Project Magenta and OC questions from a new boy

[davjones]

Project Magenta appears to this newbie as being on the daunting side, at least to get started with it.  I wrote to PM Support twice during the past few weeks, only to have my queries be fully ignored.  I read where PM support is supposed to be great, so I don't know what's going on in this case.  Maybe they consider my questions to be so basic as to not be worthy of an answer.  I really don't know.

Be that as it may, I'm turning here knowing that the level of expertise on this board is outstanding.  With quite a bit of digging, I more or less found my own answers to my original queries, but as often happens, those answers lead to more questions.

The first is the question of Wide FS.  I'm not using it to start with – I just see it as an extra level of complication that I don't need right now – I'm starting with one PC, especially since max frame rates are not yet a priority, seeing how the sim is a long way from even flying!  So I installed the PM systems demo, ran FS9, and while both seem happy, I don't see that either one is aware of the other.  My understanding is that Wide FS is for coordinating functions across a network on different PCs.  I didn't think I'd need it with just one PC.  Am I mistaken?

The next thing is that the documentation for the PM systems demo says explicitly not to use any panel other than a panel from a default FS aircraft.  Since my sim hopes to one day become a B737-300/400/500, the closest option I have is the default 737-400.  Problem is that its panel is missing most of the functions you'd hope to see on it.  I planned on using the Wilco PIC 737 as my "base" aircraft (still incomplete but much better), so does this exclude using PIC 737 or is the idea to use it anyway and substitute the panel from the default airplane?  Sounds kind of crazy, but could be done if need be.  Can't use the 737 PIC by itself because it doesn't include any of its own offsets – you only have what's in the default 737-400.  Still, it simulates most functions – it's just that there aren't any offsets for them.

Third thing has to do with the systems offsets.  This was one of my original questions to PM – I was alarmed when I looked at their published list of FSUIPC offsets, only to find that most every one listed has only to do with the EFIS in one way or another, whether for the CDU, MCP, PFD or whatever.  Nothing for the systems.  After quite a bit of scrounging, I found all the offsets I need tucked away in a file called sysvar.txt.  Appears that everything is there.  Only problem is the descriptions are very short and cryptic, and will take a lot of experimentation and trial and error to figure out what does what.  Is there a better list of the offsets somewhere?

This one is possibly more of an Open Cockpits question, but since I'm here....    I read that all of the SIOC scripts for OC cards have already been done for the PM systems package.  I found most of it on the OC site, and it does indeed seem to cover all most the functions on the overhead – at least at first glance.  Problem is that the master caution and fire warning are not on the overhead, and that seems to be absent.  Unfortunately, this might be one of the toughest ones to attempt on your own, especially when you factor in the recall function.  Any further knowledge on this?  At least it's good to see that every light in both six packs is covered by offsets in sysvar.txt!

Finally, when I try to get to the forums on the PM website, it continuously takes me to a page that tells me "redirceting to support page" and then something about the forum being replaced by a ticket system.  I must be going at it the wrong way, but I don't know the right way....

If anybody wants to find out more about what I'm trying to do with this project, have a look at http://www.60sairlineantiques.net/main-pages/737project.html

Sorry for the length of this post, but the help that it may bring might well keep me out of trouble for quite some time!  Thanks so much for your patience and any wisdom you may have to share with me.

...Dave

Dave Jones
Fort McCoy, Florida  USA


Whether you think you can or think you can't, you're right.   -- Henry Ford

[tennyson]

Hi Dave,
Good luck with your project.
Mine is finally coming to an end.

I started out with PM, but quickly ditched it for Sim Avionics.
I also had a problem with Sim A (the re-activation process within the network).

Lucky for me, I came upon ProSim and I bought it when it was cheap.

The combination of P3D V2.4 and ProSim and all my FDS hardware would be hard to beat.

Give them a look see, I think you will find all of those fine products have outstanding support and are cutting edge at the moment.


Frank Cooper

[blueskydriver]

Hi Dave,

Welcome to the world of flight simulation insanity! I'll keep my reply brief since you have done some work already and understand research is a good thing.

