katice

Awesome to hear, thank you! I am eyeing the clipper since I heard it's finally released and was following the Gyropilot saga. Learning it's improved makes me think it's finally time pull the trigger. Is there any timeline on the release of that patch? Also, seems like 314A is also being developed, might I ask if that's going to be an update/expansion or a seperate product? It's surely the variant I would be much more interested in. Apologies if I asked about things you can't, or would rather not, talk about. All the best.

That's pretty shallow review on your part then. Firstly, Milviz had almost no marketing behind their C310. While it's pretty known brand in FSX/P3D, you are pretty unknown in X-Plane world, especially for simmers that are X-Plane exclusive. Most products are heavily marketed through the .org store forum, a lot of videos and "influencers. I must admit I haven't seen much of it til it actually dropped on the market. Secondly, you need to realize the market needs. When people say P3D is a tubeliner sim, it isn't na understatment. There aren't that much quality GA planes (of course, there was RealAir, there is A2A which is a class in itself), but it's certainly a market niche when it comes to real quality. In X-Plane though, there are a lot of high quality options that can satisfy the niche of light twin GA flyhing. Not to mention Milviz released their addon right after another 310 hit the market. It certainly didn't help. Am Is saying that you might get as good sale numbers as you can in P3D? Certainly not. You won't beat P3D market right now, especially combined with FSX. But make something good that market isn't saturated with currently, and you won't be disappointed. Serious simmers are judged by being a member of a virtual airline? Come on, be serious. It's not an indication at all.

You know who is a real winner? We, the simmers. All this boasting from some X-Plane users or some deluded denial from some P3D users is baffling. In the end, good, healthy competition breeds progress for all. Who knows if P3D would bring PBR now, if it wasn't an integral part of X-Plane 11? And ortho-like features in it now? Developers learn from each other and that results in a better product for us all, so be happy. (Consipracy theories are great though, keep them coming 😂.)

Are you purposefully ignore ALL other products that state that their regions are REQUIRED and a PREREQUISITE? Is your argument really is coming down to "well, but this one product does not use this is wording!"? Because that's a bit sad. I know you now work with ORBX on X-Plane sceneries but I always had you in hard regard when it came to applying logic to your statements. ☹️ I agree with you though, this isn't a huge deal, however I don't know how biased or deluded one would have to be to deny the fact that current wording is *misleading* to say the least. If you don't agree just look at the youtube or reddit comments from users that weren't in fact aware that they are not REQUIRED but highly recommended. ORBX should just change wording to something along the lines that Froogle stated in his video and the whole issue would have been resolved. But no, now we have to have several page long thread becuase people like you don't understand what semantics is. Required and recommended aren't synonymous and you know this very well but choose to be willfully [apparently you can't even use that word around here]

Hey peeps, Seems like the link died again, anyone has the .zip file by any chance? :( EDIT: Ray has his PM function disabled, so can't really message them.

Didn't know this thread was about IXEG all of the sudden. Thrilling. Once again, I didn't include my reasoning anywhere in my posts, so your conclusion is irrelevant becuase you are trying to apply it to something I haven't even presented yet. If you are interested, I am sure we can take it to PM or thread somewhat more fitting to discuss IXEG in detail. First. Fallacy. I don't need to be an engineer nor hold a type rating in that particular aircraft to hold valid opinion regarding functionality of certain systems or the addon as a whole given I have enough knowledge on the subject. That's one of the flagship arguments made by certain other developer to disregard any unflattering feedback. "Non type rated = you don't know what you are talking about". That's garbage. Second, however, I do have rather in depth knowledge regarding subjects you mentioned and even formal education in that aspect which you seem to hold in such high regard. But you still seem to imply that I would judge something through one single feature of the addon to make my assertion based on that. Stop getting so hang on it. I already said it's false assumption on your part. Funny you mention that. IXEG vertical profile management is still vastly incorrect which was even officially stated by some people of your team and why some people expressed their disappointment when IXEG team said that there are "No changes to VNAV in next patch". Glad we at least agree on this point. And really, there is no reason to continue this conversation here. If you feel the need, my PM box is always open. Thanks!

Yes, there are people judging an aircraft by the amount of wingflex it has. I will rather keep judging a modern airliner mainly by its key system that FMS is. Also, I thought it was implied that my opinion isn't formed by that single factor, but rather of the entire package. Your mental leap as to what I do and think is not appreciated. My opinion still stands. Have a nice day.

All I am going to say is that amount of people coming from NGX and complaining about FF "lack of systems" is dumbfounding. It's almost like 1980s era airliner, with a late 80s FMS modeled won't have as much complex software in the box as late 2000 NG. At least FF draws and flies arcs, RNAV correcty :) Also, it's very interesting how easily people opinions are influenced by the " flightsim mob". IXEG has nowhere as competent FMS as, let's say, Rotate. It's a fact. Yet you will still see people swearing on their lives how IXEG is by far the best thing around while it objectively isn't, simply becuase that's what people tend to mindlessly repeat in every flight-sim related media. Seems like the key to a great addon is bascially stating how much of a study sim it is over and over again until people start repeating after you. Teaches you to take those posts with a grain of salt, eh?

