Bulau

members
  • Content Count

    147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Bulau

  • Rank
    Flight Student - Solo
  1. Bulau

    LNAV_polar.dat Files For LS-7

    I have a list of polars in my files, and I'll have a look tonight at what is there. I think the best thing now might be to use Max's polar test gauge set, from his website: http://www.fszwever.nl/ Find it under the "Gauges" section. With that you can make a test fight and generate a polar on-the-fly. I haven't used it myself, but that's the way it's supposed to work.
  2. Bulau

    You like it rough ?

    You know I do, bad boy! Nice...wish I was there!
  3. Bulau

    XCSoar, or SoarPilot, or...

    The additional thing to get from the CAISet, is the height at goal, or final glide info that it provides. Even if you are not "serious soaring pilot" (however you interpret that), knowing how much height you will have at the next turnpoint, or if you have final glide height, is IMO pretty basic info. After all, there is no point in continuing to circle in that last thermal if you have final glide height at your MC setting. To add to what I said about the moving map display, that feature is very useful for ridge task, and/or mountainous areas, where you can see the terrain relief on the map, and plan your route accordingly. Ian has implemented this in a couple of cockpits (ASW28 and LS-18). Using XCSoar, or similar, on a PDA gives you all that for any sailplane. It's often handy to know, not only the direction to the next waypoint, but how close or far you are off the course line. One other feature I didn't mention, some PDA software also display your vertical speed graphically with your track by using colour. This can be very useful for centering the lift.
  4. Bulau

    XCSoar, or SoarPilot, or...

    Hi, Scott! I inherited my wife's old Palm Tungsten 3, and was thinking of using it with XCSoar with Condor, but she only has the USB cradle for it, and I wasn't sure if I could make it work. Would either have to buy the serial cable, or a Bluetooth dongle. And it was the same issue that there are not many of the soaring software that will run on the Palm OS. I ended up using the PC version of XCSoar, and having it display on a second monitor. It's not perfect solution, since you have to take focus off the sim to access the XCSoar interface, but the benefits supercede, depending on what feature you are after. My friend DC is running it on a PDA, but I'm not sure what make and model. To answer your question about FSUIPC4, yes, you need to register it to enable the GPSOut feature needed to make the PDA software work, but I am a big supporter of registering software that I find to be useful. The moving map display that you get with PDA software is great, and Ian has implemented that in some of his FSX instruments. There are also all the other features of modern soaring flight computers that you will get, like MC setting, speed to fly, height above goal calculations, final glide, etc. so IMO, they are almost a must have for any serious soaring pilot. It takes some time to get everything set up and configured, and there is an initial learning curve for sure, but the benefits are worth it. XCSoar uses the same datafiles as Cambridge/WinPilot (.dat), SeeYou (.cup), Zander (.wpz), OziExplorer (.wpt) and FS/GpsDump (.wpt) Since Condor has a really good PDA in the sim, I was really only after a couple of features: one thing the XCSoar does (and probably SoarPilot, too) is support for AAT task, which Condor PDA does not do. Also, it was handy to be able to pan ahead on the map to see more of the terrain, which, again, the Condor PDA did not allow. XCSoar also has a graphical display of where you can glide to from your current altitude and position, base on terrain and MC setting. It is shown on the moving map as a constantly updated "amoeba". For FSX use, since not all sailplanes have a PDA or soaring computer, it is perhaps even more useful. I haven't used any other software. Anything else you want to know, just ask away!
  5. Bulau

    Progress report

    Only for CAISet LNAV gauge. If you see the button in the Polar Viewer "to L-NAV", when you press that, it writes the polar to the fsx-lnav-polar.dat file.
  6. Bulau

    Multiplayer Thermal Discrepancies

    Same here...same thermalscape!
  7. Bulau

    Website...

