Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums

Tomlin

Members
  • Posts

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tomlin

  • Birthday 01/01/1970

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.FlightLevel180.org

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Waycross, GA
  • Interests
    Irish Music and culture

Tomlin's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. Your theory of the device or axis' sleeping coincides with me- I do have it (along with about 4-5 other USB devices) attached to a powered USB hubs and Ive tried different ports with this one card. I will double check the Windows Power Mgt, as that's a good reminder. I dont recall moving them before or while FS is loading- will try that as well. thanks,
  2. A few months ago I had to dismantle my LJ45 simulator. Recently when bringing parts back together, I reattached the GF TQ6 breakout board to my LJ45 throttle quadrant. When going into FSUIPC to set everything back up, all seemed to work well except when I restart the simulator software (MSFS9) I must always go into FSUIPC/ Axis Assignments/ Spoilers and move the spoiler lever in there before it will work. I dont have to re-calibrate or even re-assign it- I simply must move the lever while on that tab in FSUIPC before it will be functional within FS. Flaps, Throttles, etc. work fine and do not require me going into FSUIPC before those will be recognized. Any ideas on how to fix this or a way to trouble shoot?
  3. Hi Pete I know it's been quite a long time since the last post on this thread from me on this subject, but I wanted to let folks know that you did fix the problem that I was having. Sorry I didnt come back and make it known a long time ago, but it just dawned on me to check into it a few days ago since I had gotten fed up with FSX and this was just one of the issues I was having at the time. I checked it with the latest version (shows how often I update FSUIPC) and it works perfectly now. Thanks again,
  4. Okay, thanks for confirming my suspicion- the programmer has had time to look at this info here in this thread and thinks he's got a solution here for our need. all the best, Eric
  5. Thanks Pete, that's what Im suspecting (pitch feedback control facility). Now, the part of equating pitch to a forward airspeed at any given amt of thrust...
  6. Myself and a programmer are looking into this feedback control facility to try to determine if it will be a viable doorway into creating a system where the KIAS or mach value placed will cause the nose to pitch up or down to maintain that reference value. Are you familiar if this facility has been used for that purpose before. Example, 250 KIAS is entered in the SPD reference window and instead of the thrust increasing/decreasing to maintain that value, the nose pitches to maintain that referenced speed? This is done on many aircraft that do not feature an auto throttle system. thanks, Eric
  7. Thanks for pointing out the structural de ice offset of 337D. That is what I was looking for. The LJ45 has Wing/Stabilizer de-ice that is accomplished via hot bleed air, hence my calling it Wing/Stab 'heat'. I realize it may not actually do anything, but I can interface the offset via the hardware to have the EICAS software show that it is indeed activated for proper procedures. Engine Nacelle Heat is accomplished via the same method-hot bleed air- to prevent ice accumalation on the engine nacelle lips, hence 'Engine Nacelle Heat'. In your opinion, is this considered Engine Heat, or is that entirely different for what is modeled as Engine Anti Ice in FS? thanks
  8. Is there an offset available for Wing/Stabilizer heat in FS? I only see: 3BE3 Pitot heat 029C Pitot Heat switch (what's the difference here?) and... 08B2 Engine 1 Anti-Ice or Carb Heat switch (and then the Engine 2/3/4 Anti-Ice as well) 1) Would the Engine Anti Ice be Engine Nacelle heat if the aircraft is a Jet? 2) Can 3BE3 AND 029C be used to the same effect interchangeably? thanks, and Happy New Year
  9. Oh, thank you very much Pete. I will be sure to give it a try. I did notice one thing that I think is the culprit if it's not on your end. It never dawned on me to consider how the bitmap start switches work in the LJ45 for FSX. Once pressed, they stay on until you press them again to turn them off. I dont know if it was intentional or not, but it seems to me that MS wanted to model the 'autostart' function a little better this time around (FSX vs. FS9) but instead of modeling a momentary that 'sticks' until the engine is started and releases, it modeled it as an alternate/latching switch. In the real aircraft the switch is momentary and you press it for a second or less, release and then the starter STARTS until then engine has lit off and then the starter automatically shuts down. This is easily modeled in FS9 using interface