So, let me start with FS9. Unless you're using a computer from 1998-2000 that is old and slow, why are you choosing this? You should skip FS9 and go with FSX, but depending on your computer setup, your "mileage" will vary in regards to user satisfaction. The better the computer, the better it'll be for you, but you've likely discovered already that everyone is still somewhat chasing a computer powerful enough for FSX to run without frame loss and able to handle a multitude of add-ons... IMHO, you should go with FSX as it is the cheapest and better route. Some folks like P3D, but you have the costs associated with P3D, and in the end it's FSX (with mods) that will be cheaper.

Now, let's talk about Project Magenta (PM) known as an avionic suite, and the simple answer is PM is dead! Okay, not dead dead, but far removed from the simulation world. Years ago Enrico (the developer) and PM were the top dogs, but SimA came out, as well as ProSim737, which took out the PM's monopoly.

Then, later on PM decided to go strictly with Professional Customers only (with limited support to the home users). That way PM can work on a smaller amount of issues rather then all the home users with thousands of problems from all the different setups. It made sense, but PM cutout the bread and butter (the home users) when they dropped the forums and went to a ticket system...that normally go unanswered for some. Being a PM user for years, I still use it; however, I'm not fond of them dropping the forums. A lot of times the home users were helping each other solve more problems then PM did, but PM could use what the home users found out through trial and error, and then use that to PM's own advantage. So, it was a win-win, but now it's...well, it's crickets chirping...

To answer your questions about the offsets, WideFS and FSUIPC, let me start with saying the offsets are pretty much used by all the avionic suites. Here is some background; a computer programmer guy named Peter Dowson came up with the offset methods many years ago. He did FSUIPC/WideFS, which are both used together, to make the interface graphical for the end-users. Now, FSUIPC is the part that gets installed onto the same computer as FS9/FSX, and it works like a translator.

Here is an example: You flip a switch on a joystick that turns on the taxi light. The switch off/on (which you assign its action in FSUIPC) is assigned the offset for the taxi light off/on, so the switch causes the light to come on or off depending on its position of either on or off. You might say that FS9/FSX has that already for a preset in its settings, so why would you do that. That's just it, you don't need to use FSUIPC in this example of the taxi light, you could use FS9/FSX settings too do it. Except think about a large GA or Commercial 737 sim with hundreds of switches, buttons and so on. Well, FS9/FSX presets (inside the FS9/FSX programs, settings pages) only has so many offsets, and that is where FSUIPC comes into play; it gives you many more offsets.

Of course you found that out already by looking at the sysvar offsets list. What you don't know is this; is that Peter Dowson wrote so many offsets (a lot actually), but then PM came into the world, so Peter provides offsets for PM within FSUIPC. In other words, Peter had (let's say) 5000 offsets in mind. He used the first 1000 for all the things he could think of, but with PM he says okay you can use offsets values 1001 through 2000, so he works with Enrico to set those offsets up. Next, other companies come online and they to want some offsets, so he gives them a range of open spaces... I explained this broadly, but in general that is how offsets from  FSUIPC, PM's sysvar.txt offsets list, FlightDeck Solutions or FDS, and their own SimA and their SYS I/O Cards with offsets, Prosim737 offsets, and others I cannot think of at the moment, came about.

Thus, that is why you need FSUIPC on the FS9/FSX computer because it translates the offsets into actions. Yes, to answer your question about "It's so hard?". It is hard at first, but you will start to see a pattern once you get into it or get beyond that first curve of understanding offsets. After that everything else falls into place...sort of. You see FSUIPC is just the translator as I said already; however, it can do much, much, more, like affect your weather inside FS9/FSX or even make AI traffic disappear from the runway as examples. That is where reading the FSUIPC/WideFS PDF files come in. Spend a lot of time reading them...period.

Okay, moving onto WideFS. WideFS is like a telephone call from a remote simulator computer to the FSUIPC on the FS9/FSX computer. It allows the remote computer to send the same offsets over to the FSUIPC. Albeit, the remote computer(s) and the FS9/FSX must already be setup for networking with each other, which I will not discuss. Anyway, here is an example: on a remote computer you have the PDF/ND screens, so WideFS just reads the data from FSUIPC to help display the info on the screen. Using PM (or SimA, ProSim737 and others), it would read the position of height, bank, speed, angle and so on, then display that onto the PFD/ND to reflect it visually. Easy right? Okay, now let's say I want to use the same remote computer to send switch or button changes back to FSUIPC; well, with WideFS I can do just that. It sends the same offset actions (actually, FSUIPC is polling for changes) back over to the FSUIPC and makes whatever changes in FS9/FSX that your switch or button was pre-setup in FSUIPC to do.

