2 hours ago, Chapstick said:

You mean the tiller spazzing out? That's PMDG's problem--they don't simulate a bypass pin being installed. And they have a beef with FSDT anyway so we're likely never going to see the kind of GSX integration that FSL has achieved.

Thank´s for info!

7 hours ago, Chapstick said:

You mean the tiller spazzing out? That's PMDG's problem--they don't simulate a bypass pin being installed. And they have a beef with FSDT anyway so we're likely never going to see the kind of GSX integration that FSL has achieved.

We fixed that too.

Thanks to an user report, who found that when the the default pushback key is pressed, the PMDG code stop doing whatever is doing that cause the pedals going crazy and the airplane vibrating when GSX was pushing, we were able to fix it by simply sending the same key when GSX starts to to push, automatically.

However, it's a bit of an hack having to send the default pushback key for no reason, and who knows if doing that might cause other issues. I still think it would have been better if they just checked the value of the GSX variable, but since they doesn't seem to be willing to improve their users experience with GSX, like other airplane developers already did, thanks to this simple trick and the flexibility of GSX, which already provides a customizable bypass pin simulation, we just adapted it to work with the PMDG NWS, without any need of their support.

If they just said: "hey guys, we don't have time/don't want to change our code for GSX, but if you just send a Shift+P command like the default pushback, the plane will stop vibrating, since we DO detect *that* one and we stop doing crazy Ivan while the default pushback is pushing so, if you send a default push key, it might work", this would have been fixed long time ago.

9 hours ago, virtuali said:

We fixed that too.

Thanks to an user report, who found that when the the default pushback key is pressed, the PMDG code stop doing whatever is doing that cause the pedals going crazy and the airplane vibrating when GSX was pushing, we were able to fix it by simply sending the same key when GSX starts to to push, automatically.

However, it's a bit of an hack having to send the default pushback key for no reason, and who knows if doing that might cause other issues. I still think it would have been better if they just checked the value of the GSX variable, but since they doesn't seem to be willing to improve their users experience with GSX, like other airplane developers already did, thanks to this simple trick and the flexibility of GSX, which already provides a customizable bypass pin simulation, we just adapted it to work with the PMDG NWS, without any need of their support.

If they just said: "hey guys, we don't have time/don't want to change our code for GSX, but if you just send a Shift+P command like the default pushback, the plane will stop vibrating, since we DO detect *that* one and we stop doing crazy Ivan while the default pushback is pushing so, if you send a default push key, it might work", this would have been fixed long time ago.

Keeping an eye out for this update to be released, thanks!

Probably the smartest addon ever. 

I am impressed by the complexity of the coding and the realism of the graphics.  

This upcoming update is simply outstanding. Congrats and thanks Umberto. 

26 minutes ago, David Roch said:

Probably the smartest addon ever. 

I am impressed by the complexity of the coding and the realism of the graphics.  

This upcoming update is simply outstanding. Congrats and thanks Umberto. 

+1

On 4/26/2019 at 8:12 AM, MDFlier said:

Then, I thought about it a bit and realized that GSX has been constantly upgraded, changed, tweaked, and improved since the day that I bought it.

You make an excellent point.  We've received many enhancements to the original GSX over the years.  For free.  I personally didn't see the need for purchasing L2 because I wouldn't use it's features.  But because of how FSDT has evolved the original GSX, I'm going to purchase L2 now to show my support.

I, too, own GSX L1, but decided to repurchase the "bundle" on their own site, just to show support for what I consider a necessary utility.  Regards.

 

M.

2 minutes ago, Paladin said:

I, too, own GSX L1, but decided to repurchase the "bundle" on their own site, just to show support for what I consider a necessary utility.  Regards.

 

M.

What do you mean by 'repurchasing the bundle'? You don't have to re-purchase GSX (I mean, you can - but it's not necessary). You only need to get the expansion... 🙂

8 minutes ago, Anders Bermann said:

What do you mean by 'repurchasing the bundle'? You don't have to re-purchase GSX (I mean, you can - but it's not necessary). You only need to get the expansion... 🙂

Think that's what he meant by showing them support, i.e paying a bit extra

7 minutes ago, Sethos1988 said:

Think that's what he meant by showing them support, i.e paying a bit extra

Well, I'm sure that tribute is welcome 🙂

 

Hi Umburto,

Would the new rendering technique help with the VDGS displays?

If I understand it they use polys that are displayed by visibility flags based on the ACs position? I’ve noticed from a distance the polys z fight and intersect making them sometimes difficult to read.

11 hours ago, NZ255 said:

Hi Umburto,

Would the new rendering technique help with the VDGS displays?

If I understand it they use polys that are displayed by visibility flags based on the ACs position? I’ve noticed from a distance the polys z fight and intersect making them sometimes difficult to read.

We already have this in Beta, but I'm not sure we'll include it in this update.

The main advantage won't be much of a better behavior against z-fighting (this is a separate issue and can happen with DirectX-based polys as well and can be fixed in non-DirectX polys), but of efficiency and flexibility because, while now we have a limited number of supported airplanes, and each new one would increase the number of visibility ( visibility based polygons still takes memory even if they don't show ), with the DirectX method, we can write anything, and it will still take just one polygon for the display part.

3 hours ago, virtuali said:

, and it will still take just one polygon for the display part.

Ah, I knew you’d already be onto it 🙂

Might you include an option for metres/feet somehow too? (I searched the manual, I don’t think i can change this at the moment, no?)

Edited April 29, 20197 yr by NZ255

I'll be playing with this so much I will never get off the ground! 😂

Any word on when we might see the highly anticipated GSX L2 update...??

I haven't seen any new news on either the FSDT forums or at their facebook page where this was officially announced.

I'm eagerly looking forward to it...😁