TASCHMANN

Oswald was arrested for murdering a Dallas police officer and the President of the United States. 

He is in custody for about 24 hours during which time he is questioned intermittently by many different law enforcement personnel.

No one records a single word he says during that time.

I have always wondered why.

On 11/3/2023 at 9:26 AM, lwt1971 said:

But the plan is for many years to come. At least a handful. Let's put it that way. That's probably a safe way to say it.

Jorg always uses many many words to say absolutely nothing.

One thing seems to be clear: ever since "The Announcement" development of and for MSFS has come to a screeching, grinding halt.

Why can't they just, for once, drop the BS and be straight with the community.

T

14 hours ago, STK said:

The Development Roadmap has been updated to reflect this change.

That "update" occurred on the day the Local Legend was to be released.  Last week the "Development Roadmap" showed the delay for SU13 but still listed for September 21 as the day for the Local Legend.

My question, and I  ask this because I am genuinely curious, is Why have something called a Development Roadmap when it is always outdated and contains completely inacccurate information?  Of what  possible use could that be to anyone?

It creates the appearance of keeping the community informed when, in fact, is does exactly the opposite.

Any word on Local legend 13 which, according to the Development Roadmap, was to be released today along with its video?

Why does the "Development Update" published today bear the date of July 6,2023?  It is also current as of two and a half months ago.  

Can it be that someone at Asobo is not checking their work before it is released?  Is this the extent of quality assurance we can continue to expect going forward?

Thanks.  I will try these suggestions and report back.

1 hour ago, Lorby_SI said:

would need to see the actual code to believe that... There are rare occasions where that is indeed the case though. 

Is that the ex-MilViz model?

Yes it is the former Milviz model.  I couldn't believe it myself until it was verified by the developer on the MSFS site. https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/release-milviz-corsair-for-msfs/374413/1790  See question by SlideRule4848 and responses.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding something?

I have always found AAO to be essential to my enjoyment of MSFS.  I can't imagine flying without it. 

My question:  I have an addon [Blackbird FG-1d Corsair] in which several essential commands, e.g. Tail Hook, are not mappable to keyboard or any button or axis.  According to the developer, they are only operable by using the mouse.

Is it possible using AAO to convert mouse movements and clicks to events that are mappable to a joystick? 

This is a beautiful addon with one very large drawback.  There have been quite a few requests for Blackbird to let us know how to bind some of the important controls.  I hope they do so.  It seems strange to have sophisticated systems without any means to control them.

Use of the mouse in VR is extremely difficult and a real immersion killer.  For example, if you are using your right hand for the stick it is almost impossible to work the following important controls using your left hand on the mouse:

oil cooler

intercooler

supercharger

fuel tank selector

hydraulic hand pump

tail hook

engine primer

engine starter

If these controls were bindable, the Corsair would be among the best planes IMHO in MSFS.

I really hope we hear from Blackbird on this question of binding soon.

It seems very clear that MSFS of whichever iteration is about exalting novelty over quality.  We've had a lot more of the former and not nearly enough of the latter with this project since the beginning.  I see no reason to expect anything different in the time ahead.

As just a single (yet fundamental) example, this program still does not launch reliably and often requires a reboot of the sim, or Windows or both just to begin using it.

Let the gamers have it.  I quite sincerely hope they enjoy it.  After all it was always designed for them.  There is a serious flight simulator available to those of us who want one.

This is really a first rate, and sorely needed, mod.  The only deep system modeling of a radial engine twin that I know of.

My question:
I was able to map the *position* of the primer knob (left right and center) using the parameter listed in the documentation.  However I have not yet been able to find the parameter to map the actual *pulling * of the primer control.  

Does anyone have any advice regarding this?  I am using Axis and Ohs.

Just to let you know.  I made both of the changes that you suggested and, of course, the axis works perfectly now on the 3 way switch. 

Great example for other developers to follow of first rate support for a first rate product!

Thanks

Thanks for the reply.  In answer to your question, I guess I misunderstood section 3.6.5 of the documentation.  Although I enjoy AAO tremendously as it adds a great deal of depth and enjoyment to MSFS, I have very little understanding of programming concepts and, at age 75, I suspect my mind is not as sharp as it once was .  I do understand how I made a fundamental error in the "Axis min" and "Axis max".

I will continue to work on the axis assignment in light of the things you have pointed out and report back.

Once again thanks for writing a great program and for your help thus far.

Thanks for a tremendously useful [read essential] program for MSFS. 

