Luke Kolin Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 We've extensively used offset 0x030C to read vertical speed at touchdown; it provides a good clue as to the quality of the landing, but it's not used in the real world AFAIK. I was wondering if it would be possible to add another offset similar to 030C to read G-forces while airborne, then cease updating on touchdown. I believe the offset to fetch from would be 0x11BA, but only while airborne, much like the relationship between 030C and 02C8. Cheers! Luke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Dowson Posted March 17, 2009 Report Share Posted March 17, 2009 We've extensively used offset 0x030C to read vertical speed at touchdown; it provides a good clue as to the quality of the landing, but it's not used in the real world AFAIK. I was wondering if it would be possible to add another offset similar to 030C to read G-forces while airborne, then cease updating on touchdown.I believe the offset to fetch from would be 0x11BA, but only while airborne, much like the relationship between 030C and 02C8. Sounds easy enough. I'll put it on my list for attention in the next increment. Please keep an eye on the Updates announcement. If for any reason i don't do it, I'll post the reason to this thread. Regards Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Kolin Posted March 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2009 Thanks for adding this into 3.907 so quickly. I did a brief test this evening and it seems to work accurately. I'm wondering, however, if it might be better to get the value at the first frame *after* the aircraft is on the ground, rather than updating while in the air. The latter value (and FSUIPC's current behavior) seems to work well for vertical speed, but I seem to get a sub-one value for G forces, whereas one would expect this value to be >1 on touchdown. Does this make sense? I recognize that the latter behavior is also significantly more complicated to implement, and I apologize. Cheers! Luke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Dowson Posted March 25, 2009 Report Share Posted March 25, 2009 Thanks for adding this into 3.907 so quickly. I did a brief test this evening and it seems to work accurately. I'm wondering, however, if it might be better to get the value at the first frame *after* the aircraft is on the ground, rather than updating while in the air. Ernot so sure that won't simply give you a "normal" rather than impact-related value. The latter value (and FSUIPC's current behavior) seems to work well for vertical speed, but I seem to get a sub-one value for G forces, whereas one would expect this value to be >1 on touchdown. Hmm. Before I make any changes, please monitor the values and check that FS is indeed doing what you think. I suspect it may not. You can do this by using a little Lua plug-in to read and log to a file the G-force continuously (with, say, a 5 or 10 mSec sleep per loop only, to make sure you don't miss any frames). Don't you use FSX too? have you checked it there? With SimConnect working asynchronously it may give different results. Regards Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Kolin Posted March 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2009 Ernot so sure that won't simply give you a "normal" rather than impact-related value. That might be true. I think we each have the same doubts, just on different sides of impact. :) I suspect I'm getting a normal, rather than impact-related, value. Hmm. Before I make any changes, please monitor the values and check that FS is indeed doing what you think. I suspect it may not. You can do this by using a little Lua plug-in to read and log to a file the G-force continuously (with, say, a 5 or 10 mSec sleep per loop only, to make sure you don't miss any frames). Ah, dragging me into Lua kicking and screaming! :) I've suspected that I need to learn how to do this for a bit. I'll dig into it later tonight. Apologies in advance if I come back with a few silly questions. Cheers! Luke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Kolin Posted March 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2009 Hmm. Before I make any changes, please monitor the values and check that FS is indeed doing what you think. I suspect it may not. You can do this by using a little Lua plug-in to read and log to a file the G-force continuously (with, say, a 5 or 10 mSec sleep per loop only, to make sure you don't miss any frames). I downloaded the guides and example LUA plugins and was able to get something basic cobbled together in around 30 minutes. You deserve a hearty "thank you" for making things so easy to delve into from this perspective. So thank you! Here's the data I logged. I had a 23ms sleep interval, and I'll give you the second I took off, as well as my landing. It's a VistaLiners 727 out of JFK 4L to LGA 31, my standard test flight. The landing is more interesting (but I figured I'd include the takeoff as well if anyone was interested). What's interesting is in both cases (I bounced my landing) the peak Gs don't seem to occur until about 50-75ms after FS detects we're on the ground. I'll try an FSX run, assuming I can do this with an unregistered FSUIPC4. (I only have FSUIPC3 registered). If you want/need any other data, feel free to let me know. Cheers! Luke msecs,timeL,ias,onGround,takenOff,G 45563,17:48:27,154,1,0,0.976 45578,17:48:27,154,1,0,0.976 45610,17:48:27,154,1,0,0.976 45641,17:48:27,154,1,0,0.974 45656,17:48:27,154,1,0,0.974 45688,17:48:27,154,1,0,0.974 45703,17:48:27,154,1,0,0.974 45735,17:48:27,154,1,0,0.973 45750,17:48:27,154,1,0,0.973 45781,17:48:27,154,0,0,0.854 45797,17:48:27,154,0,1,0.854 45828,17:48:27,154,0,1,0.741 45844,17:48:27,154,1,1,0.762 45875,17:48:27,154,1,1,1.091 45891,17:48:27,154,1,1,1.091 45922,17:48:27,155,1,1,1.411 45938,17:48:27,155,1,1,1.235 45969,17:48:27,155,1,1,1.008 45985,17:48:27,155,1,1,1.008 46016,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.922 46031,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.870 46063,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.858 46078,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.858 46110,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.877 46125,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.896 46156,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.915 