IGrant 51 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 No change there, if we get help from the devs we can do it. but we'll not do it half backed. Thanks Mathijs. In all honesty I have come across very few aircraft that the RXP units wouldn't fit into anyway albeit with varying results. Built in mesh by default is always preferable, obviously, but it is definitely not a deal breaker for me. Maybe a optional 'flat' vc radio stack panel can be considered if the RXP integration proves too troublesome. That said, I'll just sit here and hope that maybe Marcel or someone can help shed some light on the secrets of making it work. I'd pay a little extra for the product if it helped AS license the use of his working VC piece. The added RXP functionality is really worth it! Thanks for the great work and updates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panxua 3 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Hi Mathijs, One more question : about the trim values. In the present model, it is necessary to check the trim value before taking off by passing the mouse above the toggle to see the value on a tag, before eventually reverting to neutral. Will there be any kind of visual indication of the trim effective position on the new version ? Thank you in advance for your kind answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricky76 0 Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 I feel just horrible. My wife and sister-in law both worked briefly for them years and years ago. I drive by them every day and regularily visit PAT (ser#2) at the museum. That just made me sick when I heard. No words to describe how much it sucks. Lost my cousin to a snow storm flying bush to get his hours in and out of Gods Lake Manitoba back a ways. It just stops you in your tracks. My condolenses to the staff of Ken Borek Air. Charles. to think of the day to day ops these guys endure........ the level of passion to do it every day is astounding. As A Calgarian by birth, and an avid aviation enthusiest, my condolenses to all affected by this tradgedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Hoffmann 4160 Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 Hi Mathijs, One more question : about the trim values. In the present model, it is necessary to check the trim value before taking off by passing the mouse above the toggle to see the value on a tag, before eventually reverting to neutral. Will there be any kind of visual indication of the trim effective position on the new version ? Thank you in advance for your kind answer. Hi Panxua! The new twotter will feature the full working trim panel, which is located right low at the pilots seat. It contains levers and indicators for all three trim axes, fully operational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panxua 3 Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 Hi Stefan, Thank you for your answer. Then w'll be able to happy survive ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn 873 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Regarding Reality XP GPS integration.... I know I have spread hopes that it might be done. We have discussed it among the developers, and I´m not sure that it´s going to happen. The reason is that we have not been able to get in contact with Reality XP. While we have got great help from other developers towards integrating it, and also are sure that we could succeed doing so, the problem is that we would add something we cannot give any kind of support for. It would not be fair to raise the price for this product, just inorder to add the possibility to add an addon, for which we cannot give any kind of support. Not raising the price means that we would have to spend time and resources adding something other would make money on, but with no return for us. So as long as we cannot get the needed support from RXP, we won´t add it - sorry. Finn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Eric Bakker 736 Posted February 7, 2013 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted February 7, 2013 It would not be fair to raise the price for this product, just in order to add the possibility to add an addon, for which we cannot give any kind of support for. Not raising the price means that we would have to spend time and resources adding something other would make money on, but with no return for us. So as long as we cannot get the needed support from RXP, we won´t add it - sorry. Although I am not happy with the outcome I fully understand this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn 873 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Well nothing prevents useres from adding the RXP GPS as a 2D panel. Another option would be to make a VC model with a flat space for a 2D version of the RXP gps, but doing so would mean degrading the quality of the VC due to missing 3D knobs for the unit, not something we would like. Finn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs Eric Bakker 736 Posted February 7, 2013 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted February 7, 2013 Well nothing prevents useres from adding the RXP GPS as a 2D panel. Another option would be to make a VC model with a flat space for a 2D version of the RXP gps, but doing so would mean degrading the quality of the VC due to missing 3D knobs for the unit, not something we would like. Do I understand it correctly that 'the problem' and 'the support' only refers to the making of (working) 3D knobs for the RXP in the VC? (I say 'only', as in 'no other problems", I am not referring to the difficulty) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn 873 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Do I understand it correctly that 'the problem' and 'the support' only refers to the making of (working) 3D knobs for the RXP in the VC? (I say 'only', as in 'no other problems", I am not referring to the difficulty) We face serveral issues... 1. The only right way to add the RXP GPS would be to get the right variables and events for the knobs and buttons. Those information can we only get from Reality XP. I know that others overlay the 2D RXP GPS on a 3D version of the GPS in the VC model, but that is also not supported by Reality XP. 2. Adding a 2D version would be easy to do, but on the other hand jeopardise the overall quality of our work. I´m sure we will get sour feedback from some customers to see an otherwise nice cockpit being spoiled by a simple 2D gauge. So as long as Reality XP don´t react to our request, we simply cannot add it and at the same time ensure proper support. Those information can we only get from Reality XP, but we never got answers on our request mails from them. Finn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IGrant 51 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 We face serveral issues... ... 