Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest Cris B

FS9 Engravity CDU and GoFlight Interfaces (Where?)

Recommended Posts

I just bought and received a Goflight MCP Pro and an Engravity CDU just for my FS9 PMDG 737 & 747 and when I went to your eCommerce shop I was unable to find the GoFlight MCP Pro Software Interface or the CDU Software Interface. Have you stopped selling them? You can imagine my disappointment over not being able to use these very expensive pieces of kit. Without the interfaces all I can do is watch my toys collect dust! P.S. Lefteris Kalamaras doesn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

So I just spent over $2000.00 for equipment I can't use?:-8Do you know where I can get the interfaces?Flightsimlabs doesn't sell them either.This puts me in quite a bind as I purchaced all of this with FS9 in mind.:-newburn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are looking into the feasibility of a new no-cost solution for Engravity and GoFlight users, details will be made available in the future. No ETA, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry about my last post but really there is no indication anywhere. I understand the no cost solution but shouldn't that have been implemented before removing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>We are looking into the feasibility of a new no-cost solution>for Engravity and GoFlight users, details will be made>available in the future. No ETA, sorry.Robert, Ryan, & the rest of the PMDG team,Now I can appreciate that you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>We are no longer selling these products, sorry.Glad I checked (searched) the posts here first!I was just looking into purchasing the 737-600 ... -900 software.But I also have a lot of GoFlight hardware.I will wait for further information in this forum.Was the older GoFlight (GF-MCP) autopilot previously supported by your software?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ryan,I am extremely frustrated by this move. I literally just received my GoFLight MCP-Pro yesterday and got the S/N so I could get the interface today - only to find out I can't and just threw away 600$!. How can you do this without an alternative in place? This seems like such poor customer service for those that have been with you so long. I have been researching PMDG 737-NG and GoFlight for MONTHS! Even 2 weeks ago I could still buy the interface - but now I can't?! Please help me and your fellow simmers. We respectfully can't sit around and wait for months for a new product - especially when we know in the back of our heads that a perfectly good one was there and has just disappeared for no apparent reason.Can you please help us out here? I am "virtually" begging, I have a lot invested in PMDG and GOFlight and I don't want to get another aircraft just because of this - I love my PMDG 737!Anything you can do? I was fully prepared to pay - money was not then nor is it now the issue. I just need the interface so I don't have a $600 gray coke can in my sim pit! Please help.JoshTheWoodShopGuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now the same issue.Today my fmc arrived.Now i'm very sad after i saw that my hundrets of Euros was for nothing.At no point stands anything that pmdg do not sell the drivers anymore.I appeal to you to make the drivers availiable for us. PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!We are your customers and like your software.So help us please!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing this horror story, Capt. Blackburn, as I have for a while been contemplating the purchase of an Engravity CDU, seeing as it is the only stand-alone CDU available for flight simmers.If interface tools do materialize sometime, please let us hear about it, though in your shoes I would be thinking about requesting a refund from Engravity, since their CDU simply cannot be used as advertised.Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm seems PMDG really are falling behind the drag curve when it comes to supporting hardware.Time after time people are requesting that they release an SDK like Level D have with their software in order for people to interface their hardware with the PMDG software.PMDG keep hammering on how realistic their software is, how it replicates so many systems, yet how real is something that has to be controlled by a mouse?There are multiple choices of hardware out there for FMC, MCP etc, but they all fall down when being used with FSX because of driver issues, having to buy a driver for each aircraft is just down right stupid. I personally use Opencockpits hardware, owning their FMC, MCP, and shortly hopefully their EFIS. This hardware is brilliant, as it doesnt need drivers as such, it comes with its own software, that enables you to configure the hardware however you like it, so even buying a 737MCP, you can make it operate a 767. It can be done in various ways, from using FSUPIC offsets, to using keycommands, or interfacing with a SDK.So quite simply all it needs is the aircraft manufacturer to release either the SDK, or FSPUIC offsets which then allows the user to decide how the hardware works with the software.Level D did just this, a brilliant SDK, that LEEKSEECON(freeware) interfaces directly with the 767 enabling you to use the hardware fully with the 767 and control nearly every button and switch, the best bit about opencockpits, is that aside from their Modules, you can buy addon cards, to then build your own switches and displays as you want, not just having to purchase expensive modules from other developers. In fact their FMC is a fraction of the cost of the likes of engravity, and in sense is better as it far easier to make it work with any aircraft.PMDG need to do something to support the ever increasing demand to build either full or mini home cockpits. They need to release an SDK for their whole range of products, 747, md11 and upcoming 737, or where not possible release FSPUIC offsets. IF they choose to charge for the SDK then fine, they are running a business, but level D seem to manange to realease a product just as good, if not better than PMDG and still make a profit without charging for an SDK.In fact PMDG, need to look at everything with their products, from supporting widescreen monitors, Tripplehead systems, better undockable panels, etc. Because I feel that once FS11 is out, and they hopefully fix the difficulties that developers have had making a/c for FSX, we will see a lot more a/c out on the market again like we did with fs9, and PMDG will be nothing more than very nice games, rather than proper simulators like the rest are releasing.James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i purchased the interface about six weeks ago, was wondering if i ever lost the serial key if pmdg would offer support and provide a new key if i was able to supply details of the purchase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that passing mention of the OpenCockpits CDU, James. Never heard of that outfit before and holy smokes, their CDU does cost a mere fraction of the Engravity model. Gotta have one, even if I can only use it with the LevelD767 for now... hint hint.Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James-Sometimes when I read "speeches" such as yours in the forum, the temptation is to simply ignore and move on- because it is obvious that you haven't much familiarity with PMDG or how we operate.We prefer that you do not give us a directive in the third person and tell us what we "need to do" and "what simply needs to be done." We much prefer you tell us the kinds of things that would make your simming better, and ask us if they are possible.Ask any of the those who remember how limited the original 737NG was- and compare it to the MD-11, and I think you'll discover that we do a very good job of listening to customer input and adapting our products accordingly over time.The normal process is that we are constantly taking customer feedback from the forum by reading discussions and measuring what our customers really want vs. what is feasible in the development constraints of any specific product line.That being said, occasionally we have to re-align our strategic objectives- and even more frequently we have to evaluate the ECONOMIC value of the requests that we receive.Keeping in mind that PMDG's primary business model is the production of high fidelity desktop simulations, and that 95%+ of our customers do not purchase hardware beyond a throttle and joystick- we have not been aggressive in our efforts to interface with hardware devices available on the market simply because of the economics.Our products are significantly more complex than most users are even aware, so producing an SDK is not a "simple" process as you suggest above, especially when the initial development plan did not include a process for such an SDK.One of our former developers elected to produce a few interface devices for the Engravity and GoFlight MCP hardware- and these were modestly popular, but they were produced in-between projects and "instead of" focusing on an SDK that we agree would ultimately have been more valuable to our customers.We are deep into the NG2.0 development cycle, and one the agenda items being included currently involves having the NG2.0 integrate directly into a few of the common hardware consoles that are currently on the market. We are also evaluating an SDK that will allow inspired hardware developers to produce interfaces to connect their own present/future devices directly to the NG2.0 without the need for PMDG to sell interface devices. Such an SDK will be available to developers at no cost if it comes to pass.(Note here for future readers: At this time we do not see any obstacles to such an SDK- but we aren't finished yet- so this is not a promise to deliver- it is merely an observation of the fact that at this time such an SDK is on our wish-list too!)This new direction comes out of the normal evaluative phase that we entered upon launching development of the NG2.0- and it will carry forward to future projects as they come down the line.(For reasons of our need to remain forward-looking, we will not be going backward to previous products with this strategy, however- as it is not logistically supportable...)At any rate- I hope this alleviates some of the concerns you relay in your post- and I also hope that you'll please refrain from telling us what is "easy." If it was easy- it would have been done already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nameless-(Please comply with forum guidelines post in this forum. We REQUIRE that users sign their names.)If you have purchased such an interface from us, your purchase continues to be supported. Simply advise technical support if you need assistance with it as always.It is unfortunate that we had to take these items off the market. Lefteris Kalamaras, the author of the utilities, left PMDG some time ago- he is the sole author and owner of the devices. Five attempts to arrange for a license agreement to allow their continued sale went unresolved. As such, PMDG had no recourse but to remove them from sale as we did not have clear license to sell the items.I have made a longer post a bit lower in this thread discussing some of the things we are planning in order to support hardware users more fully in the future- in case you are interested!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i was reading this thread with great interest because i have several friends unable to 'hook up' with the removal of the interfaces from the PMDG website.first i have to say that in the absence of an explaination, we all have to come up with our best guess. i am pleased that at last we have been told the reasons for the removal. let's hope that an acceptable compromise can be found and that backward interfacing for the products will soon be available again allowing those who have the hardware to connect to the 737NG.secondly, i was also reading the post from James and the reply from Robert. i think Robert may have read the post in a different way to me. it was my understanding, reading the post that is was suggestive and not dictatorial. however, we're all different and perhaps i read it incorrectly.but i do agree with some of the points he made.so, i'll take a shot at it. and for the record, these are suggestions and not direct or intended directions :(noboby is a greater advocate of the PMDG 737 than me. i have built a full size 100% operational cockpit around it. more and more people are now assembling part and full cockpits based around the availability of hardware and software. one of the most popular is the 737.based on my experience (and just because i think so, doesn't mean it's right), right now for it's systems, hardware integration (if you have it) and performance is the PMDG737-6/7/8/900 series. i have tried the 'competitors', but for me nothing comes close. some perform better, but you can't integrate hardware properly,some are so tied up in security, it's a nightmare just installing and some look great, but fly like a kite :(for me to advance, i have some choices. 