hardware that can send a function for a time period and then release (I use the Flight Deck Solutions SYS3 card) and it's possible because the FS9 start switch for LJ45 requires you to press and hold it in the bitmap panel, which is wrong too, but at least when you quit pressing it, it releases the virtual switch. For FSX, you must click on the start button once your engine is running to get the start button to turn off the starter, which I believe is the root problem. Then you have the 2nd issue where sometimes it randomly wants to start the 2nd engine after starting the first, all without ever touching the other engine's start switch. Again, thanks for your help. I will try the new version and hope that it helps. As you say, it cant make it worse :-)
  10. Thanks Peter. I will get that info plus look at the logging too. Im sure Im not at the latest level of FSUIPC 4. Also thanks for the clarification on value 4 vs. 1, I would always get FS9 to start the LJ engines with 4 but it didnt work in FSX so I changed it to 1 and it's working, but again not fully the way I had hoped it would. I somehow missed what the difference was along the way. "Surely, for a jet, it shouldn't "fire off" till you enable the fuel by moving the start lever to the idle position -- performed in FS by full mixture (16384 to offset 0890, etc). Then when the compbustion flag is seen 0894 etc) you should return the start switch to 0 or 2." Yes, the LJ45 is started by moving the levers out of Idle Cutoff to Idle and then START for L or R engine. The rest is automatic (generators and everything). Then repeat for the remaining engine. Again I appreciate your feedback and it helps (although aggravates) knowing that the 738 may be broken so it may be here too as well.
  11. Thanks for your follow up on this post. The LJ45 has an armed position that prevents the spoiler from deploying unless certain criteria are met. In regards to what made me think two different version of FSUIPC was in use, it was simply because one of our group members was using FSX and I was in FS9. He advised me that he was able to get the FSX LJ45 to arm on the ground without the spoiler fully deploying, but I wasnt able to do so. What I did discover though by accident in FS9 (and this works in FSX too) is that you can pull onto the active runway and move your throttle up a bit past idle and somewhere around 38-40% N1 you can then successfully arm the spoilers to deploy automatically on takeoff if you bring the throttle back any amount. This is not quite as realistic as the real jet, which can be armed on the ground at any N1 setting and it will not deploy unless the aircraft has reached 60 Knots. I just wanted to post this simple not so realistic solution in case others would have liked to know.
  12. Im having 3 different mixed up issues with engine starting in FSX and it's driving me nuts. In FS9, via my FDS hardware/software that uses either keypresses or offsets, I have successfully interfaced the L and R engine switches to start each engine individually after pressing and releasing the momentary switch and once the engine begins to settle it the interface solution Im using also turns on the generator for that engine. However, as Ive began trying FSX Ive ran into some majory aggravations. Example 1: You press either L or R Engine Start and that engine shows START on the EICAS and begins the spool process and eventually fires off and settles. This is the 'Normal and Correct' procedure that works fine each and every time in FS9 using offset 0892 bit 1 OR 4 (L engine or #1) and offset 092A bit 1 OR 4 (R engine or #2). Sometimes this works in FSX, However, in FSX this is not the usual case (using these offsets and bits). If it doesnt work right then I get Examples 2 and 3- Example 2: You press either L or R Engine Start and that engine shows START on the EICAS and begins the spool process and eventually fires off and settles. This is where things get crazy in FSX. All of a sudden after the selected engine is started the OPPOSITE engine is now starting without any command/hardware being touched at all. It's as if the offset is actually sending 'Ctrl-E' for autostart. What's with this? A few seconds later both are running fine but START is displayed on one of the two engine start switches, and it's sometimes the first engine you started BUT sometimes it's the 2nd engine that was started automatically via voodoo magic. I see no pattern here which way is more prominate. Example 3: You press either L or R Engine Start and that engine shows START on the EICAS and begins the spool process and eventually fires off and settles. The selected engine starts and then you start the next remaining engine (L or R) and for some reason the START command has illuminated again without any intervention via hardware on the originally started engine. To get rid of it you must now