alhefner

I'm running the 7 day free trial of Simtouch Plus 2. It's a program to put instrument and control panels onto another monitor which can be either a touchscreen or not. I'm using a small monitor and the mouse. The controls are sort of static so it's OK there but it would be a lot better if it were specific to each aircraft instead of so generalized. However, the map feature is great! It incorporates Bing maps including satellite imagery. It's a moving map that is centered on your aircraft. Now, if they were to include a flight planner that used that map feature, this would be a killer application!

I never thought you were suggesting I change my handle. Nothing you posted even hinted at that. I was using it as an example. What gets people up in arms is the mandatory vs voluntary thing. Your original post indicated that you wanted it to be mandatory for people to include their first name in their signature whether they liked it or not. The mandatory aspect of it, as opposed to a request that they volunteer to do so, will always ruffle feathers. When you changed your point of view, back several posts, to giving people the option of including their first name in their signatures, I stated that such a thing was already an option should a user desire to do so.

When I am allowed to do something, it's something I think about and make a decision that's comfortable to me. When that same thing becomes a mandatory "do it or else" type of thing, my attitude about it changes since the ability to have a choice in the matter is taken from me. There is a huge difference and it really doesn't matter what the mandatory or voluntary thing happens to be. As you can see with my handle, I made a voluntary decision that I'm comfortable with by combining my first and last name. If such a handle were to be mandatory, I may not have liked it much and might have not opted to join this great forum.

Not sure how it's going to do that. Clock speed fed to the CPU is sort of a BOIS function and that's dependent on the BOIS in the motherboard. Of course, Intel could have done lots of stuff I'm not familiar with.

I posted to their forums... I was told that every issue I had was operator error by one of the support guys, including the problems with the commands not working. That was yesterday. Today, I got an email from the publisher that was in a better tone. I responded that if we could get the commands working, I would not ask for a refund.

Using runway 27 when coming in a straight path from Denver, I found I had to go up, over, and around some higher peaks to get lined up but, I made it!

I would get a better CPU cooler. The Cooler Master Seidon 120 is a decent one and will fit into most ATX cases. I'm using one on mine and it keeps the processor happy.

Well, now, that's a different thing completely Ray Proudfoot... an option, that the USER can select is certainly a good idea but then, that already exists if the user wants it... all they have to do is fill in a signature line with their name or use their real name as a handle... Oh, and I did use copy and paste and just one more click of the mouse to remove the hyperlink...

Exactly! It's a lot easier to copy and paste whatever name/handle you want to reply to than typing it. Is "Broderick" easier to type than "james493"? Is "Jedidiah" easier to type than "63joe4"? As for the "hiding" allegation.. that may be true in some instances but, so what? Some handles are made up for fun too and the person likely uses the same handle in more than one forum... My handle, "alhefner", is what I use in almost every forum I use! The exception is in a couple of outdoor and hunting related forums where I use "Renoyote". No need to go making more and more rules.

Let me start off by saying that if the program lived up to what the developer wanted it to be, according to the website, it would be GREAT! It sort of comes close in P3D but, I've had issues and no response yet from the developer about them. When flying the Lear 45, the "instructor" absolutely insists that autopilot fly the airplane from wheels up until wheels down... that's simply silly. If I connect to FSFlying School during a flight, the "instructor" may or may not properly recognize what is enabled in the aircraft and start insisting that some function or light be switched on or off...no amount of changing the switch position will change that such as "your strobe light needs to be on" when it is on already and even after repeated changing it from on to off and back will cause the switch position to register. The manual states that pressing ctrl-shft-D will put an information banner on the main screen of the flight sim...hasn't worked for me yet...at all. The manual also states that pressing ctrl-shft-X will change your flight mode back one spot...like from cruise to takeoff. That hasn't worked for me yet either. On approaches to the runway, the instructor's directions will get you onto the ground...before the runway...nose down... if you try to follow them. You'll be told not to use so much throttle even when you're already near stall speed...if you nose down a bit so you can keep your throttle position or reduce it and not stall, you are immediately told your descending too fast. If you try to use the PAPI lights ahead of you during a visual approach and you have two white and two red indicating your on the glide path, the instructor will insist that you are either too high or too low...it seems a bit random which you'll be told. It seems that the instructor refuses to recognize a plain old visual approach and is using instruments in such a no-tolerance method that a deviation of a few feet from perfect is not acceptable. In short, the program as it sits now is just too frustrating for me to want to deal with.

