Pete Dowson

Received. Thanks. It's late here now, so I'll look at it tomorrow. If you'd like to send me a Zipped FSFlightMax.DLL too (same email address), I'll look to see if it is suitable for a Key. It depends how it is written. If it is I'll see about publishing a Freeware Key for it too. It just seems odd that this hasn't arisen before -- the EXE file keys were published long ago. Regards, Pete

Hmmm .. that's extremely odd because the check that FS carries out for "bad" DLLs is performed as it is loading them -- FSUIPC will not actually be running then, and no key will be any use anyway. In fact FSUIPC doesn't start running enough to process keys until very much later. I really think it more likely that you or something changed the "OldModules" entry in the FS9.CFG file so that the DLL got accepted without FS quibbling. Which program? FSFlightMax? I didn't know it had any access in the Menu? Why would it, if there's an EXE running which you can use? Evidently there's something I'm not getting here. Er .. what is FSFlightMax.EXE then, the program which has been given the FSUIPC Access Key? Isn't that the program you run? If you don't run it, what does? The DLL? Have you tried running it? This is getting more confusing by the minute. I'm very sorry, but I'm not sure how I can help if at all. What IS FlightMax, the EXE or the DLL? My only contact with it was as a separate program which could even be run on a separate PC using WideFS. On the other problem, the crash in Weather.DLL, I can't find any reason for it here with the information in the Log. Could you possibly run EXACTLY the same sequence as you did before (the one which produced the earlier Log), but first add the line "LogWrites=Yes" to the [General] section of FSUIPC.INI? Then ZIP up the FSUIPC.LOG file and send it to petedowson@btconnect.com. Thanks! Don't forget to go into FSUIPC's Logging page and switch off the IPC Write logging after the test, or you'll keep making big Log files! Regards, Pete

I think the WideFS bit is assuming you are running a Network with bits of cockpit all over. Yu don't need WideFs for a single PC, it cannot do anything then. Regards, Pete

I don't rreally know, but I want to be able to protect FS from crashing because of bad calls from programs, so I'll need to look at it. Not really, sorry. Odd that no other user has ever mentioned the DLL. Do you know what it does? Have you tried removing it from the FS Modules folder? It is very very awkward trying to deal with a defunct product like this. Aren't there any self-help groups around who can help sort this out? All I was asked for was a Key for the EXE program. I would need to know more about this DLL before I could proceed. Regards, Pete

Which one? There are two in the listdid you get the right one? fsflightmax.exe Product: "FSGarmin", Company: "Sim Systems" KEY = 5SFB WJV4 O7C0 or Product: "FSFlightMax for Microsoft Flight Simulator", Company: "Sim Systems" KEY = Q102 FE41 ISKT But, wait a minute: according to the Log, it isn't an EXE program you are getting the problem with, but some FS module: 37531 Module identified = "fsflightmax.dll" I'm afraid I've never heard of that, nor will the Keys supplied for an EXE program work for a DLL. This, the EXE access part, is okay: 199203 Client Application: "fsflightmax" (Id=3692) 199234 C:\Program Files\FS2004\modules\fsflightmax\fsflightmax.exe 199250 Product="FSFlightMax for Microsoft Flight Simulator" 199250 Company="Sim Systems" Another thing in your log is a bit worrying. FSUIPC is trapping a crash, one which would have otherwise crashed FS for sure: 770437 ***ERROR C0000005 at 21145193 ProcessRequest 770437 *** Access violation trying to read address 0000044C 770437 *** EAX 00000000 EBX 00000000 ECX 0012F2A4 EDX 00000000 EDI 0012EBE4 ESI 21145170 This is in the WEATHER.DLL part of FS. Looks like it is trying to read weather which isn't set up. Apart from FlightMax, what other add-in or add-on programs were you running, please? Does FlightMax have anything to do with the weather, like reading it perhaps? I need to work out whether it is FSUIPC or something else causing this crash. From the details above it definitely looks like something is asking FSUIPC to read weather for an invalid location. Regards, Pete

More sensitive = more effect for less input. Less sensitive = Less effect for more input. I think you want it the other way round! :wink: No, not at present. I used to use such "S" shaped response curves with EPIC, and I have incorporated such in my PFC driver. It's on the list for FSUIPC but not at the top at present. There is a package that will probably do it -- FS Communicator. See http://www.flightsimulator.at/frm_fscom.htm. There's a document you can download called "FS-Com Analog Channel Processing V3" which seems to show that you can do a lot with the package. But it is payware again, like FSUIPC. Apart from operating in the reverse direction to what you are thinking, I think they are just scalers -- so yes, they would be linear if you have the analog inputs set to behave linearly. Since FS2002, by default, FS has treated joysticks in a kind of linear-by-time fashion rather than a direct connection. If you haven't tried it, you could add "stick_sensitivity_mode=0" to the [Controls] section of FS9.CFG. This makes FS treat the analogs like it did in FS98 days, more sensibly in my opinion. Regards, Pete