1. i either wait until the 737NGX is available. the talk on the street is mid to late 2009. and then migrate to FSX.2. migrate now, use somebody else's visual model and integrate sim-avionics or Flightdeck Software instrumentation and systems which do allow hardware connectivity (but neither of these systems is quite upto the level of control i have right now) or 3. wait it out to FS11 (i can't, i'll get bored and take up something else)so, here's my wishlist:A. an SDK like Level D have with the 767B. hardware integration made easy (ok, you have to develop it, so you have to charge for it). let's not go thru this again.C. perhaps a standard version (for the mass market) and a 'builders' version (for the more 'advanced' market) where greater flexibility on instrumentation and system interfacing thru hardware is available. i do appreciatte that the second option would be less of a volume, but i'm sure they could be 'constructive' with the pricing. in fact i did have an exchange once with robert about this, but nothing came of it.look, the PMDG737 is one hell of a product, so adding the 'qualities' they have perfected in the QOS and the MD-11, the NGX could be a market leader again.let's hope so.best regards from the welsh borders ... ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hallo Ian,Like you I am building a cockpit, although not as elaborate. When I started my project some two years ago, I wanted to build it around the PMDG 737NG. I bought the Engravity CDU and the CPFlight MCP + EFIS and their MIP interface board. Initially all went well, however it was not a stable situation. Running FS with a dual monitor output (Matrox Triplehead2G for the outside view, and PFD + ND) worked, but there was no support for a truly integrated EICAS and the overhead functions. So I bit the bullet and purchased Project Magenta. It was quite a high expenditure but now I was able to distribute functions over multiple computers. See my current configuration at: http://home.planet.nl/~pvrijald/flightsim/configuration.htm. I know that PM has problems but in my opinion it is currently the only mature solution.In addition to your wish list, I would like to add that it should be able to run on multiple computers, especially if it has to run on FSX. Best regards,--pim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This may be a little simplistic but I have a number of Go Flight units which I use through FSUIPC. I don't have the MCP but, as I understood it, the functions of this unit can also be programmed using this excellent utility.Bud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou for your reply, and I am pleased to see that you are considering better support in your future products for Cockpit builders.I am sorry that you took my post as demanding, it wasnt meant that way, purely and observation from the many forums around the net on FS, that each and every time people are dissapointed with not being able to interface to PMDG software, with their hardware, whether they are full cockpit builders or just want to make a joystick work a bit better with your products.Anyhow, based on your post regarding future products supporting this better, you did mention that it wouldnt be something that you would support for your "Older" products, so yor 747 and even the recently released MD11 will still be desktop simulations. I understand that in the future products you will be giving a better interface and understand that maybe to go back to older products is time consuming when the time is better spent on the new stuff, however is there any consideration given to maybe releasing the "Sacred" FSPUIC offsets for the 747/MD11 or even the old FS9 version of the 737 so users of these old products can interface to them? This obvioulsy wouldnt be time consuming in sense of developing a interface, just a case of publishing them. I understand before that there was concerns about realsing these due to hardware people taking advantage of your business, but based on project Magenta, Level D and many other commercial software developers all not suffering from releasing their FSPUIC offsets, is it really a realistic concern? Again not wishing to demand anything, or tell you how to run your business, but your worry to profits, is surely gone by the actual increased profits you would make by selling more software as more people purchase it because of its benefits to cockpit builders. IPODS sell better because of the support for them than that of other MP3 players, perhaps the same could apply to your 747.Anyhow, look forward to using future PMDG products again, as Im far too good at flying this 767 now!RegardsJamesP.S for those that showed an interest in the hardware support for level D here are the links to the open cockpit stuff.http://www.lekseecon.nl/ this is the great Lekseecon that allows you to interface to every part of the Level D 767.http://www.opencockpits.com/index.php?newlang=englishhttp://www.opencockpits.com/catalog/module...gplay-c-22.html there plug and play modules...337 euros for a FMC!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With over 1000 views of this post I think it says something about harware support desires for PMDG software

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With over 1000 views of this post I think it says something about harware support desires for PMDG software
I'm not sure how you can draw that conclusion, I'm guessing a lot of people were just curious as to what the thread was about. Home cockpit builders are a very small niche in an already niche market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,I had this problem for about 1 month now and found that Lefteris Kalamaras is selling the compatibility software for GoFlight and CPFlight hardware on another site.PM me for the link and I will respond!!Best regards, Patrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure how you can draw that conclusion, I'm guessing a lot of people were just curious as to what the thread was about. Home cockpit builders are a very small niche in an already niche market.
True. However, the cockpit builder also spends big bucks on their decks. How much would you have to charge for a full interface to recover your costs and make a reasonable profit? $1K, $5K, $10K? A SDK wouldn't do it since it can be copied and distributed. You'd need a DLL that was specific to the PMDG user license or something along that line that would convert from your proprietary offsets to something "standard" that could be interfaced to for the switches and lights. Something tied to the serial number of the hardware unit (CDU, MCP, etc) would let you recover your costs their also.Anyway, I've got over $50K into my sim and still not done. And there are several more like me. Granted, it's a niche, a small niche. However, if the price is set accordingly, it's doable.Thoughts?Cheers,Jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites