DirkBoehm
-
Posts
87 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by DirkBoehm
-
-
Yes I have finished race 1 with a time of 1.24 so improvement
Thanks
Mic:
Good to hear that you made it Mic.
I flew Day 1 again tonight to get you an impression how much lift simprobe should deliver. With Simprobe 3.0 (working fine Ian!) I had "Sim_Probe lift" from -2.x :embaressed: (got too far onto lee side of ridge) up to 2.5 shown by CumulusX!-Debug-window. I think we have to compare values via debug-window to be sure it isn't mixed up with a thermal or wide-spread-sink.
My time for Mifflin Day 1 yesterday 1:08 h.
Ian:
After that I tried Day 2. It's IHMO far more challenging than Day 1.
Once more I was very happy with the speach quality (BTW: Is that you? - And have you made it according to your own tutorial?).
As usual 5/5, but still one can get the idea of using a radio for communication.
Great! Congratulations for this method. :ok: :thanks:
Back to Day 2 Task:
I used the start height to fly direct over the northern high ground to its rige. Followed the rige to TP1, turned it, returned to the ridge (because I knew it was working) and ran for TP2. Unconcentrated as I was I did not leave the ridge at maximum height but still turned TP2. Still unconcentrated I had turned very hard around TP2 and lost some more altitude which resulted in too much speed and - as usual - the DG fell like a rock. I realized all that way too late. I was sure I couldn't get back to the ridge at safe altitude and therefore I returned to the airfield at TP2. Outlanded there. Day over... called my team to send the trailer. :vv:
Frustrated as I was, I went over to the bar at the airfield to get myself a beer to shorten the time and guess what: The beer was warm, the bartender unfriendly, other guests all male and not a single plane crossed my sight... should have stayed in bed. Not my day. :cry:
I'll retry if I find some time on weekend.
:whistling:
:cheers2: Dirk
-
Dear soaring freinds,
Can sombody instruct me which IP address is used for fs multyplayer and which for teamspeak2?
Hi Baron,
as Scott (sf4JC) - the fellow who hosted the server and teamspeak - wrote in another thread here, that he is busy with moving, house selling, house buying, ...
So it could be down for over a month or so. Sorry to those that have tried to use it lately, I have been so busy getting ready for the move that I haven't gotten around to turning the server on lately. I'll keep everyone posted, but I will most likely have limited access to the internet for a while after next weekend.As far as I know, there's no other S.O.A.R.-member hosted server out there. If you're running FSX, you could try FSX internal, GameSpy based multiplayer mode. On Saturday evening / night (GMT) there most probably will be a session called "Gliding....", "Soaring..." or "Segelfliegen..." hosted by a guy called Mathias. His sessions are usually full of international pilots flying gliders/motorgliders and great fun. Ther wont's be a flight plan or race usually, but feel free to just talking with the other guys (via FSX) and organize one yourself if you want one.
Try this for multiplayer fun as long as Scott is busy dealing with real life issues.
If you're flying FS9... I don't have any alternative for you. I never had FS9.
:cheers2: Dirk.
-
Hi Mic,
that sounds really good - this far.
With Sim_Probe and Auto_Thermals both showing "green" and default CumulusX! settings I was able to fly the complete way forth and back with lift coming from the ridge from start heading to south (the ridge where the 1st TP is at the end).
How strong it was? I don't remember but I was gliding with about 90kn for maintaining my altitude (iirc).
I'm sorry that I can't hand you over more detailed information but my FSX-computer started to show me a black screen with a nice bright white moving mouse pointer... nothing more nothing less... I'm a bit p#*~ off and really afraid I could loose the data of the last weeks
And last but not least: no more flying for me till problem solved :cry:
-
I am having trouble getting any userable lift of the ridges.
The best height from thermals is 5k ft.
The ridge lift is very minimal I get a couple of beeps but nothing userable. or any large area. I position myself on the top of the ridge and to the windward side only hundreds of feet above. Even very low on the trees I get maybe equal lift to sink and maintain height for short periods.
I have got to the half way point but takes me 1 hour. I cannot tget to the next ridge and find any ridge lift.
I am using the default cumulus x setup
Any help appreciated
Have you looked at Cumulus Debug Window? Sounds like if there was no Sim_Probe lift at all. Please check if Sim_Probe section on Cumulus main window is green and then the apropriate section in the debug window.
BTW: Which Mission do you fly?
:cheers2: Dirk.
-
Actually not, because there was not enough time. Two full days of driving back home 1900 km over the alps. But in the beginning I saw a trailer from Romania driving in that direction, compliments!
