Jump to content
The simFlight Network Forums

Pete Dowson

Moderators
  • Posts

    38,265
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    170

Everything posted by Pete Dowson

  1. It isn't FSUIPC you need support for. I opffer support for FSUIPC. The problems you have are with sapplications -- FSUIPC is running fine. Well, I don't know what checkls they carry out to detect that, but if they do things properly then if that's the message then I'm pretty sure it must be because you have FS and SB4 operating at different privilege levels, or different compatibility modes. Check the properties of both programs, make sure the various ways of running them are the same for both. Pete
  2. Do those programs actually want to talk to each other? I thought SB4 and FSInn were competitors. FSUIPC provides an interface into FS for programs which choose to use it. But I'm not sure whether those do, that's all. FSInn and SB4 most certainly have other needs in their interface with FS, which FSUIPC doesn't meet -- multiplayer or AI traffic injection, for starters. I don't know VAFS, as I said. Do the programs actually state that they are trying to interface FSUIPC and failing? Maybe their error message will tell you something? The log you provided most certainly showed FSUIPC was running fine. Have you tried using the support services for the programs you are having trouble with? Pete
  3. No. What is the exact symptom of it "not finding the registration"? The key file is in the FS9 modules folder, next to FSUIPC.DLL, same as the INI file and the LOG FSUIPC produces. Did you register it when running the installer as a normal native Win7 program? Is FS9 installed under the same user as a native Win7 program? I really have no idea what fiddles Windows gets up to in the compatibility modes, but if you installed FS for one specific user you have to register FSUIPC whilst logged in as that user. There's no difference for FSUIPC under Win7, 32 or 64 bit. I'm not sure why you are considering using any "compatibility modes" for FS9. I don't think it needs them. Does Squawkbox use a key? I thought it was freeware? Regards Pete
  4. I've never had the SDK nor know where to look, but I do use Google from time to time and find it quite useful -- perhaps you should try it? ;-) I just Googled "FS multiplayer SDK" and the first link looked very useful: http://www.scenery.org/tutorials_fs2k4_SDK.htm There is stuff for multiplayer about half-way down. Pete
  5. Really? don't I say somewhere that they are completely free and you can do what you like? Sorry, I should have! Yes, of course. Go ahead (though it isn't really "my page" but Enrico Schiratti's). Regards Pete
  6. Sorry, I've no idea. Probably they are part of the systems simulation in PM rather than FS, though the valve indication might be related to the FS fuel valves at offsets 3590 and following. The answer will be in the PM code -- you need to ask PM support. I'm not related to PM and have never written any of their code! Regards Pete
  7. I cannot work out why it isn't re-arming. The log doesn't help I'm afraid. I've emmailed you a request for another test. Pete
  8. Well, looking just at the LGC files supplied in the pmSystems package I see two ways of doing "if" statements. Examples: if mastercautionswitch then sixpackcaution = 0 mastercautionswitch = 0 [1] endif or if busselect1 = 4 then acvolt = 115 So, if it is all on one line, no endif. Otherwise end the sequence of resulting actions with endif. Regards Pete
  9. I think i've found the problem. it relates to the debugging code which is active on my setup because of my development system. Look out for version 3.944 in the Updates announcement later tonight ... Regards Pete
  10. Actually, there's only one occasion in the log where it could have happened in any case, where the values of both toe brakes as shown in 0C00 and 0C01, passed 150 (assuming you still have the threshold set at the default 75%). Possibly there should have been one at the start, but since you started a new log (why?) I cannot tell -- the log does not show both toe brakes "off" to start with. If it worked once, the last time you tried, just before you closed the file, it would be here: 302609 Monitor IPC:0C00 (U8) = 0 302609 Monitor IPC:0C01 (U8) = 0 ------------------------------------------------------- both toe brakes fully off 303812 Monitor IPC:0C00 (U8) = 42 303812 Monitor IPC:0C01 (U8) = 44 303859 Monitor IPC:0C00 (U8) = 131 303859 Monitor IPC:0C01 (U8) = 112 303906 Monitor IPC:0C00 (U8) = 171 303906 Monitor IPC:0C01 (U8) = 155 -------------------------------------------------------- both toe brakes passed 75% 303968 Monitor IPC:0C00 (U8) = 200 303968 Monitor IPC:0C01 (U8) = 200 304890 Monitor IPC:0C00 (U8) = 163 304937 Monitor IPC:0C00 (U8) = 42 304937 Monitor IPC:0C01 (U8) = 111 304984 Monitor IPC:0C00 (U8) = 0 304984 Monitor IPC:0C01 (U8) = 42 305031 Monitor IPC:0C01 (U8) = 0 I assume both toe brakes are still assigned "direct to FSUIPC calibration"? Since you only supplied a partial log (you pressed the "New Log" button, which I didn't want you to do -- that's why I was explicit about only touching two things on the left side of the Logging tab), I cannot tell what aircraft you are using in this example. Was it a default aircraft, and if so, which one please? I cannot reproduce the problem here so I need to try to get the same sort of setup as yours. Please, when I ask for logging, just make the selections I request, do not press other buttons at random as it spoils the results. Anyway, I clearly need more logging to see what is different on your system, so I'll work on that and get back to you. Pete
