3 minutes ago, WarpD said:

I can not... I am one of the developers. 🙂

No problem 🙂 thank you for posting pictures anyway.

Good news is that a customer just asked permission to upload videos and we granted permission. Look for posts by UN Tredsell....

Edited November 26, 20196 yr by N400QW
typo

Hi All,

I was a hesitant purchaser, not least because I've not had Steam or P3DV3 for quite some time. But I've been watching this project intently, keen for a decent range bizjet since it was announced so I decided to see what they've put together. Its a shame the devs have been so busy as I think a video or two would be well received and allay some of the criticism. Anyway, I haven't got a huge amount of time to devote this week but I have captured a few clips I thought people in similar position to myself may like to see.

My opinion, is that the XLS will look stunning in V4 with tomatoshade, dynamic lights and if we are very lucky, some rain effects etc. She needs minor refinements, as discussed in the eaglesoft forum. But as someone who flies a 64bit study level addon most of my time, I'm not disappointed. I'll add, I purchased the realnav data. I don't like to fly with out of date nav data, but was surprised that they include data for all the small airfields I intend to take the XLS+ including some DEP/ARRs that aren't in other data packages.

 

 

 

Thanks a lot! @tredsell

Nice video.

Edited November 27, 20196 yr by JLuis

@tredsell thank you for this - just what I was looking for 🙂

Thanx for the videos. Engine start does look weird due to the strange N1 overshoot, the unusually long time to light up and the very high peak temp.

Thanks tredsell. The TAWS looks good in the takeoff video

5 hours ago, FDEdev said:

Thanx for the videos. Engine start does look weird due to the strange N1 overshoot, the unusually long time to light up and the very high peak temp.

Can someone with RL experience comment on this also? I agree that it looks odd.

And not to seem like a pessimist grump: yes, the TAWS does look amazing, good job on that.

Edited November 27, 20196 yr by mattbaker

22 minutes ago, mattbaker said:

Can someone with RL experience comment on this also? I agree that it looks odd.

~17000hrs on jets and turboprops. Never seen anything like that IRL and also no FSX/P3D add-on with such a strange bug. Idle N2 is also below the operational lower limit, although still 'technically' within limits.

24 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

~17000hrs on jets and turboprops. Never seen anything like that IRL and also no FSX/P3D add-on with such a strange bug. Idle N2 is also below the operational lower limit, although still 'technically' within limits.

Any experience with the XLS+ engine type and what parameters we need to tweak?

Unfortunately I don't know what to tweak, since I have never seen such a significant case of N1/N2 overshoot, especially since I assume that you are using custom coding for the engine.

Edited November 27, 20196 yr by FDEdev

Would someone with RW  PL21 experience comment on the PL21 included here? thanks....

Been following and anticipating this aircraft for years. I'll be a day one purchaser when it comes out for 4.5. Maybe we'll get lucky and get it this year?? 🙂

1 hour ago, N400QW said:

Any experience with the XLS+ engine type and what parameters we need to tweak?

See this is kind of what the problem is here. Flight sim addons are getting more and more complex, therefore prices have been rising steadily since many years. It's understandable, if you compare the current models of PMDG planes to the one we used to have in FS9 for example. The differences and additional features are truly mindblowing, and we should be so very thankful to the work, time and sweat that developers are putting into their art.

But with price comes an expectation from the customer. If I'm buying a 35$ Carenado plane, I know there's going to be shortcomings. Expecting them to deliver perfection is unrealistic. If however I'm paying 135$ for the PMDG 777-200, then the simulation has to be at the very, very top end of what is possible with todays tools and capabilities, since the price is at the very very top end of what Flight sim addons cost in 2019.

If Carenado, for a 35$ product, was asking for help from RL Pilots with on type experience to improve upon their products realism, that would be greeted with amazement and gratitude from their customer base.

But at 120$ and a feature list that explicitly states " Exclusive: Accurate Systems (include FADEC)", the expectation is that this is already accurately simulated, or at least you know exactly what to do in order to update the product to the level of realism that the set price silently advertises.

Can you see where I'm coming from? I mean no disrespect, but this example, together with the lack of actual in game footage from the devs, is certainly something that is still keeping me on the fence.

3 hours ago, FDEdev said:

~17000hrs on jets and turboprops. Never seen anything like that IRL and also no FSX/P3D add-on with such a strange bug. Idle N2 is also below the operational lower limit, although still 'technically' within limits.

Video of the XLS+ with the Pro Line 21 shows Idle N2 around 47-48%... not sure what operational lower limit you're declaring as fact... please by all means provide documentation that counters an actual XLS+ (with the Pro Line 21) in action.