Jump to content

vtracy

Members
  • Content Count

    22
  • Donations

    $25.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

493 profile views
  1. Rafal, I get that, yes TE needs more space than GES. But that also means it is possible at all to have more precision, reality, visibility,… for a price. As long as the software handles the data stream from SSD to GPU right, I can live with the fact rhat I have to buy larger SSDs for my scenery. I have long decided that I only need TE England South, the two Germanys, the Netherlands, Austria, and the French channel coast, for my flying. So, vast areas (and space) are left out. I think it is a very good design decision by LM to offer areas that can be down loaded, or not. After all, when I am flying VFR, I do not cover huge distances, a few area sceneries are sufficient for my sim exparience. Volker
  2. Bert, I think I understand what you mean. I have TE England South. I like it very much. If only we had more of that! Like, e.g. Austria. I also bought the two Germanys but IMHO they are not as good as TE England South. A very good example of an area is Malta by simmershome (Rainer Kunst). Its only „disadvantage“ is that it requires a very fast CPU, an equally fast GPU and lots of VRAM. I am currently in the process of acquiring the necessary resources to use it as it should. Apart from that: highly recommended! Volker
  3. This discussion is too technical for me. So, I‘d like to come back to what it is that I want: We are talking about a flight SIMULATOR; that means, using it I can learn - to fly an aircraft, - to take off, to land, - to navigate. Depending on what kind of aircraft I am flying, I have different requirements. If I am flying an airliner, I need to be able to do intricate IFS, AP flying, and to ‚recognize‘ where in the world I am. For that requirement, a photo wallpaper is pure luxury. No need for realistic, 3D buildings, etc. I f I want to fly VFR (i.e. in GA aircraft) I fly much closer to the earth, my needs are different: I must be able to navigate by looking at the earth underneath me, to be able to ascertain that I am where I wanted to go, to see for myself that my VOR navigation is correct. That means the landscape must be realistic, it must have the right kind of buildings in the correct places, correct streets, rivers, hills, etc. The representation of the features underneath my aircraft does not have to be so realistic that I can recognize my house when flying over it but I must be able to recognize the city, village, boundaries, the distinct landmarks of the area; the buildings must be not only 3D but recognizable as builings belonging in that area. Take for instance, a low level fkight from Salzburg to Innsbruck, everybody knows that area… The airports of both cities are very recognizable, the area around them, too. I can see that I am over LOWS because of the buildings under me, same in Innsbruck. BUT as soon as I leave the immediate area of the airports, the landscape under me becomes more ‚general‘ in kind, it is European, but it is not: ‚alpine‘, Austrian, realistic. The buildings are all basically the same. That is not like in reality. Also, when I fly (low level!) along the Inn valley, the landscape becomes blurry, indistinct, the streets are unrecognizable, the buildings 2D,… If that can be fixed, I will be happy. Volker
  4. Gérard, yes to all ‚corrections‘! I invite everyone to contribute. Hopefully, in the end it will be a comprehensive list of things to do/observe for a trouble-free installation. Volker
  5. Gérard, what I was trying to put down was a „To Do“ list of things for a working installation. Pse feel free to correct the list of activities. I hope to help others after me/us not to have the difficulties I had.
  6. Gérard, as there are quite a number of things to observe and install, shall we set up a list (as complete as we all can) of items to doin order to ensure a working Bravo. I will begin with my list; please feel free anyone to enlarge, correct, erase items as you find useful: 1 - Sim is properly installed, latest updates included. 2 - Install - if not already done - FSUIPC6 or later as appropriate; register FSUIPC, NO lua scripts to install(?) NO Linda is necessary. 3 - Download and install latest Honeycomb driver/configurator (link here). 4 - Download profiles from aerosofts database (link here )into the ‚bin‘ folder of the Honeycomb installation folder (the 2 default profiles for Alpha and Bravo are part of the configurator software). 5 - Start Sim (P3Dv5), load any aircraft that you want to set up with the Bravo. 