FSUIPC and AirSimmer A320

[Dick64]

Is it correct that The Airbus 320, just released by AirSimmer, is not compatible with FSUIPC in fs9? And if so, is an update planned?

Dick 64

[Francois Dumas]

I am moving this to the proper forum..... although I doubt an answer is possible yet.

[Pete Dowson]

Is it correct that The Airbus 320, just released by AirSimmer, is not compatible with FSUIPC in fs9? And if so, is an update planned?

Why should it not be? Why not ask AirSimmer?

Regards

Pete

[signmanbob]

I'm not sure in this case, but I believe some of the aircraft that use FADEC have separate .ini files that have to be read through MSFS.

The only thing that you have to do is not run your throttle controls directly through FSUIPC, but within the "Axis Controls", select them to be routed through FSX or FS9 (whichever be the case). Make sure that your joystick is enabled within FS Options, then fine tune your throttle controls inside FSUIPC.

When I come across something like this, and have to "Enable" joystick controls inside FS, I delete all other assignments in FS other than the throttles and set everything else to run directly through FSUIPC.

Bob

[Pete Dowson]

I'm not sure in this case, but I believe some of the aircraft that use FADEC have separate .ini files that have to be read through MSFS.

The only thing that you have to do is not run your throttle controls directly through FSUIPC, but within the "Axis Controls", select them to be routed through FSX or FS9 (whichever be the case). Make sure that your joystick is enabled within FS Options, then fine tune your throttle controls inside FSUIPC.

When I come across something like this, and have to "Enable" joystick controls inside FS, I delete all other assignments in FS other than the throttles and set everything else to run directly through FSUIPC.

If you assign to the FS controls in FSUIPC you still shouldn't also have them assigned in FS. That would result in two controls, albeit with the same parameter, being routed through the system for every axis change. You might not notice it, but doubling the number of controls going through unnecessarily can't be efficient. And if the FS "sensitivity" was not at max and its null zone not at min, the values would probably be different, making for conflict somewhere in the add-on's logics.

If an add-on aircraft needs to see the FS controls so it can act upon them in some special way (such as setting Airbus flight modes), then it shouldn't matter whether they come from FS assignment or FSUIPC assignment. It is only FSUIPC assignment "direct to FSUIPC calibration" which would by-pass the add-on's interception.

Regards

Pete