Pete Dowson

Okay -- as I said, that was only a likely case if it was accepting the key but still appearing unregistered on reload. You weren't clear about this, so I gave both possibilities. And it is not accepting the Key there and then, when you enter it? (The rejection there can mean ANY of the three fields being incorrect, not only the Key). There is nothing in the key checking in FSUIPC which has changed, so you must be doing something different. Either that or your key has been explicitly revoked because you have published it or allowed it to be used by others. I can check it all here with the information. Do not publish it in a message, but please send the name you are using, the email you are using, and the Key to me privately, to petedowson@btconnect.com. I will check it here directly i receive it. Regards Pete

Manually? What does that mean in this context? There are FSUIPC Offset controls for Setting or Incrementing both 32- and 64-bit floating point values. Why not use those? They take parameters in 1/1000th's so you can get the fractional parts that many floating point values need -- such as this one, from 0 to 1. Regards Pete

Buttons are not programmed via EPICINFO. The buttons need configuring in the EPIC, to look like normal joystick buttons -- you can gave 32 on each joystick number, and the EPIC can be configured to provide up to 16 joystick numbers (well the ISA one could -- the USB one was a little less I think). When the buttons are programmed correctly in the EPIC, you will see them in Windows' "Game Controllers", and in FS's Control Assignments, and in FSUIPC's "Buttons and Switches" tab, and you can then assign them as needed, even differently for each aircraft if you use FSUIPC's aircraft or profile-specific facilities. I'm sorry, but I cannot advise you how to program the EPIC any more -- I've not only forgotten most of it, I don't even have the documentation. It will be quicker for you to look it up yourself, or contact EPIC support. Regards Pete

Is VBexpress that much different from VB? What VB6 package? Is the FSUIPC SDK there's a "VisualBasic" package and a "VB.NET" package. I see nothing marked "VB6". I'm not sure what you mean by "remaining NM" -- you can get the fuel quantities and if you know the fuel consumption you could work that out. But the others are straight-forward. None of that looks even remotely derived from the example in the VisualBasic ZIP in the SDK. Are you sure you aren't looking instead at Paul Henty's useful .NET DLL provisions? If so it sounds like you aren't following the rules for that package. Regards Pete

As it clearly says in the documentation. It hasn't worked since FS2000. Ditto. Thanks -- no one has ever confirm it for FS2004. Sounds the same as for FS2000, as documented. As clearly noted too. Yes, also clearly noted. You seem to be ignoring the documented status of these offsets, so why tell me here what is written already? No idea at all, not since FS98 and FS2000 days. If you have, please tell me. Regards Pete

It tells you that how? If it simply won't accept it, you have entered something wrong -- your name, email and key must all be EXACTLY as originally used and notified. I am constantly amazed at the number of ways people find to spell their own names differently! Cut and paste from the original notification if you still have it -- else be a lot more careful! If it is accepting it but still coming up as unregistered when you reload, then you are probably using Vista, and have let FS install itself in the protected "program files" folder. That will give you problems later if you have any add-ons, but meanwhile you should follow the instructions in the FSUIPC documentation for installing and registering FSUIPC on a Vista system. It isn't the same as it used to be because of Vista protections. Of course it would have been far easier if you had backed up your KEY file as advised in the documentation, but it seems no onereven reads that! :-( Pete

NEVER reveal your registration details in public! Luckily you didn't quote your name, otherwise your key would have to be revoked! 3.75 is years old and totally unsupported. Download a supported version (3.90), then register using the exact same details you originally used. FSUIPC does not automatically make you a new key just because you changed your email address -- use the original, the one which relates to the key you have! Pete

Get the FSUIPC4 + WideFS7 package, they are cheaper bundled. You mentioned "FSUIPC4 4.50 and WideFS 6.78" but note that 6.78 is only the version number of the Client program (WideClient). On FSX the Server part is up to version 7 -- WideServer7 is built into FSUIPC4, but needs its own registration. Regards Pete

100% compatible. Furthermore, they also work fine under Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit. In fact, even though it is still in Beta, Win7 is better for FS so I'm now using it all the time! ;-) Regards Pete

SceneGenX? Er, how is this related to SceneGenX and therefore "almost the same problem"? Can you explain how you tried this without one? How is FSUIPC in any way related to any A340? Please explain a little more. It looks to me like you should have statrted a completely new thread, unless you are saying that SceneGenX is interfering with your A340 and you are, for some reason, blaming FSUIPC? Pete