    I made a dummy bookmark, then.
  8. Bulau

    CumulusX! 1.8.1 patch is out

    Thanks, Peter, for your continued attention to development of CumulusX! I've been anticipating this patch for the past week or so, as it promises to resolve one of the few remaining issues we have been experiencing in multiplayer sessions with FSXX, that of thermal discrepancies between players.
  9. Bulau

    Multiplayer Thermal Discrepancies

    OK. My brother and I have XP, however we both had dotNET (probably 3.5) installed for other reasons prior to FSX, so that explains why CX! works at all for us. Same for DC, originally, though I think he is now Win7x64. Sounds like you are saying the thermal discrepancy is separate issue from that. Now that I think, it seems my brother and I have occasionally had discrpancy, both of us with AP. Will your patch fix this regardless of AP or SP2 installed? I.e. FSX Multiplayer with a mix of AP and SP2 users.
  10. Bulau

    Multiplayer Thermal Discrepancies

    Well, you know...I will have to double check, but that might be the case. My brother and I both have the Gold Edition, which includes the AP, so two of us have FSX+AP. My friend DC is a long time user of FSX, so I know that he had installed originally, FSX+SP2, but my recollection, at the time we were all installing CumulusX! and gliders, was that he uninstalled his SP2 and instead applied the AP, but I will have to ask him again. I do recall that my brother and I were pleasantly surprised that CumulusX! did not crash under the AP, as your instructions suggest it might, so I'm aware of your explanation that the AP has its own version of SP2, which is not the same as standalone SP2. Is this likely culprit? (different SimConnect version?) We both have not had any problems running it...except for these thermal discrepancies, which we don't always have or notice.
  11. Peter, we had a chance to get some screenshots of this. In the course of testing multiplayer missions with my friend DC, we noticed that we were not seeing the same thermal clouds in same locations. This was very perplexing, since the mission included a .CMX file, and also ensures we both spawn at exactly the same time. Initially we though it was because he has the UTX add-on scenery, so we repeated the test with that disabled. We had an airspawn, so landed, turned off Competition Mode, then made top down screenshots. You can see there is some matchups, but a lot of discrepancies. Can't figure this out and don't know how to approach it from here. Also both using FSX, multiplayer direct IP.
  12. Bulau

    Active Sky Evolution

    Sorry, Tony, I didn't notice this 'till now. I, and a couple other guys have been doing multiplayer FSX every other Tuesday at 8:00 or 8:30pm EDT. I realize, for you in the UK, that is not a good time slot, but you are welcome to join us if you're able. We also have a Teamspeak3 server we use. I have in mind to host a multiplayer event, but I'm still wrestling with some issues that we have encountered in our Tuesday sessions: 1. Occasionally, a player's towplane will not start and takeoff. 2. Can't force an airborne start in multiplayer session using distributed Free Flight files. (works with FSHost, but we aren't using it) 3. Occasionally have had different CumulusX! thermals between different players. I'm almost certain this is because one player has UTX scenery installed, but we are going to test this further. In an attempt to force airborne starts, I'm looking into using Multiplayer Missions. This will also circumvent the non-starting towplane issue. I'm a novice at Mission building, but intend to use only a small number of Mission features for the task. This coming Tuesday, the 19th is our Condor night, but the plan for the following Tuesday, the 26th April, is to test the the Multiplayer Mission idea and see how it goes. The distributed Mission should contain everything needed, including the .FLT, .WX, .PLN, .CMX as well as GPS-NAV.dat and LNAV_polar.dat, so people can use the FSX instruments or the CAISet instruments for navigating. Since a couple of us are also using XCSoar, I will probably include the task file for that as well. If I do ever host an event, I will schedule it on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon EDT, which should make it convenient for both North Americans and UK/Europeans to participate, i.e. late afternoon EDT should be early evening Europe, give or take.
  13. Bulau

    Erratic Lift Behaviour

    Oh yeah, about this...we have always disliked having the FSX 3D clouds interspersed with the CX! clouds, so we have changed our FSX clouds settings to 2D. (SETTINGS...Display settings...Customize...WEATHER tab...select Simple clouds for Cloud detail, and also set Cloud coverage density to Low)) I'm assuming this is not the same as turning them off, or clear skies, but what it does is render the FSX clouds as flat cirrus-like patches, at the same level as the CX! clouds. Not gone, but not as objectionable as the 3D FSX clouds. Now I know some feel having the FSX clouds in there is a good thing, as it makes it a challenge to find the thermal clouds.
  14. Bulau

    Erratic Lift Behaviour

    Thanks, Peter! OK, I'll put Wide Spread Sink back at 1.0 and see how it is. I read in the manual that disabling it would eliminate the "constant fluctuations due to air texture". Just to clarify, the wild vario swings I experienced were quite rapid, i.e. on the order of 1 second swings between -1 and +1 m/s. I actually wanted to set even weaker thermal strength for some Open Class tasks, but needed to resolve the erratic behaviour first.
  15. Bulau

