11 minutes ago, Elvensmith said:

Elephant in the room... does it still work after the core software update, I haven’t seen this mentioned in the multiple update topics?

I think it has developed the floating down the runway issue since the update, certainly took a lot longer to touch down than before, despite the same flight config.

I have heard they did some adjustments to ground effect, so that would make sense.  

Guess all the trolls are still updating their computers and making the changes on the 737 they are building with their company.

2 hours ago, Elvensmith said:

Elephant in the room... does it still work after the core software update, I haven’t seen this mentioned in the multiple update topics?

Yup, was flying it last night no problems after the update. I made two flights, one in pretty nice weather, the other in conditions deteriorating into rain. It took quite a while for it to get off the deck, but then again it was heavily loaded, the climb, cruise and descent were fine, both approaches were VOR/DME, which I hand-flew and I didn't have any issues getting the thing down okay.

2 hours ago, Car147 said:

I think it has developed the floating down the runway issue since the update, certainly took a lot longer to touch down than before, despite the same flight config.

Can't say I really noticed it floating a lot upon landing but then again, the 737 is known for doing that a bit in real life and will actually still fly well below the kind of speeds you'd not normally dare go near to. A good example of that is the accident involving Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 (a 737-800 NG):

With a fault in its radar altimeter, this aeroplane's systems erroneously detected that it was -8 feet above the ground when it was in fact still very high above the ground on its final approach. Because of this erroneous  low altitude reading, the autothrottle, which is designed to retard automatically when the aeroplane gets down to 27 feet AGL, came back to idle.

Evidently, none of the three crew on the flight deck monitored the ASI, and so they did not notice the aeroplane was slowing down whilst still quite some way from the runway and dropping altitude quite quickly owing to its reduced airspeed. It got so slow in fact that it was 40 knots below the reference speed for landing - with its airspeed registering 83 knots as it descended through 500 feet AGL. At that speed, the stick shaker went off indicating that it was about to stall. Because of this, the autothrottle began to advance and the crew manually shoved the thrust levers forward too, but the engines could not spool up in time to deliver enough thrust to keep the aeroplane flying, so it struck the ground in a tail-low attitude whilst indicating 95 knots on the ASI.

There were nine people killed in the crash landing and about a dozen serious injuries. Pretty much everyone else on the aeroplane got some bumps, bruises and other comparatively minor injuries, however, given that 126 people out of the 135 people on board actually survived the accident, albeit not all of them making full recoveries from their injuries, this is a fairly remarkable survival rate for an aeroplane which got 40 knots below Vref on approach and slammed into the ground, so it is a good example of how the 737 will keep on flying at low speed and when it gets into ground effect, will float if you let it.

Still hesitating, how does this bird fly?

I'm almost there, the fact it seems to have survived the update (thanks guys BTW) pretty much has me convinced.

Top seller on simmarket, as of 2/17/21 0800 Eastern U.S. this can't be true?

43 minutes ago, jbdbow1970 said:

Top seller on simmarket, as of 2/17/21 0800 Eastern U.S. this can't be true?

It's really not that bad.  It is just that some people jumped on the bandwagon calling it 'piracy' etc. (when it wasn't) and a lot of the sheep followed.
It isn't anywhere near perfect, but it flies nice, A/P works well, and there are some excellent paints out for it already, and update 1.1 is out adding extra functionality.
The author deserves a chance.  If he improves it alongside the community, it could well end up being something like the Zibo 737 given enough time and effort.

The latest American Airlines paints are great for this.  For what I have paid I don't feel ripped off.
 

Edited February 17, 20215 yr by bobcat999

3 hours ago, David Roch said:

Still hesitating, how does this bird fly?

It's a nice 'hand flyer', really good in fact. Dunno how much of its flight model is borrowed from the default A320, although I would think that'd be the starting point for the development of this thing, but either way it seems to fly pretty much like you'd expect a 737 to fly. 

You should keep in mind that at 20 quid, it is a 'cheap and cheerful' add-on, and it's never going to be any kind of study sim to rival more expensive offerings in other sims, although it seems it may get modified (either officially with patches or by third parties) and it has already had the switches patched to function a bit more and had some other tweaks, so it's not just been shoved out and left.

