Pete Dowson

One point? What is one point? The trim runs from -16383 to +16383. That's a full 32766 possible steps between trim full nose down and full nose up. Are you saying that isn't enough? Or are you referring to the key press? Fs organises that to be quite a small change with separate presses, but two or more fast presses, or holding it down, speeds it up. Otherwise you'd take a long time to deal with major attitude changes after flap, gear or engine changes. For a trim axis or a pair of trim buttons or sprung lever switch? For a trim axis (e.g a trim wheel) you'd calibrate with a flatter central area, via the slopes facility. For a pair of buttons or a rocker lever, where you are assigning trim up and down controls, you could use the Offset access controls in FSUIPC to assign a smaller increment / decrement. Using that way you could even use the single units, giving you 32766 steps as I said. Look in the FSUIPC User Guide, the section on programming the buttons. Just after the part about Offset controls there's a boxed section which uses this specific case as an example! Regards Pete

Yes, which I cannot tolerate in my nice realistic cockpit! ;-) All it needs is another Registered Windows message, just like they implemented for PTT (and PVT) -- the mechanism originally adopted by Roger Wilco. It is really easy to program, and I would immediately offer it as an assignable control just like the PTT one is now. It would deal with a local Squawkbox or one running via WideFS. Well, I write to them about it every few weeks or so, just so they know at least one person wants it! ;-( Regards Pete

Definitely not FSX. SB4 on FSX is a SimConnect client. it doesn't use FSUIPC at all. This is the ONLY thing stopping me even trying SB. I've repeatedly written to the two authors of SB4 to ask for a method of operating the transponder, possibly via a windows message as is done for PTT. Then I will add the facility as a control to both FSUIPC and WideClient (using both offset and message so as to work on both FS9 and FSX). They respond and apologise for not getting to it, but nothing continues to happen I'm afraid. I guess there's only me pressing for it so it isn't very important. :-(. Regards Pete

That is from the FSUIPC.LOG file, not the INI file. The INI file is where your settings (options) are. What exactly are you looking for? What is confusing you? Why are you looking in the Log file in any case? What is the problem, you don't actually say anywhere! The log extract you showed was fine, so you do really need to say why you are posting here, please, or you are simply wasting both out time? To update to 3.90 just put the FSUIPC.DLL from the FSUIPC.ZIP package into the Modules folder. Whhat are you worried about? Pete

Two points there: 1. I would think it would be more efficient to do "int Oat = 0" then read the 2 bytes directly into Oat? (I don't know C# so I could be wrong). 2. Dividing the integer by 256 will give you the degrees rounded down. Is that what you want? Otherwise, to round to the nearest degree add 128 before dividing by 256. if you want more accuracy, copy the int to a floating point variable before dividing by 256. Regards Pete

You aren't reading what is actually written! It says the value is the number of degrees C times 256. The * symbol means "times", not divide. The value is provided like that so it can be more accurate (i.e. to 1/256th of a degree). Surely you must realise that if it stored the number of degrees DIVIDED by 256 it would always be zero, as integers contain no fractions!!! The document does not tell YOU what to do with the numbers, it tells you how they are provided! It is the definition of the interface not a specification for your program! If you read the 2 bytes (i.e. a 16-bit number) into an "int", which in C is 32-bits, you must also make sure the top 16 bits are zero first! i.e. set the receiving integer to zero. If you don't do this then you will probably be getting rubbish in the two bytes you are not setting! This is normal programming practice, not something mystical. Again, then, you are probaly reading the lower 16-bits into a rubbish 32-bit integer which you need to zero first. A proper programming way to avoid this sort of thing is to always use the correct variable type for the job. A 16-bit integer in C/C++ is called a "short" (at least it is for a 32-bit system, which FSUIPC is and will remain). Regards Pete

Look at the 4 throttle page again. Page 3. There is a "no reverse zone" option. check it. If you don't see it you are using an older, unsupported version of FSUIPC. Please update your copy. Pete

It does exactly what it says it does in the blurb on the purchase site, and in the documentation -- which of course you are free to read as the download costs nothing. It extends the FSUIPC interface for applications to other PCs on a Network, so you can run them there. Plain and simple. Regards Pete

In my experience the use of separate additional windows on separate screens do not much affect the FS performance EXCEPT when you have more than one 3D view in use at the same time. Then the FPS certainly halves, or a lot worse! If you want separate windows for your panels, use the 2D cockpit and undock them. Don't use two windows, one with the outside view (3d) and another with the virtual cockpit, or part thereof (also 3D). If you are using separate windows you may as well use the 2D cockpit windows in any case, and they have much less impact on performance. Maybe, but you have to have two PCs of equal capability each with a full install of FS. Check the WidevieW website. Regards Pete