I am having trouble understanding the directions in the manual for assigning an axis to a three position switch.  The documentation for the plane lists the following commands:

Starter selector: (Left-Center-right)
CARVAR_SW_STARTER_LR (LVAR) - (0-1-2)

In an effort to set the left position, I have made the following entries:

              Enter Variable: L:CARVAR_SW_Starter_LR, 0   [I manually added the comma, space and 0 as suggested in the documentation]

               Axis min: 0      Axis max: 1

              Update value: “on change”  “float” are checked

              Device: Thrustmaster throttle

              Move Joystick axis:  Slider 0

              Input Ranges:   Left margin: 47%           Center: 73%

                                           Right margin: 0%           Deadzone: 9%

The switch does not move in the sim when I move the slider axis.  One or more of my entries is obviously wrong.  I just don’t know how to fix it.

Any help or suggestions on how to set the left, center and right positions for the switch using this axis would be very welcome.

Thanks

10 hours ago, eslader said:

Beyond that, it usually only says the flight dynamics were tested by a real pilot.  It doesn't usually say anything about the real pilot's evaluation.

Your right,  It doesn't.  Since the real b314 had its last flight in 1948 (75 years ago) I wonder who the B314 pilot is who tested these flight dynamics.  He's at least 105 years old.😄

57 minutes ago, PILOT'S said:

It's a hard argument to win you know, on the left side you have the crowd shouting - release it already, we're tired of waiting. On the other side are those that want a 100% complete and finished product. If for now we are only able to please the crowd on the left side, so be it, pleasing everybody in any case seems dare near impossible.

Jerome

It's hardly an argument, it is just the case that you have released an aircraft where all 4 engines can run vigorously when all fuel supply to the engines is shut off.  Perhaps you could tell us how something like this can happen.  Secondly if ever there was a plane designed for long range flying it is the B314 and yet it is released without a fully working gyropilot.   The P3D model took over two years before it was sufficiently patched to be usable.

Yes, there are many "Early Access" releases out there and there are some companies that have a history of following through...and some that don't.

9 minutes ago, PILOT'S said:

Could you elaborate on the it in "never having implemented it in the prior"?

Jerome

A review of the B314 for P3D forum at avsim https://www.avsim.com/forums/forum/890-pilot’s-boeing-b314-–-the-clipper/ indicates that the "final patch" wasn't released until more than two years after initial release of the plane.  The post indicates several issues that could not be fixed and is locked against any further comment from users. 

It seems that we are asked to purchase a car and a promise that "the wheels will be along later."  This is hardly acceptable from any seller but when you have a history like that of the b314 and are asking for $30, the value of that promise is a valid question for the community to consider.   As has been stated there are several first rate addons (completed) that sell for this amount.  This seems like an unfinished portover of a product that is, itself, unfinished many years after it was first announced.

3 hours ago, PILOT'S said:

that certain features are not yet fully implemented, and that there will be added functionality in the future too

The real question is when will the missing functionality be added and what  is the explanation for never having implemented it in the prior (P3D) model where it was also promised for "later"

Before buying I would suggest looking on the  forums for the P3D version of the b314 by Pilot's.  Many problems still unresolved after two years.  I bought that addon and I'm still waiting for a gyropilot to work as it should as well as many unfinished "features"

1 hour ago, pmb said:

All this lumped together drives me more and more away from the multi-sim approach to using just one sim

Your'e right about this of course.  This is exactly what I'm suggesting..one sim that is dedicated to the type of flying that is preferred by the user without being bogged down by extra code that is only required for the other.

I have always felt that it would be a good idea to  have two flight simulation programs; one for jet airliners exclusively and one for GA alone.  It seems the flight sim community is, to a great extent, divided into two groups based on this fundamental preference.  Although I am exclusively a GA enthusiast with no interest in jetliners, I know there are many whose preference is the just the opposite.

There is a world of difference between simulating the flight of a plane and simulating the programming of a plane to fly itself.  The efforts to combine both into one sim have, IMHO, been the source of unnecessary complexity and instability (bugs) in the flight sim experience.

What are the common factors between, for example, landing a Bonanza in a crosswind and a thousand mile trip in a 737.  Wouldn't dividing these simulated activities into separate programs contribute to more optimization in both ...and  tighter more reliable code? 

Such a division might enable both kinds of users to spend more time actually flying than troubleshooting.  That ratio becomes more and more extreme with each new year.

3 hours ago, Johan217 said:

I believe that is coded somewhere in the gauges files.

Thanks, I'm referring to control values like trim and throttle percentages rather than gauge readouts.  There was definitely an MSFS setting, I'm wondering if it was changed with SU10 or 11

Thanks, that site is definitely on the topic I am experiencing but it seems that in the past I would get a value readout  in the same black box with white letters than identifies the control itself.   This looked different and quite a bit simpler than the gray boxes present when "Lock" is used. 

What I'm looking for is the same readout that appears when hovering the mouse that is available in FS9, FSX, p3d and x-plane. e.g. "Elevator trim 6%"

I remember not too long ago seeing the value of a control setting being visible when the mouse was hovered over the control (e.g. “Elevator Trim 20%”) . I cannot seem to find the setting to enable this feature after SU11. Has it been done away with? If, not can someone please explain how to get this feature working?