|
|
Post by johng on Sept 15, 2018 16:53:54 GMT
I'm having an issue with the main panel views. When I look fwd left and fwd right (num keys 7 & 9) I still see the main panel. The outside view changes correctly but the main panel bmp is still there. Anyone else have this issue? How can I fix it?
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 15, 2018 17:06:50 GMT
OK .... listen up good .... "FSX USERS ONLY".
This particular issue affects "FSX USERS ONLY".
PLEASE NOTE .... FS2004 users "ARE NOT" affected by this particular issue and need not do anything at all.I´ve just finished discussing this report with our development team .... and here´s their conslusion and recommended fix .... The issue can be fixed by editing the PANEL.CFG file (again "FSX" users only) by editing the following current PANEL.CFG stated "VIEWS" section lines .... "VIEWS SECTION" VIEW_FORWARD_RIGHT_DIR=1.0, 0.0, 40.0 "PASSENGERS PERSPECTIVE VIEW-LEFT SECTION" VIEW_FORWARD_LEFT_DIR=1.0, 0.0, 320.0 .... to read precisely as follows .... "VIEWS SECTION"
VIEW_FORWARD_RIGHT_DIR=1.0, 0.0, 45.0
"PASSENGERS PERSPECTIVE VIEW-LEFT SECTION"
VIEW_FORWARD_LEFT_DIR=1.0, 0.0, 315.0"DO NOT" apply any other edits !!!! The main panel will/should then no longer be displayed when the FORWARD LEFT and FORWARD RIGHT views are selected. A panel reupload is entirely out of the question at the moment .... I´m sorry  To fix this issue once and for all may require a separate "FSX" version PANEL.CFG file being added to each Panel folder anyway .... so .... "FSX" users are going to have to apply the above recommended fix themselves .... until it´s possible for us to upload the permanent solution .... but .... which "might not" be practical for us to attend to until much later on. Once again .... FS2004 users are unaffected by this issue and need not do anything at all.Mark C BOG/CO
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 15, 2018 17:09:03 GMT
"JOHNG" .... I want you to apply the above recommended "FSX" fixes to the stated "VIEWS" sections of your DC-10 PANEL.CFG file .... and confirm this has fixed your particular issue in FSX.
Mark C
BOG/CO
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 16, 2018 17:34:21 GMT
OK folks .... listen up once more please ....
Again this applies to "FSX" users of our DC-10 panels only .... if you´re an FS2004 user of our new DC-10 panels then don´t bother reading this information as none of it applies to you  As I mentioned yesterday .... to fix this unanticipated main panel instrusion into "FORWARD LEFT" and "FORWARD RIGHT" main panel views is going to require "a separate FSX specific" PANEL.CFG file to be included within each Panel folder .... simply because it´s now become aparent that both FS2004 and FSX require different "VIEWS" specific data. This "was not" apparent to us earlier .... however .... this omission (for FSX) "DOES NOT" affect flight performance or functionality of any of the panel systems feaured among any of our new DC-10 simulations .... and just to reiterate (for clarity only) FS2004 users are "entirely unaffected". NOW THEN .... here´s the inconvenience folks .... both for us and ultimately yourselves too .... We´ve a fair bit scheduled for release this month and that´s already been planned for quite a while, and is currently in progress, in terms of intended new file uploads .... there´s "a limit" to what we can impose upon ourselves to upload during any session I don´t think we´re going to be able to re-release all 12 panels immediately and with an additional "separate FSX specific PANEL.CFG file" included .... although having said this I´ve yet to consult internally in regard to this particular matter. The fix is simple though and has already been draughted .... it´s just time (available to us) ánd what´s already been planned thats the limiting factor to us. Although only 2 lines of the PANEL.CFG "VIEWS" data need being edited (for FSX use only) .... I´m providing (below) a complete edited/fixed "VIEWS" section .... for FSX users to replace their current DC-10 PANEL.CFG "VIEWS" section with. I feel replacing an entire CFG section is probably easier/safer (for some) folk than editing 2 individual lines of data and possibly risking inviting potential for other errors to be made in the process. All the same .... the 2 (only) corrected PANEL.CFG data lines are highlited below .... in red. Otherwise the recommended/required FSX "VIEWS" section CFG.FiLE edit/fix is as quoted below .... "DO NOT" apply any other edits. This edit will be added to the "KNOWN ISSUES" section of our DC-10 manual .... until panel a panel files reupload can be convened. That´s the best we can do folks .... for the time being given the load we all currently bare To understand what´s been been experienced by "FSX" users prior to the above referenced fix being applied .... please refer to the following illustrated disclosure .... 1. Standard Panel view forward (captain side) .... "unaffected" at all  2. Unedited "FSX" version FOWARD LEFT view .... "affected s illustrated"  3. Unedited "FSX" version FOWARD RIGHT view .... "affected s illustrated"  After applying the above referenced "FSX" (only) PANEL.CFG "VIEWS" edit/fix .... this´s what should then be seen .... 4. Standard Panel view forward (captain side) .... "unaffected" at all  5. edited "FSX" version FOWARD LEFT view .... "fixed"  6. edited "FSX" version FOWARD RIGHT view .... "fixed"  Thanks to George CARTY for providing the required edit/fix  And Thanks also to Nathan FORD for assisting with the above reference imagery Mark C BOG/CO
|
|
|
|
Post by johng on Sept 18, 2018 4:38:14 GMT
"JOHNG" .... I want you to apply the above recommended "FSX" fixes to the stated "VIEWS" sections of your DC-10 PANEL.CFG file .... and confirm this has fixed your particular issue in FSX. Mark C BOG/CO Mark, I searched the message board for this or any similar post and could not find it. I certainly didn't mean to invoke the BIG RED letters. I will try to be more diligent in my searches in the future. That being said, I've applied the changes and I will report back to you. Thank you for replying. |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 18, 2018 6:45:44 GMT
You wouldn´t have found it .... simply becaue we didn´t know this issue existed before you reported it "Relax" .... you´ve done nothing wrong Colour emphasizing matters/points of importance is my personal preference and standard procedure .... to draw attention to any particular matter I consider of importance or otherwise in need of clarification We have already received confirmation of the fix (per the above illustrations), so, provided it´s applied correctly .... you´ll be fine now. Mark C BOG/CO |
|
|
|
Post by johng on Sept 18, 2018 16:53:31 GMT
It worked like a charm. I'm an FSX user so I also changed the left rear view to 250 so I can actually "look" that way. It's interesting that the main panel BMP had a range of view. I've been editing these files to my liking, which was much easier in FS9, for a long time. I will also be editing the eyepoint view. When landing I couldn't see the the runway. Should be an easy fix also since I've had to do that with many other aircraft. I'm sure that's FSX or possibly system related. I will share that edit if anyone else has that issue and if I can get it right. Thank you Mark.
