Pete Dowson

Please first read through the document on Access Registration, which you will find in the current FSUIPC SDK (http://www.schiratti.com/dowson). Section 4 onwards is most applicable. Then write to me at petedowson@btconnect.com so we can discuss the details. But please note I will be on holiday (with no Internet access) from Feb 19th till Mar 12th. Regards, Pete

Well, I'm sorry, but that must be just plain coincidence, because the visual business of Squawkbox is all down to the multiplayer protocol, which is not touched by anything to do with FSUIPC. I think the symptom you are experiencing has something to do with some file(s) you have to install, but you'll need to ask folks who know something about Squawkbox about that. Sorry, it isn't my subject at all I'm afraid. Maybe someone who does know will jump in here to help you. Regards, Pete

Well, certainly depressions rotate one way (like water down a drain) and highs the other, but that's the general direction of the winds in any layer. I'm not sure it applies to the difference at different altitudes as such. The upper winds I think tend to have different causes than the lower ones, less to do with pressure differentials and more to do with night/day changes and, yes, coriolis I suppose. Either way, I think this problem in FS has been checked in the Southern hemisphere and found to be the same, not reversed. But I'm not totally sure about that ... Regards, Pete

Well, certainly depressions rotate one way (like water down a drain) and highs the other, but that's the general direction of the winds in any layer. I'm not sure it applies to the difference at different altitudes as such. The upper winds I think tend to have different causes than the lower ones, less to do with pressure differentials and more to do with night/day changes and, yes, coriolis I suppose. Either way, I think this problem in FS has been checked in the Southern hemisphere and found to be the same, not reversed. But I'm not totally sure about that ... Regards, Pete

The jet fuel switches in FS are the same as the mixture controls in props. Full rich = fuel enabled, Full lean = fuel cutoff. You can program these in the FS assignments, but if you want the FS control names in FSUIPC's drop down I think they are "Mixture lean" and "Mixture rich". Separate ones for each engine are also listed -- Mixture N ... Regards, Pete

Congratulations. you have discovered the bug in FS which has been troubling us for months. There appears to be no way possible to set a Weather station with anti-clockwise wind direction changes as you climb, only clockwise. We think it is this problem which is contributing, maybe even causing, the sudden 180 degree windshifts folks experience. and this does occur with FS's own dowloads too. No. FSUIPC is definitely sending the weather exactly as requested to FS. It is getting corrupted internally. We've found no way around this. The only solution apears to be to always set clockwise spiralling wind directions -- to keep to "realistic" wind directions at the specified altitudes, insert an extra layer half-way between such layers with the wind direction half way beteen the others in the clockwise direction. I think this is what the main weather program authors will be experimenting with at the moment. Regards, Pete

You can just include the ZIP, as supplied in the Schiratti site. If you want to install the DLL automatically, please be sure to make the installer check the version number of any already-installed version and keep the latest one. And don't replace a user's INI file. If the whole ZIP is too large, just include the DLL but in that case please do include full details of where to get further information. Pointers to the Schiratti site and to here would be a good idea, maybe also to the Registration page. Do you have an access key for your freeware program? Regards, Pete

There was no need to remove the keyit is only valid for FSMeteo anyway and anyone who purchased FSMeteo would have it or be able to read it in any case -- it looks like it is part of the Program Version Information (right click on the EXE and select Properties - Version). What which means? The log shows FSMeteo connecting successfully to FSUIPC and clearing the weather ready to set its own. There's no error showing there. Maybe FSMeteo is having problems getting the weather from the Internet? Without knowing the specific error message I really couldn't comment -- perhaps a message to FSMeteo support may elicit some help? Maybe there's a parameter in its options which needs to be set differently? Sorry, I'm not much help with this, based on the information available. Regards, Pete

Mostly that program was concerned with the ISA EPIC driver and EPICINFO program I made many years ago, which allowed large cockpits to be built around Microsoft Flight Simulator with real switches, displays and controls. Although I'd more or less stopped developing that stuff by then (the film was made in September 2002), that's really the only reason the Director came to see me. The current main software I do for Flight Sim is FSUIPC and WideFS, the former allows ancillary application programs to interface to FS, and the latter extends that same interface to other PCs on a Network. All my FS software is available for download from http://www.schiratti.com/dowson, and you can download any of it and read the documentation inside for more information. But if you are interested in the sorts of cockpits you saw on the program go pay a visit to http://www.projectmagenta.com and browse there. Look at some of the PM user's cockpit photographs. Most of the systems shown on the Discovery program were using PM, but it wasn't credited even once. Regards, Pete

Not any update of any of my programs, no. Maybe you are using weather with extreme icing conditions in cloud layers? Try limiting the maximim icing value allowed (Clouds menu in FSUIPC). This is an extra facility added in version 3.14 specifically in response to folks having such problems with real weather. Regards, Pete