reveal the panel since I have a full size cockpit and turn off the Start Switch via mouse. What is most frustrating about this is not the fact that I realize FS9 and FSX behaive differently, but in that I get different results ( 1 of the examples above) each and every time. Why is it different? From what I see in the FSX offset listing, these are the same from version to version. I have considered deleting my default flight situation and reverting to the orginal FSX default flight situation and seeing if having that setup will 'correct' anything Ive messed up. I do know that the F1 PC-12 had a requirement for you to first load up the default C182 in order to properly start up the Pilatus. Thanks for reading this- it's very frustrating when it works perfect in FS9 but FSX. Eric http://www.FlightLevel180.org
  13. Okay. I have tested and compared the actions on FS9 and FSX. They are different, a little, and in fact FSX is better, more consistent. With FS9 writing 4800 to 0BD0 does Arm the spoiler (0BCC goes to 1), but unusually, when on the ground, FS9 is not then immediately raising them. This is actually inconsistent, because if you armed them using an axis (via the Spoiler Axis inputs calibrated appropriately), they do automatically raise if armed on the Ground. With FSX, the action is the same whether you control the spoilers via 0BD0 or via an axis input. If you are on the ground and you write 4800 to 0BD0, the spoilers will immediately deploy, and 0BD0 will actually change to 16384 (for 100%), not 4800. This is consistent with the way the spoilers behave using an axis. If you are in the air, writing 4800 does arm the spoilers correctly in both FS9 and FSX. I think the more correct action, for consistency, is that being done by 0BD0 in FSX. If I were to make them the same I would need to change FSUIPC3 rather than FSUIPC4. So, how does this affect what you want to do? Now you konw how it behaves I'm sure you should be able to deal with it? You don't want to arm your spoilers on the ground in any case. ;-) Regards Pete Hi Pete Actually, for some builders such as myself, we DO want to arm the spoilers on the ground. I found this thread while seeking a solution to an issue that was baffling to say the least. We have a quickly growing group of full size LJ45 sim builders and that aircraft has the checklist item/requirement to arm the spoiler before takeoff in the case of an abortment. A fellow builder who solely uses FSX is currently able to arm his spoilers on the ground using both a goflight axis as well as SHIFT+/ . I have tried the same in my FSX install and it does the same exact thing it does in FS9, it simply goes to fully extended, which is not desired as I'd like to be able to arm it on the ground and not just in the air for landing. I belive now after reading through this thread that the reason my fellow builder is able to arm it is due to a slightly older version of FSUIPC for FSX than maybe I have? Is there a way to enable the FS9 spoiler to be armed while on the ground please? It would be much appreciated for those folks that have aircraft that do not use an autobrake system, yet has a requirement for arming for takeoff. Thank you for your help and consideration.
  14. Thanks Pete Actually, last night I went to the sim and went in and assigned the axis' per the CH Yoke instruction .pdf here and it seems that it works great now after disabling the controls in FS9. I had no spikes at all that I could detect visually or in flight. You mentioned "using FS axis controls, rather than "direct to FSUIPC" assignment" and although I did use Direct to FSUIPC, it's working really well. If I get any more issues, I will go back and use the FS axis controls and try that. I really do appreciate your help, and it was nice to use 'Slope' for the brakes- they work much better now! I had never did any axis work in FSUIPC all this time I had it except for assigning various levers to spoilers and reversers. Thanks,
  15. Hi I have a full size Learjet 45 flight sim and have two CH Yokes connected to the powered usb hub. Initially I didnt detect any problems or spikes, but then after moving the sim and setting it up again, I have some aggravating issues where I can calibrate the yokes but I still get spiking even after checking the Eliminate Spikes button. However, when I disconnect the FO's yoke, all is well again. I have just read thru the CH Controls w/ FSUIPC document here and I think I will follow the example of disabling the yoke in FS9, and assigning axis' in FSUIPC and see if that helps, as it seems that I have read that this is totally possilbe to have two yokes connected at once. Thanks for any pointers or advice, and for a great software. http://www.flightlevel180.org
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. Guidelines Privacy Policy We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.