|
|
|
|
Post by canuck on Sept 18, 2018 17:37:48 GMT
Intriguing "We´ve a fair bit scheduled for release this month"
Thanks for the almost constant updating and support.
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 18, 2018 17:40:59 GMT
It´s actually George and Nathan that deserve the credit here. George developed the fis .... and Nathan confirmed that thefix worked. All I did was post the information .... but .... thanks anyway Aircraft such as the A300B, DC-10, and L-1011 .... each approach to land wih a fairly high deck angle. A 2D panel (unlike is the case with a VC type panel) "is" goung to impose view restriction by the very nature of its false perspective, but, pre-release testing confirms the approach to landing attitude of each of our DC-10´s "does not" present any visiual difficulties ....   HOWEVER .... to ensure this it´s essential that the following protocols are observed and practiced quite rigidly .... 1. Do not attempt the approach to landing with in excess of 20% total fuel remaining if flying with a full payload. A higher than desirable, or overweight landing "IS" going to cause both a an increased nose pitch attitude as well as requiring a faster aaproach to landing airsped .... only in the case of the latter the higher airspeed may not be sufficient to deal with the approach to landing attitude. 2. Do not attempt the approach to landing at less than the computed flap setting and weight determined V-REF airspeed .... or a higher than desirable, nose pitch attitude will result .... possibly even to the extent of restricting RWY visabilkity during the approach to landing. The above 2 panel images (as well as those which grace our manual and recent PR´s) were all made flying "a full payload", and with "less than 20% total fuel remaining", and also in accordance with the "calculated weight and flap setting determined V-REF airspeed" for the approach to landing. As these each reveal .... RWy visibility is quite acceptable and despite the approximately +3* (degree) AI pitch attitude during the approach to landing .... and which about right for aicraft such as the DC-10. Observe these recommendations/protocols .... and one should be perfectly fine under all circumstances Mark C BOG/CO |
|
|
|
Post by johng on Sept 19, 2018 17:31:03 GMT
Following V-speeds on auto approach, flaps 35, with less than 30% fuel and default payload, I was still not able to see the horizon. I'm sure it's just my setup. I've seen comments on other forums that elude to this same effect. I'm not worried about that at all. I made a small tweak and I'm happy. I did have to make a tweak to the radios section, NAV area. NAV1 and NAV2 1,0,0 in the aircraft.cfg. I have to say this is my favorite aircraft I've ever downloaded from this site and I've been grabbing them from here for many years. The panel is fantastic and has been worth the wait. I love going from cold and dark to flying. |
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 19, 2018 18:13:45 GMT
There shouldn´need to be any RADIOSD related editing .... everything´s working fine in so far as I´n aware/have seen and experienced it. FLAPS 50 .... is the recommended setting .... and with "less than" 20% total fuel remaining. You´re probably still too heavy .... and/or slightly slow too. FLAPS 35 .... and more than 20% total fuel may see you with higher than the recommended +3* AI pitch attitude during the final approach to landing .... assuming your hugging the recommended/computed V-REF airspeeds. Try ity out Glad you´re enjoying the 10´s though .... because that what it´s all about. Mark C BOG/CO |
|
|
|
Post by George Carty - HJG on Sept 19, 2018 18:18:53 GMT
Huh??
The Nav.1 and Nav.2 sections in the [Radios] section of the aircraft.cfg should both read 1,0,1 – setting them to 1,0,0 would break the ILS!
George
|
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Sept 19, 2018 18:28:55 GMT
YEP .... I agree with George .... and that (as George states) "IS" precisely what I hjave too .... and with absolutely no RADIO or NAV disfunctionality whatsover, so folks, "DO NOT" adjut your set/s Mark C BOG/CO |
|
|
|
Post by johng on Sept 20, 2018 18:59:50 GMT
Huh?? The Nav.1 and Nav.2 sections in the [Radios] section of the aircraft.cfg should both read 1,0,1 – setting them to 1,0,0 would break the ILS! George Until I made that tweak, the freqs on the main panel (pilot and co-pilot) could not be adjusted. I made the change and now it works just fine. I've shot ILS manually, appr only and land modes to make sure they all work and they do. I'll try switching it back to see if I've made an error somewhere but I don't think so. Thank you for your hard work on this panel. It's wonderful. |
|
|
|
Post by johng on Sept 20, 2018 19:05:55 GMT
Huh?? The Nav.1 and Nav.2 sections in the [Radios] section of the aircraft.cfg should both read 1,0,1 – setting them to 1,0,0 would break the ILS! George And now I've changed it back to your original settings and it still works...weird. Sorry for any confusion. |
|