I said I was going to be brief...okay, sort of brief...lol.

Let me move onto the next topic of Input/Output Cards. You mentioned Open Cockpits (OC) Cards already, but there is the SYS Cards from FDS, as well as other brand name I/O cards. If you understand what the cards do already, that is great, but in case you don't, here is the simple answer. I/O cards read/write conditions through polling. They constantly look for changes, once they see a change they perform an action via the offsets. The I or input is something the user does; you push a button , flip a switch, change the yoke position, move the throttle and so on. The O or output is just that, the cards send an output signal to light an annunciator like the Six Pack lights, to change a position of a needle on a flap gauge and so on. That means the I/O cards must work with FSUIPC (Offsets) and WideFS (when the I/O card is placed on a remote computer), in general.

I say in general because that is the standard method, but now you have OC Cards that have SIOC, which is a programming language of it's own and is one of the hardest things to learn for many people. Still the basic concept is OC cards do what other I/O cards do, but you can program things that FSUIPC might not even support; although, this type of stuff is for very knowledgeable users. Therefore, look at OC Cards as the same as looking at plastic models. You have kit form where you do everything, and then there is snap together, so too speak, and that in terms, is like cards from FDS and their SYS Cards...they're made to be easy and simple.

Let's talk flight models; you mentioned 737PIC. Well, there are many different models in use. SimA has their own, so does PM, ProSim737, and others. Now, you must understand a flight model is not like an add-on, like PMDG737NGX. The PMDG addon is a flight model and avionics suite together, but PMDG didn't want to let users set it up using I/O cards and having a full size cockpit. They are mainly concerned with the common denominator of users; the users with just a PC, Monitor, Keyboard, Mouse and maybe a Joystick. At least that is how PMDG has always been, but I here it has been changing for the better for the cockpit builders in general.

If I didn't confuse you, let me say again that PM, SimA, ProSim737, and other avionic suites have flight models, but most times they are derived from the default FS9/FSX flight model. In other words, they modify the default model to suite their avionic suite...some companies get it right, where others do not. Too tell which one is better then the other is not possible because it depends a lot on the end user. You might get OC Cards and know how to use SIOC right out of the box, but find FDS SYS Cards harder; thus, you might go with PM and it's flight model over following the track of using SimA and it's model. Or, you might like ProSim737 over the others because their model flies better on Tuesdays and not Thursdays...lol. Seriously, it all depends on what you prefer...they all have Pros and Cons.

Finally, I say this too every new member or new cockpit builder any chance that I get. You're located in Fort McCoy, Florida, so send a private message to Sam Llorca and ask to visit his sim or if you know another builder, go visit their sim. You will gain a ton of wealth from the builders and they can explain things firsthand. Otherwise, you will spend days, weeks, months and years trying to reinvent the  wheel. There are a lot of old timers here who have done that already because there were not many builders back in the "Stone Age" of cockpit building, but now builders are all around! And, most times they love to have visitors and "TALK" simulator building with others who are eager to learn it...

Good Luck,

John

[Trevor Hale]

Now, let's talk about Project Magenta (PM) known as an avionic suite, and the simple answer is PM is dead! Okay, not dead dead, but far removed from the simulation world. Years ago Enrico (the developer) and PM were the top dogs, but SimA came out, as well as ProSim737, which took out the PM's monopoly.

Hi John,  I honestly am surprised you made this comment regarding Project Magenta being removed from the simulation world.  This is far from the Truth.  I have to say that from what I have seen, I would take my Project Magenta over Sim Avionics any day!  PM Is not Dead, and I haven't seen ProSim to make any comment as far as it is concerned.