Just find the [Radios] section. you will see how to do it then, quite easily. The ADF1 is there by Adf.1 = 1 Just add Adf.2 = 1 Of course this doesn't get you the gauge in the panel -- that's another matter. Regards, Pete

Unfortunately FS's jet starter combines the start function and the generator switch. The correct starter switches in Boeings would provide: Ground (== start in FS) Off (== off in FS) Cont (continuous ignition, not provided in FS) Flight (?) The switch is spring-loaded away from Ground/Start (as in FS), but this gives "Off" in the real aircraft and "Gen" in FS. This is the problem. What you will need to do, in order to operate the generators separately, is to set the starter to "0" after starting, not allow it is default to "1". Just switch it to 1 when the generator is switched on. In fact you can do all this (for Engine 1, say) via offset 0892, you don't need the other offsets. Regards, Pete

It only saves what Windows tells it. I have WideClient on 4 PCs, changing every other year or so, and haven't had once instance of that in the six years it's been in use. The code is a standard piece used in all my programs which have windows whose positions need remembering. I really cannot imagine how the numbers could go wrong unless there's some glitch in the Windows API or video drivers scaling the pixel numbers. You can get valid negative coordinates with multiple screens if you have it on, say, a number 2 screen which you positioned to the left of your number 1 screen. Regards, Pete

Because you are pressing the button to register FSUIPC as a User. To do that you need to purchase a Key. If all you want to do is register an application you press the button labelled "Register an application program". It is meant to be quite explicit, not obscure, so I don't know how you missed it. All you are then asked to enter is the application name (the actual EXE name, minus the .exe at the end), and the Key. Pete

Cool? It was pretty warm, I can tell you! :) . The 50-years back reputation comes mostly I think from the old American (mostly) cars there. Some beauties -- I bet some of them would be worth quite a bit in the U.S. to collectors and enthusiasts. Most of these you see in Havana, not so many out in the country at large. We only spent a couple of days in Havana. Mostly out in the country on sugar plantations riding both narrow and standard gauge steam trains! Covered almost the entire length of this rather large island in the two weeks. Really enjoyable, and lovely people everywhere, really friendly. It also made quite a change being in a country like this without meeting any U.S tourists. Lots of Canadians (short journey for them, compared to ours). The only U.S Americans we saw were a group of Missionaries, I guess trying to indoctrinate the nice friendly local "heathens" (in their eyes! :wink: ). Thank you! Regards, Pete

Is this with still air? If there are any winds at the cloud levels, I think they will move -- as they do in the real world. I don't think this is really the 'problem' I was talking about so much as simply the advanced atmosphere simulation (that made its debut in FS2004) taking effect. Yes, this is more to do with the 'problem' -- if you deliberately clear all local weather settings and set global weather, you'd think the weather would be the same everywhere. Then, even if the wind did blow, the same universal weather would simple move but still be everywhere. Why it changes with the changes minimised, I don't know. Evidently changes minimised don't actually stop them. Yes, the weather engine only works on a subset of waether zones, based on the weather stations, in a matrix around you. Exactly. I tried automatically setting this right at the start, so that older FS2002-compatible weather programs could be used okay still. After we determined that we couldn't actually stop weather changing I advised all the weather programmers to change over to setting local weather. Yes, I couldn't have said it better myself. Not that I know of, no, for all the reasons just discussed. Even then it isn't easy and you may get unwanted cloud flicker effects if an external program tries to change (or keep) local weather. The best results occur when the weather program changes the weather ahead of you, not in direct view. I don't know how that could be accomplished sensibly, unless you are going to maintain a server which can provide the Jeppesen-encoded weather data replacing the Microsoft/Jeppesen site where it downloads the current "real" weather from. I suspect that getting it to go to your site (which of course may be on your own local Network anyway) is relatively trivial compared to cracking the encoding/compression Jeppesen have applied. The original FS2002 weather programs (FSMeteo and ActiveSky amongst many) were using Global weather only, and they lost control in FS2004. The problem is, as I state in the chat at the top of the forum, that in FS2004 the global weather is only applied to local stations when they have no weather. Once the local stations start "changing" (developing) their weather, they are all equipped with "local weather", so any re-imposition of Global weather doesn't have any effect locally (except possibly adverse effects from the changes this makes further afield). The only way to re-assert global weather authority is to clear the weather completely every time. Unfortunately it is really impossible to do with without any visible and possibly physical results (physical in the sense of aircraft buffeting or whatever). Well, using the menus you are effectively doing that, or more usually replacing/re-asserting ther local weatherthe visual disruption is hidden simply because you are not actually running the simulator whilst in the menus. It is easy to do that. If you don't mind periodic disruption, automatic from a program instead of manual by use of menus, then, yes, it could be done by program. But it won't be nice to watch, even infrequently. The program is better off changing the local weather stations rather than clearing all weather and reassting global settings, but even then you'd probably notice some flicker, and maybe FS would stutter a bit whilst it re-calculates the N nearest stations. With visible stutters and flickers, yes -- these you don't see in the Menu because you have stopped the action. I seem to experience "lovely clouds" most of the time. Nearly all "real weather" is cloudy a lot of the time in the UK where I fly. I get "lovely" clouds by ensuring that the 3D cloud slider is at 100% and the quality/density slider below is also well over to the right. The other two sliders can be adjusted then to give back some frame rates, but if possible both of those are best full right. Certainly the cloud effects in FS2004 seem far superior to all previous versions, and so I'm not really sure what you are trying to improve. I thought what you were after was keeping the exact clouds in the same position "fixed" in the sky, no matter what weather changes were afoot -- and I don't think this is possible (or realistic). But why are you so unhappy about the cloud graphics? Regards, Pete