There is very little in regards to the more fancy behaviour of the real 737 MAX and its MCAS functionality, although in fairness, much of that on the real aeroplane has been downgraded as part of its re-certification to flight status. For example, whilst the real MAX can still use MCAS to command a pitch change if it detects a weird angle of attack owing to the displaced thrust line of the new engines, a difference now, is that unlike before the grounding, if that MCAS intervention is overridden by a manual trim input, the system (now) cannot reset and have another attempt at automatic trimming leading to a trim runaway overwhelming the crew which was part of what caused the accidents that led to the type's grounding. Effectively, this means if you manually trim out a bizarre or unwanted automatic MCAS trim, you are basically telling the MCAS system to 'knock it off' without the need for any turning off of anything, and the MCAS system is now limited in how much it can trim too. So the MAX's stability augmentations are more similar to those on the NG now, which means the fact that this thing doesn't have too much fancy behaviour in this regard is more akin to the real MAX at the moment.

Oddly enough, as a result of those fixes to the real MAX, this also means that (at present) the fact that this simulated thing is not simulating RNP/RNAV stuff in great detail, is actually like the real MAX too, which is presently not allowed to do that RNP since the stuff the MCAS system does, means that it cannot be guaranteed to stay within the required parameters for that sort of navigation. This will probably change in the future on the real aeroplane, but right now, since you can't do that in a real MAX, it makes this a bit more realistic than it would otherwise be, although this is more by accident than design of course lol.

Avionics-wise, the systems used to depict this are much of the default sim stuff, so they are not really akin to what the real MAX has, for example, the real PFDs in the MAX can zoom the map and plan views in to a quarter of a mile and can zoom out to as far as you want to go, there being no upper limit on that. In the sim, the PFD zoom settings are not as wide-ranging on this simulated version. It's little things like this which make it different from the real thing. Many people would not even know about this stuff, so it's not really a big deal. Beyond this, the FMC/CDU is somewhat limited in functionality, but there is enough there for you to fly it on a reasonably convincing IFR flight so long as you use the default ATC, because the transponder cannot be manually set and only does this when you read back the IFR clearance.

In short, there is enough of a 737 in there for you to have fun, but don't expect it to rival the Iflys, PMDGs and FSLs of this world; the inclusion of all of that more detailed systems stuff found on the real things, which we see in those fancier add-ons, is why they are not 20 quid. If you can live with that, you'll like it, if not, wait for the Aerosoft CRJ in a couple of weeks (less than 50 quid allegedly).

Edited February 17, 20215 yr by Chock

Thanks Alan, I think I'll take the plunge soon.
Expectations are not the highest, so I won't be disappointed 😉
 

Now, I wish someone would create a 737 sound mod for this bird cuz the default sounds it comes with don’t do it for me at all!

the frame rates on this thing are terrible... about equal to 787 but jerkier... they should fix that for sure, but nobody has noticed this here for some reason? I get 50 in the FBW a320 and 35 in this 737 ... come on now

2 minutes ago, JETPETER2 said:

the frame rates on this thing are terrible... about equal to 787 but jerkier... they should fix that for sure, but nobody has noticed this here for some reason? I get 50 in the FBW a320 and 35 in this 737 ... come on now

If I was getting noticeably poor frame rates with it, I would have commented on this, but I'm not. You can see this on my review video if you don't believe me, and that's the sim running whilst I'm streaming it to a recording file saved on a different drive from the one the sim is on, and recording a V/O, and that's at a payware add-on airport too.

I'm not going to say it struggles in FPS on my system if it doesn't, and people can see this too, am I?

Edited February 17, 20215 yr by Chock

My frames were just dipping under 30 fps on occasion, and I can normally hold a steady 30.  So it depends on hardware and set-up probably.

So my next wish is for the developer to do some optimisation before anything else if he can.

Edited February 17, 20215 yr by bobcat999

59 minutes ago, JETPETER2 said:

the frame rates on this thing are terrible... about equal to 787 but jerkier... they should fix that for sure, but nobody has noticed this here for some reason? I get 50 in the FBW a320 and 35 in this 737 ... come on now

Yep, I was getting tops 17 FPS. I looked at my General Settings and I had the frames pegged at 30. Changed it to 60 and I am consistently getting 40+. Maybe I am lucky, dunno, I don't ask questions, just left it at that, went by feel. BTW I use Vsync, Afterburner says "GPU usage 40%, RAM 11GB, CPU temp 50-53C.

Regards

Edited February 17, 20215 yr by TomCYYZ

No callouts, am I the only one? I have read in this thread that they are there. V.1 and last MSFS update.