Then, later on PM decided to go strictly with Professional Customers only (with limited support to the home users). That way PM can work on a smaller amount of issues rather then all the home users with thousands of problems from all the different setups. It made sense, but PM cutout the bread and butter (the home users) when they dropped the forums and went to a ticket system...that normally go unanswered for some. Being a PM user for years, I still use it; however, I'm not fond of them dropping the forums. A lot of times the home users were helping each other solve more problems then PM did, but PM could use what the home users found out through trial and error, and then use that to PM's own advantage.

PM Never dropped the forums, They actually made an agreement with MattO and myself to move them to Mycockpit.org because we could help to lighten their support load by helping with the support. (We kinda pushed them in that direction) Now Mycockpit is Dead and there really isn't anyone over there to help with the support.

Like any software our there, Prosim, SimA, or PM if you are a paying customer (Commercial or Hobbiest) you can send emails in and they will get back to you.  (Eventually) if you purchase a commercial License they will respond to you WWWWAAAAAAAY Faster.  Every Software vendor is the same in this regard. If you Have ProSim or SimA I would like you to let me know how long it takes you to get your questions answered. (Same thing)

I/O cards read/write conditions through polling. They constantly look for changes, once they see a change they perform an action via the offsets.

Leo Bodnar Makes USB Input cards that act like a joystick card with 32+ input button connections.  Through FSUIPC you can program these buttons to offsets, and make things happen. These cards are CHEAP and Reliable, and lets not forget Don't require additional software to make them work.

PHIDGETS CARDS Are another Way to Go in my opinion, Using Allan Dyers FS2Phidgets (FREE SOFTWARE) available at mycockpit.org you can get LED's and Inputs to work very easy with the graphical interface.

SIOC and OC Cards are a very powerful solution and there are lots of guys using it if you need help.

I am not even going to comment on FDS SysCards, as I have my own opinion about the software that drives them.

[blueskydriver]

Now, let's talk about Project Magenta (PM) known as an avionic suite, and the simple answer is PM is dead! Okay, not dead dead, but far removed from the simulation world. Years ago Enrico (the developer) and PM were the top dogs, but SimA came out, as well as ProSim737, which took out the PM's monopoly.

Hi John,  I honestly am surprised you made this comment regarding Project Magenta being removed from the simulation world.  This is far from the Truth.  I have to say that from what I have seen, I would take my Project Magenta over Sim Avionics any day!  PM Is not Dead, and I haven't seen ProSim to make any comment as far as it is concerned.

Then, later on PM decided to go strictly with Professional Customers only (with limited support to the home users). That way PM can work on a smaller amount of issues rather then all the home users with thousands of problems from all the different setups. It made sense, but PM cutout the bread and butter (the home users) when they dropped the forums and went to a ticket system...that normally go unanswered for some. Being a PM user for years, I still use it; however, I'm not fond of them dropping the forums. A lot of times the home users were helping each other solve more problems then PM did, but PM could use what the home users found out through trial and error, and then use that to PM's own advantage.

PM Never dropped the forums, They actually made an agreement with MattO and myself to move them to Mycockpit.org because we could help to lighten their support load by helping with the support. (We kinda pushed them in that direction) Now Mycockpit is Dead and there really isn't anyone over there to help with the support.

Like any software our there, Prosim, SimA, or PM if you are a paying customer (Commercial or Hobbiest) you can send emails in and they will get back to you.  (Eventually) if you purchase a commercial License they will respond to you WWWWAAAAAAAY Faster.  Every Software vendor is the same in this regard. If you Have ProSim or SimA I would like you to let me know how long it takes you to get your questions answered. (Same thing)

Hey Trevor, I knew that by making my comments I would have to defend it one way or another. So, without sounding negative towards you, I think PM is great and if anyone knows me, you'd know that I only use PM and for many, many years. I do have ProSim737, but I still use PM because that is what I've worked on the longest. However, my comments are based on emailing Enrico over the years and getting things firsthand from him, as well as working on the PM flight model in beta, trying to fix the VNAV issues, and solve the landing issues where you'd get s-turns during ILS locks.

The forums were always a problem for PM because they spent too much time trying to resolve all the problems hobbyists might face. With PM being used for larger paying, training companies that have specific needs and where Enrico can do his best to keep any issues to minimums, he preferred that over all the problems that home or hobby users faced. Not because PM has a lot of issues, but because users are just...users in the end. So, when a user cannot even read the manual from PM, and then post on the forum about how much problem they're having, it only makes things look bad, even though they're not bad at all.

