The new FSIM 2.0 (former BIFS) unifies the control and configuration of all BI modules and integrates them into the MSFS.I tested my new ElectronFlux output and the GammaRay input boards with the new FSIM application and I am impressed. The responsiveness is something I have not experienced for a long time, since previously I had to pass keyboard emulation commands through FSUIPC. Now, FSIM circumvents that by allowing direct access to FS internals - functions, variables and masking + keyboard emulation - so there is no need for FSUIPC services for this kind of operation anymore.Add to that full control over the ElectronFlux LED, 7seg, etc. outputs and my cockpit needs are fulfilled.I have no way of measuring this but the difference in speed, responsiveness and stability is VERY visible even on my FAST PC.Now I am on my way to 'migrating' my cockpit from the generic GF modules to a more realistic (Lear 45) setup bu using Electron Flux, Gammaray and maybe the new Plasma MM2 module (or its bigger brother) for throttles.

Hi Al,An interesting development indeed, especially if you can build your pit with just the generic FS9 parameters (states) and controls. At least that is my impression after studying the supported EventID's and Token List.For more complicated add-ons such as the Level-D 767 or the PMDG 747 this is not sufficient I'm afraid. These aircrafts have several states and controls that are either not in the generic FS9 set or implemented in a private way and not linked to the FS9 set.And for the opposite situation, a very basic aircraft for which you need to program the systems logic yourselves (such as electrical systems, pneumatic systems, ..), you miss a programming tool for doing this, such as the SIOC tool of Opencockpits IOCards, or the equivalent in FSBUS.But again, a nice development. Hopefully Beta Innovations will continue and make available for instance all the Level-D functions that are offered by the Level-D SDK in their EventID's and Token List. Then the hardware of BetaInnovations could be used very well by Level-D cockpit builders.Regards,Nicowww.nicokaan.nl

Although I am NOT an LD fan (no 737 or any other 'heavy' on my menu I'm afraid), I imagine that adding LD functionality to FSIM is a snap (using the SDK). I think that this is more of a question of 'are LD users ready for a no-programming-needed' tool or are they religiously enjoying coding instead of flying.I have some ideas of my own for FSIM and hopefully I will see them implemented in the future. IMO, logical/arithmetic conditions would add enormously to the functionality of FSIM and it remains to be seen if BI gets the message.I hope that if BI hears these requests from more users, they will have to eventually add them to FSIM 2.5 or whatever version.On another note: I have placed my Plasma Lite + 2 x Xamps order today. Finally I do not need to worry about cogwheels and complicated throttle mechanics anymore. I can use a high quality pot without worrying about using its entire range - Xamp will do the 'range expansion' job and Plite will stabilize and smoothen the signal.You already noticed that I always choose the simplest solutions - I prefer spanding time 'flying' rather than building or tinkering w/ the cockpit.

Hi Al,Yes I know your preference, it's not much different from mine.I'm a pilot who wants to fly without having to use mouse and keyboard. That's why I started to build my pit (4 years ago) and during that (incremental) building process I was always able to fly.The coding I do with SIOC is basically very straightforward. It's just a matter of linking my hardware 1 to 1 to a FSUIPC offset (note FSUIPC is enriched with Level-D offsets by my program FSCONV).I indeed hope BI gets the message. Their hardware is impressive.Regards,Nicowww.nicokaan.nl