The are numbered continuously. The first card has input 0 to 71, the next 72 to 143 and so on.
Yep, I had it configured in exactly that way. Maybe I made a small mistake because it was very late ;) Will try it again in an hour.
Printable View
The are numbered continuously. The first card has input 0 to 71, the next 72 to 143 and so on.
Yep, I had it configured in exactly that way. Maybe I made a small mistake because it was very late ;) Will try it again in an hour.
I suppressed my message because it was not in the right folder
SIOC works but I don't know what I have done :D
Now I have a lot of PERF problems. I will try to create PERF data for my aircraft now before continue testing.
You said this could take up to 3 days. So have a nice weekend! :D
Hello,
A new version again! I corrected the socket 10055 error that was quite annoying, and changed the climb law speed switching between IAS and mach, so the mach climb mach will be the good one related to the CI and not M.790 as before.
The FD roll bar should be smoother as well.
The link: http://www.jeehell.org/A320FMGS_B7.2.zip
Enjoy,
Jean Luc
Again you rock!!!
Oh and I almost forgot, those with a FDS FCU willing to try a link with my software are welcome. I toyed around with their SDK and I probably can achive good results.
So if you're interested PM or e-mail me (jeehell "at" jeehell " dot" org )
(dcutugno you already received an e-mail ;) )
And thanks Soufiane!
JeeHell
Nice :) Got that error but I thought it might be caused by my computer ;)
Just one question for PERF tool: I ran it through last night and the entire day, but it wasn't finished and there were no results. Do I have to start FMGS server or something else? And how is the FS setup? Shall I place the aircraft on a runway?
No you should only start the PERF tool. It should position the aircraft automatically as well.
Is there anything showing up in the lower page display of the PERF tool? If it's not done, maybe the data will show up at the end of the current test.
I know it's verrrryyy long, trust me I did each test several times, sometimes having a bug just before the end of the test :twisted: but it's the only way I could think of to get "accurate" data for every aircraft you wish...
JL
No, there was nothing to see... And that after approx. 21 hrs of running.
Ok then it's not normal.
What test are you running?
Can you send over the content of your PERF folder?
What aircraft are you using? (payware or free? if it's free I'll try to see if it comes from the aircraft)
PERF folder is just a copy of the iFDG folder but without files in the 2 subfolders.
Aircraft is a complete mixture and for FS9: model from CLS, flight dynamics from PSS and weight and balance from Posky.
I used the aircraft.cfg from PSS with modifications of flaps, lights and contact points due to the CLS model and of course weight and balance (from Posky).
OK for the aircraft, won't be able to test :(
What was the test: FLEX, CLB, CRZ or DES?
What's happening in FS? Maybe you could send a screenshot of FS and the PERF tool?
If the aircraft is stalling, you may try to increase the speed through FS map (in the "environement" menu).
The aircraft is not even moving :D There happens nothing ;)
I tried all 4 tests.
In FSX it works...
Hmmm ok I will add that to the manual :roll:
Sorry for your first 21hours :oops: :twisted:
But Jeehell, I have to know if you are planning to get the FS9 and want to optimize your FMGS and especially PERF tool for it, too.
Because if not, it - unfortunately - makes no sense for me to wait your updates as I cannot use it at all...
Hello,
yes I plan to make it compatible, however I don't know when it'll be so.
If you can get the perf tool to run on fsx, then I guess the profile data wont be too much different. I'll try see what i can do for the FMGS first.
If you could tell me what are the main problems exactly with fs9, i'll try see if I can fix them in the next version.
Cheers JL
Maybe I write the current aspects down why I cannot perform a complete test of your FMGS at all:
- Problem with "only push" encoders: I just own push encoders. The function that a long push is recognized as a pull would be really great.
- Right EFIS does not work if FMGS is configured with SIOC creator (you already mentioned that).
- PERF problem: Cannot get the PERF data from FS9. Don't know, if the FS9 aircraft fits with FSX. Have to try it on saturday.
- Sometimes your FMGS works with the file created by SIOC creator, sometimes not. Have to investigate it more in detail on saturday.
- Throttle problem: The throttle is recognized by your FMGS and is configured correctly. But I cannot control the thrust. If I set TOGA, N1 raises to 70 % but very slow (maybe 20 sec.). The aircraft accelerates to about 30 kts. and then N1 decreases to approx. 30 %. Have to investigate it. Maybe the problem is not caused by your FMGS.
