Current SPAD.neXt Release: 0.9.10.0

An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Discussions about new feature ideas.
To request a new feature please open a ticket

I would consider buying a SPAD.neXt Flight Instrument Panel if

It's considerably cheaper than a Saitek/Logitec FIP. (We currently look into a pricepoint of about 60€)
63
17%
It supports higher resolution than 320x240
59
16%
It supports USB3.0
70
19%
It supports LAN connection
29
8%
It supports WiFi connection
21
6%
Has more buttons (>6)
28
8%
Has more radio dials (>2)
25
7%
It's customizable/programmable
65
18%
(I don't care at all. I don't need it)
1
0%
 
Total votes: 361

User avatar
thedazman
Betatester
Posts: 1777
Joined: 28 Mar 2015, 10:47
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Post by thedazman » 30 Nov 2019, 00:33

SPAD currently allows you to run gauges at custom resolution in VFIPs currently so I don’t see a problem SPAD up scaling old gauges x2 to new panels and down scaling new gauges to old hardware, but I’ll let c0nnex answer that properly

Daz
"theDAZman" aka "theGFXguy"
Image
https://fipgauges.com

jonfly
Passenger
Posts: 1
Joined: 15 Dec 2017, 17:51
Status: Offline

Re: An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Post by jonfly » 30 Nov 2019, 01:00

Please consider support for the upcoming FIPs from realsimgear.com

Pic here
Screenshot_2.png
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
c0nnex
Site Admin
Posts: 5419
Joined: 10 Mar 2015, 21:52
Location: Munich, Germany
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Post by c0nnex » 30 Nov 2019, 05:58

jonfly wrote:
30 Nov 2019, 01:00
Please consider support for the upcoming FIPs from realsimgear.com
a) wrong thread
b) Developing Saitek FIP support was a process of almost a year reverse engineering the usb protocl and stuff. I will not do that again. If they want their fip supported they are welcome to contact me.

User avatar
c0nnex
Site Admin
Posts: 5419
Joined: 10 Mar 2015, 21:52
Location: Munich, Germany
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Post by c0nnex » 30 Nov 2019, 06:15

Oz Flyer wrote:
29 Nov 2019, 22:37
higher-resolution displays would be great BUT then there could be compatibility problems with the old FIP's.
Can gauges support 2 resolutions?
There would be three possible ways:
a) Gauge Author provides two resolutions, SPAD.neXt will select the suitable for the device (SPAD.neXt gauge extension)
b) Gauge Author marks gauge as only suitable for one specific resolution and SPAD.neXt will refurse to render it on the wrong device.(SPAD.neXt gauge extension)
b) SPAD.neXt downscales/upscales the gauge on the fly.

I will most likely not implement (c) as it will have perfomance impacts and most likely look really ugly and displaced (worng offsets and stuff).
SPAD.neXt's mission is not to do other people's work.
(It works for vFip's becasue the upscaling is done by Windows itself, and not by SPAD.neXt)
Scenario: You craft a gauge, sell it for XXX bucks, and i have to invest Y Months (unpaid) to make your gauge up-/downscale properly.
For the same reason I stopped at a descent point to bend SPAD.neXt to make all gauges available somewhere render properly. If you follow ESX-Specs it will, if you do unsupported/unspecified stuff it will not.

User avatar
thedazman
Betatester
Posts: 1777
Joined: 28 Mar 2015, 10:47
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Post by thedazman » 30 Nov 2019, 09:27

Without C) means almost twice as much code and double the images.

If they aren’t backwardly compatible you’ll loose 90% sales

I would only support one or the other resolution then. If I got the NEW gauges myself I would update the gauges for the higher res and stop development on the old.

Re realsimgear Panel, that’s CRAZY EXPENSIVE!! AND no physical buttons and a dial short. For both reasons I probably wouldn’t support that I don’t have $4188 free to replace my Saitek FIPs

DAZ
"theDAZman" aka "theGFXguy"
Image
https://fipgauges.com

alain44
Flight Attendant
Posts: 12
Joined: 27 Dec 2016, 10:11
Status: Offline

Re: An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Post by alain44 » 30 Nov 2019, 15:13

Hi,
I have made a market Survey on other products, like RealSimgear G1000 which are quite expensive / too expensive … and in fact not flexible from what I know It is a black box …. I have had a discussion with the General Manager of RealSimGear who confirms to me that it will be very difficult, even for geek person, to write program to adapt their software to particular needs.

In my point of view to propose a solution to have one big screen with all main instruments and gauges is not a good solution because each simmer's configuration is different and simmer's whishes are also differents.

You are already making a lot of efforts to developp and to promote your products. The FipGauges are great I use 10 of them, as the main instruments !!! To adapt the Saitek Gauges to automatize check (e.i) list is relatively accessible with Spad using sim function and events.

I like the solution of individual panels because it is very flexible in terms of functionally and the raisonnable size of Saitek fip is nice.
Simmers are building their cockpit on their way at their speed according to their Financial capacity.

It is out of question to put all my FIP a side and start for a complete new configuration. Too expensive !!!

Tks
Alain

User avatar
thedazman
Betatester
Posts: 1777
Joined: 28 Mar 2015, 10:47
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Post by thedazman » 30 Nov 2019, 16:14

I really like the format of the saitek/logitech fip. It’s modular, decent size, good use of buttons and dials, (with SPAD), resolution is not Toooooo bad but they were never designed to do what we are doing with them today.

They just need to be a LOT faster, cheaper, better powered and slightly higher resolution.

It’s definitely time for an upgrade of the hardware. Backward compatibility would be desirable or even essential for anyone wanting to slowly migrate over. I would develop gauges for a new format or resolutions but couldn’t possibly recode and reimage all my gauges for free either. So sadly I recon we would have to stick with the current 320 x 240 resolution to retain compatibility perhaps.

Daz
"theDAZman" aka "theGFXguy"
Image
https://fipgauges.com

lesoreilly
Captain
Posts: 252
Joined: 31 Jul 2015, 01:07
Status: Offline

Re: An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Post by lesoreilly » 30 Nov 2019, 22:31

The Real Sim Gear unit displayed is a Garmin G5 replica. It is not a FIP......It requires that a HDMI connection be made to a Graphics card and that you are running a specific set of Add On Gauges that will simulate the Garmin G5 PFD and HSI. So these are not like FIP units anyway. It has one Knob with a Button just like the real G5.

You click the knob to bring up the sub menu...Scroll that menu to the desired function and then Click the knob. Now you use the knob to adjust the function. You can also have it auto Reset....example is the PFD to reset to the BARO adjustment so that you just turn for BARO and not have to re select the function after say using it to set HDG or IAS.....

The RSG products are based on Arduino and they do have some config files for changing what functions the buttons and knobs control, but they do use their own software as the Simconnect bridge.

Yes off topic....Sorry...

I love the idea of updated FIPs with Better Resolution.....And For DAZ -- some kind of reasonable upgrade fee would be understood to upgrade them to a higher resolution...

User avatar
thedazman
Betatester
Posts: 1777
Joined: 28 Mar 2015, 10:47
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Post by thedazman » 01 Dec 2019, 00:00

Unfortunately my off the shelf commerce website CORE can't cope with any kind of upgrade/discount based on previous purchases. I'm running fipgauges.com of a NAS drive in my bedroom !!

I think I'll be sticking to 320 x 240 for now, if I can just get extra FPS and stability i'll be happy.

I originally developed these gauges for my own personal use, I was persuaded to sell them on-line. I'm already spending too long on gauge developments beyond my own personal use. I don't want to start from scratch for upgrades. My current gauges do not generate enough revenue for me to even think about giving up just one day a week of my full time job, let alone every hour of my spare time.

My upgrades have been totally free for 4 years too and 90% of my time is working on improvements to existing gauges which doesn't make a penny, while some of that is for my own setup most isn't.

It's too early to make any decisions on what I would or wouldn't do or support. At this time we don't even know if ANY current gauges would work on a new FIP, I think it would be a mistake if there was no backward compatibility and everything hinges on that for me.

Daz
"theDAZman" aka "theGFXguy"
Image
https://fipgauges.com

alain44
Flight Attendant
Posts: 12
Joined: 27 Dec 2016, 10:11
Status: Offline

Re: An alternative Flight Instrument Panel?

Post by alain44 » 01 Dec 2019, 08:52

Hi

I fully agree with DAZ according to thr FIP size, the resolution is not a key issue. The problem is the stability and speed /FPS.

3 different levels must be considered :

- connection between pc and the device (that's the main issue). How to manage the connection between multiples devices and PC? Do you have in your relationships someone who can study with appropriate tools the component of a saitek FIP to understand it? The key point is to know at what place/level the speed restriction takes place? (PC bus, management of usb ports, FIP's device itself, …).

Other approach with the help of Ulrich / DAZ:
Perhaps, it might possible to start a discussion with Logitech to explain them the situation. Is there a solution to rewrite the firmware, to add a new EPROM, to move for USB3 ? ? I Don't know …

- management of the screen
The elegant solution found with the fip is that they don't require a graphic card. It is not possible -if you have several lot of them- to multiply the graphics cards (too heavy, too expensive,...)

- management of funtionalities
I lot of Energy has been deployed to developp i.e. XML at low level the manage functionalities. Animation of images is not so easy, even with the most up-to-date softwares.

Alain

Locked