EuroHarmony Community Forums
Archive => EuroHarmony VA => Old Forum => Technical discussions => Topic started by: EHM-0948 Bruno on March 05, 2007, 09:39:35 am
-
Dear pilots,
We are working on the Flight Logger 3.0.9 version.
Please write here bugs that you found out, or improvements that you would like to see done there.
[We cannot guarantee, still, that all the bugs and improvements told here will be solved out, but we will analyse them all]
-
The missing airborne/landing command problem: I would like to get a message in the ACARS that confirms that the server has gotten these commands.
-
Hi Magnus,
We only know that when you land mate :) ... How can the system know if you will have internet connection on a future situation ? ;D
But, I will try to prevent at least the "Take-off" situation, ok ? :) So you can avoid a 8h trip for nothing ;)
-
Another one is what happend to me recently on PP flight.
After landing and parking, I shut the engines down and got the message 'Log Ended'.
However, when I did a replay of the landing and because the model did not have time to re-open the flaps for the replay, it came down too hard and PP registered a crash which it later put on my account.
Perhaps a solution would be no more communication between FLLogger and the sevrer after the 'Log Ended' stage.
Of course, you being you Bruno, the problem was solved quickly but only via personal intervention and don't want to bother you all the time.
Sotiris
-
Hi,
True Sotiris, that a big bug that surely will be solved on the next version.
Thank you!
-
Hi Bruno,
Just a couple of suggestions... hope they help.
If possible I would like to receive a warning before flying to remind me to start Propilot if planned. I did some flights having locked the flight and then forgot to press the ProPilot button in FLogger !!! :(
Another funny thing is that after sending the flight report, if you resend it by mistake the system records it twice. Shouldn't it realize that the report has been already sent?
Best regards,
Luciano
-
Well Bruno, I don't know how the logger communicates with the server, but there should be a way for the server to send a command to the logger too? So at takeoff, the logger sends the message to the server "Airborne" or whatever. If the logger doesn't get a respons from the server in x seconds, the logger sends the message again, and after say 3 attempts without a response the logger could say there is a problem with the communication. If the logger gets the respons from the server, just add a row in the ACARS. Same procedure for landing. Don't know if it's possible since I don't know how the communication goes, but...
-
Hi Bruno,
Working on 3.0.9? Interesting...
How about:
1. creating a feature to enable stop-overs? There is a huge discussion on the forum somewhere regarding a certain flight from Australia to Europe (i believe). Guess there is enough inspiration to be found there... Would appreciate some sort of "pauze"-button, which would enable basically to 'stitch two (or more) pirep's together'. Like long flights and sometimes fuel-stops cant be avoided as you know. Good, can always work-around it, but that's not as convenient as FLogger is/can be.
2. Am not (yet anyway) flying pro-pilot so was confused the first time i used ver 3.0.8 that even though selecting only class 6 flights, i got choice of class 4 and 5 flights as well. My brother explained it to me later and that clarified matters. However, possibly somewhere in Preferences a tick-box whether FLogger is to behave "ProPilot enabled" (so, like in my case, display class 4, 5 and 6) or not (display only class 6 flights, like the old FLogger did)?
3. The way division and classes are selected in the present version of FLogger is in my opinion a bit "the-other-way-around". When FLogger is started i know already (mostly) what i will fly, and so first have to (for example) disable all divisions except main division and clas 1 to 5. That's 10 clicks(?), where 2 would do to just 'switch on' main division and class 6.
4. Had once a case where i was looking for a particular flight (believe it was EHM-6176, between EHAM and BIKF). Selected main division and class 6 (which showed the class 4, 5 and 6 flights sorted by flight number, see ProPilot comment above). However flight EHM-6176 was definately NOT in the list... First after i entered EHAM for departure and BIKF as destination she suddenly showed up! She really wasn't there earlier! And yes, FLogger database was updated. Small bug in 3.0.8 perhaps?
Some of the above perhaps a bit far fetched, but when work is in progress on a new version anyway...
