Falcon50

I owe everyone here a huge apology and I am extremely embarrassed for some of the things I said about this aircraft. I postponed my refund request after I received information from another person who suggested an extremely simple fix that corrected my problem. I will not describe the fix here out of respect to the iFly support forum.Nevertheless, out of pure frustration I admit I wrote some things here that I should have refrained from writing. The fix that solved my problem was right under my nose and I read it in the iFly support forum more than once. I thought I had tried it but obviously I didn't. JP_Visser, I want to apologize to you personally. I understand if you don't accept but I regret the previous posts I made to you. You've been extremely helpful to many in the support forum and I'm grateful for the time you spend assisting others, including myself. Anyway, I made a flight after I fixed the problem I had and this aircraft performed flawlessly. Flyinpilot212121, you were right and I was wrong. I have mud on my face and I'm eating crow at the same time. Again, I am extremely embarrassed and I hope you iFly pilots and supporters will accept my apology. I offer no excuses other than my own stupidity.

I stand by my statement. It's not a lie, it's an opinion. I'm not talking about the support that is offered - which is nice - but pretty much standard operating procedure with most if not all quality add-ons. I'm referring to the numerous posts by iFly support that they "will not dumb-down" the aircraft by applying a fix to the A/P sensitivity for the sake of realism. Yet, they have no problem with the dumb-downed visual aspect of the model with the goofy looking nav lights and strobes. I've requested a refund and therefore I have no vested interest in this aircraft or topic again. Time to move on.

I appreciate your professional sarcasm but what it boils down to is I doubt you're qualified to even speak about the real 737NG systems. Furthermore, nowhere did I say that the problems I experienced are true with ALL systems. Don't try to belittle me and suggest I am the only person with issues related to A/P and system hardware. Try to keep the conversation on an adult level otherwise try to refrain from posting. One more thing, a lot of payware aircraft won't engage the A/P when out of control limits. This isn't new to the flight sim world. Other quality payware products aren't as sensitive but all together just as "real."

Perhaps "rudimentary" was not a good word choice. All I meant was it is a piece of software for a PC and not a true flight simulator sitting on top of hydraulics. Therefore, it is almost impossible to replicate the true feeling of the aircraft. I have to disagree with you or anyone who claims it "feels" like the real thing. If you have ever flown a real airplane you would understand what I mean. I agree with you 100% in that the iFly 737 is truly amazing as far as having to follow proper procedures. But with the vast number of users who all experience the same problems using flight yokes, I question why iFly refuses to address it. Until Saitek or CH Products can create the flight yoke that is devoid of any imperfections, my wish is that iFly would create a fix. However, the attitude I get is "too bad, we don't need or want your business anyway." For example, if GM or Ford manufactured the greatest vehicle ever known to mankind but it had one problem - they discovered nobody under 5'8" could drive it because they couldn't reach the gas pedal, I guarantee they would create a workaround. I'm quite sure they wouldn't snub their noses to all the short people and tell them they don't need their business - which they don't. But it is good business practice to keep and build a good customer base for future products. Right now, iFly is operating under a poor business model.

I keep reading the same thing in the iFly support forum about this not being finicky but "just the real thing." I'm going to have to spout off now because this really isn't the real thing. This is a rudimentary simulation of the real thing and it is not the same as getting into the real Boeing 737 with real flight controls. With the various types of flight control hardware that the FS community uses, I think iFly could have tuned down the sensitivy of the A/P to accomodate those who might not have the perfect controls. You make it sound as if you sneeze in the real 737 the A/P will disengage. Having read the iFly support forum and finding out supposedly just how difficult it is for real 737 pilots to get the A/P to work as designed, I'll never get up in one again. God help us if one of the pilots itches his knee ever so slightly and bumps the controls - we'll be in completely vertical nose dive just like the iFly 737NG! I can understand if you have the aircraft a few hundred feet out of trim and not being able to engage the A/P but on my system, we're talking about what would amount to mere inches in the real world and I can't get it to link. Besides, if you want to tout off about how real this is, then tell me why the nav lights and strobes look like glowing gumballs instead of lights? I think they are disproportionate to the aircraft, stick out like a sore thumb, and look amateurish.C'mon guys admit you have some work to do, iron out the bugs, and quit dishing it off as being just like the real thing.

Can you post some screenshots?

Thanks for the suggestions. I've made some adjustments and killed some background apps but the best I can muster is 5-7 FPS. It's really frustrating. I guess my system isn't up to par. I get 25-30 FPS with the FlyTampa and FlightZone sceneries so there's something about the FSDT textures my PC doesn't like.

I don't know. Could be, but I get great performance with other scenery addons. It's strange.I don't want to take away from the original post because I do think the scenery is amazing.

I'm willing to try though I don't know how. I added the additional 2GB of RAM but it had absolutely no effect with this awesome scenery and my feelThere products.

I actually ordered 2 GB and should be here today. I'm also running Windows 7 32-bit....

I don't know about anyone else but using the FeelThere ERJ-145 v2 (FS2004) on my system with this scenery is a disaster. No more than 5 fps and it completely crashed my system on approach with a VATSIM flight. Same results with the Aeroworx B200. PMDG 737 was flawless with 20-25 fps. Obviously, an issue with the feelThere and Aeroworx aircraft. But as I like to fly the American Eagle ERJ flights in and out of KDFW, I am truly disappointed. My PC is:AMD Phenom 8600B Triple-Core 2.30 MHz2.0 GB RAMNVIDIA XFX GeForce 7950GT

Talk about a teaser...anyone have any idea what this will be?

I mean no disrespect with this comment but I am a little disappointed in Aidan Sandri's review the CLS MD81/82. It is little much of a review more than it reads like an advertisement for the product. As a matter of fact, it appears Mr. Sandri pretty much copied and pasted from the CLS website the history of the MD80. CLS's website claims that this MD81/82 is "Featuring the best visuals and realistic flight dynamics." Having read that I was waiting for someone to publish a review of this product and I was a little disappointed in AVSIM's brief and very non-descriptive review of this product. A review of any FS aircraft should detail more than four sentences on the flight dynamics. And I am a little perplexed at this comment, "The aircraft will not spin when in a stall like it should and does stall at around 90 knots, which I believe is incorrect as if I took off at 150knots, the aircraft should stall at 140-150knots."This particular review appears to have slipped by the editorial staff at AVSIM because it really tells the reader little more than what the CLS site does in their product page.