Hello all,I'm a full newbee here and also not have intentions to build a complete and big cockpit, but I do have a question. When I want to create a light switch for FS, how to connect it to the PC?There is a nice shop in town whitch sells switches and stuff so that's not a problem, but how can I tell my PC that when I switch the button on, he must "think" a keyboard input "L" for Lights and then my lights in FS are going to burn?Can somebody tell me hw to do this?Thanks,Maurice

Easiest way: brake an old keyboard open, and replace the "l" with your switch :)You could also go for a keyboard emulator, like the hagstr

that is not correct what you say there Twabi .. If you replace the "l" with a switch if you flip it on your input will be "llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll" .. that's no good. And that exactly is the reason why not preferably to chose for a keyboard.The hagstr

Hi Maurice,Welcome to the club.Although you are confident that you don't want to build a full cockpit, you'll be amazed how that "simple switch" will turn into a "small panel" and then into a "bigger panel" and so on. Yes, it is THAT addicting!There are many good hardware interfacing solutions for FS and each one has its partisans and "hate-club" (not necessarily for the right reasons, mind you) .Keeping everything in mind, you should invest a lot of time into planning the cockpit, see how many switches, lights, 7 segments you would need, and suddenly you will discover that the cheapest solution suddenly becomes way more expensive in the long run, in time, money and fuss than if you had invested into a more elegant, easier to manage and understand solution right from the beginning. Good planning is the key to a successful cockpit. You should be aware of your skills - going for a full DIY solution requires a lot of knowledge (despite what you may be led to believe). Commercial solutions, though more expensive are a much safer bet for support, professionalism, quality and longevity, but there you should always look for price/performance ratio.You are in the right forum, so you may want to do a search, read the posts, visit the relevant websites and make up your own mind. It is safer that way.But if you still claim that you want only one simple switch, then you may be better off with re-programming a multi-button joystick to perform the function that you want. It is the simplest form of interface that you may already have, and it does not require you to buy anything or to study "advanced electronics" or have any special skills :-)

I don't want to speak for him,But I think, he wants to get his feet wet. I am in the same position. At this time, I cannot plan cause I don't know what I want or how far I am willing to go.For me, All I want is a prototype to gain the first "Hello World" programming type deal. That sense of accomplishment that you get ....knowing that now all you need are details.But that first nugget... is getting that switch that you buy at radio shack and making it go on/off in Fsim.:)Manny

For something as simple as a few switches, the Hagstrom board would be a good first start. Unfortunately, if you are building a modern airliner sim, you will soon outgrow this.On the other hand, I'm using one with a Boeing 727 overhead and center control stand and it's working just fine.

This is not a flame and not a "my daddy is stronger" thing but my advice is that specifically the Hagstrom board is anachronistic:1. Needs to maintain a long ASCII configuration file so it's a lot of opportunities for bugs and syntax mistakes, leading to frustration. You wouldn't want to throw that at a novice, do you?2. RS232 interface3. Their USB board is severley limited - I know, I wanted to buy one at the time and I checked the RS232 board too.4. Expensive, or better said "bad price/performance ratio".I'd recommend a Plasma board from Beta Innovations (I can hear some guns cocking already) - it has enough digital inputs for "one switch", fltered analog inputs and rotary options for rock-steady and accurate throttles + yoke, and an excellent GUI setup interface that puts Hagstrom's ASCII cfg file to shame. Not to mention that it is cheaper than Hagstrom.

Here is something I have been looking at iocards and Open cockpit.http://home.planet.nl/~nwkaan/iocards.htmhttp://www.opencockpits.com/modules.php?na...ategories&cid=1I also found a good starter book. This is very basic... Also checkout the contents of the book "electronics for Dummies" to see if this is something that might interest you. I liked this book. Its more practical than just theories of Ohm's law etc.http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0764576607...648#reader-page

LOL!You'd better try this: http://www.engineer.ucla.edu/ it is not for "dummies" though. Sorry.But if you decide to go the path of electronics DIY, then you will need this book too, for those frustrating moments when you have to debug text files and "programs", or debug that PCB/Veroboard and matrix connections:http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/076455116...glance&n=283155http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/076455298...glance&n=283155and last but not least:http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/002863826...glance&n=283155.

"the Hagstrom board is anachronistic:"Gee, Al, I haven't got a dictionary handy so I can't argue that word LOL!!However, I can't agree with your assessment of the Hagstrom. I am using the USB 36 version of the Keyboard Emulator in tandem with the associated I/O board and, so far, have connected 23 of the inputs to various switches, buttons and levers with the greatest of ease and no problems. The Hagstrom Interface to assign the keys couldn't be any simpler to use. Assigning a key takes all of 2 seconds using the mouse!! Not an ASCII file in sight.I know that much will depend on how complex you want your cockpit to be but, for my needs, the Hagstrom does it all, easily and quickly.Pat