6 - Start Honeycomb configurator, go to ‚Profile’ in top menu, click on ‚Default_Throttle‘, click ‚Load’ on bottom right (blue button), go to ‚Actions‘ click on ‚Disable Simulator Defaults‘ ‚click on ‚Activate Current Profile‘. 7 - In Sim (P3D), click on Sim Menu item ‚Add-ons‘, on the drop-down menu, you should see ‚Honeycomb‘ and ‚FSUIPC‘ (among other add-ons you have installed, click on ‚Honeycomb‘, BFC_Throttle - Reload Bindings‘, a green band should show shortly in the upper area of the sim window telling you that the throttle bindings have been reloaded, AND on the Bravo, the lights over the gear lever and some of the LEDs in the area underneath the switches should go on, that shows that the connection between the Bravo and the sim is working. 8 - Well done! Now, you can begin configuring the Bravo (see also video link ... !)
  7. Gérard, a. I am grateful for your suggestion about the basic test, it helped me narrow down my problem, I would wish that test had been mentioned in the video-‚user guide‘; b. I found that my installation of the configurator/driver software was not complete, apparently; Imhad not suspected that because everything seemed to work, just not the switches; however, I did not know about the ‚reload‘ feature in the P3D add-on folder; I saw that the reload function was not present in my installation; c. I therefore downloaded the software anew, de-installed the old software and profiles, re-installed the downloaded software/profiles, found the reload function in ‚Add-ons‘, did the basic test: everything seemed to work: lights on the Bravo, green line on screen; d. I then configured the switches to: battery, alternator, strobe, beacon, nav, taxi, landing lights; e. when I tested the switches in the (previously loaded) A2A Piper Comanche, theydid not work at all; f. I remembered having read somewhere that there is a problem with the limit to 32 buttons/switches in P3D, assigned the switches in P3D ‚Options/Controls‘ to the corresponding functions: no luck; g. I then tried to assign them using (registered) FSUIPC6: I found ‚buttons‘ no. 82 to 89 (with subswitches), assigned them to the above functions: battery and alternator switches jumped up and immediately down again when switched ON on Bravo, of the other switches, only the landing lights worked; the flaps lever only lowered/raised the flaps entirely no increments possible (despite FLAPS_INC/DECR). I am out of ideas what to do. Volker
  8. Gérard, just to be clear: The Bravo itself, as hardware, is a beautiful product. That is why I bought it. BUT! It needs software to function properly. So, the software is part of the product, like for example, the GoFlight products. I just criticize that for me, in my installation, it does not work. Neither off the shelf, like GoFlight, nor after doing the configuration. My P3Dv5 HF2 does not receive any signals from the switches. The axes work, as do the flaps and gear levers, but not the switches. Now, it is possible that I made a mistake but then I say that should not be possible, given a good user interface. The tip about using FSUIPC and/or LINDA was one I read in a forum; it seems to have to do with the number of buttons allowed in P3D. LINDA seems to help here. But LINDA is a programming tool! WHY SHOULD i need a programming tool just to set up a set of switches?! And to reiterate, it does not work in my P3D. If anything is needed, driver etc., it should be clearly said - better: written down - somewhere. As you write yourself, in the download section for the Honeycomb produchts, the number of profiles is rising „with user feedback and suggestions“. Don‘t you think it is a bit strange that a big company like aerosoft ‚needs‘ user input! What it means is that they wait for users to complete their product (creating profiles). I think that they should provide profiles at least for the most common aircraft, for example those by A2A. Volker
  9. Thank you, John! I just wrote an irate comment in another forum on AVSIM, aboutt the (IMHO) missing drivers, profiles, user guide,... for the Bravo. I will try your lua scripts, in the hope that they will give me the necessary ‚drivers‘ to make the switches etc. work in my P3Dv5. What makes me p... off, is the fact that a tool like LINDA is at all necessary to set up(!) a flight sim instrument. Volker
