Speedbrake Arm revisited

[svenks]

Hi Peter 🙂

Well, I'm still at it with my X52 Pro LEDs, and actually it's going very well, and I almost have a working setup for PMDG 747 QOTSII - almost.

I thought I would do the spoilers last, as they seemed very simple to do - just a copy of the flaps section. However, there is one thing, I'm unable to do: Setting a LED when spoilers are armed.

The reason is primarily that PMDG has obscured that setting pretty well - but another issue is the fact that FSUIPC insists on having a part of the spoiler travel range set to be an ARM SPOILER zone.

Of course, if you don't want to use a keystroke (default: shift+/) or a button to arm them, then it's a good thing - but I would rather use a button or rather, move a lever on my Saitek Quadrant out of scale (below the lower, hard detent),  as that is defined as a button: Toggle Arm spoiler on entry, and toggle again on exit. PMDG understands this very well, and even the animation is correct!

I have seen other people a long time ago wondering about this arm zone, and so I would like to humbly suggest a checkmark for "No Arm Zone" for the spoiler axis, the same way as you have done for the throttle axes? Possible?

BRGDS

Sven Sorensen, EKCH

[Thomas Richter]

Hi,

I don't know if this is any good for PMDG use. It does it of course to the default control, depending on what PMDG is using ...

Quote

FSUIPC User Guide
page 43 - 45

The Spoiler (speed brake) control is a little special. It has no “centre” as such, but the facilities for setting a centre
in FSUIPC are used to calibrate a zone on your lever in which the spoiler should be “armed”. You don’t need to do
this, it is options: if the two centre calibration values are the same (i.e. there is no centre “zone”), then there is no
arming action taken by FSUIPC. If, however, you do calibrate with a centre zone, then the values from “minimum”
(the left most value), or lower, up to the lowest of the Centre values will all select spoilers down (i.e. parked). The
centre zone will arm the spoilers, and the range from the higher of the two centre values up to the maximum (the
right-most value) will actually operate the full range from 0% to 100% deployed.

Note that if you arm the spoilers when on the ground, P3D will deploy them to 100%, as if you have just touched
down. However, they should return to the “armed” position when the throttles are advanced.

Thomas

[Pete Dowson]

Apart from What Thomas has illurstratedfor you, this is a misunderstanding on your part:

4 hours ago, svenks said:

but another issue is the fact that FSUIPC insists on having a part of the spoiler travel range set to be an ARM SPOILER zone.

That is not FSUIPC's doing. FSX and P3D automatically Arm the spoiler at a certain point along the axis travel. it isn't FSUIPC "converting the Axis into an ARM instruction" as you seem to think, but just a facility for you to ensure that the arm value it does use occurs on a particular point on the axis travel, lining up with a detente and label perhaps.

If you don't need that, then as Thomas showed from the documentation, you are able to avoid using it.

Pete

 

[svenks]

Hi Peter and Thomas

Thanks for your replies

I had already calibrated my axis thus. But what you are saying is, that whenever you name an axis as spoiler, that behavior is what you get from FS/P3D? I must confess, that is news to me. Maybe it shouldn't be, but this is the first time I've dug so deep into FSUIPC.

Well, live and learn...

Cheers, Sven

[Pete Dowson]

1 hour ago, svenks said:

But what you are saying is, that whenever you name an axis as spoiler, that behavior is what you get from FS/P3D?

It doesn't matter if you use FSUIPC or not. FSUIPC just lets you choose where on the spoiler axis the speedbrake ARM position occurs. You don't need to use it.  If you don't calibrate the position in FSUIPC you just have to accept the position giving the relevant value.

I don't really understand your problem. FSUIPC simply gives you more flexibility. Use it as you wish.

Pete

 

[svenks]

Hi Peter

It is NOT a problem! Please don't take my suggestion as a complaint or anything.

I merily suggested something that to me seemed logical, but is a "feature“ of FS, not FSUIPC. And you must admit, it is somewhat redundant for FS to have both an arm zone as well as an arm key!

Hence my confusion - and my suggestion.

Brgds 

Sven

[Pete Dowson]

28 minutes ago, svenks said:

And you must admit, it is somewhat redundant for FS to have both an arm zone as well as an arm key!

The reason for that is that this arm detente occurs on the real aircraft -- well, certainly on the Boeing speedbrake levers. I can't speak for others.

The little amount of movement on the real aircraft between spoiler down to the speedbrake ARM position actually does nothing. After the ARM position the axis movement takes you to the flight detente (if off the ground) or the fully deployed spoiler. The latter position is automatically reached if the speedbrake was armed -- when landing is detected by the landing gear compression.

If this operation was not so well simulated by the Sim, and the only way of arming the spoiler was to send what is really a button event, it would be more complex to program for those of us who do really want a realistic implementation.

On the more general implication of your criticism of FS "redundancies", just consider: there are quite a lot of "redundant" button or key operated functions which are also performed (probably better) if you have the controls, via axis control assignments. Just think of the button/keypress controls folks without joysticks use on the NUM pad on the keyboard in order to fly! And the default combinations along with the function keys used to control the level of the mixture, prop pitch and throttle settings. All those use those key controls you can assign also to buttons. 

You can of course just use a big array of (labelled?) buttons, all assigned to the controls you need for the complete aircraft. This would be the same as using the keyboard, and would save having joysticks and other more realistic flight controls. 

Thinking the sim would be simpler by removing these flexibilities is not what more users would do. I hope MSFS turns out to be as fully as accommodating to all simmers needs as FS and P3D have been over so many years!

Pete