Update Douglas_C-47_Beta_V3.14 feedback and support topic

[ncooper]

Hello,

In my copy, the click spots all work in the predefined views except in the overhead views for the captain and first officer.
I suspect that this is because the view points are just outside the model, this is the usual cause of click spots not working.

I have made some small changes, please back up your aircraft.cfg file.
Then copy all the text in the attached file and paste it over all the camera definitions at the end of the aircraft.cfg file.

You should then find that click spots work in all the included predefined views.

[tgycgijoes]

I will be able to try that later or tomorrow. Thank you for taking the time to fix it for me.

Richard

[tgycgijoes]

Thank you for that. I don't understand what click spots. I just went through all 39 pages of the manual and did not find a reference to any or else I missed a diagram somewhere.

I don't have any problem seeing a camera view with HotKeySelect= (4-9). My question is: when I select a camera view with HotKeySelect, when in that particular camera view, none of the switches or levers are operable. They are only operable in the regular virtual cockpit and have to be navigated to with the hat switch to be clickable. It is much easier to be looking straight on at a particular area like the FO overhead or the throttle quadrant than to be looking at it from a 45 degree angle which is what is now occurring. I have not had nor do have this problem with any other aircraft freeware or payware. Need some advice please. Or are you all aware of this and it is to be a future update to be fixed.

[ncooper]

Hello,
I could not replicate what you assert, except in the two predefined views.
By click spots I meant switches, controls etc where the mouse cursor turns
into a hand and allows the control or switch to be moved.
Sorry to confuse.

[tgycgijoes]

Hi Nick,

That is what I meant. In the HotKeySelect= for camera view selection, there are no cursor hands to move the switches only in my VC. I don't think its MY computer or FSX because they work on any other aircraft payware, freeware or default.

At the bottom of the camera view, like the CA Overhead, in the aircraft.cfg, I enter HotKeySelect=4

Now when I press 4 on the keyboard and in the Key Options Select view 4 = 4 has been programmed, you will go directly to the overhead but none of the switches will have a cursor hand to move them.

I hope that I am not insulting because you know what HotKeySelect is. 4 through 9 are user programmable.

[ncooper]

Hello,

I followed your exact method and with my modified cameras definitions, your line added
and View camera 4 set to key 4, I see the Captain's overhead when I press key 4 and all
the switches click.

I have to conclude that you chose not to use the camera definitions that I attached
to my post.

You can quickly add the HotKeySelect=4 etc as you wish.

If you continue to use the existing camera definitions, you will continue to be unable
to click the switches.

[tgycgijoes]

I used your camera def's and then forgot to re-enter the hotkeyselects. I will do that in a minute and hope it works on my computer. Also, I can't find a crossfeed switch anywhere. Is there one? I know the real manuals say "if installed". Checklist calls for a fuel tank check using it.

[tgycgijoes]

Hi Nick,

Thank you for the new camera def's and they work great. I have MCE (Multicrew Experience) which I am one of the voices on (Richard the mechanic) and I just spent the afternoon with the C-47 AAF manuals and created a real checklist to use in MCE which I have tweaked and corrected and it works super. Let me know when you get a chance where that crossfeed valve is. See ya'all later.

Richard

[ncooper]

No problem, I'm pleased it worked.
I'm guessing the crossfeed valve is not installed in this aircraft.

[tgycgijoes]

Ok thanks for all your help

[DCA1161]

In preparation of an event (Market Garden) I need to have the effect dropping paratroopers working in P3D4. With a small modification I have this effect working throughout all versions of P3D even P3D4. For some reason it stopped working. I tested the effect file with the Visual fx tool from the SDK and it works fine, but somehow it cannot be activated with the smoke instruction. In the Key assignments in P3D smoke on/smoke off is connected to the I key. I know that a few gauges in the MJ C-47 does not work in P3D4. Is there anyone to help me out with this? Is it difficult to build a small gauge to activate the smoke instruction? Thanks in advance.
Roy

[DCA1161]

Some instructions on the P3D side of the forum led to the fact that I can now drop paratroopers again.
Roy

[MatzeH84]

Hey,
just installed it into P3Dv4, and everything seems to be working except the cockpit sounds. Fuel pump sound is the standard cessna one, no switch sounds, no callout/ checklists sounds, what works are only the engine/ gear/ flap sounds once the engines start.
Did I miss something during the install? I installed the 3.14 (186-something-MB) zip, the TW soundset and the 3.14 fixes.
I have her also in FSX-SE, there everything is working properly.

Best,
Matthias

[ncooper]

Hello Matthias
Please have a read here
With the new gauge from Doug Dawson installed, all will be well.