Why on Earth "google" when you can simply do what the error message tells you -- i.e. see the declaration of WinMain in winbase.h? The compiler tells you already that you have the wrong type modifier for WinMain. So, check the header "winbase.h", see why. It even gives you the line number -- 1875. Here, your code compiles fine. In the header the modifier "WINAPI" is defined as "__stdcall", the same as "CALLBACK". They are used interchangeably. The way for you to work it out is clear. And isn't there any other example of using WinMain you can find for your compiler? Nothing provided with it? Copy whatever is used in something which compiles. Regards Pete

Use buttons not axes! Pete

No, that's wrong. It is the FS aircraft panels which are configured with separate entries in EPICINFO.CFG. It knows nothing of any hardware panels -- how could it? Pete

Delete the [JoystickCalibration.] section of the FSUIPC INI file, then press the "reload" button on that options tab. The option is protected from simple "unchecking" because it means the loss of the entire settings for the aircraft or profile. There's no way the program can switch easily between specific and generic application, and it isn't nice to allow a lot of work to be undone and lost by the possibly accidental clicking of one checkbox. If all you did was check it, then all that happened is that the existing calibration at that time was copied to the aircraft specific settings. The only use of making anything aircraft-specific is if you then make some changes. Having specific settings identical to the generic settings does nothing useful, and reverting to those generic settings therefore won't make any difference whatsoever. If you suspect you've not calibrated the throttles properly, then the best thing to do is do it again, properly. Regards Pete

Compare these two: Don't you see something seriously different which would explain your result? Rather than assume a fixed gallon <> kg relationship you should really use the fuel weight value provided at offset 0AF4. Capacity varies with air pressure. You should use the 0AF4 value then convert pounds to kg. I think you should use more paretheses here. What is being divided by and multiplied by what? I've been a programmer for 46 years and I couldn't swear what the compiler would do with that. That looks wrong too. I think you just need to be more careful with your placing of * and / operators, and do use parentheses ( ) to make things clear and explicit. Regards Pete

100 times per second? I hope you have a fast processor, at least dual, and are good at programming multi-threaded. It would be much easier for you as a separate process (i.e. EXE), as otherwise to have to be very careful to avoid impacting FS performance. In several threads with different optimised priorities and hooks directly into FS for efficient, fast, data monitoring. And it only sends changes, not the same (mostly unchanging) information and certainly not every 10 mSec, but as it arises. (For FSX all this was integrated into FSUIPC, to avoid duplication). You might like to experiment first with the Lua plug-ins facilities in FSUIPC. Try the example provided which records data to a CSV file. Lua supports file I/O and therefore named pipes, so possibly you could use that technique for your networking. Regards Pete

Sorry, AdvDisplay has not been supported now for many years. It is superseded by the window facilities built into FSUIPC, which utilise the display facilities inside FS itself and therefore work more relibly. They are not panel-related, but saved with Flights. Pete

Well if they explicitly say they will not sell the franchise or release the intellectual rights (which they have indeed said), I would certainly say it is because they have a need for it --they must have plans! It shouldn't take a business expert to work it out. ;-) Pete

Don't you think there's a good reason for that? ;-) Pete

No. If your Clients are connecting automatically (i.e. you've not specified the Server or Protocol in each Wideclient.INI file, then all you need to do is set "ProtocolPreferred=UDP" in the Server parameters (in FSUIPC4.INI or WideServer.INI, whichever applies). However, if you are making your Clients connect explicitly, then just change the Protocol parameter in each WideClient.INI -- no change on the Server as it automatically supports TCP, UDP, and IPX (if installed). Regards Pete

For WideFS traffic? Yes, unless your Network is having problems. UDP has none of the checks and retries incorporated into TCP. Less red-tape, less checking. it is noticeable smoother providing your system is working well. If it isn't working well you will get lost data blocks which could make things jerky (for displays) or non-responsive (for switches). Oh, and don't use UDP if your network is in a loop instead of a star. Looped networks are common if you are using FireWire connections instead of Ethernet. The problem with loops, or any setup where there's more than one route between any two of the PCs, is that UDP does not guarantee the ORDER in which things arrive. This doesn't matter on an ordinary star arrangement (i.e. a hub with spokes). I know all this because my cockpit network was originally a firewire loop and I had to sort out what was going on when I tried UDP. Now I use an Ethernet star (with only the RCDU connected to the CDU by firewire) I am using UDP very successfully. Definitely smoother-looking especially with FSX, and I don't have to limit FS's framerate which is definitely a bonus with DX10 mode. Regards Pete

