FSUIPC and FS2004 brakes system

[rcbarend]

Hi Peter,

My name is Rob Barendregt and I am the author of much used (freeware) taxispeed and pushback XML gauges.

I have the following problem (not caused by FSUIPC, but related to it).

As you may know, the brakeshandling implementation in both FS2002 and FS2004 is not really bugfree (to put it mildly).

In FS2004, in my gauges I use the Left/Right axis-brakes-set to manipulate the brakes.

Now, with toebrakes pedals enabled and in idle position (in a deadzone, so there is not pedal "trigger" to FS), these gauge commands work fine (and proportionally), except that, once one command is given, the brake pressure never goes below 20% anymore untill the pedals are touched (which resets the brake pressure to zero again)

I have found a workaround for that, by, from my xml gauge, give two consecutive ParkingBrakes commands immediately after another, which also resets the brakepressure to 0.

Now, this "trick" works always, except when a user has a registered version of FSUIPC and has the toebrakes pedals caliberated in FSUIPC.

Can you think of a reason why ? (I could imagine that these ParkingBrakes commands are lost because of the scheduled nature of FSUIPC, or something like that)

And if so, is this something you can solve in FSUIPC ?

(either that the ParkingBrakes "Reset-trick" works again, or a solution for the underlying FS problem which causes that the brakepressure cannot be commanded from a gauge below 20% )

If needed, I can give you more info on the peculiarities of the braking commands in both FS2002 and FS2004 (they have different "bugs"), since I have made rather a study about their behaviour :-)

Regards, Rob

[Pete Dowson]

these gauge commands work fine (and proportionally), except that, once one command is given, the brake pressure never goes below 20% anymore untill the pedals are touched (which resets the brake pressure to zero again)

Even when sending zero to the brake axis?

Now, this "trick" works always, except when a user has a registered version of FSUIPC and has the toebrakes pedals caliberated in FSUIPC.

FSUIPC's implementation of the toe brakes dates from FS2000 when FS included no brake axis controls. It operates directly on the braking values in the simulation engine.

Can you think of a reason why ? (I could imagine that these ParkingBrakes commands are lost because of the scheduled nature of FSUIPC, or something like that)

No, the Parking Brake controls are not touched at all by FSUIPC. There is no "scheduled" nature. However, because FSUIPC is setting the braking directly, when the brakes are released it has to control the gradual reduction in braking pressure itself rather than let FS do it.

Normally when you apply the brake then release it, ot does NOT release braking to zero immediately, it is performed over time. It should be an exponential reduction, but I think it is actually linear. Anyway, you can see it happening if you watch the brake application values through FSInterrogate.

FSUIPC emulates this by direct interaction with SIM1.

Perhaps you are toggling the Parking Brake before the braking reduction has completed, and so your zero is being overridden. Try a few seconds delay.

... a solution for the underlying FS problem which causes that the brakepressure cannot be commanded from a gauge below 20%

I really don't know about such a problem, as I have never come across it. Can you explain how I can observe it? How are you reading this brake pressure and how long do you wait?

Regards,

Pete

[rcbarend]

Hi Pete,

Yes, of course I tried setting the axis values to 0 (or any value smaller than 3000 (without using the ParkingBrakes trick at all); that's how I detected the problem in the first place :-)

If you want I can send you a small test gauge (with description) so you can see for yourself what the problem is and that I do the right things in the right order.

If you want that, where can I mail that to ?

Best Regards, Rob

PS: Maybe I should emphasise that I don't expect you to clear up all (percieved) problems with FS2004 in FSUIPC; my first intention is to understand why my workaround does work without FSUIPC, and fails when a (registered) FSUIPC is installed. But I obviously can't do that without your help :-)

[Pete Dowson]

Yes, of course I tried setting the axis values to 0 (or any value smaller than 3000 (without using the ParkingBrakes trick at all); that's how I detected the problem in the first place :-)

The actual braking value should then decrease slowly to zero. Do you wait, or are you saying it never does? What are you actually reading?

If you want I can send you a small test gauge (with description) so you can see for yourself what the problem is and that I do the right things in the right order.

You can do, but I'd rather check the values directly, it is easier for me. I need to know what you are reading and what you think is wrong with it.

If you want that, where can I mail that to ?

petedowson@btconnect.com, but I may not get time to look at it. If I have the information instead I can do some quick checks, see what is going on.

my first intention is to understand why my workaround does work without FSUIPC, and fails when a (registered) FSUIPC is installed.