[Mr_Dirt]

You need to download the 64 bit sound gauge by Dawson and install it to get the sounds to work. I believe there is a thread about it somewhere on this forum.

[Mr_Dirt]

Sorry NC I did not see your response must have been typing at the same time.

[MatzeH84]

Allright, many thanks guys!

[jandjfrench]

Hi,
While checking the Aircraft.cfg [airplane_geometry] section "htail_pos_vert = -52.7". At least I think I know this can't be right. But when checking the default DC-3 I see the same value. I'm hesitant to make any changes as I don't know if this was done as a "temporary" fix for some other problem and never corrected. Anyone have any info or thoughts on this?
Also does anyone know of any central location where anomalies like this might be posted? I have no idea if this has been brought up before and if so I don't want to waste people's time rehashing this or anything similar. Fantastic plane, of course!
Jim F.

[ncooper]

Hello.

This is way above my pay grade.

Does the aircraft misbehave in some way because of this?

[PhantomTweak]

It all depends on where the "reference" point is.

In this case, it would appear that the position is correct, since that's where the various lights that should be on the top of the tail show up. Easy way to check. Make an entry in the Lights section at about the position that either a) you think the tail should be, or 2) the position the tail IS. Load up the plane and take a look at where the light you added shows up. That will tell you what's going on.

Looking at other positions being called out for the plane, that one looks to be correct for this plane. Just the way the dev created it.

Does that help?
Pat☺

[jandjfrench]

Hi Pat,
I wasn't sure if you were referring to my post but am assuming you were.
Here's a quote from the SDK:
"Vertical distance of the horizontal tail apex (measured at centerline of aircraft) from defined reference point, (feet). This distance is measured positive in the up direction."
I'm interpreting apex as the forward most point of the horizontal tail if it were independent of the aircraft. This would put the apex 52.7 feet below the centerline of the plane. Checking similar sized aircraft shows values which are several feet positive which seems rational.
Jim F.

[ncooper]

Hello again Jim.

I am referring to your posts.

Is there something wrong with the aircraft model that you think might be connected
to this aircraft.cfg file entry?

Have you tried amending the number to the value that you consider to be correct and
if so, what is it about the model that changed?

[PhantomTweak]

Hi Jim. Yes I was.

You're assuming the reference point is at the usual place most devs place it. Apparently, in this case, it's a bit above that.

Like I say, one way to verify it is to put a light there, load up the plane and see where it shows. If it shows up at the top of the fin, you have your answer. It would mean the reference is above where most place theirs.

Or you can do as Mr. Ncooper suggests, and change the - to + ie: just get rid of the minus sign and see what happens. Make sure you save the aircraft.cfg before you make any changes, though.

Alternatively, you can email the Dev and ask him/them.

But like I said, look at some of the light positions. They tell the tale of the tail
Pat☺

[jandjfrench]

Hi again Pat,
I don't know if your familiar with the free "Visualizer" progam but it's simpler to use than placing lights to determine locations. Here's a picture of the C-47.


I tried to draw a green circle at the reference (1/4 chord, centerline, waterline). If you look closely at the encircled area you can see a lateral line there also. The multiple longitudinal lines are 1 foot apart. If you follow the waterline (?) aft you can see that the correct "htail_pos_vert" is approximately 2.5 feet above the waterline. It's strange but after checking numerous aircraft anomalous readings just pop out at you.
When I first posted here my concern was not so much this one strange value but in seeing if there was a specific area in which to post similar things or if this had already been discussed. I have half a dozen or so more questions regarding the aircraft.cfg and without some central place I'll probably post in this thread or start a new thread dedicated to similar questions regarding the C-47. It seems with the plane still in beta now is the time. By the way I always appreciate your replies. You always make an effort to be helpful.
Jim F
Edited for clarity.

[PhantomTweak]

Hi Jim
I've seen references to that program before, but never used it. Maybe time I gave it another look.
You're 100% correct, though. It does look like it's at about 2.5' up. I was wrong, so I apologize.
Maybe there's an aerodynamic reason the placed it were they did. I read something about that in the .air file "bible". They reference the position of the horizontal tail in relation to the wing having some kind of effect. Darned if I can recall the details, though. I'll try to find it again.
Either Mr. Jahn and team had a good reason to place it that way, or it was one of those "through the cracks" things. If the former, perhaps he will tell us what gives, if the latter, maybe he will correct it.
Have you tried placing it at +2.5' and seeing what happens? At worst, it will be uncontrollable, at best, you found and fixed a problem, which is what Beta is for, after all

In any event, I'll give that visualizer a look. As I recall, last time I tried it it didn't work on my system, but that was a while back, and a couple computers ago.
Have fun!
Pat☺