If i think of something else then will let you know.
Enjoy and best regards,
Stef
EHM-1242
-
Just a suggestion.. Maybe you could put the great circle distance, which is already on the database, on the main reading area enabling us to order flights by distance..
This way it would be easier to find a shorter or longer flight depending on how much time you have available
Best regards
-
Well said Miguel. A great idea that I missed earlier.
-
I don't know if I am committing an error, but when I select a class 4 flight and a class 5 plane I get the red sentence...I think it's "the plane and the flight class don't match"...
Any way to delete it? ;)
-
During the last and this week I have tested EHM 474-400F in F1 livery, used for all the testing flights PP and IVAO network. I must confess it has been a hard work, but I have decided that I'd like to do all F1 Flights with as minimum as possible of penalties. So, I have found out in this version of PP exist a few bugs which are real bugs and the pilot can have practically no influence on protecting not to occur.
1. Starting engines. You must go from No.1 to No 4 and no other way. If the row is not this one, you get a small penalty No. 3. What for? I think it's absolutely the right and a matter of decission how I want to start engines, regardles the standard procedure.
2. The procedures up to the FL 100 are normal and if you fly carefully and by the rules - no problems. The big mama will take off and climb to FL100 without any problems, if you set the speed on AP to 265 kts IAS and climbing rate to 1800 to 2000 ft.
3. Very serious problem may occur much later, when you are flying at your final FL, suppose FL 350 and all goes fine. You are drinking coffe, talk to nicest stewardes, all is fine and then, totaly unexpected, you get the red warning OVERSPEED, even if you have AP at 0.80 M and are allowed to fly 0.86 M. Before you are capable to react.....woooops.....PENALTY! This is uncorrect and unfair, since you simply don't have enough of time to react and slow down. By my oppinion every pilot who finds him or herself in such a situation, must have at least 3 to 5 minutes to react and slow down the bird. After that, the penalty may occur, but correct the PP program in the way I suggest.
3. Shut down engines. This is just the repetition of No. 1 problem. All the rest is okay so far and it is possible to make a flight with the final score zero.
4. In general I would like to suggest also the use of penalty system for too fast taxiing. We all know the speed limitations concerning taxi and this add-on to the system would be interesting in adding to reality.
Peter LGAV HM
-
1.- I don't know whether this is a bug or not but it happens when locking a flight.
For example, when flying a Class 5 plane and getting the possible destinations, it also shows Class 6 flights which obviously can't be flown.
2.- I agree that PP should give the pilot a minimum time to react in order to correct whatever problem may arise during flight. I got a penalty for "Engines on without the Strobes type" just because when at cruise level I mistakenly clicked the mouse when pointing at the Strobe light. It was only a microsecond but that PP whatchman was fully awaken and punished me.
3.- The unfamous "Overspeeding Penalty". I don't use Autothrottle any more because it reacts too slow to wind shifts. Of course this forces you to be watching wind speed and direction all the time. However, last month I got the penalty TWICE even with A/T OFF when flying the A320. As per the aircraft.cfg file the Maximum Indicated Airspeed is 350 kts. Well, the Overspeed warning was activated when the plane hit 330 KIAS on both ocassions. As when the Strobe Light time, I shut the engines in less than 2 seconds but the damage was already done. Question: is the Overspeed flag tied to the aircraft.cfg file or it is a fixed number?
Hector Partidas
EHM-1749
-
Hi All,
Just one idea regarding the STD 29.92 altimer: would it be possible to configure the Transition Altitude. AS this is different from country to country, it should be good to be able to select this transition altitude as Radar Contact allows it as well as FSPassenger. The goal is to have realistic settings and not being forced to use the US based TA of 18000 ft. Obviously this is related to ProPilot, as I got several time the Altimer not set penalty.
Cheers
Kristoff
-
New Problems I experimented while doing the ProPilot Event:
1) Beacon light not turn on : I used the Meljet Model for this flight: Even with engine off, i got this penalty when switching off beacon light => I guess this is because the engine rpm is different from 0 but this is unfair :!