  11. Do those programs use FSUIPC? I know that SB3 did, but SB4 doesn't use it in FSX, so I'm not sure about that. I don't know either VAFS or FSInn. What indications do they give that they are trying to connect to FSUIPC and failing? FSUIPC is certainly running fine. Are you by any chance running FS and any of those programs at different privilege levels? Under Vista or Win7, if you run FS "as administrator" or any programs "as administrator", they run at a higher privilege level called "elevated administrator", the same as afforded to installers. If you do this, then everything needs running at the same level -- Vista and Win7 actively prevent programs of different levels talking to each other. Regards Pete
  12. Well, Squawkbox3 did use the FSUIPC interfaceexcept for the visualisation of the other fliers' aircraft in FS. For FS9 and before that was done using the Multiplayer interface into FS. I think for FSX they would most likely be using the SimConnect facilities to create AI aircraft, and moving those around, instead, but i do not know this. Certainly FSUIPC doesn't provide anything to do either of those two things. Regards Pete
  13. The log shows nothing wrong. what programs are you running which says it isn't there? The installer freezes, not FS? But the installer logs you've already shown show it running to completion, even to the "*************** End of Install Log *************** message at the end -- the last thing it does just before terminating normally! I've never heard of anyone getting a freezing installer -- it's so simple, it seems so unlikely! Earlier on you seemed to be running the Installer when FS was already running, in which case of course it couldn't do its job in any case. Perhaps when you thought it was "frozen" it was just in its Window waiting for you to say whether you wanted to register or not -- which I see you never have. So you don't actually want to use FSUIPC for anything yourself? Maybe you think it is frozen because you placed the logging window or FS in front of the window asking for Registration? This thread has taken a rather weird turn! How long have you been talking about only the Installer and not about FS and FSUIPC? Pete
  14. I don't think so, no. But I don't sell the program -- SimMarket are the publishers and sellers. It is very unlikely. Software is rather different from hardware. Are you seeking a refund from Microsoft for FSX? If you aren't going to use it, isn't that a similar situation? Regards Pete
  15. I don't write or support PM, you are in the wrong place I'm afraid. Are you talking about pmSystems? If so, why not look at the examples it comes with? I think there's documentation available too. Regards Pete
  16. Please go to the Logging tab, enable Axis event and Event logging (two check marks) on the left side. On the right side add offset 0C00 as type U8 and offset 0C01 as type U8, and check "normal log" below. Then set the parking brake, and press the toe brakes, together, as far as they'll go. Don't operate any other axis else the log will be too large. Show me the log (or ZIP it and send it to petedowson@btconnect.com. All this threshold facility does is "tap" the "BRAKES" control (the same as the '.' key) when both brakes pass the threshold, and reset that facility when both brakes go back to "off" (0). Please test with a default aircraft in case there's special actions on an add-on. That sounds as if you are not assigning the toes brakes to the correct FS controls. The "direct to FSUIPC calibration" is a relatively new facility. For 10 years now the calibration facilities have worked fine on the normal FS controls. Those facilities have never been withdrawn! Regards Pete
  17. If you have installed the latest version of FSUIPC, as you say, you must surely have seen and read the little Installation and Registration guide which came with it. Right? Can you read it now, and see what it says it installs in your FS Modules folder? Look, to help you I show this extract from the very first page (I have here highlighted in red the salient parts): I'll answer your question 2 if you, for some strange reason, don't manage to find the answer in the documentation. However, I am certain the answers are there. ;-) Regards Pete
