Greetings Pete - On Ground Flag (FSX)

[jordanmoore]

Hi Pete,

Haven't written you in a while. Hope this finds you well. Do you remember that I said I was working on a fun project and had decided to use FSUIPC instead of simconnect because I desired the possibility of cross-platform capability? Well, I am just getting to the point where I am beta testing my project with a few friends, and I only cared about getting it to work properly in FS9 at first, but one of my guys went ahead and tried it against FSX, and damn if it didn't basically work on the first try. I did nothing to make sure that this would be the case...so I'm pretty impressed. That is really exciting.

I have one data issue that I can't make sense of. The on ground flag 0366 that I'm reading in my program works properly when the client is connected against FS9 via FSUIPC. However, we noticed on the FSX connection (via FSUIPC) that the on ground flag seems to be set to true at all times. All of the other data calls appear to be working as expected and producing the outcome I would expect, so I figured maybe something changed aroud this one particular item, or perhaps you could give me more insight as to how I might have implemented it incorrectly. Has anyone else mentioned anything wierd around the on ground flag?

Thanks for the help, and I'll just say again how much I appreciate what you do.

[Pete Dowson]

I have one data issue that I can't make sense of. The on ground flag 0366 that I'm reading in my program works properly when the client is connected against FS9 via FSUIPC. However, we noticed on the FSX connection (via FSUIPC) that the on ground flag seems to be set to true at all times. All of the other data calls appear to be working as expected and producing the outcome I would expect, so I figured maybe something changed aroud this one particular item, or perhaps you could give me more insight as to how I might have implemented it incorrectly. Has anyone else mentioned anything wierd around the on ground flag?

No, that flag works fine, just as it did in FSUIPC3 with FS9 -- better, in fact, because it works in Slew mode too. There are a lot of things depending on that (lots of other programs) and there'd be a right kerfuffle if it didn't work.

Whenever you come here please always be sure to quote the VERSION number of FSUIPC you are using. If it isn't the latest it is also best to try that first -- and note that there are often later versions avaible in the FSX Downloads announcement above.

And please use the Logging facilities to help you debug your programs. In fact if you go to the right-hand side of the Logging Tab you can enter 0366 as the offset, with type U16, and check the FS display option below, and you will see it change in real time on screen. If you also check the "normal log" option and look in the Log afterwards you will also see that the notifications are from SimConnect, like this:

348156 Monitor IPC:0366 (U16) = 1

...

401500 SimRead: 0366="SIM ON GROUND"

INT32: 0 (0x00000000)

401563 Monitor IPC:0366 (U16) = 0

As I said, there are a lot of things which would break if this wasn't working. You have an error somewhere. Maybe you are reading it as a 4-byte value instead of 2-byte as documented? The following offset (0368) contains a timer which is changing all the time and which will be non-zero.

Please do use the tools provided to debug your work. As well as the comprehensive logging facilities FSInterrogate is also invaluable for checking things. Try it!

Pete

[jordanmoore]

Thanks Pete, I appreciate your patience. I was certain that something so widely used would put the problem in my court for sure. The information and advice you have given will certainly get me sorted out. I'll get to working through that right now. I'm thinking that your 2/4 byte question is the first thing I'm going to check. I apologize for not using the logs more effectively before contacting you. I don't know my way around the logging capability that well as of yet, and part of that is due to the fact that FSUIPC just works so well (and as described) that I rarely have problems that require log examinations! Thanks again, and all the best to you.

[jordanmoore]

Pete,

It was in fact my mishandling of the byte length (2 vs. 4). Thank you for helping me.