic 200 series improvements were: changes to the thrust reverser buckets, flap and slat changes, widening the engine support stanchions, lengthening the engine nacelles, and souping up the wing a bit with improved construction methods.

 

These improved basic 200 series models, which as you note, commenced from number 134 on the production line, were therefore not ADVs, although many of them would later be altered to ADV standards when a modification kit to make that possible became available after ADV production had started.

 

Al

That is more or less what I was trying to say. The original basic 200 that Captain Sim made is the original pre redesign version of the 732. The later basic 732's looked more like the advanced than the basic. There are basically 3 main variants of the design. Basic, Basic redesign and Advanced, the last two being very similar to each other.

Hi Tood, Im not sure what you mean by it does not fly right, I can understand the underpowered part but if you follow the Boeing climb specs for the 732 you should not have issues but the 737-200 was never a fast climber from what i know about it ( which is not much btw ). I also believe the 737-200 like the MD80 when fully loaded had to do staggered climbs allowing the fuel to be burnt off so it could climb higher. Also i think the default load out is fully loaded which could be why it feels heavy.

 

I do assume by your comments that you are/was a real world 737-200 pilot and not a passenger as im sure if you have flown them CS would be happy to hear how it performs based on the real thing :)

 

p.s. i would not know realism if it bit me on the toe :)

why would you want to mess around with guages with a complex aircraft. It's not going to work. I know nothing about it but could have told you that. Fly it like it is....

 

Doh........ (I think the word is pablum: child-like over-simplification of a subject you know zip all about)....

 

Some of us are perfectly able to tweak and customize even complex add-ons to make them personally more enjoyable for ourselves. I am not forcing you or anyone else who don't have that ability to take on board what I was testing. I short, you clearly weren't the audience for my post and tests: but some people here were.

 

I think he was just trying to get to the source of the heading stuff. Anyway, did the HDG bug movement get better for you, Stick? Means with 0.8.

I'm still waiting for 1.0, but, as said, I'm into every 737-100/-200 thread there is.

 

Hello CoolP

 

I've just tested 0.8 and heading manipulation with the left and right mouse buttons results in much better, faster turning of the heading bug. However, the mouse scroll wheel is not improved at all; still a snails pace. The aircraft now has a new GPS/NAV switch near the top of the MIP (it's unmarked so took some finding!), and will now successfully follow a FSX Flight Plan - good for times when you don't want to fly only VOR to VOR.

 

Regretfully, the heading bug is still not binded to the FSX key assignments, so it's still mouse clicks all the way...........

 

Getting better, but not one for me personally, yet.

 

Also, I am finding that the VC is very shimmery, under AA and AF settings that would normally look good in most other VCs (like NGX). I have to use the highest possible AA settings under super sample AA mode to get rid of the shimmering - with the resultant performance drop that this gives.

when cs came out with their f104, it was such an enjoyable and simple experience to purchase that wonderfully inspired creation. i'm sorry, but ever since that era, cs has always been a souce of frustration for me......aside from how great their products are.....a wise man once gave me some sound advise.....simplify simplify simplify.......but of course that's just me

when cs came out with their f104, it was such an enjoyable and simple experience to purchase that wonderfully inspired creation. i'm sorry, but ever since that era, cs has always been a souce of frustration for me......aside from how great their products are.....a wise man once gave me some sound advise.....simplify simplify simplify.......but of course that's just me

 

around 2 years ago I would have agreed with you.... but to be fair, CS have 'come out of the other side' from the period where their security systems made purchasing an absolute nightmare ........... it's now an extremely simple process again, no worse than any other vendors (and simpler than say PMDG* with their in-game activation box IMHO).

 

The CS purchasing system now is just (i) pay by CC or PayPal, (ii) get a serial/order number (iii) install using your email address and the order number.

 

 

 

 

* Not a dig at PMDG, I love their products more than any other, I just had major problems with the in-game pop up window used to activate the J41 and NGX. I even had poor RyanM spending almost a full weekend on my system last year, trying to solve the issues, with the activation box refusing to appear.

Can someone help me on how to work the Heading. I've got .0800 installed. Infact, AP works pretty darn good with both the Saitek AP and the GoFlight MCP panel. Just the Heading I can't figure out. Just some basics would be helpful...

 

thx,

 

Clutch

Just make sure the mode selector is on manual, the aileron switch is engaged, and the heading toggle switch (to the right of the mode selector) is down "on". If all of that is done it should work.

Can someone help me on how to work the Heading. I've got .0800 installed. Infact, AP works pretty darn good with both the Saitek AP and the GoFlight MCP panel. Just the Heading I can't figure out. Just some basics would be helpful...

 

thx,

 

Clutch

 

The Heading (bug) control is what is still not working with key assignments / hardware (despite CS stating that support for key assignments for Heading control was added to v0.7). :Thinking:

 

So you're not doing anything wrong: it is just that whilst key assignments/hardware support works for AP Master, HDG SEL, ALT HOLD, Course Knob +/-, it just still does not work for the most awkward to use with a mouse! : Heading Bug +/-.

 

Will they fix it before v1.0, or just ignore it now and go ahead with 1.0 and then forget about it ......... well, although CS are doing good job with developing this beta (overall)......... I am losing hope for this Heading Bug aspect ever being fixed to support FSX key assignments.

. I am losing hope for this Heading Bug aspect ever being fixed to support FSX key assignments

 

Hello

I do not have the CS737 so cannot test this, but do Fsuipc mouse macros not work for operating the hdg bug ?

The Heading (bug) control is what is still not working with key assignments / hardware (despite CS stating that support for key assignments for Heading control was added to v0.7). :Thinking:

 

So you're not doing anything wrong: it is just that whilst key assignments/hardware support works for AP Master, HDG SEL, ALT HOLD, Course Knob +/-, it just still does not work for the most awkward to use with a mouse! : Heading Bug +/-.

 

Will they fix it before v1.0, or just ignore it now and go ahead with 1.0 and then forget about it ......... well, although CS are doing good job with developing this beta (overall)......... I am losing hope for this Heading Bug aspect ever being fixed to support FSX key assignments.

 

I assume you are bringing this to their attention as well?

Also, I am finding that the VC is very shimmery, under AA and AF settings that would normally look good in most other VCs (like NGX). I have to use the highest possible AA settings under super sample AA mode to get rid of the shimmering - with the resultant performance drop that this gives.

 

Not sure if this would help, but I use DXTBMP to convert all the DDS files. Just load and save but make sure the "save MIPs" box is checked. I have shimmer problems both external and in the VC but after I save with MIPs all is well. I believe there is a method to do a batch conversion but I just don't use it. YMMV

 

Phill

Hello

I do not have the CS737 so cannot test this, but do Fsuipc mouse macros not work for operating the hdg bug ?

 

Hi,

 

Nope. FSUIPC Mouse Macros are only effective on 2D panels, where the clickspot locations are static. No effect in VCs. The CS 737 is VC only.

 

I assume you are bringing this to their attention as well?

 

You assume correct. I have fed this into CS on both a couple of relevant threads on their forum, as well as by email.

Hi,

 

Nope. These are only for 2D panels, where the clickspot locations are static. No effect in VCs.

 

 

Hello

That is totally wrong information,

Fsuipc mouse macros work perfectly in the VC, why people assume they only work in 2D is beyond me.

The mouse macro code hooks into the gauge code, they have nothing at all to do with clickspots, in fact the gauge does not even have to be on the screen for them to work.

As long as the gauges are written in C or C++ the macros will work, unfortunately they do not work with XML gauges.

 

Here is an example of a mouse macro being created in the VC of the Phenom