Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

FIVE-BY-FIVE

757 Delayed :(

Recommended Posts

"Hello guys,

Today I have to be the bearer of bad news. Unfortunately we have to delay the release of the 757. We found it impossible to fine-tune the behavior of the 4 different 757 engines as close to reality as we want. Therefore, we need to get some changes into X-Plane's own jet-engine model first. Philipp is currently working with Austin on some other aspects of the X-Plane core engine and will eventually also get the needed changes for the 757 into X-Plane. Therefore, we are currently not posting a new release date, as there are too many factors at play, like the release schedule of X-Plane itself.

With every bad news a good one is sure to follow. As a little perk we have decided to release something which was planned for the end of the year, but we have moved it to the front burner so you have something new to play with till the 757 is out. Any guesses? .."


I had a feeling this would happen :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

A good 787 lol

This is sad but good at the same time because you guys are helping x-plane be more accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

APRIL FOOLS!!  :lol: HA,HA! ........... :O shoot, it ain't April  :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this 757 hardcore?  Thanx.

 

Definition of hardcore:  PMDG or LDS jets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not good. Somehow I had the feeling this was going to happen. I was looking forward to using this bird on my vacation. Seems that is not an option any more... Now I'm depressed. :(

 

Skickat från min Nexus 4 via Tapatalk 2

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is indeed true that LR is cooperating with them to get additional aspects of a jet / turbofan engine simulated in XPX, that's great.

One of my biggest quirks has to do with the unrealistic Idle N1 vs N2 values, not to speak of the more complex three+ stage turbofans....
N1 always reads wrong when, for instance. a turbine fails inflight although you keep getting more or less plausible N2 readings... On N3 and EPR based tuirbofans I believe the details can be even more problematic to get to realistic figures...

I hope they take their time to work on that...

Austin has, once more, kindly replied to my email regarding navaid reach in XPX, and he told me that he may get into that one when he finishes the many tasks in hands right now.

As we all say / think, it'll take it's time, but XPX is getting better from day to day :-)

 

P.S.: I do not really know if the OP was meant to be... a surprise, and the 757 is in fact just about to be released (?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this 757 hardcore?  Thanx.

 

Definition of hardcore:  PMDG or LDS jets.

 

 

Probably will be the best tubeliner ( because there is no really good PMDG level tubeliners yet)  for x-plane on release but I am waiting for the IXEG737 (  will be the standard bearer) .   I bought the 777 from R+P and flown it 3 times,  I found it to be that bad. Too many systems inaccuracies for me.  Considering that Nick from the .org is involved with R+P dev  I doubt the 757 would be more accurate systems wise.  I don't think nick is the type that would be willing to wait out a PMDG or IXEG dev cycle and that is what is needed to get the systems right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I bought the 777 from R+P and flown it 3 times, I found it to be that bad. Too many systems inaccuracies for me.

 

I actually thought it was rather good.  I've flown the original PMDG 737 and the 747.  All the main systems appear to be simulated, and generally it seems to perform very well.  What systems don't you like?

 

Things I like:

- Control surfaces tied to individual hydraulic systems

- Bleed air and pressurisation systems appear to work as I'd expect

- Engine start behaviour is convincing.

 

Some things need some tuning, in particular:

- Sounds
- VNAV calculationed T/D and T/C points typically several miles out from where they should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just talked to Austin ...he says no one has contacted him about this.    Having a 3rd party influence Laminar on core model changes is a dangerous thing.  At IXEG, we have customized the engine model just fine through the SDK....so no reason the 757 team can't either and I will be quite vocal if another team causes us to have to re-write our engine model because they couldn't get it done.  I would lobby very heavily against one team getting Austin to make such a fundamental change without consultation with a consortium of developers.  Where did you get your information?

 

TomK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I have to be the bearer of bad news. Unfortunately we have to delay the release of the 757. We found it impossible to fine-tune the behavior of the 4 different 757 engines as close to reality as we want. Therefore, we need to get some changes into X-Plane's own jet-engine model first. Philipp is currently working with Austin on some other aspects of the X-Plane core engine and will eventually also get the needed changes for the 757 into X-Plane. Therefore, we are currently not posting a new release date, as there are too many factors at play, like the release schedule of X-Plane itself.

 

With every bad news a good one is sure to follow. As a little perk we have decided to release something which was planned for the end of the year, but we have moved it to the front burner so you have something new to play with till the 757 is out. Any guesses? ..

