FSDreamTeam forum
April 23, 2019, 01:15:05 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: GSX: request for remote (networked) menu option ...  (Read 9671 times)
Pete Dowson
Beta tester
Jr. Member
*****
Posts: 79


« on: November 14, 2011, 12:59:58 AM »

Hi,

I like the way GSX is coming along, but I have one serious request. I fly a 737NG cockpit, and the outside world is projected on a large screen in front of the cockpit windows. I really do hate having that spoiled by on-FS-screen menus, and therefore don't use any programs which rely on this method (only) for control.

I use Radar Contact with its menu displayed inside the cockpit using a display program, and AES with their remote controller. Both do very well.

So, please, will you consider the option of controlling your GSX program likewise with a program running over a Network? Or at least provide some sort of programming interface to it so I could implement something like it?

Thank you for listening.

Regards
Pete Dowson

Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 33944



WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2011, 10:32:03 AM »

An interesting suggestion. We might not be able to have it in the first release, but it's something we might look into for an eventual upgrade.

Note the menus are the standard Simconnect ones so, which means they all respond to keys (0..9), and GSX itself has a configurable hotkey too (defaults to CTRL+F12) so you could use macro programming on a keyboard/joystick to operate it without using the mouse.
Logged

Pete Dowson
Beta tester
Jr. Member
*****
Posts: 79


« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2011, 11:18:18 AM »

An interesting suggestion. We might not be able to have it in the first release, but it's something we might look into for an eventual upgrade.

Good, and yes please!

Quote
Note the menus are the standard Simconnect ones so, which means they all respond to keys (0..9), and GSX itself has a configurable hotkey too (defaults to CTRL+F12) so you could use macro programming on a keyboard/joystick to operate it without using the mouse.

I understand this. That isn't really the problem, it's just having menus, albeit translucent ones, appear in three foot high proportions over the otherwise great looking outside world on screen which is the deal-breaker for me. I have touch screens and EFB display inside the cockpit for such things and would really always want to keep such stuff off the scenery display.

I look forward to trying the product in any case when released, and will then probably leave it aside till your eventual upgrade, in hope!

Thanks & Best Regards
Pete
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 33944



WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2011, 11:41:37 AM »

That isn't really the problem, it's just having menus, albeit translucent ones, appear in three foot high proportions over the otherwise great looking outside world on screen which is the deal-breaker for me.

Well, if it's just the issue of not wanting the menus over the scenery, you can undock the GSX Window and move it to another monitor on the same computer.

The only remaining issue is that FSX will not save its position between sessions, like it does with its default windows, so you'll see it again translucent over the scenery when you restart FSX, and will have to undock it again.
Logged

Pete Dowson
Beta tester
Jr. Member
*****
Posts: 79


« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2011, 12:20:29 PM »

Well, if it's just the issue of not wanting the menus over the scenery, you can undock the GSX Window and move it to another monitor on the same computer.

No, I never have more than just the 1920x1080 Projector output on the main FSX PC.  Multiple video connections reduces performance. I have 6 other PCs and 8 other monitors I can use, as I do with AES, Radar Contact, SuperTrafficboard, EFB, IYP, and of course PM.

I'll be happy to wait for your network addition, should you care to add same.

Thanks & Regards
Pete
Logged
cowings1588
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 279



« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2011, 05:03:07 AM »

Pete Dowson.. Do you happen to have a video on youtube of your flightsim setup.. Sounds as if you got the complete package going on there & it would be cool too see it in action..  Smiley
Logged

COA
Bill
Travis
Beta tester
Newbie
*****
Posts: 24


« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2011, 07:44:32 AM »

After watching the Marshaller demo, I hope that should a networkable interface be implemented, that it would not only accept input, but also publish GSX output such as "servicing handled by..." "marshaller dispatched..." and the parking evaluation.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 07:47:05 AM by Travis » Logged

Pete Dowson
Beta tester
Jr. Member
*****
Posts: 79


« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2011, 11:14:32 AM »

Pete Dowson.. Do you happen to have a video on youtube of your flightsim setup.. Sounds as if you got the complete package going on there & it would be cool too see it in action..  Smiley

No, sorry. But it is the PFC 737NG ready-made cockpit, with the overhead replaced by a full Cockpitsonic one (fore and aft), and also with my additions of two headsets, two 7" touchscreens for sim control buttons, another 7" screen for Radar Contact's menu, and a 10.4" touchscreen for the EFB. These are mounted on the sidewalls.