Pretty much ProSim737 was going the same way last year with their forums or least getting to the point of it because all the time they'd spent resolving "too simple" of issues via the forums. For PM to transfer the forums to MyCockpit was fine, but it was not the same as it was on PM. In other words, forums on the PM site were there for people like Dave Jones, the checking PM out too buy it, type of guy, as well as for the regulars who were looking to get answers that were a little harder to find, but understood that if you went to PM forums, you would be among PM users mostly. Thereby, reducing the likelihood of having a person answering your questions who knew very little about PM...

Best way to say it, is PM forums were specific to PM. Using MyCockpit or even Cockpit Builders is great, but you have a lot of other types of users/builders/program owners...sometimes, giving non-relating answers. That leads me to the PM tickets system; tickets would go unanswered for sure, and yes, you're right, you could always email PM anytime. Most times getting answers right away or sometimes a few days. Not knocking the emailing, but Enrico wanted the ticket system to work, and he said so himself; otherwise, he knew that he would spend too much time just answering emails. Of course, IMHO hobbyists didn't take to ticket system.

That is why I said "PM is dead, but not dead dead...they're just far removed from the simulation world". My point is that PM is still good, but not as prominent as they once were among the simulation world. I was speaking in the terms or realm of the "simulation world" as known by the Hobbyists. The world that you and I work within for our cockpit builds.

Also, PM went after the bigger money and contract businesses, not that it's a fault; instead, there is only a finite amount of home/hobby users and with the competition, that number is even smaller. So, PM needed to keep their business operating like all businesses do, so they're doing what they think is right... It's just like PMDG, they chose their niche of the market to be non-cockpit builders; well, PM is just changing their niche to bigger companies. Yet, the problem still remains for the hobbyists or new, want to be hobbyists; you feel like PM is leaving you.

Dave wrote:  "I wrote to PM Support twice during the past few weeks, only to have my queries be fully ignored.  I read where PM support is supposed to be great, so I don't know what's going on in this case.  Maybe they consider my questions to be so basic as to not be worthy of an answer.  I really don't know."

I am not sure Trevor when you and Matt started doing the forums for PM, but it would have been at least two years ago since that PM forum on MyCockpit has seen much use like the original PM forums on the actual PM site did; most likely right after you left and started Cockpit Builders... The problem is with what David says, that he wants answers to help him decide on whether to purchase PM at all, but he gets no responses from PM staff. And, how would he know to go to MyCockpit to use their version of PM forums or too even come here to Cockpit Builders. There is nothing directing him where to go on PM's website.

Maybe, I should have said Project Magenta is more distant these days. Not sure, but I was just relaying how PM once was compared to nowadays. I am not trying to discourage anyone about PM, I am just stating the truth from my point of view; whereas, your point of view is certainly different from mine...

Best Regards,

John

[Trevor Hale]

Well Said, and thanks for Clearing all that up. 

All I say is Credit where Credit is due.  Nobody is perfect with support, and nobody is perfect when it comes to providing the perfect product.  If they were, there would be no need for competition right?

There is no right or wrong answer every company has its pros and cons.  I started Cockpitbuilders in 2008.  I am pretty sure the Project magenta forums moved in 2006, give or take a year, and when it moved PM didn't make any reference to the move on their site.  We basically took over the userbase and the data.  Don't think anything happened to it after that. (It kind of died)

Great job helping out people though in general. 

Trev

[davjones]

WOW – this sure generated a lot of discussion!   Thanks for all of it!  The part about PM's new direction was especially interesting.  While opinions vary, one thing is plain:  I don't need to expect that when I have a problem that PM will be there to help me.  This board, I'm sure, is the best source of assistance.

Just to quickly answer a few points that y'all brought up, starting with Frank's suggestion that I consider Sim Avionics, I don't think I can do that – as it looks it has to be PM -- unless somebody has a better idea.   The reason is that I'm doing a B737-300 (not an NG), and the only option I know of for the panel is to use PM's 757/767 panel with its steam-type gauges.  Only other way would be to servo-modify real instruments, and while that would be the ideal, my sim would not fly for years.  Granted, the EFIS tubes are not quite in the right layout for a 737-300, but with the various airline options that they include, I can get very close.  At least to start with, I need to use computer-rendered instruments; I just don't know of any other way.