Sorry for the long post.When I told Hagstrom that I wanted to buy their USB solution because very soon RS232 will go the way of the Dodo (it is already notoriously absent in new mobos), they told me that their USB solution was "less flexible, less powerful, less comprehensive" etc. than the RS232 due to "USB protocol limitations". Needless to say that all those "limitations" have a solution but it requires some effort for a creative design. Add to that the the VERY small number of inputs and featured for the price (of both the USB and RS232 units) by today's "standards". Ask Hagstrom what you should buy and you'll se that they invariably recommend their RS232 solution. And that still uses the ASCII file "interface".So it's THEIR word, not mine, "against" yours.Regardless, as I always claim - "you get what you pay for". Before running head-first and buy something that will very soon prove limiting both in $ and in performance, longevity, frustration etc, is a bad start. I still stand by what I say: Hagstrom's solutions are based on VERY old designs and do not have enough features to justify their price.Xkeys are a bit too pricey for the limited set of features they provide, especially since any way you look at it, it is still a matrix decoder which, if you use non-momentary switches, you need to invest time money and frustration to build a diode matrix. Same goes for some of the famous DYI solutions as well. I cannot comprehend the pride ppl feel when they look at a board full of diodes they spent one week to solder (with no bugs if they are lucky), instead of working with regular digital inputs that can be used to also directly read rotaries, etc. The only thing going for the Xkeys is the number of keys it supports and a macro software better than Hagstrom's solution. And of course it uses USB quite well despite USB's "limitations" . It is certainly better than ripping your keyboard and use its internals, although this could be a cheaper solution in certain situations.Here is another linguistic challenge: "cognitive dissonance" :-D. CD happens to ppl who have invested a good deal of effort (money, work, pride, etc.) into a solution (politics, car, house, partner and yes, FS I/O interfaces too) and then they rationalize why that solution is so good. They usually would not consider any other solution after that - just to prove their point - at the expense of their own well-being. After a while it is almost impossible to snap out of it and you find yourself evangelizing it to others too.I do not hint/say that you have a problem - sincerely, FAR from it so don't take this as a personal attack or challenge. I only say that sometimes it pays to do your own research in addition to the advice you get since it is almost impossible to know who is truly at peace whith what he/she has and who is only rationalizing.If you do not do your own research, but instead base your decision only on what others say, you really deserve the punishment of being stuck with a lemon. I spent two years "researching" and yes, I actually bought Xkeys and seriously considered Hagstrom and some of the DYI solutions - my first serious hobby has been electronics, for @15 years - but decided on my choice of electronic interface, materials, etc. based on very specific criteria (which may not apply to anybody else). I will refer here only to the I/O stuff:1. First and foremost I wanted to have a cockpit - FAST. After all I build a cockpit to fly and not vice-versa.2. The I/O must have longevity (profesionally built, with a reasonable warranty and based on modern, non proprietary protocols)3. The I/O must be easy to manage and to connect to - that meant separate digital inputs and a GUI interface.4. As many features in the smallest possible package: I really do not enjoy having 10 boards, motherboards, daughterboards, modules, etc. Less fuss, less potential for trouble and invariably, less cost in the mid to long term.5. Tech support.All those considerations led me to decide on GoFlight for very specific modules (radio + MCP), and Beta Innovations for the digital input part. Go Flight was an excellent choice from many points of view, particularly for the digital display, GUI, flexibility, tech support and longevity. The only real issue is that it is expensive and that each module takes up a USB port forcing me to use a powered hub. The reason to go with a partial GoFlight solution was because Beta Innovations did not have any output module at the time, and the other solutions (usually DIY) required a disproportionate investment of time, labor and risk - at any price. Now with Beta Innovations' new Electron Flux I/O card - basically a full cockpit in a very small package - it looks like I will be reconsidering soon and I would not be surprised to post an ad saying "Used, excellent condition, only 500 flight hours, Go-Flight radios and MCP for sale" :-)

A very good post.The only problem I have with the Go-Flight modules is that they are not a standard commercial (Boeing) rack width. Furthermore, they resemble no Collins or Gables radio currently or formerly used.Other than that, the convenience of having something that resembles a radio and that is plug and play is very important for some builders.FDS is supposedly releasing the Gables style dual nav/coms or dual navs, dual coms sometime this century. I hope I'm still alive when they announce the release.The Hagstrom board can be used with ON-ON toggles without diodes for an on-off function in FS. It may be archaic, but it gets the job done in B727. Mine is an -232 model as at the time I only had two USB ports on my computer and they were being used.

Yep - despite the isues I have with it, Hagstrom is a "true" digital input board. All that diodes matrix thing that I ranted about belongs Xkeys and some of teh DYI solutions out there.And of course you are right: GF do not look like "real" radios. I have seen ppl around here who painted and re-marked the GF radios panels to make them look more Boeing-like. It is a pity that GF didn't invest a tiny fraction of extra thought and make a more "aircraft-looking" panel for an otherwise excellent piece of HW.

"cognitive dissonance" Oh, Al looks like I gotta go see a shrink. ROFL!!Yeh, I used a gutted keyboard card for years. I only wanted switches, buttons and levers and after much research I went for the Hagstrom as a replacement 'cos it was dead simple. The originator of this thread, Maurice, as I understand it wanted to get something simple that would allow him to use a switch instead of a key on a keyboard. He doesn't want to build a cockpit. If it's only one switch the the Hagstrom price ($100) for the two boards I mentioned is a bit steep but for 36 switches it's a snip. Maybe there are better and cheaper ones around nowadays but it does what I want it to do.However, I would agree it is not an ideal solution for the really serious cockpit builder.As for me I don't have any plans to build a 777 super-dooper - and I suffer from a condition called VHWWIG (Very Happy With What I Got) :-)Pat

LOL on VHWWIG (have to jot that down for future ref). I constantly look for better, simpler solutions so my own VHWWIG condition is only a temporary "setback" for me :-)If I were Maurice, I would "gut" a cheap $10 USB Joystick from the "freebies Home/Office Depot bin" and use the 4-11 or so buttons for whatever purpose, while "programming" them from within the FS and/or FSUIPC.It cannot get any cheaper, simpler or safer than that!