Funny you haven't deleted any unsigned posts that completely sided with your narrative. Unfortunate, eh? Alas, I assume it's a norm around here. [MODERATOR NOTE: Katrin's comment above is made without support of facts- and represents his opinion, which in this case is ill informed. Katrin- please don't make up facts to support your opinion. - Moderator] Anyhow, as I said earlier, 30% steam commission is reasonable. DTG's cut they wish to achieve is a little steep, but certainly something that isn't non-negotiable. However, steam as a platform offers extreme exposure which frankly might even deem to be worth it. We shall see. Katrín Eiríksdóttir

Found the mod by accident, followed the step and it worked like a charm! I love all the changes made, and the GTN fits just perfectly. @raymar You are a rockstar. The only issue I have, sometimes GTN just refuses to start, no matter what I do. Although I am farily sure it's the GTN fault, not the mod.

Those are stock xenviro clouds, at least one of their variations. If you have it you should know.

Touché ;) Of course! http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/36688-xenviro-experimental-clouds-for-payware-xenviro/ There you go. You can get pretty nice results with it.

You mean the stock xenviro clouds are better than the released pack? Ok... stock xenviro: reworked: I don't see how could you imply the former looks more "real", but whatever floats your boat.

Why do you need RealityXP integration if they are coming with their own GTN750? At least your nav data will be fresh :)

I have their 737-200 combi. For the discounted price, it's a bargain. No issues here on the latest patch of P3D v3. The only thing - installer doesn't install their bonus WX (if you own it) radar into VC, it has to be done manually via panel configs apparently. Now, that bobcat looks rather tempting...

And no one is holding that against you, nor against Eaglesoft. We all know creating a complex addon takes years. It was just silly to counter "its been in development for few years" with "it hasn't even been a year" while the facts are obviously different. Looking forward to XLS+, if it will remain on Citation X level, we're really looking forward for a treat. It's probably the worst performaing aircraft in my fleet. I would not recommend it unless Wilco can get its performance optimized.

But that's X-Plane. Extremely detailed 757v2 goes for $65 ($45 with discount) while PMDG planes for $135. In P3D/FSX everyone charages as much as they can. With few exceptions of course.

They made you pay for avatar mode, you think they would give you a discount for an actual update?

Yes, I know! I have quite a big collection of custom waypoiints stored, was just wondering how will that work with flight plan import. Will it recognize our custom, "named" waypoint?

I assume becuse we're talking from potential customer perspective. I don't really care how much time you devote or devoted in last 3 years to the project. It was announced years ago, so as potential customers we wait several years. Given the past experiences, wouldn't be surprised if we had to wait another year or two. Nothing against you personally or Eaglesoft for that matter. Thanks for doing what you do, it's just that we DO indeed wait for quite a bit. As for actual topic at hand: XtremePrototypes Lear 25D. Amazing VC, good frames, I think almost every switch animated and functional. Regardless if you have GTN or not, it's still perfectly flyable. Just one tip - read the manual. Especially part about correct installation which might save you from tons of frustration.

Considering PMDG constant claims they know nothing of planned or ongoing 64bit development, I somehow fail to see how ORBX would have an access to the new SDK and PMDG not even aware of such in existence. ORBX will probably release something really anticlimactic like new version of ther 64bit FTX Central for "easier" download Also, I don't OOM beucase I don't leave my planes to fly themselves for several hours, and that's pretty much the only thing 64bit *could* help with, without alternating all the legacy FSX code. This, and making us rebuy addons. Not really optimistic about this one.

The GUI is a brilliant feature. Everything in one place to set up just how I like it. Simple, yet brilliant. Thank you for continuously making it better. Quick question to this one - how will GTN handle a case where a waypoint isn't in database? I think we all know Garmin DB can be a little finicky.

XP11 doesn't have that folder whatsoever, as XP11's default GPS was modernized. Mind, that a lot of XP10 planes still have old GPS installed when transfered into XP11. Since GPS feeds information from the folder I copied, maybe there is some intereference during GTN activation within sim if it's not present? Anyhow, I had one more, single crash when activating the GTN since I moved the folder, which seems to be much better result as before it was crashing every single time. Hope this helps, but might be another dead end.

Hello, I experience crashes on most aircraft when trying to run GTN750 in XP11. Any change it's somehow connected to new default GPS that I assume replaces the one from 10? G64: 311.619: dref.newFloat: Caught duplicate request: 'xscenery/mu2b60/annun_fuel_low'. Returning existing handle ID. --=={This application has crashed!}==-- EDIT: I think I got rid of the problem. So far, I restarted the sim couple of times, and tried on all my aircraft and there is no issue! What I did: Went to my XP10 installation and went into X-Plane 10\Custom Data, copied entire GNS430 folder, went back to my XP11 installation and pasted it into the same location (X-Plane 11\Custom Data). So far so good, no crashes. GTN seems to be stable.

Do you have to "dare" for icing effects in $140+ product... ?