I don't produce any program to do what you wish in any case, PMDG or no PMDG. I think you might be thinking of something more likeWwidevieW, by Luciano Napolitano. That involves having FS installed on both computers, but with then you can have one supplying views and the other used for cockpit panels. If your frame rates are low, check whether losing the outside views saves you anything in the first place -- close the main outside view (right click on it, close). Any difference? If not, then there's not much you can do except upgrade your computer. Regards Pete

You are making an error! It isn't only the Key which has to be correct, it is also your name and address. All three parts are part of the Registration. If you believe you are entering every part exactly as originally, then please send the details (registered name, address and key) to me at petedowson@btconnect.com, and I will check them here. Incidentally, version 4.40 has now been superseded by version 4.50. You should download and use the newer version when you try to enter the details correctly! Regards Pete

In all previous times this happened it was found to be due either to a bad/incorrect mouse driver (the one for the Kensington mouse springs to mind), or else, more usually, one of the other add-ons installed in FS's Modules folder. One that is known to interfere somehow on some folks' systems is PMDGoptions.dll. See this thread: viewtopic.php?f=54&t=70188&p=436556&hilit=pmdgoptions#p436556 Why it occurs, and only on a minority of systems, is still a mystery. I've never had any problem here so it is difficult for me to isolate. It must be something to do with those DLLs performing prior keyboard interception. All I can suggest is to temporarily remove any other add-in modules (move them to a "saved" folder or something like that), register FSUIPC, then, with FS closed of course, move the removed DLLs back. Take care only to move added DLLs, not any of those belonging to FS9 itself. Regards Pete

Yes, it is a bit, er, messy, how it has to hook into the bits of FS. But I am very pleased it turned out so useful! ;-) Thanks & Regards Pete

Run the FSUIPC4 installer from the downloaded ZIP, as described for you in the section on Registration in the User Guide, which you can find in the FSX Modules folder. The User guide does contain a lot of information which you will find useful with FSUIPC4. Regards Pete

No. FSUIPC sees virtual buttons as buttons. You assign those in the Options tab for buttons -- that puts the entries into the INI file for whatever you program them to do. Pete

Okay, let's see: Offset is 7B91, and it is 1 byte. Value 0 means normal, 1 means standby. So, since you say you have a toggle switch, you want it to write 0 to 7B91 in one position, and 1 in the other. So go to the FSUIPC Buttons and Switches Tab, and assign it as follows: "Press" (i.e. for a toggle switch = "on"), to "Offset byte set" control in the drop down list. Enter x7B91 for the Offset, and 1 for the parameter. "Release" (i.e. for a toggle switch = "off"), also to "Offset byte set" control in the drop down list. Enter x7B91 for the Offset as well, but 0 for the parameter. See? Quite logical. Just apply what you read to what is available! If you don't really have a toggle switch, only a joystick button as you now intimate (has it changed?), then it will be different. You only assign to the "Press" and you use "Offset byte togglebits" with offset x7B91 and parameter 1. Then pressing the button will toggle between the two modes. Pete

Is this on FS9 using Squawkbox? If so I believe the method is documented, via FSUIPC offsets, on their website? If so, if it is done by offsets changes, you can assign any button, toggle or keypress to do it in FSUIPC's options. Get the details from the SB site, check them and then, if you need help in working out what to assign in FSUIPC, show me what you found and I'll help from there. Regards Pete

Okay. That shows the same thing happening both times: 74031 Button changed: bRef=0, Joy=4, Btn=20, Pressed 74031 [buttons] 85=P4,20,C65706,0 74031 FS Control Sent: Ctrl=65706, Param=0 and 79656 Button changed: bRef=0, Joy=4, Btn=20, Pressed 79656 [buttons] 85=P4,20,C65706,0 79656 FS Control Sent: Ctrl=65706, Param=0 but I think I know what is happening. This is an Axis control, and FS only reacts to CHANGES in the axes. All it is seeing is 0 arriving both times, so, no change. There are two possible ways around this. Either edit the FSUIPC INI file to add another action to the same button, to set the trim slightly differently first: 85=P4,20,C65706,1 86=P4,20,C65706,0 Whether '1' will be enough or not I don't know. Try it, else increase it. Or you could program the Press of the button to send the1 (or whatever), and the Release of the button to send the 0. Regards Pete