Hmmm. Strange. What is it supposed to do, hide :wink: windows from you? Maybe it is supposed to remember window states and restore them like it saw them, but somehow got it knickers twisted, so to speak. Glad you sorted it! Regards, Pete

One other thing. Windows offers the facility to force any program to start minimised, maximised or in a normal window. Right click on the shortcut or icon you use to run it, and select Properties. Check the data there -- maybe you've somehow told Windows to override whatever Wideclient is trying to do. Pete

There's absolutely no code in WideClient that has anything to do with the "task bar" (I assume you mean minimising it?). You must have something else doing this, somehow, though I cannot imagine what. WideClient will start off minimised if you ask it to. Even if it starts off minimised, right clicking on it and restoring it should get you a window back. All that stuff is left to Windows, WideClient doesn't touch any of it. Is there some important reason to get it as a Window, by the way? It should work quite happily maximised, restored, minimised or even completely invisible. Your log extract showed nothing out of the ordinary. Regards, Pete

The joystick analogy is just a convention. The business of 9 "joysticks" each with 32 buttons derives from the standard (outdated non-DirectX) Windows joystick support API which allowed each joystick (out of a maximum of 16) to have 32 buttons, represented by a bit each in a 32-bit DWORD. The same analogy was extended many years ago by my EPIC driver for Windows 95/98. It presented the older ISA EPIC card as a set of 16 joysticks each with 32 buttons, 6 axes and a "POV" (point of view input, or "Hat"). Whether the things at the source end of these "buttons" were really physical buttons or just events made in software inside the EPIC was not relevant -- in many cases there was not a one-to-one correspondence. The "button" events would be programmed to perform whatever cockpit actions the EPIC programmer desired. The virtual button facilities in FSUIPC are merely a continuance of the same sort of theme, for programmers of any equipment. Yes, you can do that too. In fact the facility that activates in FSUIPC is the same one as that being used by WideClient when sending the keys it receives -- except it is WideServer doing the eventual "sending". Don't forget, when sending keys to either WideClient or FS directly you can address them to the top level window with Classname "FS98Main". The program itself then doesn't need to have keyboard focus. Regards, Pete

How long have you been here? :wink: I was away for three weeks, from Feb 19 to Mar 13. My good lady and I had a two week break in Cuba, a Steam Railway tour, followed by a week's stay in Madrid with my son, who works there. :) . No Internet access at all in that time! Thanks for your kind thoughts. Actually, we would normally take another break soon, August time, a relaxation in somewhere like Madeira (our most favourite Island in the World), but my wife is going in for a hip replacement soon, and I am due to have operations on my eyes for cataracts (they are making the world fuzzier every day! :? ), so we are not booking anything more at present. When things are settled again, do not worry, we will take a break! :D :D :D No, not at all. Believe me, I've been just as responsive over all of the last eight years or so. It is possibly more visible with a Forum, but this is actually less work for me than replying to the 100-200 emails per day which it had built up to over the years. The trouble with email support only is that each reply benefits only one reader, so I find myself repeating things so often. Here it is a lot better. Though it doesn't eliminate repetition, it does at least build a resource which helps answer many folks who would have otherwise emailed me individually. By the way, my surname is actually Dowson, not Dawson -- a much rarer variety! :wink: Regards, Pete

Just write your program to emulate any buttons you choose from the 288 available (288 = 9 x 32)! Which ones you choose doesn't matter unless you have other software also using this facility, in which case of course you'd want to avoid choosing the same bits. Once your program is operating the bits in those "virtual button" locations, THEN you can easily program them in FSUIPC to do whatever you like. All you need to do is get your program to operate each "virtual button" and program it in turn. This is EXACTLY the same as connecting a real joystick or button pad and programming the buttons on that in FSUIPC. The "virtual button" facility emulates real buttons. Okay, fine. Please yourself. I won't argue. I just don't understand how you find buttons so mystifying. Regards Pete

