Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:56 pm
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
Almost 3 months on and no fix is forthcoming. Anything to report please?
- Slayer
- Posts: 1517
- Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:26 am
- Contact:
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
I will ask again. Sorry about lack of updates...rayproudfoot wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 10:43 pmAlmost 3 months on and no fix is forthcoming. Anything to report please?
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:56 pm
- Slayer
- Posts: 1517
- Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:26 am
- Contact:
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
It was our intent to update this to work in 5.2 but apparently it isn't possible.
Developers reply: "On indefinite hold due to problems with LM implementation"
I know it isn't the answer you guys wanted to hear, apologies.
Developers reply: "On indefinite hold due to problems with LM implementation"
I know it isn't the answer you guys wanted to hear, apologies.
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:56 pm
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
@Slayer, thanks for your reply even though it staggers me. What could LM have done with a point update that has broken the weather radar code? It was fine in v5.1 but now broken in v5.2HF1.
Can you share LM’s reply with us?
Can you share LM’s reply with us?
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2019 5:07 am
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
You really think LM broke the code that nobody else has an issue with?rayproudfoot wrote: ↑Tue Sep 21, 2021 10:30 pm@Slayer, thanks for your reply even though it staggers me. What could LM have done with a point update that has broken the weather radar code? It was fine in v5.1 but now broken in v5.2HF1.
Can you share LM’s reply with us?
PMDG.FSLABS,Majectic,Aerosoft i dont see anyone else with "LM broke the code" excuses.
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:56 pm
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
Steve,
I would like a fuller answer to my question please? What has broken in P3D v5.2 that makes it impossible for you to make the Wx radar work?
I only bought this gauge in March and a couple of months later it's useless. Strange how Hi-Fi can keep the wx radar working in Active Sky P3D even with v5.2 HF1. Why can't you? Or are you abandoning P3D in favour of MSFS?
I would like a fuller answer to my question please? What has broken in P3D v5.2 that makes it impossible for you to make the Wx radar work?
I only bought this gauge in March and a couple of months later it's useless. Strange how Hi-Fi can keep the wx radar working in Active Sky P3D even with v5.2 HF1. Why can't you? Or are you abandoning P3D in favour of MSFS?
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:56 pm
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
@Slayer, given this gauge is now “dead” how about a credit towards another Milviz product? I only got use out of it for a couple of months.
-
- Posts: 3446
- Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:38 pm
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
Sorry been tied up with other projects so haven't been on the forums.
The issue is we used undocumented hooks to get the data we need. Hi-Fi does the same, but I can't speak for their methods.
Every time a new P3D version comes out, we have to spend a fair amount of time tracing the new hooks down.
We looked at a new option that would get rid of the hooks, as this would make it more worth our while. However there are issues with it that prevent us from using it at this time. As such, I am waiting for LM to fix it before I do any upgrades.
The issue is we used undocumented hooks to get the data we need. Hi-Fi does the same, but I can't speak for their methods.
Every time a new P3D version comes out, we have to spend a fair amount of time tracing the new hooks down.
We looked at a new option that would get rid of the hooks, as this would make it more worth our while. However there are issues with it that prevent us from using it at this time. As such, I am waiting for LM to fix it before I do any upgrades.
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:56 pm
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
@JonathanBleeker,
Thanks for explaining the situation. Are you confident LM are going to fix whatever needs fixing? Have they said the current version has flaws that will be corrected in a point release?
You’ll appreciate it is frustrating that the wx Radar is broken in the Milviz app but works with the Active Sky one.
Thanks for explaining the situation. Are you confident LM are going to fix whatever needs fixing? Have they said the current version has flaws that will be corrected in a point release?
You’ll appreciate it is frustrating that the wx Radar is broken in the Milviz app but works with the Active Sky one.
-
- Posts: 3446
- Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:38 pm
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
We have talked about it, no assurances at this time though.
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2021 4:21 pm
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
Hello!
Now that a P3D V5.3 update has been released, will you consider fixing the WX advantage radar to function with the new version?
I would really like to get this working again as I paid for the V5 upgrade, and can't use it with the updated versions of V5.
Thanks!
-Trent
Now that a P3D V5.3 update has been released, will you consider fixing the WX advantage radar to function with the new version?
I would really like to get this working again as I paid for the V5 upgrade, and can't use it with the updated versions of V5.
Thanks!
-Trent
- Slayer
- Posts: 1517
- Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:26 am
- Contact:
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
It is my understanding that something changed with the way weather works between V5.1 and V5.2 that broke the WXR, to work it would require a fix from LM or a total rewrite of the program (which probably isn't happening)
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2021 5:56 pm
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
With respect why hasn’t the Active Sky weather Radar broken with the same update?
-
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 6:34 pm
Re: Prepar3D v5.2 compatibility
Could we have a little more technical info about what exactly seems to be broken/have changed between 5.1 and 5.2 please? I'd be happy to post at the LM forums asking for a fix there, but I don't think it would be terribly effective without some hard information to press the point. Thanks