Please let's get this straight -- you originally said it fails when the user calibrates his toe brakes in FSUIPC, not just when he installs and registers FSUIPC. Those are two very different things.

If you still really only mean when the user calibrates toe brakes in FSUIPC, then didn't my explanation of the difference help? You seem to have ignored it?

Regards,

Pete

[rcbarend]

Perhaps you are toggling the Parking Brake before the braking reduction has completed, and so your zero is being overridden

:oops: I'm truely sorry, I missed that one :oops:

That is the explanation I was looking for, why my ParkingBrakes "trick" doesn't work with FSUIPC installed AND toebrakes calibrated with FSUIPC.

FYI: I also found the cause of the original "problem" I was trying to bypass. Which, as I expected, has nothing to do with FSUIPC.

This is what happens (without FSUIPC installed):

In FS2002, the Left/Right brake axis (both via pedals and via the AXIS...Left/Right..SET in a gauge) has the "bug" that when applying a certain pressure, you have to release the pressure fully before a lower pressure is seen by FS2002; i.o.w. in FS2002 only reacts to more pressure, not less (untill the pressure is released fully)

In FS2004, this problem is solved: FS2004 accurately and instantaneously follows the pressure (=position) of the toebrake pedals.

And now the error I made in my gauge: unlike eg. ThrotlleSet you have to command the AXIS_LEFT/RIGHT_BRAKE_SET with a value between -16000 and +16000 instead of 0 - 16000, with:

- 16000: 0% pressure

0: 27% pressure

+16000: 100% pressure

Since this is obviously is not linear, and knowing the problem of FS2002, I just jumped to the wrong conclusion.

Anyway, thanks for your help, and sorry to have bothered you.

Best Regards, Rob Barendregt

[Pete Dowson]

unlike eg. ThrotlleSet you have to command the AXIS_LEFT/RIGHT_BRAKE_SET with a value between -16000 and +16000 instead of 0 - 16000, with:

- 16000: 0% pressure

0: 27% pressure

+16000: 100% pressure

I think those values should be -16383 to +16383, but 16000 is close enough I suspect :D

There are two sets of Throttle axis controls, one running 0 to 16383, and ones running -16383 to +16383. Both have idle at "0" but the ones with -ve ranges provide reverse thrust too -- these are made use of in the separate throttle assignments in FSUIPC.

Anyway, thanks for your help, and sorry to have bothered you.

No problem! Glad you got it sorted.

Regards,

Pete

[rcbarend]

....should be -16383 to +16383....

Ok, I'll grant you the 2.285% extra :P

...but the ones with -ve ranges provide reverse thrust too..

I have been trying to find those (as xml K:event), but I cannot find them in controls.dll. What did you mean with the "-ve" ?

Best Regards, Rob

[Pete Dowson]

I cannot find them in controls.dll. What did you mean with the "-ve" ?

All the FS controls in CONTROLS.DLL are listed in both numeric and name order in my controls documents, on http://www.schiratti.com/dowson. There's one there for FS2004. That's the same list accessible for Key or Button assignment in FSUIPC's Key and Button assignment pages.

"-ve" = negative. Sorry, I thought it was a standard abbreviation. I've been using it since I was a tot!

Regards,

Pete

[rcbarend]

Hi Pete,

I had another question/observation about the FS2004 braking system.

First of all, if I understand your previous post correctly, FSUIPC only processes the toebrake axis commands when given from physical toebrake axis, and the NOT brake commands given from the keyboard or from a gauge.

Right ?

If so, maybe the following is of interest to you.

1. Using toebrake pedals in FS2004, without FSUIPC.

If you load a flight, and press a pedal once (so FS2004 "sees" that brake pedals are connected), from that moment on the non-proportional brake commands, either from the keyboard (default keys "F11", "F12", ".") or from a gauge, are no longer working anymore. The only solution: reset the flight.

Now, I wasn't sure whether to call this behaviour either a "bug" or a "feature".

See also 3.

2. Using toebrake pedals in FS2004, WITH FSUIPC.

I'm not sure what happens now in detail.

What I can understand from your previous explanation, FSUIPC still uses the old (non-proportional ?) braking system of FS, using it's own algoritm to emulate proportional braking. Does this mean that the effect described under 1. therefore should not occur now ??

3. Using FS2004 without toebrake pedals.

Note:If my opening statement is true, it's not relevant here whether the user has FSIPC installed or not.