  18. Did you read the previous message in this thread and try that? Or else simply provide the ServerName and Protocol parameters to WideClient in its INI file. If neither of those work, you have a firewall in the way. Regards Pete
  19. Strange. works fine here. This looks wrong though: Those 16380 values are the default values. Are you sure you ever calibrated the reverser, mixture, rudder and toe brake axes? I suspect not. Just pressing "set" isn't calibration -- that's only the start. You do have to set decent minimum, maximum (and for some, centre pair) values -- normally reasonably far away from the physical extremes to be sure they can be reached. And it is obviously quite important to set a dead zone at the brakes off position too so you don't inadvertently brake when using the rudder. Furthermore it looks like you've not reversed the brake axes, which is normally necessary for most toe brake arrangements, so they are off when released, on when pressed. Or have you arranged that some other way? If so, then I think what is likely happening in your case is that you never reach the 75% of brake pressure needed (simultaneously on both brakes) to activate the facility. You could of course check that theory by reducing the threshold, maybe by a lot! Please find the FSUIPC User Guide, go to the section on joystick calibration, and follow the numbered steps you'll find to achieve correct calibration. It is simple enough. If you don't use FSUIPC to calibrate I really see no point in using FSUIPC for your assignments in the first place. ;-) Pete
  20. I'm afraid version 4.52 is out of date and has not been supported for several months. I doubt it, as FSUIPC does not use SimConnect for reading any buttons or switches. It sounds like you have a bad joystick or joystick driver installed, possibly one not compatible with Windows 7. When you are using a supported version of FSUIPC and if you still have not solved the problem, come back and we'll investigate via Logging and so forth. Pete
  21. Yes. There is even a section in the WideFS documentation on precisely that subject. Look in the Technical guide, under the heading "PTT (push to talk) for Roger Wilco, AVC and TeamSpeak". Pete
  22. There's no error in the Install of 4.53, evidently. If you copied the later FSUIPC4.DLL file into the correct place, it surely must be there. But Win7 should have prompted you, asking whether to replace the older one (which of course you should have allowed). If it didn't I expect it changed the name, putting the word "copy" or something in there. (You cannot have two files with identical names in the same folder). Have a look in the folder with Windows Explorer. I'm sure you will see what's wrong! You have to REPLACE the file if you want to update. Having a renamed copy won't work because it then looks like something different. Files are known by their names.. If you cannot manage files with Explorer it might be better to stay with 4.53 until I release 4.55 in due course -- certainly before Christmas. That will have an installer as all the main FSUIPC4 user releases do. Oh, by the way, 4.546 is no longer available for download. 4.547 replaced it. Regards Pete
  23. So, I don't need to look at this install log? Is that from when you had a problem? It says the signature check failed. Regards Pete
  24. Glad you found it all useful! Pete
  25. That is certainly starting to sound like a hardware problem. Maybe in the networking hardware or possibly in computer memory. One thing to check, first, though, is whether there's a memory leak from something running on either PC. If the memory becomes rather full one of the first things to suffer are the TCP/IP network exchanges as they get no buffer space. You can run the memory resources part of the task manager to compare free memory at the start with the state when the networking stalls. It means you haven't installed the IPX protocol into Windows, that's all. You only need that if you want to use it. It used to be a standard part of Windows until WinXP -- it's the original very efficient local networking protocol (not for Internet) invented by Novell. WideFS has always supported it because it is so efficient -- but it is more difficult to set up. I suspect this is mainly because Microsoft don't seem to like it. WideServer prepares listening sockets for all three supported protocols -- TCP, UDP and IPX. Those are of increasing efficiency in that order. But the only protocol you use will be the one you select. You could try "Protocol=UDP" in the WideClient INI to see if your connection lasts longer. It will certainly use less buffers (or rather the same number of buffers, but for less time, as there 's much less checking and confirmation in UDP). Incidentally, Windows Explorer uses UDP when exchanging files over the local Network. Oh, one other thing to try. A network frame rate of 34 is probably higher than you need. You could try limiting the frame rate in FS (in the Options-Settings-display menu) to, say, 25 or 30 max. See if that helps. Regards Pete
×
×
  • 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.