Really, my first choice would be Prosim737.  But, again, I don't really see a practical way of doing it, unless I just used their (free!) systems module, and try to get that to work with the PM glass cockpit/EFIS.  Even if it's possible, it sounds like it could open the door to more problems.  Any other thoughts on this?  Still a possibility -- I haven't committed to PM just yet.

As for John's suggestion that I use FSX instead of FS9, the first reason for that decision is that I want the best frame rates I can possibly get – I'd like to never see it go below 20.  IMO, realism is instantly destroyed the moment the frame rate goes below 18 or so, and with FSX, this is bound to happen. As you said, everybody's still chasing the PC that's powerful enough to run FSX well, and stuttering frames is something I'd like to avoid.  A second consideration is that more PCs would be needed to try to get acceptable frame rates, and I intuitively feel that the more PCs I have in the mix the more problems I'm likely to have.  Third, in my limited observation and experience, FSX isn't as stable as FS9.

As for using SYS cards from FDS, while it might be preferable in some ways, I'm afraid I have too much time and money invested in OpenCockpits to turn back now.  A lot of the time I've spent has been coming to grips with the SIOC scripting language, and now that I have, I'd hate to turn away from it.  I've been pretty happy with OC so far.

John – I think you misunderstood my question about Wide FS.  It was really about the need to use Wide FS on a single-PC setup – not about FSUIPC.  I'm fairly conversant with FSUIPC offsets, how to work with them in SIOC, and also with the block of offsets specifically set up by Pete Dowson for PM.  Your discussion of Wide FS suggests that you agree with me that it's only needed when you have more than one PC in the picture.  All I need to know right now is if I need it for my (temporary) single-PC arrangement to get FS9 and the PM systems demo talking to each other?

I don't know why PM almost insists that you set up a network and jump through all the related hoops before you even begin.  Many know that you just don't need to do all that, at least not to get started.

Does anybody know of a site where there are other SIOC scripts for PM, especially one that includes the master warnings?

Finally, I never heard of Sam Llorca, but if he lives around these parts, I'd like to meet him.  There's only one other builder within a hundred miles that I know of, and I've come to know him pretty well.  Actually, Matt Olieman lives very close by, (though we seldom see him at our FS club meetings) and I was therefore surprised to hear that mycockpit.org is dead.  I had a look at the site today and it seems to be alive and well, although I didn't see the PM forums.  I did see a little "PM discussion" board, but there are only perhaps two dozen threads on it – surely there must be more than that if PM moved them to that site.  Wonder why PM never mentioned moving the forums.  No wonder I couldn't get to them on their site!

Repeating myself briefly, if you want to see what I hope to do with my project, see http://www.60sairlineantiques.net/main-pages/737project.html , especially the page named "The Plan."  As it says there, please let me know if you have any better ideas than mine!

Again, I'll be thankful for any help, including any further discussion my long-winded post may inspire.   

...Dave

Dave Jones
Fort McCoy, Florida   

[TomR]

Hi,

John – I think you misunderstood my question about Wide FS.  It was really about the need to use Wide FS on a single-PC setup – not about FSUIPC.  I'm fairly conversant with FSUIPC offsets, how to work with them in SIOC, and also with the block of offsets specifically set up by Pete Dowson for PM.  Your discussion of Wide FS suggests that you agree with me that it's only needed when you have more than one PC in the picture.  All I need to know right now is if I need it for my (temporary) single-PC arrangement to get FS9 and the PM systems demo talking to each other?

I don't know why PM almost insists that you set up a network and jump through all the related hoops before you even begin.  Many know that you just don't need to do all that, at least not to get started.

for single PC setup you don't need WideFS.

The reason PM start with Network-setup is simple because older PC's and graphic cards couldn't handle OpenGL (PM software) and DirectX (FS9/ FSX / ...) at the same time and gave often OpenGL crashes.
Even newest PC's and Graphic cards don't like that and you will see frame drops when running both on one PC in either PM or FS or may be in both.
That's why it is best to have minimum one PC for FS and another for Avionics displays.
You will find the above problem with all Avionic suites like PM (OpenGL) / SimA (OpenGL) / Prosim (GDI+). For pure testing it works good enough but as always it depends on what you expect and what fulfils your needs.