Someone at FDS forum asked the G3 compatibility, my reply is we will test that togheter in a few days, my request to Jeehell si now that, ask to Peter D. for official reserved offsets to avoid 66C0... he will offer for free, so we can do InterfaceIt programming and don't interfere with future programs or special users setups.
Kiki: I will try to address at least the throttle and the encoders issues in next realease. I cannot guarantee any time frame nor result but I'll do my best.
Dcutugno: for the offsets we'll see later on, for the moment I believe it's ok to use the offsets I provide.
JL
Beta 8 is out, see the newest thread. This one is closed and merged with old ones.
JeeHell
Hello guys,
The newest B8 version is out : http://www.jeehell.org/A320FMGS_B8.zip
Whats new:
-FS9 compatibility should be OK (throttle issues and APU)
-Long push can recognized as a pull if your hardware does not have a pull button on the encoders
-MCDU display fully reworked. It now has the exact characteristics of the real unit: 14 lines of 23 characters, and a new font is used (Lucida Console, it should be already present on your system)
-corrected bug with DECEL disappearing
-AP heading on ILS interception is kept until localiser is actually being captured
-DES managed speed should switch to the SPD LIM now
-DES selected speed should be kept correctly
-Right EFIS can be used with SIOC now
-You can set joystick sensitivity in the AP/FBW module
-Altitude won't change when you select +/-1000ft in ALT mode.
-DME2 is now displayed on ND
-APU door takes time to open
-FD pitch bar is now smoother
(bold lines are for you Kiki ;) )
Have fun!!
:D Great :)
Never expected that this would be done so fast. Thank you :)
I will test it tomorrow.
You're lucky I could find a friend who doesn't use his FS9 anymore ;)
As for the rest, it's truly easier and much more fun than the VNAV ...
I imported the aircraft in FSX and now I am running der PERF Tool. Before I start test flying I want to have real values for my aircraft.
But I tested your FMGS yesterday eveving in a few minutes. It works with FS9 :) But I recognized some things:
- APU starts very fast. I read that realistic start up times are between 50 and 70 seconds (A318-A340), depending on environmental conditions (temperature, pressure).
- N1 of APU just reaches 99.9 % - 100 % looks better ;)
- Don't tested the cooldown of the APU but to tell you some values: An A330 APU has 100 seconds to shutdown: 15 secs of disconnecting equipment which is powered by the APU at this time and 85 secs of a real cooldown. AVAIL is still illuminated during this 100 secs.
Hello,
Well i'll go for the 100% N1 and the longer start sequence.
But for the cooldown, it'll have to wait I think, not on top of the to-do list ;)
Tell me how it goes with this new version when you have time to do heavy testing, I'm waiting for all feedback!!
Sure ;) Currently PERF tool is working. I think I will test it on saturday in my cockpit.
Take your time ;)
By the way I thought a little bit about what you can improve optically.
In my opinion the PFD needs a rework. I mean font style, size, proportions of fonts and lines, etc. The other screens, too, but mainly PFD.
Don't get it wrong: it looks great at this time. But perfect is better than great :D And with a rework on the style it would come closer to perfect :)
Well then I'll need you to be more specific on this one as I thought it was quite close to the original unit :?
Maybe if you can come up with a nice picture comparing the real thing and mine it would help to see what I need to change?
(it's not that I'm not willing to, don't get me wrong as well ;))
And as of the fonts, I think the current font is not great as it's simply Arial. But If you have any idea of a font I could use (preferentially freely distributable, or included in windows basic font package...)
For those using Flight Deck Solutions FCU hardware, I've been testing with Davide (Dcutugno) a plugin for their Glare Software which makes the FCU almost plug'n'play compatible with my software.
The link is: http://www.jeehell.org/FDS glare.zip.
The only thing to do is launch the FDS_FCU module.exe with administrator rights at least the first time you launch it (it will register the associated dll to the glare software in the registry).
After that, you just launch the FDS Glare software and the FMGS server (as well as PFD,ND, MCDU and OVHD). You won't need the FCU or the right EFIS anymore.
Please note that it does NOT make the FDS I/O boards compatible.
I would like to thank in public Jeehell for the time and effort spent on making this module for the new g3 FCU of the FDS.
It is a great job! we are just ironing out the last few thing but almost complete, free to try it and report!
Perf tool is still running to get FLEX values :D Nice to see approx. every 10 secs. a value coming out^^
Yep, I will compare them in a picture the next days. Guess it is mainly the font type and size/proportion.
