Just in case you haven't subscribed to our site for all the latest on Xplane & in particular this great looking plane, here's the link to the interview with Ramzzess and Philipp, the developers:

 

http://xsimreviews.c...philipp-munzel/

 

Look deep into the pics, there's almost as much detail in them, like the reflections, as in 20 of the 800 pages of their draft flight manual!

Looking good

Yes, raising the bar. I cannot imagine any better planes, even for FSX.

Yes, raising the bar. I cannot imagine any better planes, even for FSX.

 

PMDG MD-11, PMDG NGX, FSLabs Concorde and FlyTheMaddog MD-82 - just to name four. The developer himself said the level of simulation is about on par with Level-D, and all those four pretty much raise the bar on the Level-D.

Let's wait and see what the X Plane 777 has with regards to systems accuracy. There is already a list of things that are NOT modeled.

Slapping a "Top Level" sticker on it this early is a little premature.

And saying it's on the same level as PMDG and FSLabs at this time is rather bold and extreme.

I have respect for any developer, but premature, false expectations does not do anyone any good.

Good to hear a new serious heavy metal project is in the works for XP. We need those But as Goran says, it remains to be seen how

accurate the systems and flighmodel really are. We (4-5 people) already used 3 years on the 737, so it's hard to imagine it can be

done by 2 people in just 6 months. But lets hope they pulled it off.

 

M

We (4-5 people) already used 3 years on the 737, so it's hard to imagine it can be done by 2 people in just 6 months.

 

+1

 

I guess for some systems, they'll not start from scratch. Don't forget, Philipp made the systems for the CRJ-200, as well as the FMS based on the vasFMC project (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0), and before that, he was also a member of the vasFMC team.

+1

 

I guess for some systems, they'll not start from scratch. Don't forget, Philipp made the systems for the CRJ-200, as well as the FMS based on the vasFMC project (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0), and before that, he was also a member of the vasFMC team.

 

that plus SASL for the basic systems, where Ramzzess has some experience with. So… it might be possible. I'll never be able to judge the end result because of my low interest in airliners, but I'll support those developers (IXEG and them alike) by purchasing anyway and am very curious about what the airliner experts will have to say about those planes.

It's true that the small team and shorter dev time does raise a cautionary flag with regards to how deep the sim will be. One thing to consider, however, with teams like PMDG is that they go all out to simulate some of the deep, deep level systems that I'm sure 98% of their customer base will never use. I'm not saying that like it's a bad thing, mind you, but when it's obvious that there will be limitations due to development logistics, you have to strive to hit the details that the majority of users will want to use. For me, if I can set weight and fuel, perform a realistic normal startup, program and execute a flight plan based on real world routing using a Boeing style FMC with no trace of the default X-Plane FMC hiding in the background, and perform a Cat III autolanding after flying a real world arrival, all my criteria will be met. Failures, voltage irregularities, exact rivet counts, and any of the more arcane aspects of abnormal flight conditions don't really concern me for the type of flying I do.

It's true that the small team and shorter dev time does raise a cautionary flag with regards to how deep the sim will be

 

Ramzess got a 3D model from Boeing. He only needed to reduce polys for fps.

Philipp has done all for the crj, hence only little work needed.

 

As both have great experience and are working full time, they should achieve the same as 4 or more less experienced people, maybe not working full time.

"Ramzess got a 3D model from Boeing."

"Ramzess got a 3D model from Boeing."

"Ramzess got a 3D model from Boeing." no wait what? Lol wow ok. Talk about a reduction in polygons.

"Ramzess got a 3D model from Boeing." no wait what? Lol wow ok. Talk about a reduction in polygons.

 

Very simple....the're Blender scripts for such.

Ramzess got a 3D model from Boeing. He only needed to reduce polys for fps.

Philipp has done all for the crj, hence only little work needed.

 

As both have great experience and are working full time, they should achieve the same as 4 or more less experienced people, maybe not working full time.

 

If only it was THAT easy.

I've seen a Boeing model or two. I'm just going to make a WAG that it was used for reference only. Assuming it was a design model, there was probably more detail in the landing gear lever than in an entire PMDG aircraft, and the massive amount of reduction to something usable in X-Plane would cause all sorts of artifacts. I doubt it was a design model, though, since that would contain proprietary info, and the software we use has a proprietary format that's not very friendly with other modelling packages.

 

And just to make it clear, I don't say this to be combative. I'm hopeful for as complete a simulation of the T7 as anyone else, but common sense says that 2 individuals over a relatively short amount of development time means there will be some limitations.

If only it was THAT easy.

 

Says our commercial member, which himself is not even capable of the very basics, alike supporting all OS etc.

 

@JonRD463. Yes some artifacts for reducing poly number, but generally faster than creating all from scratch. (at least for me)