[Trevor Hale]

Lol perhaps in my long-winded discussion I also misspoke. When I said mycockpit.org was dead.... I meant "not used as much as it used to be"

I don't think we moved old PM posts. Just the member base and started the new forums. Which died really quick and since I have left mycockpit I don't think it gets used much anymore.

In any case the point is moot.


Trev

[Garys]

Although Mycockpit is pretty much a GA/DIY builder forum these days, the Project magenta forum is still going over there and is still a good source for PM builders even if if it isn't to the same standards of the PM forums of the old days.

Even though the PM software itself has had some ups and downs by trying to simulate to many aircraft at once, Ive only ever had to use the ticket system a few times and have always had good support from Enrico. He was even kind enough to make a separate 747-8 style stabtrim gauge for the upper Eicas when I requested that feature, so for me I have to give PM support a thumbs up. 

[Sam Llorca]

I used Project Majenta for many years and love how easy it was to set settings and updates,  in many cases I had to upgrade hard drives or even build a new computer system and with just a computer generated code sent to Project Magenta, I had the new key code in less than 24 hours to keep me flying.
In my case I have to give Project Magenta support a thumbs up too.

[davjones]

My apologies for the delay in responding to the recent round of posts, which I thank everyone for.

On Thomas's say-so that I don't need WideFS for testing, I set up the PM systems demo and got it working nicely.  On my sorry old laptop that is -- it doesn't work my two newer desktops!  I can sort through that though.

I spite of this small victory, I have some reservations about diving into PM.  From the beginning, I've had some disquiet about it, but as I said, I don't see any other way out for a 737-300. 

I'm not the type who minds paying top dollar for top quality.  The problem here is that the lack of support, awkward website, lack of forums, and so forth are part of the product as a whole, and are below par.  Overall feeling is that they want to deal on a sell-it-and-forget-it basis.  I can't help but compare this to a most helpful email exchange I had with one of the top wheels at PS 737 a couple of months ago.

I saw that Gary and Sam have had good experiences with PM support (and I've read about others), but I don't know how long ago that was.  Things seem to have changed.  Also saw that Gary mentioned that their forums are still alive but I don't know how to get to it.

Despite these misgivings I haven't forgotten that, once set up, PM works brilliantly by most accounts. Makes it a little easier to put up with the background problems.

But it does make me wonder if it's possible to use the Prosim 737 systems module if I use the PM CDU, MCP and GC pieces.  Even if it is, does it sound like an invitation to bigger problems as I go?  Any thoughts on this?

Thanks, John, for your discussion of flight models.  It was helpful, but I'm confused on just one point since the PM documentation stresses that they do not provide a flight model, other than for the professional system -- and that's not compatible with MSFS.  I do understand now that the others do provide their own.

But that discussion leads me to another question that's been nagging at me for some time.  What about the exterior models?  Granted, for a full-size sim you don't really need it, but outside views and wing views in replay is a feature of Flight Sim that I'd like to keep if possible.

It's gonna take a little while to figure out the big picture of how all these pieces fit together -- especially how the PM aircraft relates to the "base" aircraft -- in my case the Wilco PIC 737, especially since PM limits you to the default MSFS panels.  Come to think of it, that's the first question I tried to get PM to answer.....

Thanks again for all the help and thanks also for your patience with my long-winded posts!

...Dave

[blueskydriver]

Hi Dave,

Tell you what, rather then me continue posting in this thread, how about we go offline and you call me on my home phone? I will send you a Private Message (PM) with my phone number and help explain things to you...

John

[Bob Reed]

Hey Dave. We also have a PM forum here. Scroll down and have a look. There are still a number of people using PM and most are willing to help out. I am using some of the PM software once again and I use to run the 737 suit. So why don't we bring the PM forum back to life?

[jackpilot]

Hi Dave

You  may also consider using Flightillusion gauges  for your early 73 instruments coupled with FS9 and PM systems logic for the OVH /pedestal etc.
PMSystems is highly customizable and the guys at Flightillusion can replicate (customize)virtually any gauge.
And you can stay with FS9 ( wise) for fluidity and 180° outside viewing as well as any flightmodel that suits your needs.
I had the same idea (737-200) a few years ago and FI was then ready to embark.
http://flightillusion.com/
This is more sexy than any NG!!