    Erratic Lift Behaviour

    Recently, I've made a couple of tasks to try out Ian and Wolfgang's new ASH25. I basically took some Open Class tasks from Condor, and recreated them in FSX. Rather than make very long distance tasks, I try, instead, to set lower cloudbase and weaker lift. This means making some custom .CMX files, since the default settings seem rather 'safe'. I confess I've not read enough about all the parameters that CumulusX! controls, and as a result I'm likely making some mistakes. In the .CMX I mainly changed the thermal strength, and the diameter. In some test flights, I was often getting very erratic behaviour, with the vario swinging wildly from sink to lift, never finding anything steady enough to circle and climb, unless I slewed almost right up to cloudbase. If I was much below cloudbase, impossible to find any lift. So I tried lowering the Weak surface Layer Height, and also lowered the Minimum thermal ceiling (although I have cloud layer set in FSX weather, so this should not be a factor). These changes seem to work, because in our multiplayer on Tuesday past, everything seemed stable...lift strength was in the selected range and no wild fluctuations of vario. I think also, I need to pay more attention to setting the wind layers to match the cloud height in FSX. In other words, if I have a wind layer change at or near the cloud base, can this contribute to the erratic behaviour I experienced? What other .CMX parameters should I pay closer attention to to keep things as realistic and stable as possible? CumulusX!.cmx: 1500 ; Minimum Ceiling of AutoThermals [0 ... 10000 m] 3000 ; Maximum Ceiling of AutoThermals [0 ... 10000 m] 2.5 ; Minimum Strength of AutoThermals [0 m/s] 5.5 ; Maximum Strength of AutoThermals [15 m/s] 1000 ; Minimum Diameter of AutoThermals [0.3 ... 3 km] 1800 ; Maximum Diameter of AutoThermals [0.3 ... 3 km] 20 ; Minimum Duration of AutoThermals [10 ... 45 min] 40 ; Maximum Duration of AutoThermals [10 ... 45 min] 5 ; AutoThermals Coverage [1 ... 15 /100km^2] 1 ; AutoThermals Sink Scalar [-1.0 ... 3] 100 ; Weak Surface Layer Height [0 ... 1000 m] 1 ; Thermal Lean Factor [0 ... 3] -1 ; Wide Spread Sink [-1.0 ... 1] 25 ; Inversion Layer Probability [0 ... 100 %] 25 ; Inversion Layer Weakening [0 ... 50%] 150 ; Minimum Inversion Layer Thickness [150 ... 10000 m] 300 ; Maximum Inversion Layer Thickness [150 ... 10000 m] 300 ; Minimum Inversion Layer Thickness [150 ... 10000 m] 600 ; Minimum Inversion Layer Thickness [150 ... 10000 m] My Open Class edit: 1000 ; Minimum Ceiling of AutoThermals [0 ... 10000 m] 3000 ; Maximum Ceiling of AutoThermals [0 ... 10000 m] 1.0 ; Minimum Strength of AutoThermals [0 m/s] 2.5 ; Maximum Strength of AutoThermals [15 m/s] 1200 ; Minimum Diameter of AutoThermals [0.3 ... 3 km] 1800 ; Maximum Diameter of AutoThermals [0.3 ... 3 km] 10 ; Minimum Duration of AutoThermals [10 ... 45 min] 40 ; Maximum Duration of AutoThermals [10 ... 45 min] 6 ; AutoThermals Coverage [1 ... 15 /100km^2] 1 ; AutoThermals Sink Scalar [-1.0 ... 3] 50 ; Weak Surface Layer Height [0 ... 1000 m] 1 ; Thermal Lean Factor [0 ... 3] 0 ; Wide Spread Sink [-1.0 ... 1] 25 ; Inversion Layer Probability [0 ... 100 %] 25 ; Inversion Layer Weakening [0 ... 50%] 150 ; Minimum Inversion Layer Thickness [150 ... 10000 m] 300 ; Maximum Inversion Layer Thickness [150 ... 10000 m] 300 ; Minimum Inversion Layer Thickness [150 ... 10000 m] 600 ; Minimum Inversion Layer Thickness [150 ... 10000 m] Hmm, oh yeah...looks like I also disabled Widespread sink...mistake, or is that the main factor which smoothed everything out?