Buttons & Switches problem FSUIPC 4

[Pantu]

Hi Pete,

sofar was using FS9 but now I´d like to switch my homecockpit (B737 Proj.Magenta )to FSX.

According to the docs one could ease up workload of button assignments by just copying the buttons section from FSUIPC3 to FSUIPC4.

Sofar so good.

The problem however is, that FSUIPC4 recognizes the button presses (virtual buttons generated by MCP747). The virtual buttons in MCP747 are mostly all of "Toggle" and some of "Flip Flop" type, (as recommended in the docs) but wouldn´t display the assignments in FSUIPC4 setup page. Hence no reaction on the corresponding parts of project magenta.

If however I reassign in FSUIPC4 the button with exactly the same function it works.

Looking into FSUIPC.ini - I can´t find any difference compared to the copied part. It shows exactly the same coding like when it was copied over.

Does that mean that I´ll have to reassign every single button again?

Any clue what I´m doing wrong? I´ve read your docs over and over but not getting any clue what´s the culprit.

Any hint highly appreciated.

Thanks

Best rgds

Peter

[Pete Dowson]

The problem however is, that FSUIPC4 recognizes the button presses (virtual buttons generated by MCP747).

Sorry, is recognising button presses a problem now? Why? Do you want them ignored?

The virtual buttons in MCP747 are mostly all of "Toggle" and some of "Flip Flop" type, (as recommended in the docs) but wouldn´t display the assignments in FSUIPC4 setup page.

What is "MCP747"? Maybe it isn't connecting to FSUIPC?

If however I reassign in FSUIPC4 the button with exactly the same function it works.

Looking into FSUIPC.ini - I can´t find any difference compared to the copied part. It shows exactly the same coding like when it was copied over.

Does that mean that I´ll have to reassign every single button again?

No. I'm sure you must be misinterpreting something. There's no difference whatsoever between a line manually inserted into the correct section of the INI and one generated by FSUIPC from the options, if indeed they are identical and in the correct section. There cannot possibly be any difference, because that's what FSUIPC reads for its definitions and there is nothing else it can get that information from. See? It's a logical impossibility.

Any clue what I´m doing wrong? I´ve read your docs over and over but not getting any clue what´s the culprit.

I don't think the documentation will describe an impossible situation like the one you are describing. I think you should show me the non-working section and the working section. There's something you are not spotting.

Pete

[Pantu]

Sorry, is recognising button presses a problem now? Why? Do you want them ignored?

Of course not. Sorry wrongly expressed.

What is "MCP747"? Maybe it isn't connecting to FSUIPC?

It´s the aerosoft Australia MCP747 autopilot box.

No. I'm sure you must be misinterpreting something. There's no difference whatsoever between a line manually inserted into the correct section of the INI and one generated by FSUIPC from the options, if indeed they are identical and in the correct section. There cannot possibly be any difference, because that's what FSUIPC reads for its definitions and there is nothing else it can get that information from. See? It's a logical impossibility.

I don't think the documentation will describe an impossible situation like the one you are describing. I think you should show me the non-working section and the working section. There's something you are not spotting.

Pete

Thanks Pete for prompt reply.

Did check the fsuipc.ini file character by character and eventually found the culprit.

When I copied the "Buttons" part from the "old" FSUIPC3.ini into the Fsuipc4.ini, I overlooked that there was already an empty "[buttons]" in the FSUIPC4.ini existing. (It´s definitely time to get some better glasses now - before X-mas)

Empty buttons section erased and voila, the problem is solved.

Again, thank you very much for your outstanding support and please take my apologies for bothering you with my own stupidity.

Best regards

Peter