|
Post by imovequick on Nov 28, 2018 14:31:00 GMT -5
I will test as soon as I can!
|
|
|
Post by captaincampion on Dec 16, 2018 13:05:07 GMT -5
I can confirm that the new interface works, i enabled the parking brake and doors in the 319 and made a test flight. All went perfectly. I barely flew the 319 due to the inteface problems so i'm really elated by this change. Thank you!
|
|
|
Post by peter on Dec 16, 2018 16:15:13 GMT -5
Hi Captaincampion,
that's excellent news, thanks for the confirmation.
Cheers, Peter
|
|
|
Post by Travis on Dec 17, 2018 22:31:17 GMT -5
Very good - thanks for the update!
I've made a note in the "Aircraft Interface Matrix" document. (If anyone reads such stuff....)
Best,
|
|
|
Post by goalgod on Jan 19, 2020 2:51:15 GMT -5
Beta 2 allows the FSLabs A320 interface to be used by an aircraft installed into a folder named "\FSLabs A319", but we've received no feedback so far as to the effectiveness. Regards, Hey Travis,
could you do the same for the FSL A321? I found out that the LVARs are the same as for the FSL A320. It should work in the same way as it does for the FSL A319.
Would be great to have the option to fly the A321 with FSCaptain as well without setting nearly every system in the plane to "in-op".
Thanks.
Best regards, Thorsten
|
|
|
Post by Travis on Jan 19, 2020 14:00:47 GMT -5
Hello Thorsten,
I can do such if you can confirm the folder is "\FSLabs A321\" (and/or something else?).
Perhaps it is that and possibly another folder??
If you're not certain, email us your most recent ADMIN log file and I'll have a looksee.
Best,
|
|
|
Post by cxn4026 on Mar 3, 2020 22:20:21 GMT -5
I wonder if such kind of adoption could be more easliy done by user? Like giving some sort of "overide" option, even at every time when start flying as a backup, so new variation of supported add-ons (like FSL321, QW78X, PMDG736...) could just be "force to" use existing interface.
|
|
|
Post by peter on Mar 4, 2020 4:07:01 GMT -5
Hi CXN4026,
user can already create an interface for their airplanes themselves. The procedure is described in "Introduction To FSCaptain Interfaces.pdf", but it is not an easy option. You first have to collect information about the Lvars. Then a user can either send the information to us and Travis writes the code, or a user can write a program himself and put the file into a specific folder (step V in the document). Not everyone is ready to do this, and virtually all users prefer to send the Lvar information to Travis.
Cheers, Peter
|
|
|
Post by cxn4026 on Mar 4, 2020 4:48:40 GMT -5
Hi CXN4026, user can already create an interface for their airplanes themselves. The procedure is described in "Introduction To FSCaptain Interfaces.pdf", but it is not an easy option. You first have to collect information about the Lvars. Then a user can either send the information to us and Travis writes the code, or a user can write a program himself and put the file into a specific folder (step V in the document). Not everyone is ready to do this, and virtually all users prefer to send the Lvar information to Travis. Cheers, Peter I know, so I mean rather than going though all those code things. Could there be an small options in "Aircraft Characteristics" OR even just in FCDU to allow user to "Force Use" existing interface for an new "Unknow" aircraft?
|
|
|
Post by peter on Mar 4, 2020 17:16:29 GMT -5
The short answer is: No The long answer is: if all airplane developers would adhere to the style of variables used in default airplanes, then it wouldn't be a problem at all. Unfortunately, they do not. I am really not blaming them: they invent cool new features, do things in a different but better way than default planes, and sometimes move the entire airplane dynamics out of FSX/P3D to be more efficient. That's impressive work, but as a result, there are no general standard on what Lvars they would use, and how. It took Dutch and Travis several months to figure out an interface for the brilliant, but very non-standard, Majestic Q400, for instance. Or take the doors for recent PMDG planes: their Lvars aren't simply 0 for closed and 1 for open. They have a variable that determines how wide the door is opened. Since there are no standards, it is simply unpredictable how the next airplane model will work, and hence we cannot guess an interface that works in a satisfactory way. A few variables seem always to work (e.g., climb rate, altitude, ..), but almost every other variables doesn't work for one or the other 3rd party airplane. The airplanes where everything works in FSCaptain without creating an interface seem generally to be very basic. Hence, if you want to use FSCaptain to the fullest with a really good airplane model, you usually need to let Travis and Dutch create an interface Note, however, that you can always use FSCaptain without any interface. It will create and monitor flights for any airplane without any additional information, just using what it can get from the airplane's configuration files. However, FSCaptain will then generally not be able to monitor all parameters. I can tell when you departed and what your landing speed is, but it may not be able to see whether you had your landing lights on below 10,000', if you engaged engine anti-ice while flying through snow, or whether you opened the cargo doors during boarding. It is only these refined features for which you need an interface. Cheers, Peter
|
|
|
Post by Travis on Mar 4, 2020 23:51:40 GMT -5
Hi CXN4026, In the last 12 hours I recovered my {WinDir}/System32 folder from an impossibly stupid decision I made a week earlier to run a batch file "As Administrator" without bothering to consider the context in which said batch file would run. Hint: it ran in {WinDir}/System32 with the authority to delete most things in my {WinDir}/System32 folder. So please don't ever do that unless you want to experience an unrelenting Windows STOP: 0x0000007B 'INACCESSIBLE_BOOT_DEVICE' BSOD upon booting. Give me a few days to think on your request. I currently think "of course I can do this," but I'd rather let my current coding-adrenaline rush pass over before I could know. Best,
|
|
|
Post by Travis on Jun 8, 2020 1:02:00 GMT -5
While we never received any other feedback on this, I have an idea for a future version of FSCaptain to allow a Captain to "select" an interface on the FCDU to be used in conjunction with an existing Override or Load Map match.
For example, if Aerosoft were to release an Airbus 380 package which used the same LVARs that we look at for their A330 Professional, any Captain would be able to designate the existing Aerosoft A330 interface to be used by the "new Airbus 380."
This is a silly example, but I hope it demonstrates the concept....
Look for something like this to arrive well after the official release of 1.8.2.
Best,
|
|