lostrealist

And one sunday afternoon later, I already found the solution. Maybe someone in the future will benefit if I share it here: Disabling the "Saitek Panels" option on the LINDA Setup page, and I also renamed the associated file in linda-cfg/aircraft/Default FSX for good measure. This disabled all of the default bindings and now my assignments are getting through. It works so well! ❤️ Granted, the button lights on the panel are MEL'd now and the values it reads out have nothing to do with what's set in the Q400 but this I expected. Having all the buttons work any way I want them to is more than enough to ask of LINDA I think, so let me also add a thank you for this wonderful tool and also to Capt. PERO for the many hours of work that must have gone into the Q400 profile. ❤️

Since it's been two years I'm sure the question isn't relevant to OP anymore, but just in case anyone else with the same question ends up here: On the right side of your taskbar, just left of date and time is a little icon that says your current keyboard language. "EN" for english, DE for german. You can click that and change the language back to german, this will not affect FS2Crew in any way since it has nothing to do with the voice recognition language. You have to do this every time you reboot your device or wake it up from sleep mode if the OS language is set to English, but it's a small price to pay.

Hello there you guys. I am kicking and screaming at this point over the Saitek Multi Panel which I recently added to my collection. I want to use it with the Majestic Q400 Pro, which is always a troublemaker, and it seems the default Saitek bindings are getting in my way. There is no issue at all assigning functions that the Q400 shares with default FSX inputs. This means that the AP Master, HDG and ALT buttons work fine, as does the rotary button to set the bugs. What doesn't wanna work with me is the special functions. I have the Q400 profile installed into LINDA and the assignments all in place. There is literally nothing else on this machine that would drive the Multi Panel, but still what I percieve to be its default "Plug&Play" button assignments are there. As an example, if I set the Flaps handle to "Do Nothing" (or anything else for that matter), all it will ever do is move the Flaps lever in the Sim. If I grab a default FSX tin can, the Multi Panel buttons work, even though there is literally nothing on my device that I could find that might be driving and assigning them. Either this stuff is buried really really deep or I have become the victim of a curse. I have cleared all button assignments from FSX via the Standards.xml and have a fresh FSUIPC.ini as well. The device does not even get actively recognized as a controller by FSX (or Windows) so I cannot access any key bindings for it from inside FSX at all. I have uninstalled the device via the device manager and I have painstakingly made sure there are no traces of any Saitek, SST, Logitech or MadCatz software or registry entries around. It still seems that the default Saitek assignments are overriding my LINDA, causing only the functions linked with default FSX controls to be available for my Q400. I am this close to a clean Windows reinstall on this machine and trying this from scratch but since this is already appearing like witchcraft is involved I am wary that this will only yield the same result. Does anyone have any idea what I could do? Anyone else ran into this issue? Any help would be much, much appreciated. Am I maybe missing something here? No, Spad.Next ist not an option to me, but for experiment's sake I downloaded the trial to see what that would do and that son of a gun works. With that running, I have no default bindings and all assignments made there will work fine, including special Q400 functions. I very much disagree with that developer's pricing practices though. I get it, it's a nice piece of software, but I need neither a beautiful GUI nor tons of modules and addons for other stuff that I don't use that I would be forced to buy with the complete package which is the only way to get the Q400 module, I do not like to be milked like that. There's gotta be a way to achieve the same thing with LINDA, right? All I need for a starting point is for the panel to be "dead" outside of LINDA. I tried the "old", free SPAD to supress any commands not set by LINDA, but it doesn't help either. I would be so thankful for any possible fixes for this situation. EDIT: Did some more fiddling around. The panel is now indeed "dead" without LINDA, but the problem persists, because LINDA apparently insists on sending FSX controls rather than the ones I set up. Had a look at the tracer for the trim wheel. I have it set to "AP VS PITCH UP" which should let one manipulate the AP VS and IAS setting respectively, but this is what gets executed: [EVNT] Execute Command = "FC:65615:0" [F] FSX control: 65615 param: 0 Which is, apparently, elevator trim. What am I doing wrong here?

