Gentlemen, Start Your Engines (We Hope)

X-Plane 11.00 public beta 13 is out, and hopefully it has restored engine operation that beta 12 broke. If you are developing an aircraft and your engines don't work right in public beta 13, please let us know.

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

About Ben Supnik

Ben is a software engineer who works on X-Plane; he spends most of his days drinking coffee and swearing at the computer -- sometimes at the same time.
This entry was posted in News. Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to Gentlemen, Start Your Engines (We Hope)

  1. Günther Wittwar says:

    Starting the engines of the B200 from Carenado works again.
    Also fixed: feathered prop does not windmilling anymore 🙂

    But the turbine is still windmillig, at wind with about 20 kt 2,5% N1, about 1000 RPM
    I don't know if this is ok with a PT6


    • Me says:

      I fly King Airs (B200, B100, C90). With a prop feathered the airflow through the inlet will still rotate the engine core. You could even use this rotation to airstart if you get the rpm above 12%. Carenado is not perfect, but they get a thumbs up from me. I did have to reduce landing flap drag on the C90 by 20% however.

  2. Steve.Wilson says:

    How long have you been planning that post title, Ben? 😉

  3. RD says:

    Ben, if those changes in idle are not a bug, why the default jets are still operating below standard N1 idle?
    Haven't LR updated the default fleet yet?


  4. Dave Sullivan says:


    Well, pb13 somewhat fixed the engine problem with the Flight Factor 767-300ER. I can now get it started but I have to keep the throttle way too high to keep things turned on (hydraulics, packs, etc.) If I leave it on idle, no go. Also, now the built-in pushback is broken and I can't even reverse thrust pushback. I filed a bug report on this.

    After filing the report, I did a full flight in the FF 767-300ER...When descending and the auto pilot throttles back, I get all kinds of warnings (hydraulic pressure, packs, etc.). So, from my point of view, it appears that progress is being made but the 3rd party engine fix for this plane is not yet totally fixed. I note that pb11 had none of these issues.

    Additionally, pb13 seemed to impact the fmc on version 1.1.27 of this plane...couldn't select, the preceding paragraphs issues were encountered with version 1.1.23 (for which I had no problems in pb11).

    Keep up the good work!

  5. Anderson Lucas says:

    Thank a lot... Best title ever! hehehehehe, thanks a lot for this update...
    Xplane 11 is getting better every day!

  6. Dean says:

    FlightFactor A350 still not working. 🙁

    PB 12 and 13:
    Engines start up, but not enough power. Hydraulics and Generators off.
    Will any editing in Plane Maker help?

    Last worked in PB11.

  7. Cameron says:

    Try the f-35 latest version 1.7 noticed unless I unlock the afterburner it wont spool past around 70 percent or so but once the afterburner is enabled I can use 100 percent engine power. I didnt have the issue before the last update.

  8. Christophe says:

    I have to check again on the PMDG DC-6 but I think it still broken.

  9. Christophe says:

    My mistake Ben, engines are OK on the DC-6.
    It still remains the inversed rudder animation (but behaviour OK) - bug filed. - but not planned on urgent pb13 I guess.

  10. Mark Hayling says:

    Hi Ben.
    I tried the Carenado PA31 CHIEFTAIN 350 with pb13 and the engines start but instead of a few seconds of cranking its practically instantaneous. Also, throttle must be advanced quite a bit to keep the engines running.

  11. franck CARVEL says:

    For all planes, the idle power is too low, about 10%.

  12. Michael Kalamboukis says:

    Hi Ben
    IXEG 737 Classic only one engine working . both starting nut only one of them accelerate. the other keeps idle around 40%.

  13. Michael Kalamboukis says:

    Hello Ben,
    |I installed a clean copy of xplane, plus IXEG still the some .

  14. Riccardo says:

    This weekend relased xp11 beta 14 ?

  15. Tom Knudsen says:

    Getting 30-37 fps with visual effects on HDR, Number of Objects to High, Texture Quality to Maximum and Reflections set to off (this feature is totally useless and while intented to be awesome, it is just a performance killer), Anitaliasing set to 2X SSAA FXAA

    This with the default B58 (test aircraft) gives me as I said 30-37 FPS in game with no drop or peeks. Sadly everything I now on introduce as airplanes or scenery the FPS indicator will continue to drop making XP11 pretty much a very heavy driven game for my computer spec. (i7 3770K stock speed - 16GB DDR3 1866Mhz ram - Asus Nividia GTX 1080)

    This PB is by far the most correct step in the right direction as of performance. Never got this high or should I say stable performance with default X-Plane. This is good, if this is a baseline, I sure hope things get better. Best notion with the settings in XP10 was that it could be more adjusted to fit low to mid end PC's. Since most of the users are having variable specs, I do believe the power is in the eye of the beholder, not the creator as when it comes to adjusting graphics settings/loads. I would bet this it's why X-Plane 10 feels more like a performance friendly simulator for today's computing hardware. X-Plane 11 while it looks damn good compared, it feels like a simulator for the future. With that statement mean it will fit the computer "low to mid-range" in about 1 1/2 year if Moore's law are applicable as a measurement.

    So keep up the progress we all love regardless of our opinions and feedback. We are dedicated and absolutely in love with the product you may call work and we call life!

    • Sebastian says:

      Couldn`t agree more. Performance is rock-solid now and really fun to Play. I have a Gtx 970 with a Skylake I7 6700 and everything on High.

