FSUIPC

[BWright]

I use the RKG Airspeed Gauge from FS9. That gauge and the RKG FuelStatus gauge still work fine---with FSUIPC 4.0.1.0. As soon as I installed FSUIPC 4.0.1.5, the TAS readout for the RKG Airspeed gauge stopped working.

I deleted FSUIPC 4.0.1.5 and reinstalled FSUIPC 4.0.1.0 and the RKG Airspeed gauge worked again!

I experienced several crashes in FSX while flying a D> flight from KJFK to KBGR in the A321 Airbus. I was somewhere just past KPSM (Portsmouth, NH) when the crash occurred each time. I was using FSUIPC 4.0.1.0 at the time of the crash. A report was sent to MS and they called in the entire crew on Saturday to resolve the problem. We should have an answer by lunch. :lol:

Tim

[n4gix]

Why are you posting this information in this forum? Since it involves FSUIPC, should it not properly be posted in that forum, where there's a chance Pete Dowson - the author of FSUIPC - might actually see it? ;)

[GaryGB]

Hi Bill:

Good Heavens... lighten up!!! :shock:

I believe he is entitled to post information here offering general FSX consumer feedback on the fact that he successfully got an indication of the high interest Microsoft has for the widespread dependency of many add-ons for proper function of FSUIPC, so much so that they actually got people to come in to work on a Saturday, and they are so diligent in their efforts that they will have an answer to his problem by Noon! :wink:

Personally I think he might have been saying this tongue-in-cheek, but you never know! :twisted:

I do agree that he should find an abundance of help via the FSUIPC forum (in addition to here) though! :D

GaryGB

[n4gix]

Hi Bill:

Good Heavens... lighten up!!! :shock:

Why the :shock: :?: :D ...

...after all, I did :wink: , which indicates a bit of levity, while still reinforcing the point that Pete really needs to know if there is a "bug" in his latest release of FSUIPC... :D

[GaryGB]

Hi Bill:

After re-reading the above posts, I agree that the primary focus of the thread originator had to do with FSUIPC problems as you may also have concluded.

Based on the manner in which the orignal post was written, I believe it could be interpreted as largely critical of FSUIPC and/or Microsoft, rather than truly describing a real world technical support response actually received.

Yet I believe the post, as an FSX consumer's "situational" commentary, however satirical (or mildly sarcastic?) it was worded, was entitled to be made here as well. :roll:

Based on the manner in which your reply was written, it seemed to me that your post could convey a sense that the other party was unwelcome to post here on the basis of topic specificity, and thereby deserving of pejorative admonishment for having done that, perhaps also for having jovially cast dispersions on FSUIPC and/or Microsoft for the malfunctions experienced in FSX.

Bill, I do greatly respect the many valuable contributions you have made to the FS community via your posts and freeware submissions over the years, so I hope my rather specific concern expressed on this will not be perceived as anything more general than I describe herein. :)

I must say that numerous occasions your posts have been rather critical of newcomers who may not yet be familiar with prior information on matters FS, how to use forums and forum search engines etc.. And it has been my perception that you have manifested a marked and vigilant, almost unconditional defense of Microsoft seemingly whenever forum participants exercise their right to voice their critical reactions and opinions, or they voice tentative conclusions (correct or incorrect) while trying to deal with, or to understand the latest FS version.

I mean no offense by asserting this, as I certainly understand how frustrating it can be to have to wade through some of the more outrageously worded and apparently unfounded end user posts. And yes, it is an overworked excuse by frustrated, impatient and undisciplined people that they simply put the blame for their challenges onto Microsoft or some other 3rd party when they also have some responsibility to sit their butts down repeatedly and do some studying (like many of us have already tried to do) in order to grasp somewhat complex FS subjects that can only be made partially easier to use by people from all walks of life via a graphical user interface.

But I believe it is important that we remember there are a wide variety of people who are at different levels of understanding in the forums who might just re-think their positions if they were provided with a non-judgemental, patient, simplified, matter of fact explanantion of how things actually are and how things can be if one does 'thus and so'. It might also be really effective at putting out fires (flames?) in forums. Then forums can be more harmonious, and one doesn't have to hose down one's hip waders as much while cruising those forums for one's own purposes. :wink:

Not everyone has the patience to do this, and it probably can get dis-satisfying rather quickly. But I believe that if we cannot, or will not help someone, we should at least "do no further harm".

I daresay the forums are not intended to be a shooting arcade where 'ace gunner geeks' possibly despondent over being overworked, underpaid, misunderstood, underappreciated (and frustrated by having so much distraction and stress in the forums as they go about their business) do not just politely and in a moment of remedial instruction, "clear the air", but indulge rather in taking "potshots" at the objects of their derision... just like the people taking "potshots" at Microsoft! :idea:

I was rather disproportionately vigilant myself at the time I wrote my hastily issued post above after just having dealt with another party's pattern of recurrent negative behavior which I believe jeopardized the good spirit of welcome, comeraderie, and learning in a supportive environment for people at all levels of skill and understanding in the SimFlight Forum system.

So I suppose my reply above could also be considered somewhat disproportionate to the particular occasion, but well-intended by virtue of a perceived sense of mission on behalf of the open and courteous setting I hope we all would like to maintain here; therefore I offer my apologies to you for my having "risen too far above" the occasion. :oops:

Kind regards,

GaryGB

[BWright]

Why are you posting this information in this forum? Since it involves FSUIPC, should it not properly be posted in that forum, where there's a chance Pete Dowson - the author of FSUIPC - might actually see it? ;)

Ooops! Sorry, Bill. I do get confused sometimes about where I am when posting. I don't see how anyone could read my post and think I was being sarcastic or disrespectful to MS or Pete Dowson! Did you notice the emoticon following that last sentence? I was just kidding about MS getting a solution so quickly.