2. Adding a 2D version would be easy to do, but on the other hand jeopardise the overall quality of our work. I´m sure we will get sour feedback from some customers to see an otherwise nice cockpit being spoiled by a simple 2D gauge. So as long as Reality XP don´t react to our request, we simply cannot add it and at the same time ensure proper support. Those information can we only get from Reality XP, but we never got answers on our request mails from them. Finn I obviously can't speak for everyone but for my part I always appreciate a provision to change the radio stack around to my liking. I can live with out 3D knobs on the radios if it means I can slip in my WAAS GPS and what ever other bits I see fit. It just opens up a whole world of possibilities for your customers that want to combine their other add ons with the aircraft. RXP WAAS, WAAS Unlimited (2 linked GNS), RSP weather radar, FSMap and so on. Frankly, I don't know why more developers don't give us the option of having a 'flat' empty canvas to put our own radio stack units on. Just so long as it is optional via a control panel or something of that nature to choose between them. If someone wants 3D knobs over RXP units or what ever they can have it and not ever have to think about it. I will grant you, The radio stack in 3D looks brilliant in the previews and I give all the credit in the world for adapting the FS GPS500 and it would be a shame to loose the 3D elements but if that option is given to me I will almost always modify the radios to the configuration I want. Nothing at all against what the developer worked on and envisioned, it is always a matter of personal reference with those things. Of course, with that all said I still hold out on hope that Aerosoft will figure out a solution for native RXP 3D support. From what I can tell, I am not sure anyone has ever done it by using the gauges click events coded into the 3D part. It just looks like clever mapping to me and some do it better than others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Fly 56 Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Looking forward to it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocBird 12 Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 I wonder if it would be possible to see the work in progress in a video? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JanTenner 38 Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 I am really looking forward. I got the version of the old Twin Otter which came with Antarctica X. If there wouldnt be an announcement for this new Twin Otter I would buy the full package of the old one. But now I have to learn patience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KPD 0 Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 Has the work on additional exterior models started yet (wheel/ski, tundra, etc.). If so, is there any chance for a couple of preview shots? Textured, untextured, whatever, really. This thing is now on top of my most wanted list, above PMDG 777 and A2A F-4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xflash 22 Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 Those information can we only get from Reality XP, but we never got answers on our request mails from them. Why not simply ask realair or orbx? Aerosoft sell thier products and i think it is easier to get in contact with them. They done the integration of rxp. And the katana 4x has this Integration too. If this is no Option, the simpliest Way is to create a panel with a clear space where normaly the GPS is placed, write a small Info how to add this Panel to the plane and a Note that there is no support for this panel version. I hope you understand what i mean, my english is not the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Fly 56 Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 By the way, is there an expected release timeframe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reald 19 Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 Still 2 months..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocky 118 Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reald 19 Posted February 15, 2013 Share Posted February 15, 2013 I got this info on january 18th so if we're lucky i'd day in a month.... Real Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emi 5161 Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Still 2 months..... And where did you get that from? Any information published will be published through this forum, so don't believe anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reald 19 Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 And where did you get that from? Any information published will be published through this forum, so don't believe anything else. Just go back page 19 i've asked Mathijs and that the answer he gave to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deputy Sheriffs mopperle 4162 Posted February 16, 2013 Deputy Sheriffs Share Posted February 16, 2013 Just go back page 19 i've asked Mathijs and that the answer he gave to me... So you should read carefully: We need at least two months more. Meaning somewhere beyond March (April, May.....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snave 466 Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 I think you've misconstrued. `At least two months more` means not less than two months, not two months. It could be a year away. Or more. As with all software projects you have to be a borderline halfwit to persist in asking about delivery schedules and expect them to be adhered to. They're not baking cakes. It's done when you can buy it. Now please can we stop wasting time on gormless buffoonery..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Attwood 33 Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
![Aerosoft Team [Inactive Account]](https://forum.aerosoft.com/uploads/monthly_2023_09/Aerosoft_Social_Media_Profilbild_Neu23.thumb.jpg.03721825e6a434ed4af0c8b2b73a5898.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.