To mount the full overhead (the PFC one is 3/4ths size) I had to lower the front window top edges, dropping the overhead fore end and allowing it forward mode. So the view out front is narrower vertically -- but checking with a real 737 it is actually more realistic that way. It's quite surprising how narrow those windows really are.

PFC 737 is at https://flypfc.com/?/training-systems/mfd-jet/, but the version they've pictured there has their own overhead, not so realistic as the Cockpitsonic one, and the one in the overall pic is missing some of the MIP panel switch units above the displays but below the MCP+EFIS+6packs -- they are in the other pix there though. You'll notice that because the whole thing is narrower than a real 737 there's no lower Display Unit (the two CDUs are adjacent), and the centre console and throttle quadrant are narrow -- actually a modified version of their separately purchasable centre console. It does have motorised trim, but not motorised throttle. The dual yoke and rudder controls are linked.

Cockpitsonic overhead units are at http://www.cockpitsonicuk.co.uk/ or http://www.cockpitsonic.com

Regards
Pete
« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 11:20:30 AM by Pete Dowson » Logged
OmniAtlas
Newbie
*
Posts: 24


« Reply #8 on: August 26, 2015, 02:37:23 PM »

So...its 2015, haven't used GSX for a few years now because I'm still unsure if there is a way to implement the use of it in a home cockpit setup.

Does anyone have a solution?
Logged
Eric P.
Newbie
*
Posts: 9


« Reply #9 on: November 27, 2015, 07:51:55 PM »

So...its 2015, haven't used GSX for a few years now because I'm still unsure if there is a way to implement the use of it in a home cockpit setup.

Does anyone have a solution?

Hi!

I think the developers of GSX donīt have it in the program in future... i too donīt understand this reaction... i would pay for a remoteprogram with this option. i think, no flightsimmer wants a window in the screen, and the most people have a laptop and use 2 pcīs for flightsimming... i donīt know if in future this option will ever come...

BR
Eric
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 33944



WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 28, 2015, 11:17:08 PM »

the most people have a laptop and use 2 pcīs for flightsimming... i donīt know if in future this option will ever come...

I'm sure that most people have a laptop, but "having it", and using it for flight sim, it's not the same thing.

If it was true that most people that use our products use multiple networked PCs for flight simulation, we should have seen it in the sales of the "Volume License", which is a specific license available ONLY to users that want to have more activations, because they need to run our products over a network.

This never happened so far, I don't think that sales of the Volume Discount option ever reach 0.1% of the total sales so, from this data, we can only assume that a very tiny minority of users use a network for flight simming.

Or, at least, only a very TINY minority of them is prepared to pay for it which, from our point of view (deciding if it's worth spending valuable time that might be spent otherwise), it's the same thing...
Logged

mroschk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 314


« Reply #11 on: November 29, 2015, 12:45:54 AM »

..maybe GSX can be controlled via FSUIPC Offsets ?
That would be great.
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 33944



WWW
« Reply #12 on: November 29, 2015, 01:23:25 AM »

..maybe GSX can be controlled via FSUIPC Offsets ?

GSX doesn't requires or interacts with FSUIPC in any way.

But even if it did, it's not like that using FSUIPC could magically "control" GSX, it's not an issue of HOW to control it (we would surely use standard Simconnect ways, like how we'll connnect to SODE, for example). The issue is it must be AWARE of an external control and programmed to react to that in ways different than standard.

So no, it's not something that can happen easily or automatically, it would require (as explained so many times), an investment of time/manpower that we cannot afford to divert now from features that, instead of being used by a tiny minority of users, would benefit everybody.

I'll revert the question, so you can probably understand it more easily:

- Do you think GSX is 100% COMPLETE right now, and it doesn't need ANYTHING else, EXCEPT for a remote control option ?

If you can reply YES to this question, then it might make some sense discussing on a remote control option. But until then...we'll work on the rest, first.
Logged

mroschk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 314


« Reply #13 on: November 29, 2015, 02:00:24 AM »

What you did first is your decision, it was just an idea because many other Programms do it the same way and
FSUIPC is great (not only) for that.
Logged
virtuali
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 33944



WWW
« Reply #14 on: November 29, 2015, 02:26:33 AM »

it was just an idea because many other Programms do it the same way and FSUIPC is great (not only) for that.

Again, FSUIPC wouldn't be needed, since Simconnect provides any means of communication between add-ons in a client-server mode.

But as I've said, you are confusing the mean of communication (which is just an implementation detail), with WHAT a program should do when connected to something else and what different behaviors it should have. THAT'S the time consuming part, not the way the program communicates with its clients.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!