Your personal observations and apparently conflicting data nonwithstanding, I think arguing a point that drugs in general have a more glorified image now than they did some decades ago is going to be extremely tough. And that's the thing with personal observations - I don't know what music you listen to, but pop culture references to weed were certainly there aplenty before Rap became a mainstream genre. I mean, Shakespeare liked to get high. When and where I grew up, adults thought absolutely nothing of offering children a sip of their beer. Or heck, a glass of it. I was among the many kids whom their parents occasionally sent to the store to get them a pack of cigs and the clerks thought absolutely nothing of handing an eight-year-old a pack of them. My personal view is that sensitivity to these kinds of topics as a whole has grown steadily in our society over the past decades and there seems to be a lot of data out there that shows the effects of this. Smoking is widely considered plain disgusting among teenagers and is nowhere near as common as when I was in school, where we'd meet our teachers in the "smoker's corner" and neither side batted an eye. Public advertisements for tobacco are banned completely where I live - compare this to the ads that you mentioned from the olden days. Could you imagine someone actually trying to make a positive health claim when trying to sell you a legal drug these days? Again I don't mistrust you when you tell your observations but I'm not sure you're inferring all the right conclusions from them. There is less stigma on weed as there was at the height of the (hilariously unsuccessful) war on drugs days, that's true for sure, but there is certainly not less stigma on it than there was in times before that. Whole generations before us used it as tobacco substitute. The fact that it's now practiced more openly again does not neccessarily mean it is practiced more accross the population.

I regret to inform you that at least the part of this that is not entirely speculative and mostly opinion is not correct. Marijuana usage outside of medical applications has dropped significantly since the 1990's and many legislations that have legalized recreational use are seeing a further decline especially in younger cohorts. And I'm sorry to say it but not everything they told you about the stuff in Reefer Madness is accurate either. Do not get me started on how many lives it has wrecked versus how many lives have been wrecked by the very same cold alcoholic beverages we allow ourselves after a long day at work. You're dismissing a group of people who do not share your lifestyle as a bunch of lazy, stupid welfare cases.

1. Dunno, it's not like he dials in a value that I didn't want, he just keeps turning and turning and turning... he'll set IAS 999 if I don't stop him. And it really happens a lot. But I guess it's obviously something about my specific setup then, so disregard. 2. Sounds neat! Thanks for considering it, really appreciate it.

I know this question is from a while ago, but is it possible that informing the ground crew is a requisite for him to fire 'em up that might be missed here?

Hi there! I purchased FS2Crew a few months ago, getting a lot of good use out of it for sure. Overall I'm quite happy and think it's well-done for what it is. However one thing that I've noticed is that my FO can be quite a character when it comes to turning in headings or altitudes. Thankfully you took the precaution for this with the "Cancel Last Command" line but to be quite honest, the guy messes those actions up much, much more than he gets it right in my cockpit. I have basically decided to make it SOP that the FO is not allowed to touch the AP panel, because I'm seriously talking way over half the attempts he runs away. I can live with this, as it's not uncommon anyway to have the PF in sole control of the AP when it's engaged, but I felt this might be a really extreme case that could be mended somehow? No offense, but with how bad it works at least on my end, I don't even see the point in having that functionality at all. Am I the only one whose FO's mind kinda switches to idle when he starts turning a knob? Again, it's not dramatic to me personally, just wondering. The other thing I was wondering is if there isn't a way to allow for some more customization to the tune of maybe switching checklist items around? I'm only guessing here as I have no clue but to me it seems the program is just running down a list of things and waiting for a corresponding input after certain items, or generating a certain output in the form of a setting changing in the cockpit after certain items - couldn't it be possible to give the user access to the order of these items? There's a couple of little things... I know you based these pretty much verbatim on real-life checklists of a now-defunct airline, but seeing as how different operators do things differently, this chance at adjusting some procedures a little would really put this thing over the top to make it "my" aircraft and "my" crew. Likewise any sort of opportunity at all to add my own phrases to the voice recognition would be amazing. That way a user could make little tweaks they might find useful, like not having to say "set THE logo light TO on please" but getting away with "set logo light on", like it is for the other lights... or even more meaningless stuff like "Absolutely!" when the RA asks for boarding - not that useful but again, would really add to the immersion in making it "my" thing. Either way, thank you for your work and effort on the product. I wouldn't wanna miss my FO as he is.