Carenado A36 semi-blank PFD

[ryanbatc]

My first XP purchase... not going so well *sigh*

 

I get this semi-blank PFD that flashes between normal display and this... then after a few min XP freezes (or immediately after I press autopilot buttons)

 

Running latest XP10 beta x64 with HDR mode off. 

 

Win7 x64 SP1, i5 2500K @ 4.4GHz, 8GB ram, GTX 570 stock speeds

 

[ryanbatc]

Edit:  In addition to that I've got another bug with the course setting... it rolls past 360 ... see the example.  I've noticed this with other XP10 addons as well... 

 

GRRRR not happy at the moment

 

[steven winslow]

This is not the best place to post support questions on Carenado products.  I wish I could tell you what is causing this problem, but I can't even begin without your log.txt.  You should post this issue and your log.txt here:

 

http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showforum=106

 

and here:

 

https://carenado.zendesk.com/home

 

Check the knowledge base at Carenado's site and if you can't find the answer, post a question.  If you can't post at the org and you need Dan's contact information, I can provide that to you by PM.

[dainja556]

I seriously wonder if there is any quality control element at all with the Carenado planes being released on X-Plane. 

[ryanbatc]

That's helpful... I didn't even know they had a support forum... thanks

[Femke]

I found a similar problem to the missing figures and backgrounds on the glass panels on the Bombardier Challenger from dden PFD and MFD panels that is.

It has only happened since I installed their latest 64 bit SASL and only happens with HDR enabled.

As ddens' support only appears to be available at the borg, from where I am banned I have no way of contacting the developer to find out if he can give me some advice on the problem.

Shame we cannot get him to come here and join our forum also.

It just means I no longer purchase addons from developers who only supply support at the .org exclusively no matter how desirable.

[PWJT8D]

I've been having the same issues with the PFD blanking out. The last time it happened to me I reset all systems to operating correctly in the aircraft failures and that cured it  :/

[Femke]

I checked aircraft failures first, nothing was showing and the fact that enabling and disabling HDR multi times with each change resulting in the same fault seems to be pointing to some sort of compatability problem between the updated plugin and X-Planes hdr.

[Mario Donick]

This is not Carenado's fault, but the well-known Lua memory problem. As SASL uses Lua, SASL has lots of out of memory errors in 64 bit mode on Windows. Neither Carenado nor the SASL author can do anything about it -- it will be fixed by Laminarin XP 10.30.

(Even if you're banned from the .org, it helps to follow the support forums there.)

[Femke]

Errm its not made by Carenado its ddens bombardier challenger. My problem is not apportioning blame for the incompatability problem it is the fact that this particular developer only provides support through the org which I have no access to for asking for help.

Ahh my bad I hijacked the thread a bit, and I think you answered both mine and the OP's posting. My apologies.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Femke

[ryanbatc]

Thanks Mario...  that's what I discovered...

 

Seems 64bit is still a WIP.  Are there any downfalls to flying in x86 XP10?

[Cameron]

Are there any downfalls to flying in x86 XP10?

 

Highly dependent on your rendering config. Aside from the limitation in how much ram the sim can use in 32-bit, no, nothing else is different. Give it a shot!

[steven winslow]

I seriously wonder if there is any quality control element at all with the Carenado planes being released on X-Plane. 

 

Before you make comments like this it would behoove you to know the source of the problem.  It's not a Carenado problem as Mario mentioned.  Your snide comment does nothing to help solve the issue.

 

Again, if you're having problems with a Carenado product, why in the world would you look for a solution here?  Click on the links I've provided above and you will surely get the answers and support you need.

[Cameron]

Again, if you're having problems with a Carenado product, why in the world would you look for a solution here?

 

Because forums are a great source for questions answered, often times quicker than normal support channels from customers who have already seen and experienced these problems...including you, Steven.

 

Try and see beyond the Cheer Team that you have going on.

[steven winslow]

I was merely suggesting that Carenado customers would get faster support through more appropriate channels where their customer service people hang out and provide timely help and support.  I agree there are numerous forums that are great resources for help and general information and commiseration, but when the question is so specific to a particular product, don't you think it would be more appropriate and efficient to contact the developer through established lines of communication?  That seems much more effective to me.

 

I find it interesting you selectively refuse to give support to the CRJ if it was purchased at the org and you tell those customers to get help over there, and yet you are suggesting this is a good place to get support for Carenado products? Is that some sort of double standard?

[Cameron]

I agree there are numerous forums that are great resources for help and general information and commiseration, but when the question is so specific to a particular product, don't you think it would be more appropriate and efficient to contact the developer through established lines of communication?

 

Efficiency is up for debate. Appropriate? Depends, I suppose. It is definitely a suggestion I would offer. That said, it's obvious this is not a single persons issue. Carenado products are (presumably) in the hands of many. Limiting your support stream as an end user to one plance when you have forums at your fingertips is almost silly. I often times go to the forums for help on things I need (X-Plane or not) because I know I will often times get answers WAY faster than a company can get back to me.

 

 

I find it interesting you selectively refuse to give support to the CRJ if it was purchased at the org and you tell those customers to get help over there, and yet you are suggesting this is a good place to get support for Carenado products? Is that some sort of double standard?

 

No, but nice try. 

 

The primary issue here is that the CRJ does not ship the same plug-in OR activation method between the various stores. File and folder structures are also different. As such, telling someone to try something that does not apply to the X-Aviation version or vice versa is purely frustrating for the customer. Chances are that majority of the customers here in the CRJ forum are X-Aviation customers, and used to the X-Aviation way. The same policy exists at the org for the very same product, and it's not personal. The experience is different in many regards, and as such, support is split. This is a much different situation than that of Carenado products (and many others for that matter).

[dainja556]

Your snide comment does nothing to help solve the issue.

 

Wasn't intended to.

 

 

Before you make comments like this it would behoove you to know the source of the problem.  It's not a Carenado problem as Mario mentioned.

 

I'm not referring to the blank PFD.  About that, though, it sounds to me like Carenado released a product that, when you use the platform they chose and claimed compatibility with, results in problems.  Regardless of the technical source of the problem, If they're going to claim that the plane works on that version of X-Plane and on that platform, perhaps that should have been verified prior to shipping it.  If there were good quality control measures in place, perhaps that incompatibility would have been discovered and it could have been disclosed to potential buyers.  I don't know that much about the blank PFD problem though, I haven't looked into it much.  That's not what I was referring to, though.

 

What I'm referring to is the myriad of problems that the Carenado planes have when they're released.  All of them things that would have been caught if there was decent quality control.  Just off the top of my head:  the Cessna 208 missing a hand on the altimeter, the transponder light not working, the engine response being a large departure from reality.  Some other recent plane having a compass that rolled over at something other than 360, turn coordinator broken, transponder dial not functional.

 

These are all things that were present upon release.  These were all things that could have been found by a little bit of flight testing.

 

If they're missing such obvious things, it really makes me wonder how much effort is put into the behind he scenes stuff.  Are they just bringing the model and textures over, making the gauges work, slapping together a flight model, and shipping it?

 

Their support is great.  They seem to get issues fixed pretty quickly once a customer points them out.  But why are customers the ones to discover all of these really obvious screw ups?

Edited April 5, 2013 by dainja556

[steven winslow]

These were all things that could have been found by a little bit of flight testing.

You're absolutely right. I can attest to the fact that there is a fair amount of testing, but there are so many things to be checked that some of those little things (and some not so little things) get overlooked. But I don't think there's been a payware product from ANY developer released over the past two years that hasn't had glitches upon release that required some sort of patch or work around. Even this forum is full of threads seeking help with issues with various payware. That doesn't relieve Carenado, or any other developer, from the responsibility to try to put out a perfect product. That is the goal and some day it will be achieved.

 

Are they just bringing the model and textures over, making the gauges work, slapping together a flight model, and shipping it?

Short answer, no. There is a lot of work and testing done with each of Carenado's aircraft. That being said, Carenado's timeline for bringing their planes to X-Plane is an unprecedented feat. Nobody has ever attempted to bring so many aircraft to X-Plane in such a short time. It's a lot of work to get done with very short deadlines. There's bound to be things that get missed. The good thing, as you've mentioned, is that Carenado is quick to recognize the issues and resolve them.

 

If they're going to claim that the plane works on that version of X-Plane and on that platform, perhaps that should have been verified prior to shipping it.

I agree, but until V10 is FINAL FINAL, there are bound to be things pop up without warning to developers. From one iteration to the next, X-Plane can break what the developers' thought was fixed. It's a little unfair to put all the blame on the developer when a lot of the issue is created by Laminar and the whole beta and release candidate process.

 

But why are customers the ones to discover all of these really obvious screw ups?

Isn't this the eternal question we ask about X-Plane itself? I think if we take a look at just about any product in the world today, there are thousands of examples of issues the manufacturer missed that were later discovered by consumers. Automobiles, computers, cameras, baby strollers, etc, etc.

I'm grateful for all the work done by all X-Plane developers. Over the past couple of years I have become more aware of the inner workings of X-Plane and the X-Plane community and I have been given some insight into all the work that goes into these products. I think we have a tendency to hold these guys to fairly high standards and when a product comes out with a wart or two we are not very kind or patient about it. Not only do we want "it" NOW, we want "it" PERFECT! As long as developers continue to provide good customer service and are responsive to the issues, I think we should be a little more forgiving of a few oversights, while encouraging them to be more diligent in their quality control.

Edited April 6, 2013 by steven winslow