Cheers, Peter
950km a day? uh oh. Sounds really bad. Hope you still could preserve some impressions from your vacation and didn't loose all energy on route?
BTW: Stop by for a coffee break next time. You must have been really close after about 300km (two weeks ago) or after 1600km on your way back home
We'll head north in august, stay at north sea for a while and then will take the long route back via the Netherlands, Belgium and probably Luxemburg. Exact tracks aren't set yet. I really need some days off to defrag my HDD (say: brain). Just even thinking about vacation helps to get through my days.
:winks:
-
... that's what you really deserved (imho at least) after the CumulusX! development.
BTW: Did you stop at Rieti on your way back and brought us some nice pics? :clapping:
-
There's a bug in that mission recording a good landing after passing through the finish - the 'success' area is misaligned. I can't remember where the area actually is - it's around the airfield somewhere.
Ian
...and if you have any addon-mesh installed: Don't land at all... you can't reach the success area anymore. Sad but true.
:cheers2: Dirk
-
:yahoo:
Hi Ian,
Tonight I was rocking the mifflin ridges... Day 1 task. Regretfully still with Sim_Probe2.0 to be comperative.
Finish time 1:05:04 :pilot:
My impression was: Pretty easy task if you stay close to those ridges.
Off to day 2 with sim probe 3.0 the next days (hopefully).
Blue side up,
Dirk.
-
Look for this settable variable in the SDK
PLANE BANK DEGREES
Hmmm... that's what i tried. but it seems as if FSX looses this for the next simulation step. perhaps i'll try to set it every step till glider reaches some defined speed. We'll see.
From the cockpit cable and parachute are only visible until few seconds after take off. Later on it disappears below the rim of the canopy. The cable is hardly visible at all (different from aerotow) because it's much thinner. Consider to show the (animated) stretched parachute only.cheers,
Peter
I think Scott thought about outside views... But this will presumably one of those steps i'll plan for Ver. 2.5 or higher.
-
How's it coming along Dirk? I had a thought today of watching (and remembering) a radio control aircraft winch at work, and how awsome it would be to be able to see the actual tow line at work from launch point in FSX. For those using FSX for R/C simulation, that would be an incredible addition. Do you or anyone know if this can be possible in FSX?
Scott
Hi Scott, hi all,
it's constantly improving, but very slowly - I have to admit that. The last few weeks I had more work for the job I get paid for than I could stand. I think I (with the help of Peter - Thank you again Peter) have solved my major problem (transfering the "world" coordinates into the (settable) system with the aircraft as reference point).
Last tests on this issue will be done tonight.
Follwing steps will be:
- implement rope/cable (still don't know what's correct english term) sagging again... dependant of material this time
- Calculating the actual force by torque and revs of winch engine, probably adjustable (we'll see)
With this two major parts done, all of you guys will get a beta version from me, well, those of you who are interested in testing the beta, at least.
Further steps will be:
- comfortable user interface
- two or three special features
BTW: Anyone got an idea about how to keep the plane parallel to ground (to simulate the guy running next to plane keeping wings leveled)?
Scott: As for the rope, I don't have any idea yet. I think what you would need is an animated object - no further idea. I'll think about this one after start procedure is authentical. Hope you don't mind.
:cheers2: Dirk.
-
I *might* see if I can do something to help out... the glider's been a long time in development so it can't be that much of a rush. I actually own a C3, the predecessor to the C4 - they're excellent pieces of kit with a very good user interface.
Hi Ian,
sad to read that you're not really planning to do it - I'm sure you would have been the right one to develop the C4. As I'm in steady contact with the developer I know about the problems that caused the project on hold. Need more information, just ask (I could even tell you the range of your reward). If you change your mind, just let me know. I'll hand you over all contact information you'll need.
Creating the C4 shouldn't be that big a deal (although I'm not really planning on doing it) because I'm assuming they'd skip all the complexity of computer setup. I reckon there are two major hassle factors:1) unless you have CumulusX the vario audio is uncompensated which is a complete waste of time
I'm not sure about this one. As far as I got with my research, you could calculate a complete new netto-vario-gauge without touching CumulusX!, or am I wrong? My Idea was to calculate sink/lift by using static and dynamic preassures which i could get from altimeter and by recalculate dynamic preassures from ASI. Does this idea lacks of something?
2) the C4 can calculate final glides around multiple waypoints, but XML gauges can't access the flight plan, so this feature realistically would have to be missing unless the gauge was in C/C++ and the code read the actual .PLN file which would be a ridiculous amount of hassle for a simple function. Actually it's worth mentioning the final glide calculation itself isn't exactly trivial, but I think that part is ok in my NETTO vario now.That's one of the two points why i dropped thinking about doing it myself. :winks:
True, final glide calculation isn't exactly trivial but by searching for McCready one gets all information, ready formulas and more.
The other bits of the glide calculator - display volts, outside temp, etc are trivial.Ian
Full ACK.
We'll have to see how this odysse continues - or if it continues. The whole story really is sad but true.
:cheers2: Dirk
-
Hi Ian,
that was fast - and... the result should be great effort for all kind of gliding in FSX.
You now can as well replay your flight to analyse it and improve your flying with this newly achieved information as you get closer information on where you left time in competitions.
Third possible use of those IGC-Files will be preventing cheeting in competitions.
And last but not least we could probably compare simprobe calculated ridge lift to real life flights (as far as we get weather information about those) or compare it to Condor Sim. I'll set up a flight plan for both simulators and then will make some tries, if you're interested.
I'm going to download simprobe 3.0 tonight and probably hit for a first try... if my job lets me.
Please be assured that I am really impressed about the development of sim probe. Respect! :respect:
:cheers2: Dirk
-
Gents, I got to tell you this project is currently paused. The reason is simple, the developer who we hired to build the main flight computer (the complex gauge that tells the pilot in great detail what to do) could not deliver. So right now I am looking for a new developer to do this. This gauge was one of the main features and absolutely needed for the high end glider add-on we were planning.
Both Aerosoft and the main developer Joachim are sad about this delay, certainly as we can't plan a release now. When there is news we';ll let you know.
Hi Mathijs,
you're just kidding, aren't you? Please tell us that this is just a bad kind of humor and this doesn't happen... well... not again!
With this new message in mind I wish I would be the reason for the delay.
Cheers,
Dirk.
-
Hi Ian,
this is great news!
ad. 1):
should be a good feature for us, helping to improve training of flight tracks (e.g. answering the question "would it have been better to head over for the ridge, even with the longer way to fly or is it better direct with thermals" ... just fly it twice and compare). I'm really looking forward to it.
ad. 2):
Impressive. That's truely gonna help with inflight decisions.
Keep up your good work Ian and... take your time, we can wait if that improves the product :thanks: :respect:
:cheers2: Dirk.
-
Welp, I've got some results, but not done yet. There were a total of only 5 pilots. The most flying at one time was 3. I forgot to post where to put an individuals IGC file if they had one, so that didn't get done. Preliminary results might show me as the winner of the contest course at 50min13sec. I originally got a time of 35min53sec, but I think I had stronger wind at the time.
Aircraft flown throughout the day were...
Schweizer 2-32 Sailplane
Stemme S10 Motorglider
Flight1_Cessna_152 1
DG808S
Schleicher ASW-28 (LX/N6LX) fs9 0.0
Schleicher ASG 29-18 MOTOR GLIDER
Duo Discus X Front #3n1
sf4JC
Hi Scott,
sad to hear this news. Perhaps we should advertise any further event (if you still got the mood and energy for a second one) longer and on more web sites/boards...
I promise to try to participate next time.
:cheers2: Dirk
-
Hi Scott,
first: I really appreciate your work and imho you do a great job with this event. Selecting an area, creating a task, painting, setting up the server, promoting the event... I must admit that I'm sure there was even more work you did (or will do) and that I forgot about to mention.
Great! :respect:
second: I'd really love to join this event - but unfortunaltely I won't. No. Cut out the "un" from "unfortunately". I'll be on holiday in Spain. :yahoo:
I really hope that the event will be successful and that it won't be the last one.
:cheers2: Dirk
-
Do you have some weather tool installed, e.g. Active Sky, which creates its own weather settings, or perhaps FSUIPC?
regards,
Peter
Hi Folks, (especially Peter),
Just to get you an idea about CumulusX! and possible interference with other weather tools:
I have not encountered any problems yet running FSX@AccelerationPack-SP2, Vista, DX10 Preview-Mode CumulusX!, SimProbe AND ActiveSkyX !
...and I played around with settings of all my FSX-tools. Seems as if it runs okay with Active Sky X.
:cheers2: Dirk
-
Hi Ian,
as I got frustrated by simconnect again this weekend, I tried Austrian Day 3. I'm imressed. Thank you Ian for those other competitors. On some stage (mostly the runs to TP1 and TP2 I was just watching the other gliders out there and completely forgot to watch my vario and my speed (as usual I had to turn off sound for not upsetting my wife and get some hot meals the next days)... well, to sum it up: I finished. Slow, but happy. That was really funny. WAY better then Day2 and much more challenging.
I was that happy that yesterday I had to travel to Zell again for Day4. The task is great and I'm very happy with the competitor's reward. But... where have all my new friends gone? I really liked those guys. Hope that they're allright? :winks:
My conclusion for you: You got better each mission created and I can't wait to find some time for the Mifflin competition.
:cheers2: Dirk.
-
Sorry Ian,
as Scott, I've been busy last weeks (as you probably know) but - nevertheless - I've started a first try on your soaring missions. Shame on me, I haven't noticed them before.
I know that it seems to us "creatives" that critics is the only feedback you get (if any) and how frustrating this can be...
Well, back to your missions.
As stated, it's been my first try. I've just finished Austrian Soaring Day 2 in 1:15:xx and must admit that i have had a lot of fun. I got myself into big trouble at turnpoint 1 but just while heading for a field to landing out I found lift that got me back to race.
Well done Ian! :respect:
Single point for critics: No reward? That rewarding system of FSX is one of the most challanging features of the mission system. Hitting a single mission over and over again, to find hidden rewards or simply to get the better ones... I love it.
Just one point kind of irritated me at the beginning. In the mission briefing I was told <Your callsign is "Zulu Hotel." > and in flight I found myself flying with competitors callsign "YN".
Perhaps you could need some beta testers for avoiding those minor errors? :whistling:
The next days - after falling into the next simconnect-frustration, I'll head for Day 3 ... and continue this thread - I promise.
:cheers2: Dirk.
-
Endurance soaring flights are no more recorded since the late 50ies, when they stopped at somewhat of 56 hrs. The FAI decided, that further records are no longer achieved through airman-ship, rather than through coffee. :yahoo:
Cheers,
Peter
Hey pals,
:java: won't be the problem for us, will it? :whistling: As we can exit our planes in 4000ft, run to the kitchen, setup a fresh dosis, pit stop by the toilet and then climb back into the aircraft at 3500ft
But as long as we're talking about a multiplayer event, I have other things to concern about.
Don't know if this is an issue outside Germany, but here we're usually disconnected by force after at least 24h online-time. Plus: If one's unlucky he even gets a new IP from his ISP. Any ideas how to get around beeing disconnected in flight? Peter?
Another issue I see is: Which planes will be allowed?
I think it should be reglemented somehow. To get visual information about your competitors (e.g. who's that one in front of me, can I keep up his speed, etc.) it would be great to see ones plane as the type it is.
I think it the number of planes to choose would be big enough if we limit them to Wolfgang's gliders, those standard planes of FS9+X and perhaps two or three additional ones.
:cheers2: Dirk.
-
Gee, I made the same experience.
BTW, once you have set up the automatic sending of data, you can give up your own local timer loop, if you trigger all the processing through the callback routine. CumulusX! does not have timers at all, rather uses events from FSX only (and from the GUI, of course).
You have mail on that one... hopefully
The guys seem pampered with perfect conditions, usually? My club is flying in the Eifel region and we did already training camps where we had to wipe the snow from the wings between the flights (and from the tents, btw). Though, this was 25 years ago.
Yeah... today my wife reported (she used to fly there ten years ago - until she grounded herself before the doctor did) that if there was the slightest possibility of rain they kept their doors shut - even if the rain was expected on another continent... or that was more or less how it felt for the students.
I'll try to get myself up somewhere else. Enough clubs around here, so I still hope one of them will let me do my researchs :pilot:
It is. Did you fail in sending me a message?
Cheers,
Peter
Hope you got one tonight?
:cheers2: Dirk
-
[snipped the code above]
This sends fresh data automatically to your registered handler for the sim object data. Though not absolutoely necessary in your case you may also consider some fallback code, most likely something like finalising your winch function, when the user switches away from normal sim operation, say to slewing or to changing the airport and the like. For detecting this you should register callbacks to system events as sim start and sim stop, slew on/off, or dialog mode.
best regards,
Peter
Hi Peter,
thank you very much for this explanation (it's more of a verification since I played around with some test-lines tonight... till 2:00 in the morning).
I've had a classical CKI-error (Chair Keyboard Interface), which was the reason for me to ask: If one doesn't use different threads, either the timer ticks or the Win32-message reader part would run... never both :nono: :whistle3:
So I first got new information every simconnect message was recieved but didn't got my form updated (I'm doing that in a timer-ticks-event) and in my second try I got my form updated with old values cause I got my code ticking that timer... :not_i:
In the evening i'll go ahead with coding and most possibly split my tasks into different threads by tonight.
I'll report my efforts. And most likely the next questions as well.
Fallback, error handling etc. will surely follow but - as usual - is of minor priority for my pre-alpha versions
:thanks: Dirk.
BTW: I tried to get myself into a glider the last two weekends but it seems as our local club guys won't fly until thermal lift can carry their hangar doors :ok:
Hope to find another club that uses a winch next weekend.
PS: Is the email adress I got from you still correct?
-
Thanks Dirk, and yea, I've decided not to worry about cheating since it's going to be a fun fly. I've run into another possible problem with lift or aircraft flight dynamics between sims. I recorded a flight in FSX with the FS Recorder and tried to follow the flight in FS2004, and just couldn't keep the rate of climb and even the altitude for that matter. So that might be another advantage FSX has over FS2004, but I need to run some more tests. Also, I think I may be still running an older version of the aircraft in FS2004, so I'm going to update that to see if that is possibly my problem.
sf4JC
Hello again Scott,
I think I could perfectly live with two race "classes" (is classes correct here?). I would be happy if we just all fly together and then compare our result with the competitors which used the same Flightsim for the race.
Just my 50 cents.
:cheers2: Dirk
-
Hello everyone, (I assume it's especially for Ian and Peter, so a special Hi to you both :help: )
I hope you can help me out. Perhaps I'll answer my own question after a while as often it helps to just talk about those problems but as long as I don't do it here, I'm stuck.
1) Introduction
2) Project status
3) Problem description & questions
4) Planned steps
5) General comments
1) Introduction
I'm coding a winch launch tool. (Hope it's not too early to come out with this secret.) I'm quite used to coding - especially VisualBasic - but very new to game addon programming. The winch will be my first addon, to be honest.
2) Project status
My project is set up in VB, I referenced simconnect and the communication works. I learned how to read out simconnect variables, how to create objects and how to set variables. No problems so far. My winch is positioned and created as an object (a standard fuel truck actually) at 1000 meters away from the user plane in direction of plane's heading on the ground. I calculate distance and direction between those two objects and the results are reasonable. I vectorise the force in the plane coordinate system into three components (X, Y, Z) and calculate accelerations - regarding the rope/cable/wire (what's that thing called correctly in english?) sagging. With the help of a timer (counting milliseconds between one "SetDataOnSimObject" and the other) I get the speeds, which to set for the variables "BODY VELOCITY .." with the following SetDataOnSimObject-step. Summing up: My plane moves in the direction it's supposed to be accelerated. :yahoo:
3) Problem description & questions
While I SetDataOnSimobject in a loop (start loop, calulate new velocities, setData, go back to start loop) my plane moves fluently and looks fine. As I need new position of the plane (to calculate distance and direction) to the winch each step I added a data-request and with the onRecieve-event I calculate the new speeds and set them... then I call a new data-request and so on. The effect is that my plane is just trembling - it's more of a hopping, don't really know how to describe - in the direction of the winch. I guess that the plane accelerates, then - before the next data-request is handled by simconnect - the ground friction is breaking the plane down to Zero movement and the velocity to what I add the new calculated Speed-Delta is Zero. This could be an explanation why my plane doesn't move correctly, but regretfully I didn't have the time to proof this yet. :whistling: :beatcomputer:
What I didn't understand (yet) is:
Do I have to "update" my RecieveDataByType-structures or is it updated automatically after registering it once and adding a handler for the recieve-event? If it's not updated automatically, what would be a useful interval to request new data? :unknw:
Would it be better to set the "BODY ACCELERATION .." variables directly? That would mean a less of calculation to be done.
4) Planned steps
The next steps after solving the problem above will be: Calculate the correct forces with some function looking aproximately like a rev/torque-curve of a truck-diesel engine. Then I'll add some abort parameters (as for rope break, overload of predetermined breaking point, user action: tow release). Following action will be adding of error handling. Then "Going Beta" - preferably end of may (hope it won't be may 2009 :whistling: ).
5) General comments
Special Thanks go to Peter "Funky" as he got me started, handed me over some very helpful material and answered a lot of stupid beginner's questions.
Same to Ian for publishing his source code... that helped a lot.
If you need any additional information, please don't hesitate to ask here - or via email if you need me to send you an example. My email address is dirk (dot) boehm (at) gmx (dot) de
Hope one can help.
:cheers2: Dirk.
Oi!
in Missions
Posted
Ian, there's something odd for Day 2.
In the Overview there is written "Note there is a special airspace restriction across the whole area to 7500 feet".
The Details page tells me "the TASK AREA height limit of 9000 feet MSL".
I'll stay under 7500 but perhaps you'd like to fix that point.
Is it only me reading those instructions properly?