  16. CarlosF says:

    Did you forget there are also ladies in this world of simulation too! 🙂

  17. Tom Knudsen says:

    Let's not forget the most dedicated of them all, Emma Kate Bentley 🙂

  18. Francois Ruel says:

    Now I have an issue with the C172.. It needs a lot of throttle input - almost 2100-2400 rpm to get it going. Anyone else is getting that issue since pb13?

    • Saar says:

      I did not encounter this issue.
      I tested this in ICAO: YBAF.
      Plane started rolling ~700rpm and accelerated as expected. I was able to bring it to 80knt when RPM reached 2000-2200.

      Try to switch location, I had an issue with "stuck" plane, had to push throttle almost to the end to make plane move, at the end I had to change location to fix it.

      • Ben Supnik says:

        I think this will be fixed in beta 14.

      • Francois Ruel says:

        Saar, thank you for your reply.
        I tried last night from YBAF and still the same problem. I need to bring the throttle to at least 2200 rpm to get the C172 start moving. After that, it's usually ok.
        Ben was it the type of issue you were referring to when you said that beta 14 could fix it?
        Thank you!

  19. Joao Alfredo C. Pinto says:

    I can say that I am from the red team, AMD hardware.
    I find only problem in starting movement with Cessna 172, it requires more power.
    Graphical performance I consider good, after improvements in pb9, use X-Plane 100% "pure" no add-ons, nothing.
    Annoying by X-Plane 10.52 with improvements of pb9 !!!

    João Alfredo

  20. Eugene says:

    Weird issue with X-Craft E-195 v2. Engines start correct, but when you move throttle lever - nothings happen, engines don't react. Here's small video shows this:!Apfp9a6A-HJdgnpq0pQ-RzeIMGuL

  21. John says:


    Engine Problems with PC12 and SenecaV.
    Power idle SenecaV Engine stop.
    1500RPM Vac warning.

    PC 12 idle power downwind for 2 Minutes.
    Engine Fire.

    Final approach planes will drift right and left with no gusty wind. If i put the power back and then fast forward...plane drop. Stall...hard to recover.

    Leave taxiway planes crash. Slow speed.

    Sometimes planes stuck at position. 100% power than moves.

    Some NavData not correct. Wrong ILS Freq. With actually Airac1703. But don´t take effect in GNS430/530.


  22. Sloboda says:

    Not OK for me. Perhaps on pb 14 (I hope...)

  23. Günther Wittwar says:

    Hi Ben,

    recently I posted about a strange Carenado B200 behavior:

    "I filed a bug about the B200 from Carenado, all reflective surfaces inside the cockpit are mirroring landscape textures, even above 8/8 cloud layers.
    This bug exists in Beta 10 too."

    A further finding maybe interesting for you, if not - I didn't write anything ...

    The reflections from outside will be seen, if "Visual Effects" are set to Medium,
    setting them to High (HDR) the surfaces inside the cockpit are refleting the cockpit, as it should be.

    /Günther Wittwar

    • Ben Supnik says:

      This is expected and is a mandatory upgrade - that is - artists have to specify for interior glass surfaces whether they are "inside glass" or "outside glass" in v11 - we have no way to guess this correctly for legacy v10 aircraft.

      • Günther Wittwar says:

        This I understand, Ben, seems also depend on the level of Visual Effects.

        I just wonder why is it working with the Visual Effekts set to High?
        Is at that level another kind of guessing at work?

  24. Federico Villa says:

    With this latest update I cannot run my Full X-Plane 11 simply crashes while loading. My X-Plane 11 installation is a plain addon or plugin.

  25. Alexander says:

    When I purchased the X-Plane 11 Beta in early January I thought I'd have a new fine, stable Sim by March or April.
    Why does LR fundmentally change things so late in a Beta program?
    Your customers are waiting for a final product, the addon developers are waiting for release and the new SDK.
    Customers want to enhance XP11 with addons, but developers cant progress.
    The current turns in the Beta are bad for your Business and reputation, I think.

    • Ben Supnik says:

      We have three choices.

      1. Make the change at 11.0, albeit late in the beta. This makes people who think the beta should be final really nervous. It makes developers who have shipped their add-on despite it being a beta unhappy. It reveals the mismatch in expectations between LR and third parties. It shows the danger of having a reasonably stable EARLY beta when all feature work is not done.

      2. Make the changes in a point release. Our goal is to maintain add-on compatibility during the binary release, so this makes the change a LOT more expensive - the change has to be wrapped in a big pile of compatibility code. This is not impossible..but it takes developer time. That developer time means something else cool for x-plane doesn't happen until later.

      3. NOT make the change at all, and continue with the old code. Based on what Austin has learned about engines, he considers the old code to simply be _wrong_. Wait another few years.

      Given these three choices, I thought option 1 was the least bad option.

      We are trying to get to 'final release' as fast as we can. But the fact that we still call it a beta, and not even an RC, should give you some indication of where we are at with that process.

  26. John says:

    Beta is beta guys. Thats it. For now what it could be later...very good so far.
    For stable IFR long flights better choice is at the moment XP10.
    We must wait...for the big suprise. 😉

    Wishes for me are:
    Stable planes. Stable sytem.
    Correct NAV implementaion
    Old plane integration 10 to 11
    Trip planning tool

    Will the Carenado planes (PC12/TBM750/SenecaV) work stable after final release without an carenado update ?


    • Ben Supnik says:

      Hi John,

      Probably not. There are mandatory engine model updates for v10->v11. If the author doesn't update the plane and the plugin code in the plane is picky about engine behavior, it's unlikely the plane will "just work close enough".

Comments are closed.