  10. I not only agree with all that was said here about the Bravo (I only have the Bravo), it is IMHO even worse: Aerosoft put a hardware product on the market, thereby insinuating that it is (more or less) complete. NOT SO! Obviously, the ‚software‘ to make it all work with a simulator is not present. I consider the profiles an essential part of the product. First deficiency. Then, in the face of the obvious difficulty of ‚configuring‘ the hardware, they totally forget the most important part, a user guide! I know that it has become fashionable to not have a UG, but that is usually accompanied by a user interface that is self explanatory (see iPone)! For a product that is so (wonderfully) versatile, it is a shame not to provide a VERY detailed UG. To then ask a/the programmer to author a video in which he, the specialist, explains the set up to non-specialist users, borders on effrontery. He, the programmer, cannot be expected to be able to explain the functions in a way that a normal i.e. non-programmer, user can follow. What they should have done is what other, conscientious, software houses do: put a normal user in front of the screen (and hardware) with a first version of a UG and then watch what is obviously missing in the explanation. That, of course, is very time and manpower consuming... at is therefore often not done. (I know what I am talking about; I did software design - and wrote user guides - in my professional past). I for example, have so far not been able to make the switches work in P3Dv5. Although i did ‚program‘ them in the Bravo setup, they do not appear in P3D, and do not work. The sliders work, I assigned them in P3D options/controls; as do the gear lever and the flaps lever. I did program the AP buttons and knobs but did not test them yet. More important for me are the switches. I tried them in P3D „options“ and in FSUIPC6. When i throw a switch, it does not register in FSUIPC. The problem is, I do not know how to search for mistakes (I made) or missing settings or inputs, as I do not understand the programming philosophy behind it. A dissappointed and irate Volker
  11. I am very reluctant to trust a Oculus Quest successor. After all, we here are talking about flight simming, not gaming! Consider: with Rift S, we have to have the most powerful and VRAM-heavy graphics cards on the market (e. g. GTX 1080ti or 2080ti)! Plus an overclocked CPU with >4 GHz. Does anybody think that this can be achieved (today) by a smartphone-like device in the headset?! I don‘t until otherwise proven wrong. Of course, it would be wonderful not to be hampered by cables. But with today‘s hardware, I tend to look for a WLAN connection between the PC and the headset for transmission of graphics values to the headset. Even a kind of co-operation between the graphics card in the PC and a processor in the headset would be helpful both for performance and ease of use. I could imagine a specialized (graphics) processor with lots of VRAM, which converts the vector data coming from the PC to pixels... I do not see that in the new headsets. Please! Prove me wrong!😁 Volker
  12. NealH, I have Rift S installed (Rift previously): As mentioned in this forum, the round white dot IS the mouse. You still have to use a mouse button (on yr mouse) to activate/klick. You can move the dot by yr mouse, as well. The controllers cease to function as soon as one switches to VR in P3D. That is a known and acknowledged deficiency of P3D. Re. Hand tracking I tested both the built-in HT as well as the LEAP version (with addnl hardware): IMHO it is not precise enough to be useful in an aircraft while flying, because it has a ‚hit rate‘ in my tests of about 50% which means you have to klick and klick and klick a switch or button. That is why I went back (reluctantly and dissappointed) to mouse klicks. Volker
  13. Tx hiflyer! A demo is certainly better than nothing. But what I would really really like, is to have a 'Guide' that tells me 'you must first download this software then installit; then download that software, install it,..., then call up the settings page of [e. g. FlyInside] and choose following settings; then put on your VR HMD and you will find...' That way, I could know that I did everything in the right order (if one is advisable) and installed the right software using the right settings. Instead of finding out all by myself by trial-and-error. There is enough of that, still, with P3D Volker
  14. can anyone point me to a spot/forum, where the complete(!) installation and configuration procedure for Oculus, FlyInside, vorpX(if needed) and everything else that is needed in order to use the Rift in P3D! I have looked everywhere (that I know) in order not to have to re-invent the wheel, make all the mistakes, suffer all the disappointments,... that others have gone through. BTW; I cannot understand that software companies who live from users using their products, do not give extensive(!) support in setting up all the correct steps for a successful installation!... Volker (longtime P3D and FSX user, frustrated by the repeated need to do my own research)
×
×
  • Create New...