Yeah, I watched that demo. They have more video on youtube so, I'll watch those too. Where did you find that overlay?

Now THAT is nice! It looks good and can be used with touchscreen or mouse. If it displays and uses all the controls that are enabled in the sim, then it's really good! Basically for about $150 (basic LED monitor at about $100), a person has controls that fit each and every aircraft. With a panel made using the hardware interfaces, the user would have to reconfigure a lot of things when going from one aircraft to the next sometimes or, build custom panels for aircraft... that adds up in time and money.

Like I said...$350 is a lot more of a chunk of change RIGHT NOW and ALL AT ONCE than $31 (according to Google converter) to make a panel of switches...when I want warning lights, I'll get another board for those...when I want more switches for another panel, I'll get it... Unless GoFlight has a "pay as you go" thing where I can say "I'm only using 15 of the switches and none of the lights so, how about I only pay for that and when I use more, I'll pay for those."

Somehow, I see $349 all at once (http://www.goflightinc.com/products/gf-dio-digital-input-output-board) as a bit more expensive than $31(http://www.leobodnar.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=94&products_id=205) ... I may eventually spend $350 on boards but, they will be just the boards I want at the time instead of a combo board where I may only use 1/10 to 1/3 of it...

PERFECT! Exactly what I was looking for! I can use toggle switches or momentary contact type depending on what I desire and the airplanes call for... Thank you sir!

After flying all fat dumb and happy for a little while, I got the brilliant idea that I needed to actually learn how to operate the aircraft I was flying in simulator... big mistake! Now, I find that for "proper" operation, there are a lot of systems and subsystems with discrete switches that really do need attention before, during, and after a flight! So, I figured there must be something available from the manufacturers of controllers out there to fit the bill. There is, sort of. Saitek has panels already set up for several functions and it certainly is possible to reassign switches through FSUIPC when needed but, I still find their panels a bit limited. GoFlight has very good looking panels that are very flexible as for switch assignment but, I'm not made of $$$$$ so they are out from the start. That leaves me with designing and building my own panels if I want full flexibility and lower cost. I know there is a USB interface out there for projects like this...I have actually seen the product on the web but I can't remember what the heck it's called or where to find it! I also don't know if it will interface with FSUIPC or not. Any of the GURUs here got some good info to pass on? I'll be most appreciative!

Yeah, I'll do that before trying again... I didn't see flames but there was a whole lot of smoke!

"user\appdata\local\LockheedMartin\Prepar3d" Delete the folder named "shaders".. that is the exact one...the only one...in my installation it is the only folder in that path... This is NOT the same path as where the flight simulator PROGRAM is installed...

Not so that you would ever notice. The SSD has a device address and the files are directly addressed on them. There might be a few microseconds of difference between having it all on the same SSD or split between two or more SSD's... What slows things down is when you put a program onto a mechanical HDD where access times are determined more by rotational speed and the seek times of the heads...

Come to think of it, I copied all the P-51 aircraft over from FSX..at least I think I did. In the "Vehicles" tab, they show as a Microsoft published item.

Yep, typing in a drive letter along with a folder name will certainly work! I was unaware of the problem of using control panel uninstall... in fact, I have done it...without problems. I reinstalled and used the program key that was sent to me and all was well but, obviously other people have had problems.

OK, this is just a guess at what happened... The installer suggested an install path of C:\program files(x86)\Lockheed Martin\Prepar3d v2 or something very similar. That, of course specified the C drive and you wanted the install on the E drive so, you simply browsed to the E drive E:\ and selected that without specifying the rest of the path which should have been E:\Lockheed Martin\Prepar3d v2 That won't work well! So, I would uninstall from the control panel, delete all the files that the installer dumped onto your E drive, then do a reinstall ensuring a full path is specified. If what I'm guessing at is not what happened, then I'm lost...

It shouldn't matter which drive you chose to install it on... did the install make a "Prepar3d V2" folder?

That is very strange indeed. If you used the Prepar3d install .exe to install the program, there should be a "LOckheed Martin" folder with a sub-folder containing Prepar3d and all of it's files. What method of install did you use?

Prepar3d installation will create a folder named "Lockheed Martin" then install P3D within that folder. The few addons I have installed for P3D so far have had no problem finding, or being pointed to, that folder. If the installation of the addon asks for you to show it where your P3D installation is at, just point it to the "Lockhed Martin" folder or perhaps to the P3D folder inside it...