It's actually DOWSON, not Dawson, as in the name of this Forum and on all my programs. But most folks call me Pete. Ouch. These re-installs cause more trouble than they fix. Why did you need to do that? So, what other SimConnect client applications do you have which "work fine"? Which one is that, please? Tell me exactly what you did. Re-installed Windows? On a freshly formatted disk as well? Wow! If the disk wasn't re-formatted first I'd guess that the WinSxS folders containing simConnect are still in the same mess as before. And when you installed FSX, did you run it and check it before moving on to install SP1? I think that's needed. You've edited this so I can't tell exactly, but is there no listing of ANY valid SimConnect folders in Windows\WinSxS? The folder names, with FSX and SP1 installed, should be: C:\WINDOWS\WinSxS\x86_Microsoft.FlightSimulator.SimConnect_67c7c14424d61b5b_10.0.60905.0_... C:\WINDOWS\WinSxS\x86_Microsoft.FlightSimulator.SimConnect_67c7c14424d61b5b_10.0.61242.0_... Also there are lots of entries in the registry with all these details, and I think they are crucial to the working of the WinSxS system too. This certainly creates problems when folks rollback to a backup up setting in Windows, because the folders containing the files still seem to be left. I suspect this is what is going wrong during uninstalls too, but yours is the very first time I've ever seen anyone report NO versions of SimConnect installed correctly. The problem where FSUIPC couldn't load if the base version was okay is remedied in version 4.50, which only needs one working version. If you have the Deluxe version of FSX, you can find and run the SimConnect.msi installer to try to fix it. The SP1a SDK from the Microsoft site needs the base SDK installing first. Another alternative is to try installing the SP2 update, which will install its version of SimConnect. If you are okay at Registry reading, checking and editing I can provide some info I've sussed out about SimConnect registry entries -- but ALWAYS make a restore point before ever touching the Registry unless you feel very confident! Regards Pete

Using WideFS, you mean? WideClient can certainly relay keystrokes to FS via WideServer (part of FSUIPC), but the best way is to assign, in Wideclient.INI, a "virtual button" to the "M" key. Then you can program the button in FSUIPC to do whatever action you wish that may be assigned there -- selecting Map view included (I think that is performed by one of the "View Camera Select" controls -- it'll be 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4. Not sure which). Please refer to the "ButtonKeys" section of the WideFS Technical document. It is quite near the end. Regards Pete

Sorry, no idea. I need more information. Like version number of FSUIPC? (If not 3.90 or 4.50, update first). Can you enable Button and Event logging (only) in the Logging Tab, please, and see what is going on via the Logging? Pete

It's actually supposed to be about 12 seconds, and is a safety feature to prevent loss of controls because a fly-by-wire program or gauge happens to stop working (maybe terminated). That's normally something done by program. Why would you want it done by pressing a button? The only way I can think of doing it is by using a Lua plug-in, to loop re-writing the disconnect flag every few seconds 9with a "sleep" for the rest of the time), until you release the button or press another to send it a flag. Lua plug-ins, when installed in the Modules folder, can be assigned to a button and made to recognise flags set or changed by another or the same button, even read buttons themselves. Almost any failure mode could be programmed via Lua plug-ins as they have full read/write access to all FSUIPC offsets. Regards Pete

And, in the latter case, repeating immediately -- or are you suggesting another delay to decide whether to repeat or not? You also realise, I assume, that the latter option would preclude having a separate assignment for the button release? In order to determine whether to do the short-time or the long-time action, the release would need to occur before the short-term action could occur. It is going to be very complicated for ordinary users to understand precisely what is going on, I think. What, exactly is the application for this you have in mind, please? Regards Pete

The problem then is how do I differentiate between a "long press" and someone just normally wanting to repeat the current "press and hold" programming? I don't see how you could have both. Incidentally, in the new releases just out the button repeat action has a delay (adjustable in the INI file), so you can make, say, one increment easily enough and hold for faster repeating. The default gives you something like 2/3rds second. 2 seconds is a long time pressing a button, especially if you are trying to fly and airplane at the same time! ;-) Regards Pete

Glad you/we found the way, eventually! Well, it shouldn't. Trouble with my place in this is that I'm in it too deep and what seems obvious to me is quite the reverse to some, as I find out occasionally in this Forum. So, I stick to what I do best -- programming, and technical support, and try to encourage users to help each other. It works quite well mostly, though no doubt things could be better. But isn't that true of most things? That would be great -- any way you'd like to do it. If you'd like to send anything to me as an attachment, send it to petedowson@btconnect.com. Within the next hour or two, in fact. Well, the 'new' options are (or perhaps were, by the time you get to look) listed in the Changes list in the Updates announcement above, where they've been accumulating over the last three and a half months. This new release is merely the culmination of lots of work, Beta testing and feedback, mostly through this Forum. There's nothing drastically new to anyone who's been keeping up to date here, but there is quite a lot for those who haven't. I would be very grateful for anything you feel you can contribute. Don't worry about the timescale or committing yourself -- no commitments either side, as you say. Oh, and Bon Voyage! Best Regards Pete