[davjones]

The good information keeps coming.  To start with, I'll be talking to John tomorrow -- hopefully he'll be able to help me get the big picture.

Bob, as I was typing last night's post, I very seriously thought about exactly what you suggest -- resurrecting the PM forum that's already here.  The only reason I backed away from it was seeing that it hadn't been used since May (I think it was,) and I didn't want to sound like I was in favor of beating something that's already dead. But if you feel that it can be revived and made the de facto PM forum, I'm surely all in favor of it.  Who knows -- maybe someday I'll know enough that I could even help out, instead of just being the one with all the questions.   

Gary -- have you seen the forums at PM recently?  You said they're still active, but I can't find a way there.

Jack -- I looked at Flight Illusion several times in the past -- and just now.  On the one hand, they seem to be working in the direction I need, but the cost, when you figure how many instruments you need (two of everything except engines) plus the supporting hardware, you start to see that you'll run out of money at some point.  Plus one thing they don't seem to have worked out yet -- but may later -- is mechanical digital displays.  Take the ASI for one example -- it needs to show the Mach number (digitally) and a digital indication of the actual IAS.  Don't see any bugs in the pix either.  I think I need to start out with computer-rendered instruments, and keep this open as a possible road to a major upgrade in the future, while at the same time giving them time to further refine their product line, which I assume is one of their normal activities.  Could end up being great, but I don't know about for right now.

Hoping John can help me to understand much more than I do now, and maybe from now on I can post my questions and problems maybe just one or two at a time.  And Bob, please keep us posted on the idea of bringing the PM forums back to life -- it's badly needed.

Thanks again for all the help and great discussion.

...Dave     

[Garys]

Hi Dave,

The forums are over at www.mycockpit.org  scroll to the bottom of the forum index page and you will see PM 4th from the bottom (underneath the fly engravity forum) in the advertisers support forum section.

To answer your other question, I have a small issue that is currently being worked on and in trying to troubleshoot if it was a software issue or hardware issue, I logged a ticket early last week and had a reply on the same day too both of my questions.

[davjones]

the Project magenta forum is still going over there and is still a good source for PM builders even if if it isn't to the same standards of the PM forums of the old days.

Gary --

My apologies -- I misunderstood where the PM forums were still going.  I was thinking you were talking about at PM -- and wondering why I couldn't find my way -- but I realize from your latest post that you were talking about at mycockpit.   I was aware of that forum but hadn't paid enough attention to it.  Now it all makes sense.

Still, if we can revive the PM forum here, I'm all for it.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

...Dave

[HarryZ]

that from what I have seen, I would take my Project Magenta over Sim Avionics any day!

I used PM for several years and recently switched over to SimA.  No contest when comparing the two.  SimA, in my opinion, is head and shoulders above PM. More detailed, more realism and works off one computer as opposed to the several required by PM.

PM's tech support isn't what it used to be and I too never got replies to some of my queries.

[Trevor Hale]

See there is the problem with the flightsim world.  Some have great experiences with some software/hardware, and others have crap experiences with that same software/hardware.  There is no fluidity.  No common Ground, and no consistancy.

Just goes to prove the fact that you can't keep everyone happy.

People are always pushing the envelope compared to what they want (Feature wise) and others are just looking for a stable solution.  That the beauty of Trial software I guess.

Seems that most FSSoftware companies provide the Taillight warranty. (As soon as you leave the store so does the support).

Moral of the story is do your own research, and as soon as you purchase something, if you don't like it, you only have yourself to blame.

[Garys]

Unless of course you bought software based on false promises.... but you've already heard that story 

[Sam Llorca]

Or unless you express your opinion on a site and is not well accepted by the supplier, there goes your customers service, or if you want to be independent and tried another software that you think it would work better on your setup or just to be curious about it and the previous supplier finds out, there goes your customer service also, it shouldn't be like that, but we are humans right? It happens, in my case I tried  not to bother the suppliers anymore and tried to solve my issues on my own, is better for your health.