Actually, I was unable to reproduce the problem, anyway. I have noticed that many problems with FSX appear very sporadically. It is also just possible that someone at this forum might have experienced a similar problem.

I am truly sorry for any misunderstanding about my post. I am not angry with anyone, MS or, certainly not, Pete Dowson. I just thought he should know about the gauge failure. As you no doubt have already experienced, the printed page is not always the best medium for communication. That is one good reason for using the emoticons. :)

Respectfully,

Tim

[n4gix]

After re-reading the above posts, I agree that the primary focus of the thread originator had to do with FSUIPC problems as you may also have concluded.

Actually, Gary... the only relevant information in the OP was that the latest version of FSUIPC caused a previously working gauge to quit working, as demonstrated by replacing said version with the previous version.

Hence, the problem is properly one of continued FSUIPC integrity, and one of which Pete needs to be made aware. After all, what is "broken" for one, will be "broken" for all FSUIPC users... :lol:

Please understand that given the present circumstances, the nerves of nearly all developers, customers and yes - even ACES folks - are stretched tighter than high C on a piano, so it's hardly a surprise that there are times when one's posts and/or replies might be seen as something other than what they are actually intended.

[Francois Dumas]

Let me move this to Pete's forum then so he may see it too.....

[n4gix]

Ooops! Sorry, Bill. I do get confused sometimes about where I am when posting. I don't see how anyone could read my post and think I was being sarcastic or disrespectful to MS or Pete Dowson! Did you notice the emoticon following that last sentence? I was just kidding about MS getting a solution so quickly.

Not to worry, Tim! I certainly saw the intention behind your post as merely being one of reporting a possible problem with the latest version of FSUIPC reading and reporting the TAS variable.

The second paragraph being then only a tongue-in-cheek comment regarding alledged support response... ;)

[BWright]

Ooops! Sorry, Bill. I do get confused sometimes about where I am when posting. I don't see how anyone could read my post and think I was being sarcastic or disrespectful to MS or Pete Dowson! Did you notice the emoticon following that last sentence? I was just kidding about MS getting a solution so quickly.

Not to worry, Tim! I certainly saw the intention behind your post as merely being one of reporting a possible problem with the latest version of FSUIPC reading and reporting the TAS variable.

The second paragraph being then only a tongue-in-cheek comment regarding alledged support response... ;)

I'm glad all is well, guys. I hate those kinds of misunderstandings and, believe it or not, I really do worry about them. There is enough tension in our present world without us guys at FS sites quarrelling among ourselves.

I have the deepest respect for all FSers and developers. I am often amazed at the enormous amount of knowledge at these sites. And Mr. Pete Dowson ranks right at the top of the list, for me. What would FS be like without him?

Peace to all.

Tim

[Pete Dowson]

I use the RKG Airspeed Gauge from FS9. That gauge and the RKG FuelStatus gauge still work fine---with FSUIPC 4.0.1.0. As soon as I installed FSUIPC 4.0.1.5, the TAS readout for the RKG Airspeed gauge stopped working.

Could you use 4.02, (or, better 4.023 available here) please, and let me know? I cannot really investigate problems with old versions. The TAS is read directly from SimConnect and is always okay here --- can you tell me what is wrong with it when to see it "not working"? Is it non-zero and static, or zero, or changing but a wrong value?

Note that you cannot necessarily go by the default FSX gauges. I notice that the "TAS" in the ND of the default 738 is actually the IAS -- it is identical to the speed indication on the PFD!

If you do get an incorrect indication, please enable IPC Read logging (in FSUIPC4's Logging page) and repeat the test so I can see just what that gauge is reading. If the log is large please ZIP it up and send it to petedowson@btconnect.com.

Thanks,

Pete

[BWright]

I use the RKG Airspeed Gauge from FS9. That gauge and the RKG FuelStatus gauge still work fine---with FSUIPC 4.0.1.0. As soon as I installed FSUIPC 4.0.1.5, the TAS readout for the RKG Airspeed gauge stopped working.

Could you use 4.02, (or, better 4.023 available here) please, and let me know? I cannot really investigate problems with old versions. The TAS is read directly from SimConnect and is always okay here --- can you tell me what is wrong with it when to see it "not working"? Is it non-zero and static, or zero, or changing but a wrong value?

Note that you cannot necessarily go by the default FSX gauges. I notice that the "TAS" in the ND of the default 738 is actually the IAS -- it is identical to the speed indication on the PFD!

If you do get an incorrect indication, please enable IPC Read logging (in FSUIPC4's Logging page) and repeat the test so I can see just what that gauge is reading. If the log is large please ZIP it up and send it to petedowson@btconnect.com.

Thanks,

Pete

Hi Pete,

Actually a strange thing happened. The problem just went away. And I was unable to reproduce any crashing of FSX, too. I thought the crashing might have been related to default scenery as in FS9 before the patch. But whatever is going on with FSX, it seems to be sporadic.

Thanks for your reply, however.

Respectfully,

Tim

[Pete Dowson]

The problem just went away.

Ah, okay. Good, then, for nowif it happens again though, please, latest version, Logs.

Regards

Pete