Maybe I can create my own font for the FMGS.
Found some minutes :) I hope you will not hate me for my accuracy :D
But I love your project and want to support it in every way to get it perfect :)
http://www.christophpaulus.com/files/comp.jpg
- other font (maybe I can create one?)
- blue font and blue symbols have to be brighter (light blue?)
- background in tapes has to be darkened
- no white border on left side of speed and altitude tape and on bottom of heading tape
- values on speed and altitude tape have to be on the left side of the tape
- values on heading tape has to touch the bottom
- 30° values on heading tape (and on ND rose!) have to be bigger (18, 21, etc.)
- VS indicator has to be smaller
- blue triangle for selected speed has to be bigger
- bank triangle has to be smaller
- bank lines are small rectangles
- colors of artifical horizon (blue and brown) have to be darker
- the 4 yellow lines and the radio altitude in the brown part has to be really yellow
- inner vertical part of these yellow/black rectangles in artifical horizon (don't know their name) have to be longer in vertical direction
- wrong proportion of pitch angles on artifical horizon
- numbers on artifical horizon has to be bigger and the distance to the corresponding lines has to be bigger
- short lines on course tape for 5° (185°, 195°, etc.) have to be shorter (just a bit)
- I think most lines have to be thicker
- vertical line between OP DES and NAV on FMA is shorter than the others
- all FMA lines have to be positioned more to the right
Haha too late ;):lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by kikigey89
Ok I'll try to correct those graphical inconveniences. Just for my info, is that a 330 display or 320? if it's a 330 one are you sure it's identical to the 320?
As for the blue/brown of the artificial horizon, I think there are different colors depending on the DU type (older CRTs and newer LCDs for example). Maybe I'll add an option to set the RGB value of each color? What do you think of that?
For the font, we definitely need a new one ;) It has to be a true type font (.ttf format). If you agree to create one and make it freely available through my software it would be greatly appreciated!!
I could add an option to change the font as well, but I'm afraid not using a preset font might "damage" the overall rendering (i.e. texts not aligned properly, overlapping other part of the display).
Cheers,
JL
It's an A330 as I thought both are the same. But now I compared A330 to A320. The only differences are, that the FMA line of A320 is not shorter.
Second thing is that the VS tape differs completely. Your VS indicator looks more like an A330 indicator. Maybe the PFD style is depending on the age of the aircraft. Maybe newer A320 have an other style than older?
But I don't really care at this time how your VS indicator will look like ;)
I tested the PFD on 4 different TFTs and on all the colors looked the same. Are you using a CRT? RGB option would be nice.
Sure, I will try to get a good software for creating fonts.
I will inform you if there's anything new on this.
Yep, found some pictures where the A320 VS indicator look like the one of the A330.
So there are different versions of the PFD.
That's what I meant with CRT or LCD type of real unit, the LCD are the latest hardware Airbus has produced (on the A320 it is easily recognisable as the corner of the EIS screens are either round or square depending on the display technology, I don't what they did regarding the A330s?)Quote:
Originally Posted by kikigey89
I think I will change the default colors, but create the possibility to change the RGB of each color used (not that many: black, green, 2 types of blue, gray, white, yellow, red, magenta, amber, and brown I think).
As for the proportions/size I will do my best.
Tell me if you can create a font, it seems to be not that easy ?
JeeHell
My A330 is D-ALPI which was build in 2007. It has TFT screens.
Main problem is to get a freeware editor...
Hi,
unfortunately I had to cancel Perf tool after approx. 40 hours because my computer had some problems... But no problem with your software.
Perf tool takes definitely too long. After 40 hours it was at 6000 ft and I saw in the files that it increases up to 14000 ft?
I think it will be better if the tool just records every 10 degrees and every second FLEX degree. The values in-between can be created by a spline interpolation.
So it can be 5 times faster!
I found a tool for font creating and it seems that it is working properly. Maybe I can send you a first font file this evening for testing.
It won't be near to the Airbus font but it should be a test if my created font is working with your FMGS. If it works, I will start to create the real font.
Please tell me, where I can send the font!
Chris
Hi,
For the PERF problem, I know it's long but it's not exactly linear.I actually use the interval they give int he A320 FCOM. I'll see if I can easily add an accuracy setting to increase the interval between 2 measures.
For your font, you can send it to my e-mail "jeehell #at# jeehell.org"
JL