jmig

I fly with a Quest 3 and it did fine.

The RV 8 will be a purchase for me. I have always considered it to be the "Fighter" of the Van's RV line.

I am new to the Meta 3. However, I use the purchased Virtual Desktop app and just load MSFS from there. It works fine.

As a former USAF aviator, I would like to add my 2 cents. I flew B-52's during the Vietnam era and dropped bombs. I later flew the RF-4C in the US. In the B-52's we did a lot of "simulated" bomb runs. In the RF-4C I did a lot of photographic runs over many targets. I also participated in two Red Flags where weapons release was simulated. My point is that the military rarely does life weapon fire. These are done on designated ranges. Even BFM is simulated with Fox 2 or Guns, guns, guns calls. So, having live weapons in MSFS is like having a conceal weapon permit. You can carry your Glock but how often will you use it? (Hopefully never.) What I love in DCS and wish we had in MSFS are the realistic flight models and operations. What DCS offers is a true combat environment where the enemy can shot you down. In the dynamic missions what you do can effect other aspects of the campaign. It would take a lot of programming to do this in MSFS. Combat usually takes place in a small area, think Iraq or Ukraine. That is why the DCS Maps can be small in size. They are based on areas where combat has taken place or reasonably will happen. Shooting down unsuspecting airliners is unrealistic, even if you think of them as drug runners. A lot my flying in the RF-4C was cross-country. I went to different bases and once to an airshow. You can do this in MSFS. In the B-52D we usually took off, flew 10-12 hours, landed, and deplaned in the same spot we left 12 hours before. I don't think many of you want to do that. I would like to see somebody build the various military bases in MSFS to the quality of top civilian airports. Then I could fly cross-country from say Barksdale, AFB in Louisiana to Dyess, AFB in Texas. That would be like the airliner guys flying from St, Louis International to JFK.

I don't know if this will help? It is listed as Flysimware LLC on Discord. If you need an invite, I am sure it is on their webpage.

LesORiley on the SWS PC-12 Discord channel has posted a method of getting the Condition lever to work using ranges. He uses SPAD.Next but it should work in Axis&Ohs and FSUIPC. They both allow you to assign an event to an axis range. Far warning, however. This method is not for the faint of heart. It requires more than point and shoot knowledge of the setup applications.

FSUIPC can read Go-Flight buttons and rotaries. You then assign them using FSUPIC Buttons app. Go-Flight's GFDev64.dll must be int he FSUIPC folder. AxisandOhs will read the buttons but not the rotaries.

I am asking for help from someone who understand programming, especially SIOC and its ability to work with FSUIPC. I am a 68 year old former pilot. I flew both GA and military fighters. So, my interests lies not with the airline type of aircraft, but with the military fighter type. Ten years ago I set out to build a cockpit based on one of my favorite aircraft, the T-38. That cockpit was named here as the Cockpit of the Month by Mycockpit.org.. With the introduction of TacPac cockpit simulation can take on a new dimension. So, in my quest to pretend I am still 24 yrs. old, I have decided to rebuild the cockpit and turn it in a true fighter simulator with weapons and refueling abilities. Since, I am not interested in flying just one single type of aircraft, I am making a cockpit that can be best described as an offspring of the mating of the F-16 and F-18. I purchased an Opencockpits FMC V3 to use as an Up Front Control Panel (UFCP)/FMC. The information on the Opencockpits site says the FMC is a USB device and can work with FSUIPC. I have found out that that is only partially true. It is not a true USB device. In order to get FSUIPC to see the buttons and keys you need a SIOC script that writes to FSUIPC. Within the SIOC software package are several scripts designed to get the device to work with Project Magenta and iFly software through FSUIPC. However, these scripts will not work for general purpose FSUIPC. The offsets they write to are reserved for those software products. In writing to Peter Dawson for help he told me I need to use offset 3340, which is a DWORD that allows you to use the device as a joystick or two and assign the leys as buttons in FSUIPC. This is where I need help. I am not a computer programmer. I grew up before computers and actually used a slide rule in college. I was able to get SIOC to work with the T-38 simulator by copying and modifying already written scripts, and help from people like Nico Kann. This is a step up, however. Before I has actual buttons and switches. Now, I need to get FSUIP to recognize the FMC keys as buttons. I don’t know how to do that. If someone can show me how to start, i.e., write the script that will allow offset 3340 to see the keys, I think I can take it for there. I just need to know how to write to and set the numerous bits in a DWORD. Once I know what to do, I can work my way through the actual process of assigning the different keys. Thanks, John

I have always liked that airplane. It is one of the aircraft I keep coming back to, over and over.