Correct. Almost exactly correct. WideFS has two components, WideServer which works alongside FSUIPC (or is actually built into FSUIPC in the FSX version), and WideClient which runs on one or more Networked PCs. The Server services the clients, of course, and the Clients imitate the FSUIPC interface so that programs written to talk to FS via FSUIPC can do so across the Network. Not limits as such, but the data being exchanged relates to what FS can provide or accept -- except that FSUIPC also acts as a clearing house for data exchanged between Networked components of some applications, like Project Magenta whose airliner cockpit implementations can involve many PCs performing different functions in a complete cockpit. End of the line? Has FS been withdrawn? Strange. Last I noticed FS2004 was still in furious use on a vast number of enthusiasts' systems, and it is six years old this Autumn, and on top of that FSX is still growing in popularity. All that's happened at present is that we have a longer than usual period of stability between versions (longer than the usual 2 or 3 years), allowing more and more sophistication with add-ons, and perhaps also allowing the hardware to catch up with FSX! Now wouldn't that be something? ;-) Regards Pete

FSX has, probably only in the DeLuxe version (not sure) a G1000 Gauge. I don't think it is an exact replica with all of the functions. There's an add-on from Mindstar which does a much more professional job. See http://www.mindstarprods.com/aviation/index.html Project Magenta certainly have a GA glass cockpit, which looks rather like a G1000 but doesn't explicitly mention what it is based on. I don't know offhand of any others, though I know PFC (http://www.flypfc.com) have been working on interfacing a real G1000 to FS and X-plane. There's never any problems with any FS gauges or external add-ons in sizing them to fill a screen. The Project Magenta one will be a separate free-standing program interfacing to FS via FSUIPC or WideFS, so if you are thinking of programming the interface to your Sim that might be an easier option. FSUIPC won't handle UDP or TCP connections itself. WideFS is the Networked extension for FSUIPC. You'd install FSUIPC in FS, enable a WideFS link to your Sim's PC and write the interface to FSUIPC/WideFs to run there, talking to WideClient no networking needed in your program. All the information you need to interface to FSUIPC is provided in the FSUIPC SDK. However, the access to FSX's own G1000 gauge is not great -- it's an area where Microsoft didn't expose very much. There may be more options with the MindStar one -- you'd need to ask them. But in the end the one with the most likely interface options would be the Project Magenta one, whether it ran with FS + FSUIPC, or your own software emulating FS + FSUIPC. That's about all I can help you with at present. (I am not into these new-fangled systems -- 737NG is my most modern avionics interest. ;) ). Regards Pete

Well, ActiveSky certainly does here -- AS 6.5, ASX and ASA all do. Of course ASX and ASA do it via SimConnect, not FSUIPC in any case. I didn't think Radar contact ever did -- it uses the multiline display, to provide the menu for ATC selections and responses. I'm still using RCV4 with FSX. And what would they be? For messages sent via FSUIPC you can divert them and inhibit them, separately for multi-line (as for RC) and single line (AS6.5). FSUIPC cannot do anything with messages sent via SimConnect. Regards Pete

You certainly did not need to buy FSUIPC4 in order to use FS Commander, it has an applications license. You only need to buy FSUIPC4 if you want to use any of the User Facilities it offers. It sounds like FSUIPC4 is not installed correctly, or FSX is not installed correctly. I'd need more information to help with that. Er, what does that actually mean? You don't "read" a folder. Folders are places on disk where files are kept. If you want me to advise, please find the FSUIPC4 log files INSIDE that modules folder. There will be an Install log and, hopefully, a normal log called "FSUIPC4.LOG". Both are ordinary text files. You can read them with notepad, and paste them in a message here. Look through the User Guide, see if you want to use any of the facilities it offers. If not, you've wasted your money. You should have browsed through what it offered first, really -- the user guide is installed for you along with other useful documents specifically so you can find things out BEFORE spending any money. No, nothing except the user guide. But FS Commander needs it -- maybe you don't need FS Commander either? Sorry, but you really aren't making a lot of sense. Please separate out the problem you seem to have with an application using FSUIPC with your worries about whether you've spent your money wisely. Regards Pete