Right! I've sussed it! :D When you provide a /CFG:parameter to FS9, it looks for the new CFG file, NOT in the "usual" folder (usual for FS9), but in the FS9 folder, where the CFGs always used to be! If it doesn't find it it creates a new one, in that folder, using the name you gave. Everything will therefore return to default -- I assume the FLT file error you got was because you'd deleted the standard default FLT that FS installs. If you place your alternative CFG file into the main FS9 folder the [FSUIPC] ControlName facility works well. Please note that, when you do this, ALL of FSUIPC's ancillary files use the new name -- FSUIPC.INI, LOG and KEY. So in your case, not only will you want to make your alternative FSUIPC_JOY.INI, but also you'll need a copy of your FSUIPC.KEY file renamed to FSUIPC_JOY.KEY. Phew! I was a bit concerned with this facility before I discovered this oddity. I will make a note about it in the FSUIPC Advanced User's Guide. Regards, Pete

No, none at all. Esound, AdvDisplay and (I think) all add sections to the Panel.CFG file if they are configured to do panel-specific things, but FSUIPC doesn't touch any of it. Sorry, I really have no idea what would do that. Certainly a corrupt PANEL.CFG file could lose you gauges -- just one line missing will do that. All the "gaugeNN= ..." lines in each Window need to be consecutively present. If one of the numbers is missing, FS stops scanning for more gauges in that window, so they would be missing. Regards, Pete

Nor do I, but I think folks who write to me or about me in this way have fixed ideas about all this in the first place, so they read things into it which aren't really there. I think this came out in some of the later comments the gentleman made. I should be immune by now after all I went through in the early days of FS2004, but I'm not it seems. It is still very upsetting, and effectively turns me off further development for a while. It is a good job I am going on holiday soon, hopefully I'll come back with renewed enthusiasm! :) Incidentally, I myself have a lot invested in FSUIPC and the other things I make -- my own cockpit endeavours would also be useless without them. So unless FS2006 is a turkey there would still be some strong motivation for producing updates for FS2006 and so on, as they are needed. It's just that I don't want it to be a commitment. I don't want to make promises which may not be fulfilled, for whatever the reason. The same flexibility applies to the commercial side. Maybe FSUIPC 4, if and when it exists, will be free to existing subscribers, maybe it won't, maybe there'll be a discount, maybe it will be complete freeware again. It would be nice if I can afford the latter -- and that probably depends upon how my pension arrangements pan out next year. But taking my pension so early (I will be 62 when FS2006 is released) makes that a little doubtful. Whatever, I don't think I should try to "sell" FSUIPC to anyone with promises of a llifetime extending into FS2006 or beyond, and I think it just a little unreasonable of prospective customers wanting to make this a condition of sale. As others have said, there are alternative interfaces being produced and no doubt those will improve with time, so they'll help alleviate the pressure. If I can fit in time to do FS2006 versions and fly and indulge in other hobbies and family matters, I will be happy about it. Thanks very much for your support! Best regards, Pete

You didn't read what I said. I said I would not delete anything here. I hate censorship. I just don't think it is appropriate to continue. You are evidently entrnched in your views and I don't see any point in extending this futile exchange, that's all. It helps no one and just wastes time. Pete

Okay .... there's something odd in FS2004 which I don't understand yet. The /CFG: facility does appear to work in a fashion now I've done more tests. But FSUIPC cannot read the [FSUIPC] section from this -- the FS routine it calls is providing the value from the regular FS9.CFG even though it, itself, seems to be using the named CFG -- at least for some things it is. I'm actually wondering now whether Microsoft had forgotten about the /CFG: facility, when making other changes, and that selecting this makes some parts of FS read the original CFG and other parts read the new one. Certainly that is looking the case from my tests so far. If I add your [FSUIPC] section to the regular FS9.CFG file, it works -- FSUIPC then uses the new ControlName for its INI, LOG and KEY file. I'll look for a solution but at present it doesn't look promising. Regards, Pete

They are additional user facilities provided by FSUIPC over and above the original freeware purpose of FS6IPC, and neither are in any way essential. It is attitudes like yours I'd dearly like to lose, but they are following me even now it seems. I'm sorry, but you don't need to read my replies. I try to keep them factual but you don't like the facts, so I'm sorry, but you'll need to go elsewhere. I did not actually say that, you are misreading things. It's a "little" considering how much work over how much time. Check the context. Yes, indeed, I'm a fool. I'm afraid that I did have too much faith and respect for the Flight Sim community. If I'd had known how it was going to turn out I would probably have not started on FSUIPC 3 back in February 2003. I should have realised how base human behaviour so affects the folks I believed in when the voluntary contribution scheme I set up to try to finance my way to FSUIPC release flopped so dismally. Good! I really am looking forward to the day when I can stop developing it. I am looking forward to being able to spend some time flying, and maybe also get on with my model railway as I've been promising myself for several years. This was supposed to be a hobby. I didn't want it to be a business and I still don't want it to be. When I get my full pension started, probably April 2005, then I will have the option. Anyway, enough is enough. This forum is for technical support. If you want to send me more personal comments please use the private channels so I can delete them. I don't like deleting things here at all, it smacks of censorship which I hate. Regards, Pete