Please do us all a favor and use the quote function rather than just putting quote marks around these kind of statements so that you get the result as you see here. By doing as you have done in your original above, someone is going to take you as a commercial member and report you, which as you know, has happened in the past and causes no end of gnashing of teeth and wasted energy.

[quote]Today I have to be the bearer of bad news...[/quote]

Using the BBCode Quote function removes any confusion immediately. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually thought it was rather good.  I've flown the original PMDG 737 and the 747.  All the main systems appear to be simulated, and generally it seems to perform very well.  What systems don't you like?

 

Things I like:

- Control surfaces tied to individual hydraulic systems

- Bleed air and pressurisation systems appear to work as I'd expect

- Engine start behaviour is convincing.

 

Some things need some tuning, in particular:

- Sounds

- VNAV calculationed T/D and T/C points typically several miles out from where they should be.

 

 

I think they did a fine job with the FMC nav functions from what I could tell,  but v speed predictions appear to not work all that well,  the engine control system is very poorly simulated ( assumed temp is very broken, Alt eec does not function properly) the sounds are AWFUL,  it sounds like your outside the plane with  the APU running or the flaps deploying.  taxi lights do not turn with the nose wheel.   

 

They also tied both flight directors together,  to me it's a medium level sim,  in high level sims like the NGX and what IXEG is building  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, Got some clarification.  There is a proposed change to the engine model in x-plane, it won't affect us at IXEG and anything beyond that I can't speak for the 757 team, so their "press releases" are the goto information from them.

 

TomK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Philipp is currently working with Austin on some other aspects of the X-Plane core engine and will eventually also get the needed changes for the 757 into X-Plane.

 

Blessing and curses, all at the same time.

 

This is a blessing because you've got a platform development team willing to listen and adapt to the needs of 3rd party developers on the fly.

 

This is a curse because you've got a platform development team which could now be pulled away from their current work in order to repair/enhance a subsystem in the sim which is probably only going to be utilized by a small fraction of all X-Plane users. Of course, I say this not knowing if the items needed for the 757 are just 2 minutes worth of tweaking, or if they are going to be a 2 week struggle. Not to mention Tom's valid concerns (*since answered) about things breaking for other developers.

 

If the X-Plane development squad was larger, it could easily absorb even a significant change - but being what it is, any reallocation of time will have an impact somewhere. I only hope whatever engine model changes are needed are truly quick and easy to allow the guys to carry on with whatever bigger picture improvements are underway.

 

The first impression I get from this news is not any sadness at a 3rd party delay (meh), but rather a mild irritation that a 3rd party project may just have leapfrogged over other work that the broader population of X-Plane users would be more likely to see and enjoy.

 

Blessings and curses, I say!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


As a little perk we have decided to release something which was planned for the end of the year, but we have moved it to the front burner so you have something new to play with till the 757 is out. Any guesses?

 

What is that little perk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess one thing they ( LR ) could fix, and wouldn't arm anyone, is the simulation of the windmilling low pressure compressor (usually read as N1). N2 looks more or less acceptable when an engine flames-oout in XPlane, but N1 figures are way out of sync...

 

Then, their model is, I believe, not prepared to tackle more complex 3 spool turbines ( i.e. RR )... Adding a bit more of complexity would be great :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


the engine control system is very poorly simulated ( assumed temp is very broken, Alt eec does not function properly)

 

I'll be quite honest and say: I've never paid attention to what the EEC is doing, apart from limiting the max N1 speeds (which the 777 seems to do).

 

Am I correct in believing the Alt EEC is supposed to override the standard safeguards that are normally in place?  Evidently there's a lot more to learn about turbofan thrust management than just controlling the throttle lever.

 

 


the sounds are AWFUL, it sounds like your outside the plane with the APU running or the flaps deploying.

 

Yes,  I'll agree 100% on those points.  I also think the "ambient" sounds could certainly be ditched.

 


They also tied both flight directors together, to me it's a medium level sim, in high level sims like the NGX and what IXEG is building

 

Now I think the upcoming 757 is going to do this as well.  However, I've not been put in a failure condition where I would want to take advantage of independant flight directors or air data systems.  For *normal* flight it's fine, though I appreciate the failure conditions reveal the true extend of systems fidelity under the bonnet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blessing and curses, all at the same time.

 

 

The first impression I get from this news is not any sadness at a 3rd party delay (meh), but rather a mild irritation that a 3rd party project may just have leapfrogged over other work that the broader population of X-Plane users would be more likely to see and enjoy.