Since the user now would normally uses the keyboard functions ("F11", "F12", ".") for braking (or joystick buttons with the same functions), the same effect as decribed under 1. occurs if he is using a gauge (like mine) that (temporarily) uses the FS functions for differential, proportional braking: once one AXIS....SET command is given from the gauge, the non-proportional brakes commands ("F11" etc) are disabled again.

This I DO call a bug..

Several FS2004 users have confirmed the behaviour mentioned under 1. and 3.

Since still a lot of FS users do not use toebrake pedals, and the fact that a major function of FSUIPC is about solving/bypassing deficiencies in FS, I have the following questions:

- Can you confirm this behaviour in FS2004 ?

- If so, would you also qualify this as a "deficiency" ?

- And if so, is this something you are able c.q. willing to solve in FSUIPC ?

Best regards, Rob

PS:

About the "-ve" abbreviation: by now, you should be used to the fact that not everybody you correspond with has English as their native language :-) :-)

To me, the only thing I recognised was the syntax of a UNIX command line option :-)

[Pete Dowson]

First of all, if I understand your previous post correctly, FSUIPC only processes the toebrake axis commands when given from physical toebrake axis, and the NOT brake commands given from the keyboard or from a gauge.

Right ?

It cannot see commands given on the keyboard. they are not actioned by FS sending a message with the control numbers I recognise. They operate through some keyboard table some place. Whilst I could intercept keypresses I do not have access to the table so I don't know which should do what. besides, I've never has a need to do it.

In the case of Gauges it is different. I do see "trigger_key_events", so if the gauge uses one of the FS controls I know, I will deal with it (if asked to, of course).

Using toebrake pedals in FS2004, without FSUIPC.

If you load a flight, and press a pedal once (so FS2004 "sees" that brake pedals are connected), from that moment on the non-proportional brake commands, either from the keyboard (default keys "F11", "F12", ".") or from a gauge, are no longer working anymore.

I expect all that is happening is that the regularly-polled input from the axis is overriding the key press. Or maybe it is more serious, but I couldn't say from experiments I'm afraid.

What "non-proportional" brake commands are you using from a gauge? If you used the AXIS_LEFT_BRAKE_SET and AXIS_RIGHT_BRAKE_SET controls (the ones used by FS2002 and FS2004 for brake axes), then I should think these would be okay. You could experiment with those by assignment with different parameter values in FSUIPC's Key or Buttons pages.

What I can understand from your previous explanation, FSUIPC still uses the old (non-proportional ?) braking system of FS,

No, not at all. It changes the braking pressure directly, inside SIM1.SIM or SIM1.DLL, where it actually has effect. It is not sending any controls to anything. It is direct maniplation. It was the only way on FS2000 -- there were no controls whatsoever providing any proportional effect, though internally the simulation did have the implementation of braking pressure, as you could see by its gradual reduction on release, or increased effect when "pumped".

Does this mean that the effect described under 1. therefore should not occur now ??

Since when using FSUIPC for proportional braking the axes aren't really connected to FS, I assume it won't occur, but I've not tried it.

This I DO call a bug.

Not sure why. Isn't it for the same reason?

Can you confirm this behaviour in FS2004 ?

If so, would you also qualify this as a "deficiency" ?

And if so, is this something you are able c.q. willing to solve in FSUIPC ?

Q1. Yes as far as your (1) is concerned, and I don't see that (3) is different.

Q2. Well, not really, you would expect folks to either use axes or use keypad. If I were writing a simulator I'd choose axes over keypad, if I knew it was operable. I'm not sure how you'd deal with conflicts between them. This is one way I suppose.

Q3. I can't deal with FS keyboard controls, and I've no idea what you are doing inside your Gauge. But if you wanted you could make your gauge control brakes via FSUIPC offsets instead of FS controls. Then it shouldn't interfere with any other FS functions.

About the "-ve" abbreviation: by now, you should be used to the fact that not everybody you correspond with has English as their native language

Well, I did apologise, and as I explained, I use it without thinking as I have done for 40 years or more. It is like any habit, difficult to break. I suppose if I said "+ve" you'd recognise the "+" as meaning positive, no? The problem is that the ASCII negative (-) is too short and used as a hyphen. I really cannot promise never to use it again just in case my recipient isn't so good at English, but I do apologise. I don't see what else I can do. And your English seemed so good! :) Maybe if your English was bad I'd have spelled everything out and used easier words in any case. Sorry again. :?

Pete