Well you may think that, and you are of course entitled to your opinion, but you apparently don't know much about my history in the field, nor have you looked at the extent of my contribution over the last 10 years or more. Out of all that, I have only started earning a little in the last six months, yet in that time I have suffered tremendous abuse because of it. It has been the worst time of my life. It is this which makes me think I may not "want" toapart from the sheer time involved and the total lack of cooperation from Microsoft. In the 6 months Beta period from February to July 2003, the FS2004 release date, I spent at least 2000 hours on FSUIPC alone, and probably nearer 3000 altogether. Even since FS2004 release it has been a full time job. I would dearly like a life as well, and it would be nice to actually fly the simulator occasionally in other than brief test modes. I don't want any advertising, thank you, and I only wanted to earn enough to allow me to actually continue after my other sources of income dried up suddenly. I can chuck all this in and earn money other ways, and I must say that it is tempting to do that with such attacks as yours starting up again. :cry: That is plainly not true, as you really ought to know. The main function of FSUIPC, as an interface for applications, is still free for freeware programs, and in that sense it is in EXACTLY the same boat as its predecessor FS6IPC was -- Adam allowed free use for freeware and charged commercial developers a license, just as I do. The USER license for FSUIPC is just for the extra user facilities which in no way can be considered essential and which certainly weren't supplied by FS6IPC. Please get your facts right before trying to be nasty and unfriendly. Thanks, Pete

I'm sorry if you felt that way. Would you rather I lied to you and promised things I may not be able or want to deliver? I was just being honest and straight-forward, stating things as they are. If you consider that unfriendly perhaps you prefer salesmen to technicians? If so, this most certainly isn't the place, sorry. Oh, and you aren't a customer anyway, are you? Not even potentially :) Regards, Pete

I think it says 20 Euros, not Dollars. VAT is the "Value Added Tax" compulsory for EEC purchasers -- it varies from country to country in the EEC but I think because SimMarket is based in Germany it will be the German rate of 16%. You won't be liable to VAT then, as Canada is not in the EEC and I don't think it even has an application in, like so many others currently do! :) These queries would be better addressed to http://www.simmarket.com who deal with all this stuff. I am concerned with programming and technical support. Do NOT buy it then. There is no way I am going to be committed to making an FS2006 version after all the pain I went through for this one. And in any case, even if I do make one I would not expect to give away the FS2006 version just because you paid 20Euros for this. Are you getting a free copy of FS2006 when it comes out? If it does comes about I would expect FSUIPC version 4 to be priced similarly to the current one, plus inflation. No, I do not agree with that sort of restriction. The license is yours, not your computer's. You can use it on as many computers as you like -- not that it is relevant now we know you won't be buying it in any case, eh? :wink: Regards, Pete

Of course. The instruments on the panel on the FS installation you are flying can have the panel showing. It does by default. If it isn't showing press W until it does, or Shift+1 for the main part. You must have switched it off!? You can obviously have the panel showing on any PC running FS, but you'd have to check to see whether the instruments on the WidevieW clients are driven or not. This is more a question for WidevieW. I don't know, sorry. Pete

You have to either use multiple screens on one PC, or WidevieW linking multiple FS installations for that. WideFS is for linking FS applications on a PC not running FS at all. Depends what program you are wanting to display your instrumentation. If you are dependent upon the FS panels, then these will only run in FS, so you display them on a PC running FS. If you are using Project Magenta instrumentation, or some other software which works with the FSUIPC interface, then you can put these on separate PCs linked by WideFS. Regards, Pete

Ah, yesthe Professional Edition had extra aircraft. 7.96? Doesn't seem to mean anything, does it? :) Still, if it is consistent that's fine. Well done. Regards, Pete

Since FS2004 has changed pretty much everything about where what files are stored I think there will be difficulties with this. Are you sure the /CFG: command line option actually does anything in FS2004? I couldn't get any of that to work here at all. The message you are getting is to do with FS, not FSUIPC. Maybe files have to be in different places for things to work. I haven't enough time today to experiment again with this, but I'll make a note to try it all again soon. There was another thread on the same question, but I think the writer found and alternative method to do what he wanted. What is your need for separate FSUIPC INI files? Maybe there's another solution. Regards, Pete

It isn't possible now, no. I can have a look to see what's involved, but I'm a bit tight for time before my holidays in two weeks. It might have to be just a (relatively obscure) INI option, as I don't think the correct solution for a wonky lever is to use another. However, having said that, you can of course, change your lever assignments around. though I suppose that will become rather confusing if you ever want asymettric thrust! :) Anyway, I'll put it on my list of things to do and see how I get on. Regards. Pete

It's got to be before I go on holiday, in two weeks time. Currently I'm aiming at the 14th, but it may be earlier. Regards, Pete