Eric, I know fellow who flies for one of the airlines in RL who uses a 52" TV. He told me that he really likes the larger format. All newer TVs have a HMDI port. You can get a DVI to HDMI adapter for only a few dollars. This will allow you to connect to the TV. In 1080p mode you are getting 1920 X 1080 pixels. I am currently researching this myself. I have three projectors but have only hooked up one, because of space requirements. (My wife insists on keeping a bed in the bedroom, for grand kids to sleep *he looks to the heavens for help*) I have stood 4 feet in front of a 42" HDTV and I thought the resolution was clear and focused. If you plan on running more than one TV at a time, you will need a heavy duty graphics card.

I am one of the "real world" T-38A beta tester pilots. For the hundreds of hours of flying profiles, building and submitting spreadsheets of the various test results, and later flying Alpha, 1,2 3,4 then Beta a, b,... I received my very own FREE copy of the final product. I am well satisfied with the bargain. I would like to offer my view of what you will get when you spend your money to purchase the Milviz T-38A. You will receive an airplane that will give you as close to a real experience of what it is like to fly the T-38 that is possible in a simulator like FSX. I have had a love affair with the T-38 since the my "Boom" or "Dollar Ride" (as it was called in my days). I have spent thousands of dollars on building a full size cockpit which contains a full size control stick and realistic controls. Almost every switch in the T-38 is duplicated and functions. I flew the T-38 testing in that cockpit. I also flew it on a second computer with a CH Products joystick, rudders and throttle. The feel was totally different between the two set ups. However, there were moments when I felt I was back in the cockpit of the real T-38. I believe the fidelity to the actual bird is that good.Col. Scott offered a good punch list of items which he felt were less than perfect. Colin (Milviz) has already said that we will fix what we can. Some of the items on Col Scott's list were flagged and mentioned by myself and the other T-38 pilot as well at a couple of the airline pilots on the team. They were discussed and the programmers attempted to get them closer to what we felt were more realistic. In some cases we did have to settle or less than we wanted. Often a fix broke something else. The drag is one such example. We struggled to get the proper drag ratios for both altitude and a low level in the pattern. Many times one adjustment caused something else to go south. In the end we all settled for something less than we wanted. However, again, the fidelity to the real airplane is very good.Other items like the sound levels of the buffet and AOA sensitivity were both a mixture of compromise and building for the average consumer. I mentioned earlier that I flew the T-38 with both a basic setup and with the high end expensive cockpit simulator. I did this because I knew most people would be experiencing this aircraft through their six inch tall joystick and 19" monitor. We had to make the aircraft fly realistically in this arena. I also wanted to get it to fly well using a full length stick, bass shakers and projector setup. I wanted the most realistic possible T-38 possible. I wanted this for myself. :) I believe we did just that and more. In all simulation and virtual realities there is something called, "Suspense of Disbelief." Suspense of disbelief is the ability to forget you are in your world and feel as if you are in the virtual world. This airplane does that for me. Flying an overhead approach from the break, through the final to landing is as close to real as I have seen in an FSX airplane. More than once, I found myself smiling. I hope our efforts will allow each of you to feel the same.If you are on the fence about buying this airplane. If you feel that some of the minor items (and they are minor) Col Scott pointed out make this aircraft not worth the money, try it and see. If you use Flight 1 you have a 30 day return. I am willing to bet that very few of you will return the plane. If you do buy it you will see just why 50,000 plus USAF pilots called the T-38A the "White Rocket."

Gerry, You might want to check out Mike's Flightdeck. He has all sorts of good information on his site about cockpit building.

I have to agree with the above. I find his airplanes to be well made and fun to fly. The Kodiak is by far my favorite, with the possible exception of the Viking. The only reason I might like the Viking better is because I seriously considered buying one for my business flying needs. The Kodiak is a great bush plane for FSX.

Something tells me I should wait a week or two. :(