Excuse me, but this is getting ridiculous. In a software development process this leapfrogging as you call it is totally normal.

There is no fixed priority since some things will be pushed back, while other minor details might suddenly get a much higher priority simply due to the whim of a single developer. In such small companies developers work more or less independend from each other since they can interconnect with each other immediately if necessary. You don't have to propose a change and wait a few months to receive a compromise that doesn't help you one bit... Instead you go to your colleague that probly has the necessary informations in his code and discuss your problem with it. In many cases the solution isn't something that you would have expected , but something completly different, that needs less code changes than yozr original idea.

But you can't do this if your colleague is on a critical path  Otherwise you would really delay something. So you have projects that you can't continue since it would disrupt the work of your colleagues, you have problems that would simply take to much time to start at this moment, you have things where you don't know how to fix something and you have things that are not so complicated and that depend only on your own systems. And only you can decide which you will fix when.

Sometimes proposed changes might be very bad or even stupid ideas since the requester simply doesn't know anything about your code or the implications that his small change might haver for other components.

So there is no leapfrogging, instead it would be extremly inefficient id youz would make a single queue. In a big caompany you couldn't work this way, since the managers wouldn't even know what their engineers are really doing, but each administration layer really decreases the efficiency dramatically!

 

So I have to say: Sorry you simply doesn't know what you are talking about! It is simply impossible from the outside to determine the real internal status and priorities on the inside of such a small company.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about the little confusion, I received this news immediately after they posted it on the FlightFactor Facebook page.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone5 using Tapatalk 2

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be quite honest and say: I've never paid attention to what the EEC is doing, apart from limiting the max N1 speeds (which the 777 seems to do).

 

Am I correct in believing the Alt EEC is supposed to override the standard safeguards that are normally in place?  Evidently there's a lot more to learn about turbofan thrust management than just controlling the throttle lever.

 

 

 

Yes,  I'll agree 100% on those points.  I also think the "ambient" sounds could certainly be ditched.

 

 

 

Now I think the upcoming 757 is going to do this as well.  However, I've not been put in a failure condition where I would want to take advantage of independant flight directors or air data systems.  For *normal* flight it's fine, though I appreciate the failure conditions reveal the true extend of systems fidelity under the bonnet.

 

 

I would not mind some of the drawbacks if this was a 30 dollar plane marketed as a mid level sim but it is marketed as a study level sim and priced as such.  As far as the eec goes you can get it to override but it does not do so in the manner the real plane would and if you try to limit the takeoff trust with a assumed temp  you can not override the limited thrust.  The only way I could reduce thrust with assumed temp is to enter a NEGATIVE assumed temp. I read up on everything I could find on assumed temps and I asked some RW pilots  in the 777 and it should not even be possible to enter a negative temp let alone have that negative assumed temp reduce thrust.  When you try to enter a proper assumed temp the N1 INCREASES then with you get up to near the limit the FMC will allow you to enter  you finally start to get a slight derate but nowhere near what you should see.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've bought R+P 777 and was highly disappointed. I was expecting PMDG quality. Wish I would've done my homework sooner. But on the X-Plane platform, its the only decent 777. How I wish PMDG would've made a 777 version for X-Plane users. What I'm mostly unsatisfied with the most is the virtual cockpit, looks extremely bad. After being so used to the high level of details on FSX planes and coming to  this. I was extremely disappointed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've bought R+P 777 and was highly disappointed. I was expecting PMDG quality. Wish I would've done my homework sooner. But on the X-Plane platform, its the only decent 777. How I wish PMDG would've made a 777 version for X-Plane users. What I'm mostly unsatisfied with the most is the virtual cockpit, looks extremely bad. After being so used to the high level of details on FSX planes and coming to  this. I was extremely disappointed.

 

 

Soon X-plane will have PMDG level quality.  The IXEG 737 will be at that level and may surpass current PMDG offerings.   

 

There is a lot of strong points on the navigation side on planes that Phillip is involved in but with that said I have both the crj and the 777 and there is a lot of  tech errors that are obvious on both and none were ever fixed.    Plus Nick from the .org is involved in the R+P projects that alone is enough to reason to worry about the fidelity of the systems and quality of the product. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<p>Really? I'm curious, do you have any pictures that you can show me? I would love to have a PMDG quality aircraft for X-Plane.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Nevermind, I found screenshots, looks impressive, however I'm not a fan of classic models. Wish they would've done the latest NG model of the 737 instead. Sigh</p>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites