Jump to content

pellelil

Members
  • Content Count

    162
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

33 Excellent

2 Followers

About pellelil

  • Rank
    Developer of Flightplan Visualizer

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/forum/919-flightplan-visualizer/

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Every time I have released a new version I have noticed that there are still a few download of the old one. In this case I that estimate version 1.16 have been downloaded 10-20 times since version 1.17 was released. I am guessing that most of these are people who have just come across the version 1.16 and downloading it, not knowing there is a version 1.17. Also I can be someone who want do have some of the older flightplans, that were made obsolete (hence not included) in version 1.17. Anyway I would like to hear if any of you ever have been downgrading to a previous version and if that is the case, why?
  2. Version 1.17 have just been released, and it can be downloaded from AVSIM using this link: https://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=p3dutil&DLID=218897 Version 1.16 is a mandatory version that you must install and run prior to installing version 1.17. I urge to you to watch the video released with version 1.11 (available via the help-menu) as it tells you how you can manage your flightplans. A video explaining most of the changes in version 1.17 have also been uploaded to YouTube and link for this video is also available via the help-menu. Below is the entire list of all changes implemented in version 1.17, but the two major things is being import the new AigFp format developed by Alpha India Group and being able to create your own user-aircraft. List of changes: A big Thank You to Alex for the donation, it is appreciated ... You are actually the first one to donate, but then again I never expected to get rich writing this software ๐Ÿ™‚ Both version 1.16 and 1.17 are mandatory, so if updating from a previous version you MUST install/run both versions as outlined on the forum. Running version 1.17 will forcefully update all flightplans to the latest file-version, as version 1.18 will remove some of the backward comparability. Added support for importing flightplans from the new .aigfp file-format used by Alpha India Group. Export of flightplans (in aifp-format) is disabled for flightplans originally imported from .aigfp files, because the repaint-info is not imported from these. Beside the supplied aircraft-types contained in the ("factory") aircraft-database, users can now add their own user-aircraft, both in form of owned (flyable) 3rd party aircraft and aircraft-types (used in flightplans, or as basis for owned aircraft). Added support for Helicopters (simply created the "aircraft" with the engine-type set to "Heli"). They will be listed/treated as an "aircraft" with a specific engine-type (and in stead of a "wingspan" they have a "rotor diameter"). Many reports have been added to list "suitable" substitute aircraft based on match-score (a value between 0 and 100, where 100 is a perfect match). Likewise reports have been added to visualize repaints that you have, and those you might be "missing" for a particular aircraft/airline. In form leg-info you can now "tag" a leg by pressing the new "Tag" button. Doing so will add the leg to the new "Tagged legs" menu-item found in the "Misc" menu. This menu can contain the last 10 tagged legs (flights). Selecting any of these 10 menu-items will open the leg-info form and show the details of the tagged leg. The AIG flightplan download-form will now only pre-select flightplans with a new season or a new revision, as you have to pay attention to flightplans with status "Not installed" since the reason these are not installed can be due to airlines being defunct or have changed their names. The AIG flightplan download-form now have 2 numbers above the list-view. The first tells the number of flightplans being listed for the selected season, and the 2nd number in parentheses tells the number of checked flightplans. So choosing a season, you can simply look at the number in the parentheses to see the count of new seasons/revisions to install (without the need to scroll throgh the list). The "Defunct list" (list of all defunct airlines, as marked by AIG) that can both be displayed in the "AIG flightplan downloader" and the "Enable / disable flightplans" forms, is now both sorted by Name (first) and by ICAO (last), making it more easy to look for a particular airline. The Leg-info and Edit flightplan -forms now both list the (flightplan) sub-folder name and the name of the original imported filename (in case you need to see the version/revision number that AIG append to this filename). The same sub-foldername and original imported flightplan filename are also added in the top when generating a leg-info report. If the departure/destination airports have gates marked as favorites, or gates with comments, therse are added to the leg-info report. E.g. "Gate G47 (36.0): B744F, no-jetway", where "36.0" is the radius of the gate (in meters), and "B744F, no-jetway" is the comment. Many "behind the scene" changes were made to the Leg-info report, and more data have been added (e.g. carrier/operator-callsign, time-zone/offset, airport-size, rank and traffic-density). Added a button to the Leg-info form to show list of possible substitute aircraft, sorted by scored (based on how well these match the parameters of the original aircraft). Internally the program stores- and perform all weight-calculations in lbs, however in settings you can now choose if weights should be shown in lbs or kg. Using EOW- or MTOW- filter sub-type in the aircraft filter the specified weight will now be according to the chosen weight-unit specified in the settings form (in previous version it was fixed to be lbs). Obtaining METAR/TAF messages from the internet takes a few fractions of a second, hence the "Show as Report" button on the Leg info form, now contains an asterisk until the METAR/TAF messages have been obtained, as these would otherwise appear as "not obtained" in the generated report. So if you need these messages in the report, you should wait pressing the "Show as Report" button, until the asterisk is removed. The form for creating user-airlines now contains a "Lookup" button that lets you search for airlines, so you can check if an airline already exists before creating it as a user airline. Airlines without official iCAO/IATA-codes are sometime created with an artificial ICAO code of "---". Airlines with this ICAO-codes are no longer listed as alternatives. Reordered the two "fields" in the "Min. Rank" and "Min. Traffic-density" combo-boxes, to make it more easy reading- and picking- the correct. Improved scanning of readme-files during import (more files are excluded such as "Repaints.txt"). Changed the default size of the about-form, to make it more easy to being reading the history-text without having to first resize the form. All forms in FV have been made with a HD resolution (1920x1080) in mind. Some users are running at this resolution, but have chosen to scale the font-size to 125%. If doing so, some forms were not fully visible. Hence there is now a new setting item called "Reduced desktop". If defaults to be disabled, however once enabled some forms will be reduced in their size (e.g. the flightplan-, airline and aircraft- list-views in the Leg Search form will be more narrow, allowing the form to be fully visible). The country sub-filter no longer supports wildcards (nor partial codes), but now it accepts both 2 and 3 letter (ISO) country-codes. The filter-text will be colored red, if an invalid country-code is entered. The result-viewer now have a "Save as" button that allows you to save its content. Also an "Enable edit" check-box have been added, which puts the text-box into edit-mode, so you can change its conent (e.g. before copying to clipboard, or saving to disk). Right-clicking the main-map there is now a menu-item to show country, time-zone/offset (as a hint) at the GPS-position of the mouse-cursor. These information are downloaded from the web, hence there will be a small delay. Added more logging, to better identify which actions might have led to the program displaying an error-message. Also tweaked the log-format a bit to make it more readable. Updated all external libraries to the latest versions. Added release dates for each version in this version-history text. Fixed: If marking gates as favorites or adding comments to gates these data were not saved unless other user-data were added to the airport (e.g. marking the airport as favorite, setting rank/traffic-density, manually specifying size, taxi-in/out times, entering comments or hint-text for the airport). Fixed: If changing the ICAO-code of a user-airline, the alternative-list was not updated until next time the form was opened. The form also got a minor optimization in the process. When editing an user-airline you can now press enter in stead of clicking the "Save" button (as long as the Comments field does not have focus). Fixed: In a few cases the week-number was not calculated correctly for multi-week flightplans. Fixed: In some cases the week-day was still shown as a "name" (2 letters), even if the user had selected to display these as numbers in settings. Fixed: Aircraft/Airline search forms would not perform initial search when opening the form, if the search-text was blank. You had to enter a letter, and delete it again, before the search was performed. Fixed: Aircraft search form did not use natural-sort when sorting by name (e.g. "CRJ1000" was listed before "CRJ200"). Fixed: Setting core-affinity to a non-zero mask, and change it back to zero, it would not return to its initial state (e.g. all cores selected) until the program was re-started. Data: Updated a few airports with missing country-code and/or missing time-zone. Data: A few new aircraft were added and some aircraft were split in dedicate pax/freight-versions. Data: A few helicopters have been added. Data: Aircraft-data updated as there were still a couple of freighters with non-zero passenger-count. Also the weight constraints were updated for A LOT of aircraft. Data: Cumulative aircraft-types (such as "[32S] Airbus A318/A319/A320/A321") are now removed in many views, unless the type is in use by at least one active flightplan. Flightplans: Compared the list of flightplans bundled with FV to the list of flightplans available in AIG AIM. This meant a few flightplans were marked as defunct (and removed from the installer) and a few missing were added (primarily from 2017). Flightplans: The first Summer 2020 flightplans have been added (FedEx and UPS). Flightplans: All new/updated flightplans have been added to the installer, and all obsolete have been removed. A total of 783 active flightplans are bundled with the installer.
  3. The video for version 1.17 was uploaded last night. I suggest that you at least have a look at the first part as it shows how to make sure all of your flightplans gets updated in case you have them in multiple sub-folders. Remember that both version 1.16 and 1.17 are considered being mandatory. So if you have not yet been enabling all of your 1.16 flightplan sub-folderes you should do so prior to installing version 1.17 (when it becomes available).
  4. If you have enough free space on your C-drive, then there is no need to read this post, as it is aimed at those who need/want -to free the space occupied by Flightplan Visualizers (FV) data-files on the C-drive. Most of these data-files does not take up that much harddisk-space, however the cached map-tiles can easily take 1-2 GB of space. This tip is not only for FV, but can be used for other programs as well. E.g. I had the same issue myself with DCS (Digital Combat Simulator), where I was able to release +200 GB on my C-Drive, simply by moving my entire DCS installation from my C-drive to another drive and executing a single/simple CMD-command (didn't have to change/update any path/settings afterwards). Some of you might have a computer with either a small C-drive, or a C-drive that over the years have been filed to the point where you would like to free some space by moving the data-files of Flightplan Visualizer (FV) to another harddrive. While developing FV I designed it so I could at a later point quickly change the path to utilize another drive/folder, however I never implemented a way for you to change this path in the GUI. It would be easy to implement an entry field in the settings form for specifying this folder path, however doing so I would need to implement a function to move all the data (while the program was running), and also I would need to make the installation program aware of this new path, so when updating FV it would install the new/updated flight-plans into this new folder, in stead of using the the default data folder. In stead of implementing such a feature directly in FV, we can simply use a build-in Windows feature called "Symbolic Links" (or just "symlinks"). A symlink is a link between a "virtual" folder and a "physical" folder (you can regard it as being a special kind of a "short-cut"). Once you have made this symlink, the program (in this case Flightplan Visualizer) will simply see the virtual folder as a "normal" folder that contains the same files as those contained in the physical folder. Also it does not matter if you change the files in the virutal folder, or you chance the files in the physical folder. So this allows us to put the physical folder on the another drive, and then put the virtual folder where FV expects to find its data-files. So if putting the physical files on the D-drive, these files will only take up harddisk space on the D-drive, and on the C-drive there will only be a link, hence the files don't take any space on the C-drive (saving a file to the virtual folder, it will actually be written in the physical folder). So while you can put the physical folder anywhere, the virtual folder HAVE TO be put where FV expects to find its data: "C:\Users\[UserName]\AppData\Roaming\FlightplanVisualizer", where "[UserName]" naturally have to be replaced by your own windows user-name. Here below are the steps to go through in order to setup the symlink: Step 1: Stop FV If FV is running it MUST be closed. This will both ensure that any un-saved data will be saved, and also you will not be able to do some of the steps if FV is currently accessing some of the data-files. Step 2: Backup Before proceeding setting up this symlink, I highly recommend you make a backup of your current data-folder (using the path listed above). This will ensure that you are not loosing any data if you do something wrong in the following steps. Step 3: Move current folder Next you have to MOVE (not copy) the current FlightplanVisualizer with all its sub-folders from the C-drive to a new drive/folder. Once moved you can rename this folder to whatever you want (e.g. "FlightplanVisualizerData" or simply "FV-Data"). However the rest of this description is written as if it still have the name ("FlightplanVisualizer"), and it is put in the root of the D-drive ("D:\FlightplanVisualizer"). Naturally you can also copy the folder, and then delete it afterwards on the C-drive, but then a move is more simple. The reason you have to move (or copy+delete) the "FlightplanVisualizer" folder from the C-drive is that we cannot make the virtual folder as long as there is a physical folder with the same name at the same location. Step 4: Start command-prompt Windows does not contain any GUI for setting up a symlink, so you will need to use the CMD window. To make sure you have the rights to create the symlink, you should launch the CMD with administrator rights (e.g. in windows 10 press WIN+Q, type CMD, right-click, and choose "Run as administrator"). Step 5: Setup the symlink To setup the symlink we simply have to type in a simple command called MKLINK (short for "make link"). However do to the names of the folder in use, the command is quite lengthy. If you want to, you can simply enter MKLINK (without any parameters) and press ENTER to see a description of the various parameters this command excepts. The first parameter is the Option to specify which kind of link we want to create. Here we will use /D to create a directory symbolic link. As you can see (beside the options) the Link (virtual folder) should be entered before the Target (physical folder). If a folder-name contains a space, the folder-parameter have to be entered in double-quotes. So I suggest you do so whether or not it is necessary (just to be on the safe side). So here below is the full command to enter, be sure to replace "[UserName]" with your actual windows user-name, and use the folder name you choose to use as the last parameter, if you placed it elsewhere, or renamed it to something else than "D:\FlightplanVisualizer". Simply type the command into the CMD Prompt window, make sure the folder names are correct (first the virtual folder, then the physical folder), then press ENTER: MKLINK /D "C:\Users\[UserName]\AppData\Roaming\FlightplanVisualizer" "D:\FlightplanVisualizer" Once the command have been executed, you can open a windows explore window and navigate to the folder "C:\Users\[UserName]\AppData\Roaming". Here you will see that it contains a folder called "FlightplanVisualizer". However this folder is being displayed with a special icon, as it have been identified as a link (virtual folder). At this point you can start FV, and it will start as normal. If you in FV choose the menu-item called "Open UserData-folder" (found in the "File" menu), windows will open an explore window for the folder called "C:\Users\[UserName]\AppData\Roaming\FlightplanVisualizer\UserData". This folder will appear to contain all the files it used to contain, even though these files now in stead are contained in the physical folder on a different drive (remark that the virtual folder appeared with a different icon, however the file-icons inside this folder appears with the normal file-icons). Symbolic links are cool and can be used for many things. As written in the first paragraph symlinks can be used for other programs, like I used it to move my entire DCS installation/configuration to another drive in 2 simple steps (move files/create symlink). I have also seen examples where symlinks have been used to only move a games MOD-folder to another drive, while keeping the rest of the game on the default drive (in case you have many/large mods installed). Also to make sure you have some kind of a "backup" of your data, you could locate a physical save/data-folder on DropBox, GoogleDrive or OneDrive, and then make a symlink where the folder used to be (e.g. to have a "backup" of all your FV -data, -settings and -flightplans on DropBox). Symlinks can also be used as means for qickly switching between different configurations. Once FS2020 releases I hope there will be a tool similar to Peter Dowsons MakeRunways that will be able to scan the scenery of FS2020 and extract information regarding airports (hopefully MakeRunways will be updated for FS2020). So if I will be able to import such data, FV could be used both with P3D and FS2020. In that case a symlink could be used to change a (sym)link between a virtual UserData-folder and a physical UserData-folder for each of your different simulators (e.g. for those of you who like myself uses FV to find inspiration of which flights to fly). You can then share the Data, Flightplans, Logs, MapCache, Unzip folder between P3D and FS2020, and only have a sim specific UserData-folder (and then have batch-files that delete/re-create the symlinks, allowing you to quickly switch between different user-data folders without having to move files, or change settings). To delete a symbolic link, you simply delete the virtual folder. Deleting the virtual folder will not affect the physical folder or the files it contains. However be sure not to delete the physical folder by accident in stead, as it will then be gone. To clarify: if you have made a virtual folder, and you want to remove this virtual folder it is important that you delete the folder, and not delete the individual files within these folder. When you delete a single file in the virtual folder, that single file will also be deleted in the physical folder. However if you only delete the virtual folder, the files in the physical folder will remain ... if in doubt, make a backup of your physical folder before you delete anything ๐Ÿ™‚ In all these examples I have described symlinks for folders, but symlinks can also be created for individual files (e.g. "MKLINK c:\temp\virtual-file.txt c:\somefolder\physical-file.txt"). This could be used to quickly switch between different/individual settings-files, in stead of switching between entire data-folders. Likewise to delete the virtual file, simply delete it (the physical file will not be affected).
  5. You have a plan โ€ฆ until you make a new one ๐Ÿ™‚ I did initially not plan to include any of the load-sheet code that I have mentioned previously (the reason for why the form for creating an aircraft contains so many weight/load-fields). However while refactoring some code I began working on it anyway, as it allowed me to โ€œshape that code for the future useโ€ I had planned, and the more I wanted to test out this code, the more code was written to handle it. Its still in its early stage, and as of now only visible in the Leg-info report that can be generated from the leg-info form: As marked by the red-square a number of fields have been added to the report. In the aircraft section, you can see the max-number of passenger along with the various structural weights of the aircraft along with the load-data (passenger/luggage weights). These data are โ€œstaticโ€ and are either those I have entered for the aircraft in the (factory) database, or those data you enter for the aircraft that you create yourself. The rest of the data are dynamic/random and are randomized each time this report is generated (this will change in the future). In the first section you see the data for the random payload (passenger/luggage and cargo). The passenger-count is randomized (with a normal distribution) at the load-factor specified for the airline in use (e.g. at 89%). In this example the passenger-count have been randomized to a total of 271. The total luggage weight is simply the passenger count multiplied by the either the international- or domestic luggage weight. Beside the luggage-weight there is also a (random) weight for additional cargo. Different load-manager for different (3rd party) aircraft works in different ways, and needs different data. This is the reason I show various calculated values in the parentheses. E.g. in some load managers you only need to enter a passenger-count, in others you need to specify how many are male-, female- and child-passengers. Likewise in some you you donโ€™t need to enter the luggage weight, as it will be calculated automatically based on number of passengers, or in others you need to enter the total cargo as one value (sum of both luggage and additional cargo). If I were to fly a flight in a PMDG Boeing I would disregard all these individual fields and in stead simply enter the Zero Fuel Weight that is listed as the 4th last field in the red box, and let the PMDG FMC work out the number of passenger/weight of cargo based on this value. In order to calculate the payload, the program needs first to calculate the fuel required for the flight, as it ensures that the calculated payload will not exceed the structural limits of the aircraft (e.g, ensure the EOW + required fuel + total payload will not exceed MTOW). This fuel calculation is very basic, and should not replace more advanced fuel calculation that you might currently use. However as you can see in the next section of the report, it calculates various different fuel-weights. The next section in the report contains various calculations that lets you ensure that the structural limits of the aircraft are not exceeded by the planed payload nor fuel. The first 2 lines shows the expected weight at take-off and at landing, and the values in the parentheses shows the headroom, before these structural limits are broken. The 3rd line shows the planned Zero Fuel Weight (ZFW) along with the headroom (basically how much more fuel+payload that can still be loaded). The next two lines shows how much more payload or fuel that can be added (you canโ€™t add the total of both). The last line contain a value I normally calculate in hand before each of my flights. It shown the maximum amount of fuel that can be aboard when you land in order to not exceed MLW. The value in the parentheses shows how much fuel you need to burn/dump before landing (e.g. returning to the same airport in case of an emergency). In this case we will need to burn/dump 59632 lb of fuel before landing in order to not exceed MLW. As I said this is not how its planed to be implemented. Currently the Leg Info form have a button called SimBrief which will send much of the data to SimBrief where you can plan your flight. I plan to replace this button with a new button that will in stead open a form that contain entry fields where you can enter fuel/load-data. I will fill-out these fields with the data you now see in the report, but you will be able to change their values (or re-randomize load-out) as you see fit (e.g. you might use a more precise external fuel-calcuation tool). Once you are happy with these data, they can be sent to SimBrief, or a report can be generated in case you need to enter some of the data into another tool.
  6. Did a graph showing the difference between the real MLW (Max Landing Weight) from the aircraft-database in relation to the estimated MLW. As you can see the worst case is more than 20% "wrong" (greater than 1.2), but on average the estimated MLW is within 3% (absolute deviation) of the real MLW. As I wrote yesterday it will always be best to enter the correct weight-data (if you can obtain the data), but otherwise this estimation can be used (at least the estimated values are better than zero-values). As explained before these data are of no use at this time, but I plan to add a feature in a future version, that will be able to suggest a load-out (pax/cargo), where these data will be used, along with a few other fields (e.g. cruise fuel-burn, max passengers, load-data/factors and naturally the distance to fly). Of the the 4 different estimated values (MLW, MZFW, MPL and MFL) MLW is the "best", meaning there is the smallest deviation between the real-value and the estimated value. Estimating MZFW there are a couple more estimated values that spike above a 20% deviation, but on average the estimated MZFW falls within 5% of the real MZFW. Of the implemented estimation-methods, estimating MFL is the "worst" (least accurate). It have a couple deviations above 90%, and 3 others above 70%, but on average the estimated weights fall within 5% of the real weights. Once again: using the correct data is always best ๐Ÿ™‚
  7. We are getting closer to a release of version 1.17. Feature-wise I don't have more items planed for this version. But I still have a few more tests to carry out. Also I will have to record the video for version 1.17, and finally build the installer. So if all goes well, I hope for a release within a week or so. When you create a user aircraft you should make sure all the data including the weight-constraints are set correctly. However obtaining the correct data can be a task in itself. As a minimum you HAVE TO enter both EOW (Empty Operating Weight) and MTOW (Maximum Take-off Weight). The other weights (MLW, MZFW, MPL and MFL) can be "estimated". I say "estimated" as these cannot simply be "calculated". The weights you don't know, can be marked as estimated weights (by putting a check-mark in the "Est" check-box). After having marked them, you simply press the "Re-estimate weights" button. The program will then search through all aircraft types that have all weight data, that best match this aircraft. Using these data it will statistically analyze these data in order to estimate the values. In the screenshot below you see the data for an CRJ 700. The inserted box (outlined in red), shows the estimated weight-data (MLW, MZFW, MPL and MFL). As you can see the estimated data are naturally not equal to the real-data, but they are not that bad (at least they are better than zero values): Naturally it is always best to obtain- and enter the correct data, but as I said, it is not always that easy to find them. In the database of aircraft-types I supply with the program, there are aircraft where I have not been able to find all of the data, and there are aircraft for which I have not done much to find it (e.g. most of the military aircraft). But most (if not all) aircraft will at least have EOW and MTOW which allows you to use the estimate feature, if you don't want to dig up these data yourself. As always, if you do come across errors, or think you can assist providing missing/correct data I will be always be happy to accept it ๐Ÿ™‚
  8. First helicopter have been added ๐Ÿ™‚ FV have been made with commercial (pax/freight) aircraft in mind, but during development more GA/BizJets have been added, along with various utility and military aircraft. Now the time have finally come to helicopters. In all aspect they are handled like aircraft, with the exception that the engine-category is set to "Heli", and in stead of a "Wing-span" (Dimensions) it have a "Rotor diameter".
  9. As I have explained previously many of the data you can enter for an aircraft is currently not in use by the program, but I have various ideas for the future, that might need these. One such thing is to have the program suggest a payload (passenger/cargo) for a particular leg, and in this aspect many of the aircraft weight-fields will become needed. I have added a weight-check report that is available when you are creating/editing user-aircraft, both for owned (flyable) aircraft and aircraft-types. This simple report will look at the various weight-fields and compare the values to each other. First it will simply look for zero-values (all weights should have a valid non-zero value). Then it looks for weights that are greater than other weights, that they should not be greater than. E.g. none of the weights should be greater than Max take-off weight (MTOW). Finally it will look at compound (added) weights being greater than the structural limits of the aircraft (as entered by the weights). Of the 6 entered values the first 4 are using the "official" short-cuts (EOW, MTOW, MLW, and MZFW), whereas the last 2 are my own defined short-cuts (MPL and MFL). The first 4 all have to do with the structural limits of the aircraft, as specified by the manufacture and the qualification of the aircraft. Here is a short description of all 6 values: EOW (Empty Operating Weight): Is the operational weight of the empty aircraft. Empty means that no payload (passenger/cargo) is loaded, nor any fuel have been loaded. But normally all liquids except fuel (oil, hydraulics, water) is loaded, and so are the crew, the beverage/food for passenger and so on (basically everything except payload and fuel). MTOW (Maximum Takeoff Weight): This is the maximum allowed weight of the aircraft (all included) when it Take-off. Many aircraft are allowed to taxi at a higher weight (called MTW - Maximum Taxi Weight), but it have to reduce its weight to MTOW or below during the taxi, which it does by burning (taxi) fuel. The MTW weight is not included in the data, as it is not needed by the program. MLW (Maximum Landing Weight): In most cases MLW is less than MTOW, but for some aircraft it is the same value (MLW is never greater than MTOW). Normally this is not a problem as the aircraft is burning fuel during the flight, wich reduced the weight of the aircraft. But in case of an emergency it means that the aircraft might need to go into a holding pattern in order to dump- or burn fuel before coming back for a landing (depending on the severity of the emergency). In a serious emergency (e.g. loss of all engines) an aircraft might have to land with a higher weight than MTW, no matter if it can result in failures due to excessive structural stress. MZFW (Max Zero Fuel Weight): Is the maximum weight of the empty aircraft (EOW) + the maximum payload (passenger/cargo), but without any fuel loaded. Basically MZFW is the same as EOW+MPL. MPL (Maximum payload): This weight is the maximum weight of the payload (passenger/cargo) that the aircraft can carry. Please note that in most cases EOW+MPL+MFL will exceed MTOW, meaning you should never expect that the aircraft is able to carry ist maximum payload (MPL) and at the same time be able to carry the maximum fuel (MFL). So on very long flight (requiring lots of fuel) you might need to reduce the payload. Or said in another way, you should only expect being able to carry MPL on shorter flights with less fuel. MFL (Maximum fuel): This weight is defined by the capacity of the fuel-tanks. As written above don't except being able to carry maximum fuel and maximum payload at the same time. As visible in this example screen-shot above, 2 errors and 1 warning have been identified. The first error lists that "MLW < MZFW". MZFW should never exceed MLW as it means even if the was no fuel abort, the weight of the empty aircraft (EOW) + the maximum payload (MPL) exceeds the structural maximum allowed weight of the aircraft when it lands (MLW). The actual weight-values are listes in the parentheses, and it is obvious that 688000 (MLW) is less than 727000 (MZFW). Naturally you can not see which weight-value is "wrong" (they both might be), but at least you can see that there is a problem. The 2nd error more or less tells us the same, but in stead of looking at MZFW it uses EOW+MPL (MZFW should be EOW+MPL). When you create/edit an user-aircraft you are able to enter fuel-burn values (amount of fuel being burned per hour). Internally the program stores all weights in lbs, and fuel-burn is stored as lbs per hour. However if you have specified in settings that the program should use kg, all weights are listed in kg and fuel-burn is listed as kg per hour. If a cruise fuel-burn value have been entered, it will take this into account and generate warnings if the weights are exceeded when the aircraft is loaded with enough fuel to perform fly at cruise altitude for 40 minutes, and land with enough fuel for 20 minutes of flight at cruise. Hence a warning will be created if EOW+MPL+40 minutes of flight at cruise exceeds MTOW, or if EOW+MPL+20 minutes of flight at cruise exceeds MLW (basically you should be able to take off with MPL with enough fuel for 40 minutes of flight at cruise, and land still carrying 20 minutes of fuel at cruise). These are very basic calculations and does not take taxi/climb/descent fuel-burn into account. But still they can be used as a "rule of thumb", so you need to apply your own judgment as if there is a problem with the various weight-values (hence why they are listed as warning in stead of as errors). In this case the report lists the 3rd item as a warning, informing us that loaded with MinLandingFuel (20 minutes worth of fuel at cruise) it will exceed the landing weight. This shouldn't come as a surprise, as the two proceeding lines already tell us that even without any fuel the maximum landing weight (MLW) will be exceeded. These warnings are only possible if you have entered a fuel-burn value (the entry-field is located below the displayed report-form). If no errors are found when you press the "Check" button, the report will contain a list of the maximum amount of payload you can carry at different fuel loads (5% interval), at take-off and at landing. In the report below you can see that if you take-off with 100% fuel (11344 lb in this case), you can only carry 54.22% of max payload (which is calculated as 8607 lb of payload). If you want to take-off with a 100% payload (15875 lb), you can only carry 35.93% (4076 lb) of fuel. In the lower section of the screen-shot you can see the calculations for landing. If loaded with 100% of fuel, you can only land with 45.20% (7175 lb) of payload. If the report is made for an aircraft with a non-zero passenger count the available payload will also be calculated as an amount of passengers that can be carried on both international and domestic flights, using the values from the right side of the form (more on these below). As visible in the screen-shot above, if you want to take off with a full load of (all 66) passengers on an international flight, you can only take-off with 45% of fuel (5105 lb), in which case it leaves a headroom of 178 lb (in addition to the weight of the passengers and their luggage). In the lower section of the same report you can see that with a full load of passengers on an international flight you are able to land with 30% fuel (3403 lb), which leaves a headroom of 448 lb. Had the flight been domestic (less luggage weight) you could take-off with 50% of fuel, and land with 40% of fuel. This report can be used to give you a rough estimate of how much much fuel/payload you can carry (at take-off/landing), but these values are very easy to calculate in hand as exact values in stead of looking at 5% intervals to determine these values (e.g. max possible payload at take-off = MTOW - EOW - required fuel). The prime purpose of this section of the report is like the errors/warnings mentioned previously, to assist you to determine if the various weight-values are "correct". E.g. if you start to see many negative values, and/or you can only carry 10% of payload when the aircraft is loaded with 20% or less of fuel, I'll bet the values are not correct ๐Ÿ™‚ The fact that you might see a few negative values in the lower section (regarding landing) is not a direct sign of a problem. It is not all aircraft that are able to land without exceeding MLW with a full load of fuel even if not carrying any payload. When I am going to implement the feature to suggest a load-out for a leg I will use the airline load-factor values, which are typical in the range from 70% to 90% (based on country/region of that airline). However it is not used as a fixed value. In stead I will pick a random load-factor with a normalization around the specified load-factor. So in an airline have a load-factor at 88% there is a much higher change the load-factor for a certain leg would be set to 88% in stead of being set to 83% or 93% (but it could be anywhere in between). I have also added a report to check the load values/factors compared to MPL (maximum payload weight), however for this report it will do its calculations with a fully loaded aircraft (load factor = 100%). This report will check the passenger/luggage weights against the MPL (maximum payload). First you should perform the aircraft weight check (as described above), and adjust the aircraft-weights as needed so it does not list any errors. After you can perform the load-data check. This check is only valid for aircraft that have a usage defined as a passenger aircraft of some sorts (e.g. Passenger, Pax/Freight, Combi or GA). In all other cases (e.g. trying to perform it for a Freighter) it will simply display a message box. In the right side of the screen in the "Load values/factors" group-box, you can enter the weights for passengers (male, female and child) along with the weights for luggage (international and domestic). To the left of the "Load values/factors" group-box you find the "Passenger/Crew count" group-box where you can enter the maximum passenger count. It will then perform the check to see if a fully loaded aircraft with the heaviest passenger type (typical "male") with either none-, international- or domestic luggage exceeds MPL (maximum payload weight). Beside only testing for heaviest passenger type it will also test for a mixed type. This mixed type will be closer to what the random load-generator will select (once implemented), but as of now in this test it is defined as a fixed/mixed class with 45% being male, 45 being female and 10% being children (13 years or less). If the passenger weight of male-, female- and child-passengers have been set to the same value, the mixed type will be suppressed (as it would have the same weight the others): The load-check report in the screen-shot above have been made for an ATR 72-500 using the default passenger/luggage weights setup per aircraft. The default weights specify a male weighs 200 (lb) , a female 179 and a child 76. Likewise the default values specify international luggage weight as 44 (lb) and domestic as 33. In the edit owned aircraft form below the report-form we can see that "Max passenger count" have been set to 66 passengers. In the report 5 of the lines are listed as "Info:" and these lines inform us of the headroom (how much more payload weight can be added to the aircraft without exceeding MPL). So for instance an all male passenger load-out on a domestic flight would leave us with a headroom of 492 lb before exceeding MPL. However the 2nd last line is listed as "Warning:", and it tells us that a (fully loaded) All male passenger flight with international luggage would exceed MPL (maximum payload weight). The value 16110 is calculated as 66 * (200 + 44.093), and this exceeds MPL by 235 lb. Based on these values I would probably not change anything. The chances for a 100% fully loaded aircraft (only with male passengers) is not likely. Even a fully loaded aircraft (all seats taken) is not likely, so just with a single seat empty (200 lb for a male passenger and 44 lb for international luggage) we will not exceed MPL. Likewise the ATR 72-500 is not an aircraft with a very long range, so it is probably more used on domestic flights (lighter luggage), than being used for international flights. When I am going to implement that random load-out generator, I will try to limit the loud-out to NOT exceed MPL (by either/both reducing the passenger count or/and reduce the number of male passenger vs. female/child passengers. But still you should use this report to see if any of the values seems to be wrong. Here below is such a report that tells you that something is wrong and you should verify that data (both the aircraft weights and the passenger/luggage weights). As you can see in this report all 6 lines are listed as "Warning:". Even a mixed load-out of male/female/child passengers with no luggage would exceed MPL by 4060, and an all male load-out with international luggage would exceed MPL by 23833. So you should try to see where the problem is (perhaps "Max passenger count" is set too high, or MPL is set to low or the passenger/luggage weight are too high). The better these values are set (the less items shown in this report), the better that random load-out generator will function once implemented ๐Ÿ™‚ As written previously/elsewhere, you should set the passenger/luggage weight-values to match those of the load-manager supplied with your 3rd party aircraft (e.g. the one Aerosoft have made for their Airbusses). For PMDG I will probably just use these default values to (once implemented) calculate a random ZFW value, and then simply enter this random ZFW value into the FMC, and let the sim work out what that equate to with regard to passenger-count/cargo.
  10. I have previous shown a screen-shot of the data that can be entered for a repaint for an owned aircraft, but since I have added a couple of fields in form of a "Kind" combo-box and a "Generic" check-box. The Kind lets you choose between the values: "Special", "Current" (default value), "Outdated" and "Retro". Naturally the "Generic" check-box lets you indicate that the repaint for the selected airline is utilizing a generic repaint: The screen-shot above is for the "LOT Polish Airlines (Nordica)" repaint for the Aerosoft CRJ 900. I do not have a specific LOT repaint for the CRJ 900, but since I sometimes want to fly the LOT routes for the CRJ 900, I have chosen to use the default Bombardier repaint for the Aerosoft CRJ 900 (as visible by the comment I have entered). You might ask why you want to fill out these info (like "Installed", "Kind" and "Generic") and the answer is simple: to be able to filter on them, when you perform a leg search. Naturally it is completely up to you if you want to enter your owned aircraft and their repaints. However if you do you are able to filter on these data when you perform a leg-search, so the leg search will only contain results for the 3rd party aircraft you own, and (if you choose so) for the repaints you have for those 3rd party owned aircraft. On the Search-legs form I have moved all the "Select all/none" buttons to the top, and at the bottom (below the list-views) you find the additional controls. In the "Aircraft-types" group-box I have added quite a few controls for filtering on owned aircraft and their repaints ("FP.Registration" is always enabled as it have to do with the aircraft-registration from the flightplan and has nothing to do with owned aircraft/repaints). By default (as shown in the screenshot below) these controls are all disabled, hence when not enabled, the search will work as it did before. You have to check "Must have owned substitute" before any of the other controls becomes active: When you check the "Must have owned substitute" check-box the "Excl non-favorites" check-box and "Min-match-score" numeric-up/down controls (a long with "Must have repaint check-box) controls will be enabled. As you might recall the score is a value between 0 and 100 that tells how good a match an owned aircraft is on a specified aircraft type. e.g. a with a score of 92.323 a Boeing 777 Freighter is a good match for an MD-11F, but not a perfect match, in which case the score would be 100. Using the "Min match-score" control you can specify the minimum match-score a substitute must have, in order to be included in the result (e.g. only include matches above 90). This value defaults to 0, meaning all substitutes you have defined will be included. The "Excl non-favorites" check-box is pretty self explanatory, as if checked the result will be filtered to only include those owned aircraft you have marked as being a favorite (this is done when you add/edit an owned aircraft). E.g. my Carenado aircraft are not among my favorites (IMO: they make beautiful looking aircraft, but the quality of the avionics/systems lets much to be desired). When you check the "Must have repaint (airline)" check-box the rest of the controls becomes active ("Min-kind" combo-box, "Exclude 'use with all airlines'", "Excl. not-installed" and "Excl. generic" check-boxes). These controls allows you to filter on the repaints you have defined for your owned aircraft. For my Carenado Phenom 300 I don't have any repaints for a particular airline. In stead I only have the default generic repaints installed along with the aircraft. Hence for this owned aircraft I have simply checked the "Use with all airlines" combo-box when I added this owned aircraft. If I for some reason don't want to include these in my leg-search results, I can check the "Exclude 'use with all airlines'" combo-box. The "Min kind" combo-box lets you choose the minimum "Kind", where it defaults to the lowest "Retro" (beside retro the other values are "Outdated", "Current" and "Special", where "Special" is the highest level). So when "Retro" is selected, it will not filter on "Kind" at all. The last two check-boxes are pretty self explanatory, and lets you exclude repaints that are marked as currently not installed, and those marked as generic (e.g. the generic Bombardier repaint I have chosen to use with my CRJ 900 for "LOT Polish Airlines (Nordica)". So if I want to limit my leg-search to only include results for my favorite owned aircraft using the repaints I have currently installed, and exclude those that are not marked as "use with all airlines" and those I have marked as generic, and exclude those that are retro (by setting "Min kind" to "Outdated"). I would set up these controls as this: A bunch of new reports have been added to assist you finding out which of your owned aircraft you might want to use as a substitute for an aircraft (type) from a flightplan (e.g. as mentioned I don't own a flyable MD-11F, but have chosen to use my PMDG Boeing 777F as a substitute). Likewise there are reports that show you if you own a repaint for a particular owned aircraft/airline, and if you do not, for which other owned aircraft you own that repaint (e.g. a flightplan might list a particular route being flown by an Airbux A319 for that particular airline, but you might not have that repaint for the A319, but might have it for the A318 in stead). Naturally it is entirely up to you if you want to fly that route in the A319 using another repaint or your prefer flying the route in the A318 in stead, in order to have the correct repaint. Here below is a part of a (leg-info) report for an Air France flight in an Airbus A319 from LFBD to LIRF. The report shows I have no Air France repaints for the A319, however I do have one for the A318 (which is installed) and an "Air France (Skyteam)" repaint for an A320 (not installed): I have (manually) chosen the A319, A320 to be substitutes for the A318 (as they might have the repaint which the "correct" aircraft does not - just like in this case). Beside these chosen-substitutes, the report also lists all the "non-substitutes" owned aircraft for which I have an Air France repaint, and for each (both substitutes/non-substitutes) it shows a match-score (the results are actually ordered by decreasing match-score). So had I not had the repaint for the A318/A320, I would still be able to see that I have it for the A321 even though I have not defined the A321 to be a substitute for the A318. This match score has dropped to 88.537 as the A319 and A321 are "more different" than the A318 compared with the A319, where the match score is 94.308. But still the A320 shows a match-score of 95.540. Two combo-boxes have added to the Leg-info form, where the first contains all your owned aircraft and the 2nd shows all the repaints that are available for the selected aircraft. If one of the substitutes have the correct repaints (in this case the A320 does have the Air France (Skyteam) repaint), the combo-boxes will automatically have selected the owned A320, and the Air France (Skyteam) repaint. The check-boxes/labels to right of these combo-boxes shows a few information for the selected owned aircraft and repaint. In this case we can see that the A320 is indeed a substitute for the A319, and this repaint is marked as not-installed, non-generic, can be used as carrier or operator-repaint, and its kind have be defined as "current": When you setup the repaints for a particular owned aircraft you can generate a report of "missing repaints". A "messing repaint" is defined as a repaint for any of the aircraft for which this owned aircraft have been defined as a substitute, having routes utilizing those aircraft and a repaint for those airlines have not yet been defined (that was a mouthful). For example I have chosen my owned Aerosoft CRJ 700 being a substitute for both CRJ 700 and -900, as well as a substitute for the AN-148 (i don't own a flyable AN-148 and the match-score have been calculated as 93,279, so not a bad score). Here below is report of the "missing repaints" for this owned CRJ 700: It appears among my active flightplans for the AN-148 the only missing repaint (for an AN-148) is form the airline "Air Koryo", and since there is no indented lines below this line, I don't have any other owned aircraft for which I have an "Air Koryo" repaint. The next section covers the repaints for the CRJ 700, and here are listed two other airlines for which I don't own a repaint ("Ibex Airlines" and "South African Express Airways"). The last/larger section covers the CRJ 900. The first line lists "Air Nostrum" as I don't own an "Air Nostrum" repaint for my CRJ 700. However as visible by the next 4 lines, I do have "Air Nostrum" repaints for my owned, CRJ900, -1000, ATR 72-500 and my Q400. The "check-marks" indicate that the CRJ 900 and -1000 have been defined as substitutes for the CRJ 700, however the ATR 72-500 and Q400 have not. So IMO I am not desperately in need for an "Air Nostrum" repaint for my CRJ 700 as I have one for my CRJ 900. Personally I would rather fly a route intended for an "Air Nostrum" CRJ 700, in an "Air Nostrum" CRJ 900 (hence I have the "correct" repaint), than flying the route in a CRJ 700 using a generic repaint (you might have other preferences). Last but not least, when you edit a flightplan, there is now a new button on the aircraft tab-page called "Owned substitutes". When you press this button it will generate a report with a "section" for each of the aircraft in the flightplan. If there are no owned aircraft that have been defined as a substitute for the aircraft-type, it will list the 10-20 most suitable owned aircraft for that aircraft-type. For example I don't own a flyable Airbus A340-300 nor have I define any of my owned aircraft to be substitutes for it, hence will list the top scoring matching aircraft. As can see the Boeing 787-9 scores 94.189 which is not a bad score, but still I don't want to use it as a valid substitute for the A340-300 (you can naturally setup your substitutes as you prefer): In the lower part of the above screen-shot you can see the flightplans contains flights for an Airbus A330-200, and I have defined my Aerosoft Airbus A330-300 to be a valid substitute for the A330-200, and indeed I have told there is an Air France repaint available for this aircraft. As you can see it is currently not installed, and I have written "Aerosoft" in the comment-field, to remind myself I can download this repaint from the Aerosoft download-section if I want to install it. Here below is another part of the same report (for an Air France flightplan). Again I don't own a flyable Airbus A380 aircraft, however I have defined the Boeing 747-8 to be a substitute for the A380, but as you can see I don't have an Air France repaint for my PMDG 747-8 (installed or otherwise). Likewise I don't own a flyable Airbus A350-900, but I have defined my PMDG 777-200LR to be an substitutes, and for this 777-200LR I do have an Air France repaint, however marked as not-installed (so I would need to install it before trying to fly any routes). The next section is for an Boeing 777-300ER and thanks to the PMDG expansion I do own a flyable Boeing 777-300ER, and again I do have the repaint (it can be downloaded via the PMDG tool), but not currently marked as installed: Its hard to describe how to setup your owned aircraft/repaints, and how to filter on them in a detailed way, without writing a full novel about it, but I hope it will be more clear in the video I will record with the release of version 1.17. But if you have any questions fell free to use the forum.
  11. In the upper/right corner of the leg-info form I have added a new button labeled "Tag" and when you press this button the Leg (Flight) that is currently displayed in the leg-info form becomes "tagged". The last (up to) 10 tagged legs are added to a new sub-menu on the main form. When you open this sub-menu you can see just enough info about each leg to determin which tagged Leg is it, and when you select one of these menu-items it will again open the leg-info form and show all the details for that leg. As visible in the screen-shot, the text in the menu-items lists: departure/destination-ICAO, Aircraft-Iata/Icao/Name, Airline and departure/destination-times. In many cases when I want to fly a flight, I begin by using the Search-leg function and setup the search-criteria as I prefer. I then might open the Generic randomize form, to have it randomly pick one of the routes. When I pick a random route, I might press the the "Pick random route" button multiple times, if I don't like the first few flights suggested by the program. I might come across a flight that I might want to fly in case I don't find another that I might like better. Now when I come across such a flight I can simply tag it, so I can access it again very easy via the new menu-items. Likewise when I have found a flight I want to fly, in the past I might open other forms in FV in order to look up various things (e.g. information about the departure-, destination- or alternate airports. I then had to "remember" the leg (flight) I was looking at if I needed to lookup information about this leg (e.g. the flight-number, or the departure/destination times). Now I simply tag the flight i have chosen to fly, and then I can open/close as many forms I want to as I know I can easily
  12. Thanks for the kind words. Its a bit sad more sims don't support attaching a function to a button going "Off" out of the box, as I think it is very useful in many cases (especially with 2/3-way buttons like those on the Warthog throttle). FSUIPC allows you to do so in P3D, but that is the only one I know of (hence why I made this tool). In other sims I do miss the "modifier" option you have in DCS (often I use the paddle-switch as my modifier, so all other buttons can have two functions). But then again nothing is perfect ๐Ÿ™‚ Dave I used to do all kinds of weird sh*t in the CH Products programming interface, e.g. the driver had support for 3 modes, so all buttons could have 6 different assignments (3 modes that all had support for both an shifted/non-shifted function). Normally I would keep the same function for the buttons in all modes, and then just do something different with the axis in each mode. E.g. for DCS I used to use one of these modes to "half" my elevator/aileron input so it was more easy to air-refuel, and for FSX/P3D I used the modes to switch rudder-pedal/aileron input around, so I basically could use my (CH) yoke as a steering wheel on ground while taxing, and then shift to "normal mode" before take of. Also in this "ground mode" it would reduce my physical throttle input so even when moving the physical throttle to its full extend it would input about 30-50% of throttle, so it was more easy to dial in just the correct amount of throttle to taxi ๐Ÿ™‚ I still have my CH Products rudder pedals, but these days I only fly with these and my Warthog HOTAS (without any special CH/Target "programming", but using this tool to get the full effect of the 2/3 way buttons). It was a bit weird to get used to fly airlines with a joystick in stead of an Yoke, but now my throttle/joystick is placed on either side of my keyboard 100% of the time. Whereas with a Yoke I had to mount/un-mount it every time I switched between flying and using the PC for other purpose - its such a drag writing software with a yoke between yourself and the keyboard ๐Ÿ™‚
  13. I come from a CH Products background myself, but switched to the Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS some 3 years ago. I love the build quality and digital precision of the Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, but IMO Thrustmaster's programming interface Target have one big minus, and that is the Target-"program" boils down to a single (virtual) controller with a maximum of 32 buttons and 8 axis, whereas the programming interface for CH Products can generate as many virtual controllers you need, each with 32 buttons and 8 axis, so more buttons can be handled directly in the sim, in stead of defining keyboard-shortcuts to be send (the sim can handle multiple hardware buttons being pressed at the same time, but multiple keyboard-shortcuts have to be send sequentially). Anyway to address this, I last year wrote a small program allowing me to use both (or all 3) positions of the 2/3-way switches on the Warthog throttle, without using Target. I accomplished this thanks to vJoy, which is a virtual Joystick driver (that is sadly not still in active development). The way it works, when you switch one of the physical 2-way buttons to it's "On"-position that button goes on (as per usual). However when you switch it to the "Off"-position a button on a virtual controller (handled via program and vJoy) goes to its "On"-position. You can then setup you sim to perform some action when this occurs (the sim, will simply see it as if 2 different controllers are attached). The program was made with DCS in mind, but can be used with any sim that supports multiple controllers (e.g. P3D). To function you need to install/configure vJoy (once), and then you need to run this small tool (each time you want to use it). I had various ideas to expand this tool (like support for multiple/other controllers). But I never got around to do this, and I don't have any current plans to do so. So for now the program is hard-coded to- and will only function with the -Warthog throttle. The download-zip contains the installer, and the (PDF) documentation which contains more info about the program and explains how to install/configure vJoy. www.liljendal.dk/portals/1/files/tmp2019/Joy2vJoyInstaller100Beta.zip
  14. Backup, Backup and Backup !!! In case you don't want to loose data you should ALWAYS backup the UserData folder ('C:\Users\[UserName]\AppData\Roaming\FlightplanVisualizer\UserData'), and the Flightplans folder ('C:\Users\[UserName]\AppData\Roaming\FlightplanVisualizer\Flightplans') and its sub-folders (especially if you import flightplans yourself). However having said that, I have never experienced any data-loss in FV myself, nor have I heard of other users who have lost any data. However potentially you could loose data if the program broke down or was forcefully stopped, while saving data. Because whenever you save any changes (commit changes to the data-files) it would always begin the process by first deleting the old data-file, before it began writing the new one. So if the program stopped (for any reason) shortly after deleting the data-file, that file (and the data it contained) would be forever lost. New in version 1.17, when the program is about to save a data-file it will begin by renaming the (old) data-file by adding a ".backup" extension. Then afterwards it will begin to save the data to disk. If the program is forcefully closed (by the user, or due to an error) before it finish writing this file, you will at least still have the old ".backup" file. The next time the program needs to load the data-file (e.g. starting the program again) it will load/use the ".backup" file in stead. Naturally the changes you were trying to save will not have been written, but at least your are no longer loosing all other data. If the program is able to save the data-file without any issues, the ".backup" file will automatically be deleted after the data-file have been saved (so you should never manually remove ".backup" files yourself). If a backup is being recovered a dialog-box will appear to inform you about it, and it will be logged as well. Here below is an example of a flightplan file being recovered from a backup: 22:52:35.654|1|INFO|Trying to recover from backup-file: 'C:\Users\...\Flightplans\COMMERCIAL\SAS Scandinavian Airlines - Su19.bfp.backup' 22:52:35.673|1|INFO|Recovered from backup-file: 'C:\Users\...\Flightplans\COMMERCIAL\SAS Scandinavian Airlines - Su19.bfp.backup' This change makes the program more "resilient" than it was previously, however it does not eliminate the need for your to backup your data ๐Ÿ™‚ When renaming the file to a backup-file before writing the new data-file, it will simply add ".backup" to the full filename. So before installing version 1.17 you should make sure you have not made such files yourself, otherwise it will try to recover those files in stead of the reading the data-files. A ".backup" file will always take priority, so if a ".backup" file exists, it will remove the "normal file" and try to load the ".backup" in stead. Such files will ONLY exists prior to version 1.17 if you have manually made such files, so you only need to verify if you think it might be the case. Logging is an art form: either you log too little, in which case you are not sure what happened if you get an error, or you are logging too much, in which case it becomes hard to find what you need to find in the log, and taken to the extremely the amount of logging will have a negative effect on performance. In FV I have been very conservative with what I have chosen to log, meaning I did not log very much (unless you changed the log-level from "info" to "debug" or "trace"). In version 1.17 I have decided to begin logging some more, so the log-file will be a bit more informative in regard to what was done before an error might occur. But still I feel I log on the light-side, so the log-files will not grow crazy-large, nor will it impact performance. The program will (as before) automatically archive the log files, so you will never have more than 3 archived log-files and the current log-file. So there is not need to manually clean-out in the logs.
  15. Added a feature to generate a report of aircraft-types, for which none of the owned aircraft have been selected to substitute this type. In each section (with a score of 100.000) the aircraft-type itself is listed first, and below are listed between 10 and 20 of the best matching owned aircraft: The purpose of this report is to assist you choosing which substitutes you might want to define. In this case it appears I could choose to use the (owned) Phenom 300 as an substitute for both the Learjets 2x, 6x, and 8x.
×
×
  • Create New...