I've no idea how yur are sending them, but WideClient merely reacts to the standard WM_KEYDOWN and KEYUP messages. There's nothing clever, no magic. If you are using a programming language which supplies microaoft's "spyxx" program you can check the messages it is receiving and compare them with the ones it gets from the keyboard. Yes, thought you don't need to write a whole DWORD just to change one bit, just the byte with that bit will do. Bits 0-7 are in the first byte, 8-15 in the second and so on. Neither. How can you get 32 x 9 bits into a 32 bit word? And 3341 is only one byte past 3340, with only 8 bytes. For 32 x 9 bits you need 4 x 9 = 36 bytes, as it says, from 3340 all the way to 33663 inclusive! You write to them through the FSUIPC interface. Please see the SDK. You use FSUIPC_Write and so on. Sorry, you are losing me completely. Of course you need to set the button first, else how can you program it? I assure you it is 1000% easier and mch more efficient and reliable than messing with keys. What exactly is so strange about a "virtual" joystick button being recognised by a bit changing in memory? This is exactly how all the joystick interfaces work. Regards Pete

It is just waiting for a connection. Seems like you''ve got a parameter in the WideClient.ini file which tells it to hide or start minimised -- just delete the INI and start again, or open it up and check the Windows and other parameters near the top. All the parameters are documented in the WideFS DOC so you shouldn't have any problem. Pete

I had a look, and it was pretty easy. I also found the menu bug -- looks like it's been that way for a *long* time. Evidently not many folks using it for individual menus. The saved flight filename system will be as follows: A 16-bit (2 byte) count will be updated at offset 3BD4 each time a flight is saved, no matter by whom or how. To get the name of the last saved flight, you will need to use the "path reading" mechanism operating on offsets 0FF0-10FF. This is described in the text section of the Programmer's Guide already. The last saved flight will be using a 3 in the Command Word. Note that flights are normally saved to the default Flights path, and this won't be included in the flight filename you read. The best thing to do is use the path reading facility once only, when you first get connected, with command word = 1, then prepend the path to the filename (check that there's a separating \ character) before using it. I've made the changes but its getting very late here now so I won't test till tomorrow sometime. If you want an interim version to check out, please email me on petedowson@btconnect.com. Otherwise it'll be in the next general release, probably 3.24 in two weeks. Regards, Pete

Great! That's good -- it saves me a lot of work adding new controls which aren't really needed after all! Phew! :D Good flying! Regards, Pete

Oh, I see. But doesn't that amount to the same thing? Simply swapping over which side is "standby" and which is "in use" instead of swapping the frequencies themselves? Don't the FS Controls I listed operate on whichever is the "standby" frequency whichever side it's displayed on? This should be exactly what the controls I listed for you do -- they don't change the "in-use" frequency, only the "standby". You can't be talking to a controller on the standby frequerncy because that isn't in use! Perhaps I need to re-install the PMDG panel so I can test the controls I mentioned, but it is bit of a palava when I don't need it. Can you re-check please and describe it a little more carefully? Internally they must be changing the frequency not being used. It sounds like all PMDG have done is made the display of the standby left or right according to the swap button. Can you please just try the commands I mentioned and tell me what happens on screen for each state of in-use/standby, standby-in-use? Thanks, Pete

Assuming you are talking about using FSUIPC controls to do this, then obviously it is more efficient in terms of Network use, and also to reduce the latency in the response, to connect to the Server. The only way it would be more efficient on the Client would be if the MCDU itself could accept your inputs, but I don't think it has button programming facilities. Some joystick drivers offer keypress capabilities from buttons, so that's another possibility. Correct. Regards, Pete

I don't think that the FS sim engine is designed that way, with simple values which can be changed on the fly. I am no expert on the aircraft side of things, but it seems to me that the parameters read from the Aircraft.CFG and the AIR files are used as a basis for generating a complex flight model, maybe with tables and all sorts. Certainly most of these things interact with each other. There are jet thrust values for each engine (204C etc) but I suspect that these are derived values and I doubt whether you can change them, though you are welcome to try. I really don't know of any "spoiler effectiveness" value internally, but simply manipulating the value in 0BD0 should be sufficient provided there's enough effect pre-defined for the aircraft. Even if the were specific values matching your needs which I could find and map offsets to, which is unlikely, I doubt whether writing to them would have the effect you might be seeking, simply because of the interaction in the modelling. I don't know what you are trying to do, but experimenting with writing to the assorted velocities and accelerations (3060-30B8 and 3178-31D0) may give you what you want. Alternatively try changing the loaded weight and distribution (1400). Regards, Pete