Jump to content

MarkDH

Members
  • Content Count

    946
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

119 Excellent

1 Follower

About MarkDH

  • Rank
    Almost Aviator

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Bedfordshire, UK

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    Other
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

3,686 profile views
  1. I looked at MobiFlight briefly when I wanted to add LEDs but I went for Air Manager in the end. MobiFlight looked great for hooking up standard FSX or P3D functions but the way of accessing values from Lvars seemed awfully clunky, and my Twin Otter cockpit needs a lot of that. Air Manager, in contrast, can natively access Lvars and can also be scripted with Lua, allowing complex behaviours to be created. I only have one panel with outputs at the moment, but I have a hybrid approach with all the inputs managed by Bodnar boards while the outputs are managed by Air Manager driving an Arduino Mega. Air Manager could handle the input too, which would be a cleaner solution if starting from scratch.
  2. You can watch my hands-on experiments with each of these boards in the following video.
  3. Here is an important question for me: can you control it without the mouse? I seem to recall that when the F1 GTN530 was released this was an emphatic NO, which is a complete deal-breaker. Maybe they fixed it. The RXP is completely controllable from the keyboard, and hence mappable to real buttons and switches.
  4. You can mix and match controllers like this with no problem. You just need to ensure you only have one device mapped to each analogue axis.
  5. I don't know what it is you're trying to demonstrate. I understood you to be saying that whatever you set in the 'full screen resolution' field is how many pixels get drawn in the window regardless of how you resize it. Perhaps you aren't saying this (which is preposterous and demonstrably untrue). Maybe all you are intending to say is that the OP is saying 'resolution' when he means 'window dimensions'. I think we can all agree that in windowed mode the resolution of anything you see is whatever you have your Windows desktop set to.
  6. They come with the product, which is available for download from the second link you provided. You only pay if you go on to register it, which you do by purchasing a licence from the first link.
  7. Without wanting this to become an internet pedantry war, you asked 'how could FSX possibly know' you have disconnected and reconnected a USB device while it wasn't running, and I told you. I can't make sense of your last question.
  8. Most of the useful functionality is absent from the free version. The free version is a component that developers can build their products around, which means it is a pre-requisite for many products. That's its only use. The paid version of FSUIPC gives you all kinds of advanced programming and configuration features for your sim, notably axis and button programming, saved profiles for specific aircraft, Lua scripting and probably a lot more. There are extensive documents available (for free) that describe all the features. The user manual has a section on the precise differences between the free and paid versions.
  9. The YokeInput software was written by Aerosoft. It has been discussed in this forum: https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/forum/245-hardware-and-os-discussions-suggestions-and-insights/
  10. Let's stay focused on the issue, which is that if the sim has auto-assigned mappings it may have created duplicates. (You may also have missed that I said 'between flights'.) And BTW, I'm pretty sure that plugging a USB device into the same port doesn't guarantee that Windows will enumerate it identically each time. I think this is why FSUIPC has the 'joynames' feature.
  11. Just resize your window manually to how big you want it. There's no real advange I can see to making it a precise 'resolution' (by which you seem to mean window size). And yes, I would expect it to improve performance, at least in principle. Of course it depends where your bottleneck is.
  12. This is comparing apples and oranges. You lose frames because you are trebling the pixel count, not because you're using Surround! I doubt you will see any significant performance difference between a 3-screen Surround and a single-screen UW monitor.
×
×
  • Create New...