2) STALL detection while the airplane was @ 270 kts !!
3) Penalty because one door was open while engine oN !! As for the topic 1, the engines were switched off, but I guess because of rpm not being 0, I got the PENALTY :!
I accept to get penalty when I do faulty actions, but not under that conditions ...:!
-
During last flight I got a penalty for altimeter not set above FL180...I just pressed the wrong button and the altimeter got to 2991...and then I put it back to 2992 in 2 seconds...The flight logger should wait for some time to record the penalty...:s
-
I'm new here, and already encoutered some gremlins. My virus checker wont let me download flogger, but its been wrong before. Even so, even with anti virus off, It will download but wont install.. any ideas?
-
Hi All,
started my first tour today with the Autumn in Alps tour (straight to the hardest one!!)
apparently it won't let you choose on of the Academy birds for the tour legs. It keeps flashing the red 'not compatible' nessage.
I'm sure that's one of the simplest things to correct.
-
Sotiris, simple work-around is select the plane before the flight, and ignore the "incompatibility" message at that point...
-
As suggested to me by Bruno I am posting here the same point indicated elsewhere:
I think one of the most important thing for a pilot is to monitor his fuel quantity (a recent ATR crash happened because of the wrong gauge installed on the aircraft and insufficient check by the crew). In the beginning I used to fly always with full tanks and 'unlimited fuel' setting. Later, starting to use FSPassengers, I checked more often my fuel, trying to consider the most economical/fast way of flying, with sufficient reserves at destination.
Now, since FLogger monitors the fuel quantity in the aircraft, wouldn't it possible and fair to imagine a penalty for too low/negative fuel at destination? Or even for too much reserve? (but this may be too hard to say for each kind of aircraft).
Cheers,
Luciano
-
Luciano,
you're very correct that fuel is important in the clalculations and should be included in the FLogger.
However, if the calculations results are the same ones that I get after PP flights, than they are occassionally wrong.
OK, I have also cheated with fuel before but there are times when even when the correct fuel is used I get a negative value for the cruise leg in the analysis you get after a PP flight.
Even the authors, acknowledge this and say that the graphs may be incorrect or sometimes not print at all.
Therefore, important as it may be to include fuel in the considerations, I think we need to make sure it measured correctly first.
(People get a false 'wrong altimeter setting' and cry about it, imagine what would happen if 10% of PP flights had a fuel miscalculation and unwarranted penalties.... It would be riots!!;D )
Now, I don't know how the fuel would be calculated but please make sure it's bullet proof. People take their 'false penalties' very seriously apparently :]
-
Just to chip in on the fuel "debate", perhaps in the first instance it would be possible to "lock the filler cap" for PP flights? By preventing in-flight refuelling, you'd per default force people to think a little bit about fuelling at least.
And the nice thing about this change is that it wouldn't overly penalise anyone. Those of us that do it by the book wouldn't be affected, we already use fuel planning to ensure we're not on fumes before we land, and beginners could just be advised to fill up before departure (tankage???). The only possible "victims" would be pilots learning about real-world fuel loads, and as we've all said many times over, don't use PP to learn about a plane...
-
Make it compatible with Vista please, at present I cannot use it. I just get Runtime Error 70
-
Does any more guys like you have that problem that Simon reported ?
Flight Logger doesn't work on Vista ? :o
-
Ok, things that we will correct on this 3.0.9 version:
- No more "penalties after shutdown engines".
- The Great Circular distance has been added on the Timetable datagrid.
- The Transition Level has been also created on a textbox, with the default value of "18000" (in ft).
The rest of your improvements (re-fueling, fuel verification, penalty time delay, etc) need further analysis and are not as detailed as these 3 things.
I'm not saying that they don't make sense ok ? :) ... I am just saying that they will not cover all pilot's agreements or they still need to be more detailed.
We are developing them now. Please wait for more news.