46172,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.915 46203,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.931 46219,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.947 46250,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.963 46266,17:48:27,155,0,1,0.963 46297,17:48:27,156,0,1,0.979 46313,17:48:27,156,0,1,0.994 46344,17:48:27,156,0,1,1.006 46360,17:48:27,156,0,1,1.006 46391,17:48:27,156,0,1,1.019 46406,17:48:27,156,0,1,1.032 46438,17:48:27,156,1,1,1.045 46453,17:48:27,156,1,1,1.045 46485,17:48:27,156,1,1,1.123 46500,17:48:27,156,1,1,1.123 46531,17:48:27,156,1,1,1.125 46547,17:48:27,156,1,1,1.125 297766,17:52:38,125,0,1,1.046 297797,17:52:38,125,0,1,1.046 297813,17:52:38,125,0,1,1.046 297844,17:52:38,125,0,1,1.046 297860,17:52:38,125,0,1,1.046 297891,17:52:38,125,0,1,1.046 297906,17:52:38,125,0,1,1.045 297938,17:52:38,125,0,1,1.045 297953,17:52:38,125,0,1,1.045 297985,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.045 298000,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.045 298031,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.045 298047,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.045 298078,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.045 298094,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.043 298125,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.043 298141,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.043 298172,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.043 298188,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.043 298219,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.043 298235,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.043 298266,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.043 298281,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.042 298313,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.042 298328,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.042 298360,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.042 298375,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.040 298406,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.040 298422,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.040 298453,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.038 298469,17:52:38,124,0,1,1.038 298500,17:52:38,124,1,1,1.037 298516,17:52:38,124,1,1,1.037 298547,17:52:38,124,1,1,2.224 298563,17:52:38,124,1,1,2.224 298594,17:52:38,124,1,1,3.259 298610,17:52:38,124,1,1,2.266 298641,17:52:38,124,1,1,1.037 298656,17:52:38,124,1,1,1.037 298688,17:52:38,124,1,1,0.878 298703,17:52:38,124,1,1,0.878 298735,17:52:38,124,1,1,0.880 298750,17:52:38,124,1,1,0.880 298781,17:52:39,124,0,1,0.880 298797,17:52:39,124,0,1,0.878 298828,17:52:39,124,0,1,0.877 298844,17:52:39,124,0,1,0.877 298875,17:52:39,124,0,1,0.875 298891,17:52:39,124,0,1,0.875 298922,17:52:39,124,0,1,0.874 298938,17:52:39,124,0,1,0.874 298969,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.874 298985,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.872 299016,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.872 299031,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.872 299063,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.872 299078,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.874 299110,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.874 299125,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.874 299156,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.874 299172,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.875 299203,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.877 299219,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.877 299250,17:52:39,123,0,1,0.877 299266,17:52:39,123,1,1,0.877 299297,17:52:39,123,1,1,0.875 299313,17:52:39,123,1,1,1.586 299344,17:52:39,123,1,1,1.510 299360,17:52:39,123,1,1,1.189 299391,17:52:39,123,1,1,1.189 299406,17:52:39,123,1,1,0.973 299438,17:52:39,123,1,1,0.955 299453,17:52:39,123,1,1,0.955 299485,17:52:39,123,1,1,0.992 299500,17:52:39,123,1,1,1.003 299531,17:52:39,123,1,1,0.992 299547,17:52:39,123,1,1,0.986 299578,17:52:39,123,1,1,0.986 299594,17:52:39,123,1,1,0.992 299625,17:52:39,123,1,1,1.002 299641,17:52:39,123,1,1,1.008 299672,17:52:39,123,1,1,1.008 299688,17:52:39,123,1,1,1.010 299719,17:52:39,122,1,1,1.008 299735,17:52:39,122,1,1,1.008 299766,17:52:39,122,1,1,1.008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Dowson Posted March 26, 2009 Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 What's interesting is in both cases (I bounced my landing) the peak Gs don't seem to occur until about 50-75ms after FS detects we're on the ground. Hmmm. So if you want the peak I'd need to keep changing the offset when on ground until it decreases, leaving the hiughest value I saw? I'll try an FSX run, assuming I can do this with an unregistered FSUIPC4. (I only have FSUIPC3 registered) Lua facilities, like Macros and assignments, need a registered copy. Sorry. Show me your Lua program (to save me time) and I'll run it here when I get a chance. Regards Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Dowson Posted March 26, 2009 Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 ... I'd need to keep changing the offset when on ground until it decreases, leaving the highest value I saw? I've implemented this now for you to try. If you please download these updated versions: http://fsuipc.simflight.com/beta/FSUIPC3908.zip http://fsuipc.simflight.com/beta/FSUIPC4508.zip and let me know if these work for you, both in FS9 and FSX. Regards Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Kolin Posted April 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2009 and let me know if these work for you, both in FS9 and FSX. Sorry I have not gotten back to you sooner, Pete. It's been chaotic here. The FS9 implementation certainly works "correctly" in 3.908, and I think the FSX does. My memory is giving out. Cheers! Luke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Dowson Posted April 4, 2009 Report Share Posted April 4, 2009 and let me know if these work for you, both in FS9 and FSX. Sorry I have not gotten back to you sooner, Pete. It's been chaotic here. The FS9 implementation certainly works "correctly" in 3.908, and I think the FSX does. My memory is giving out. Thanks! Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now