Regards,
-
I can confirm that it does not run out of the box on Vista.... There may be a workaround, I will let you know as Vista has some strange security policies as I am sure you are all aware!
-
The best statement I have seen here sofar is Murray´s: "Don´t use PP to learn to fly a plane". Many of us jump from one plane to another and fly it, or try to, without even bothering to get a good look at the panel. It works good when you are not being monitored because too many details are ignored.
I maybe an old-fashioned pilot (I got my pilot license back in Jan 1969) but I can assure you guys that the procedures remain the same in real life. Now, why it should be different in the sim world? I have said many times that the beauty of the flight simulation is the possibility we have to fly as real as possible. But the problem is that we want to fly as real as possible without performing as real as possible.
Since the very beginning I fell in love with EHM because Propilot. At that time I used (and still do) and application called FS Flight Keeper and for the first time in my 25 years flying FS I found out that I was a very lousy FS pilot. But the whole thing remained between FS FK and myself. FS Passengers is less demanding technically speaking than FSFK but posed some other pressures which are not that bad.
This said, here is my idea for the next PP version:
1.- Capability to monitor pilots carreer in EHM.
This simply means that whenever a pilot is a candidate to be promoted to another rank and is allowed to fly a new fleet, he or she should choose what plane or planes would be the ones to fly.
Once this is confirmed, the pilot MUST fly at leas 10 hours WITHOUT crashing in the new plane. This special training session should be monitored by PP. I am not a computer genius but what I know is that many things can be done today with a computer.
There should be a minimum passing score to get promoted.
Only after getting this 10 hours logged in PP and with a score above the passing leve , the pilot would then be promoted.
This could reduce the crash rate we have.
To finish with this point and speaking about crashes, could it be possible for the MT to make the crashing reports public more or less like the NTSB does? This could help other pilots to learn from others. I realise this is a little bit touchy and that´s why it is only a suggestion.
2.- Capability to monitor the fuel usage.
Many has been said about this issue so I will not get in the details except for one thing:
I am not very sure about how PP calculates fuel usage. For example, if you have a look at the PIREPS for the Kuala Lumpur-Bahrain leg, you can notice a wide variety of quantities. How is that for the same type of plane, the same distance and almost the same flying time the fuel usage in one is 200,000 lbs while the other is about 100,000 lbs?
Sorry for the length of this post but I had to take advantage that my boss is out of the office today and I could not wait until tonight.
Regards,
Hector
-
Hi Hector,
You got some good questions out there.
We are already thinking about the ProPilot v2, and some of the features that we want to implement are related with your Point 1. So, we can't just develop that on Flight Logger because that's not the objective of that software.
The objective of Flight Logger is to analyse your flight. Not to take career decisions or other kind of. That logic needs to be implemented on our site.
The Point-2 is a good point as I said before. But still we need to think about it later. What the flight logger does not is to monitor the "fuel in tanks" that is given by the FSUIPC. Just that.
The Flight Logger doesn't communicate with FS2004 directly. It always uses the FSUIPC software.
Regards,
-
Hi Bruno,
thanks for your explanation. It fits me for I sometimes tend to think about PP and FLogger as if they were a monolytical block which obviously they are not.
Regards,
Hector
-
I have also a problem with the logger: when i want to login it says 'can't find the pilot', like my account doesn't excsits, i only joined yesterday, don't know if that's the problem...
-
Hello, I gather your name is Pieter! :)
The first PIREP you file must be done manually to "activate" your account. At the moment you have a temporary ID (EHM-2CS2) that will change to your proper ID when you have filed your first flight manually.
To file your first PIREP manually, press the Pilot button on the home page then from the links below press the "PIREP" button. This will bring up a page where you can fill out the details of your flight manually. Once this PIREP has been verified by your Hub Manager you will then be issued with your permanent ID so you can use the flogger to file your reports.
If you have any more problems, please feel free to contact one of us or just post here and we will answer you as quickly as we can.
Good luck,
-
ok, thanks for you're reply
I'll do my first flight this evening or tomorrow, keep up the good work for this VA!