[BUG] G1000 reversionary mode electrical power

Dear Asobo, In order to configure the G1000 units to support reversionary mode
we have to put the following XML tag inside panel.xml:

      1.   2.   Systems_AS1000
  3.   AS1000_PFD
  4.   AS1000_MFD
  5. 

However when you have more than 1 PFD unit, after doing this, all the PFD
units get linked to the avionics circuit breaker and lose their independence
and configuration they had on each electric circuit configured before. For
example my aircraft has 3 units: Unit 1 is powered via the main Battery BUS.
Unit 2 and Unit 3 are powered by the Avionic BUS. When you turn on the battery
only the first unit must be ON… when you flip the avionics switch the other 2
units should also come ON. In addition they are circuit breakers for each
unit, and each circuit can jump or be used to isolate them and turn them ON /
OFF. All this works fine… but as soon as the LOGIC tag goes in, UNIT 1 and
UNIT 3 lose this independence and both are being turned ON and OFF at the same
time. The pictures below illustrates: NO LOGIC TAG INSIDE PANEL.XML:
Correct Electrical behavior…


Correct Electrical behavior…
LOGIC TAG INSIDE PANEL.XML: FAULTY Electrical behavior…
Do you guys have any clue why
this is happening? it seems the Cessna Caravan has the same issue, both PFD
panels are running on the same circuit and you cannot separate them unless you
remove the LOGIC tag from the panel.xml, but if you do this, then you lose the
reversionary mode,… Thanks in advance for any help with this. Note this is
now preventing me from implementing the reversionary mode on my project and
Piper is giving me big head aches because of this, so if you guys could help
me it would be very much apreciated. Regards, Raul

Dear Asobo, In addition to the issue above, every time you hit compile the
light potentiometers of the units loss control and they go offline (black out)
if their light potentiometers are lower than 25% at day or 50% at night…
causing a lot of pain as a developer to work. And as soon as you change the
time night they go OFF… since their auto setting drop the potentiometers /
ambient lighting and boom they black out. Resetting the flight restores
functionality. So it seems to affect only during developing mode, but
considering I hit compile over 2,000 times per day… you can imagine how
frustrating this can become. Something is really off with the tag in
panel.xml, any assistance will be very much appreciated, removing the config
in panel.xml fix all problems but then we are unable to use reversionary
mode… please help… Best, Raul

ASOBO devs, There was a similar issue discussed about 1 year ago about a
problem with the electrical circuit in the core sim. If you make two breakers
and set one to MFD and one to PFD, if you pull the MFD breaker the MFD goes
off. However if you pull the PFD breaker then both went off. The DA40NG would
have this issue if you added working breakers

      1. circuit.41 = Type:CIRCUIT_PFD                        #Connections:bus.2#            Power:10, 15, 20.0#            Name:PFD
  2. circuit.42 = Type:CIRCUIT_MFD                        #Connections:bus.1#            Power:10, 15, 20.0#            Name:MFD
  3.  
  4. my model xml
  5.             
  6.             <UseTemplate Name ="IHIT_ELECTRICAL_Switch_Breaker_CXBY_Template">
  7.                 <CIRCUIT_INDEX>41CIRCUIT_INDEX>
  8.                 <BUS_INDEX>2BUS_INDEX>
  9.             UseTemplate>
  10.  
  11. my model behavior sub xml
  12.     <Template Name="IHIT_ELECTRICAL_Switch_Breaker_CXBY_Template">
  13.         <Parameters Type="Default">
  14.             <CIRCUIT_INDEX>1CIRCUIT_INDEX>
  15.             <BUS_INDEX>1BUS_INDEX>
  16.             <NODE_ID>ELECTRICAL_Switch_Breaker_C1B1NODE_ID>
  17.             <ANIM_NAME>ELECTRICAL_Switch_Breaker_C1B1ANIM_NAME>
  18.         Parameters>
  19.         <UseTemplate Name="ASOBO_ELECTRICAL_Switch_Breaker_Template">
  20.             <NODE_ID>ELECTRICAL_Switch_Breaker_C#CIRCUIT_INDEX#B#BUS_INDEX#
  21.             <ANIM_NAME>ELECTRICAL_Switch_Breaker_C#CIRCUIT_INDEX#B#BUS_INDEX#
  22.             <UseInputEvent ID="ELECTRICAL">
  23.             UseInputEvent>
  24.         UseTemplate>
  25.     Template>

Hello Simbol, What do you mean by hit compile ? Are you building the package
or using the quick reload ? Or something else ? I’d like to reproduce your
issue.

@eidar hi Eidar, yes when I hit build inside MSFS of
my project.

If I do a “reload”
via MSFS menus, the behavior with the lights potentiometer doesn’t occur.
Thanks for looking into this. Best, Raul

Hello again, Can you show me your electrical tag inside your panel.xml for
both screens (MFD and PFD) ? Example:

      1.   2.   AS1000_PFD
  3.   
  4.     
  5.        name="CIRCUIT ON:28" unit="Boolean"/>
  6.        name="CIRCUIT ON:29" unit="Boolean"/>
  7.     
  8.   
  9.

Have you already set the .flt files of your aircraft ? Because doing a build
package
, reloads the container of the aircraft and reads your flt file.

@eidar Yes, but it is irrelevant… doing a “reload” all works… doing a Build
it doesn;t… Note the light potentiometers are set correctly and confirmed via
SimVar Watcher… and yet after hitting build, the units are going offline when
you are at night even when the light potentiometers are set to 30%-50%… this
is a fault in the base core code somewhere… under normal circunstances units
should not go offline until they are below 10%… Also note, if I hit flight
reload… the behavior is not present. Same thing if I come from main menu and
load a flight (gate, runway, etc.). Only occurs when I hit build. In addition,
nothing fix the issues we are explaining with the circuit breakers, etc. that
is remaining a problem not matter what unless you remove the tags from
panel.xml Best, Raul

Hey :slight_smile: Have you seen this message?

@eidar sorry I didn’t… I am getting now the
panel.xml I have and I will attach it with visible for moderators only so you
have have it. Best Raul

Hello @Simbol We have investigate your issues and we
got a fix in intern, can you send us your package (see [3) provide private
content](https://devsupport.flightsimulator.com/articles/5483/how-to-report-a-
bug-or-crash.html)) to see if it work on it ? Best regards, Yohan

Hi @Yoanito many thanks for the help with this.
The package is currently over 2.5GB size. so I am thinking alternatives to
prevent such large upload because I only own BOX.com for
large cloud uploads and as I understand it you guys cannot access
box.com. So either I prepare a sample project with the
problem that is much more smaller and could fit into a free google account,
find alternatives upload places, or if you guys have the fix on SU12 beta I
can wait to test myself. What would be your preference? also please let me
know what accounts you guys can access from your office (Google, DropBox,
etc.) so I can also try alternative ways to upload the full thing? Best, Raul

Hello @Simbol I’m currently able to access
box.com but if you want you can send us your package via
wetransfer, it’s only up to 2GB, we can also access google drive for example.
Best regards, Yohan

Hi @Yoanito , Ok when I get home tonight I will
upload the file via Box and we can try like that. Thanks for the time for
looking into this issue. Best, Raul

Hello @Simbol, Happy new year! After some digging we
think we’ve found what causes the reversionnary mode to not work properly :
1. System_AS1000 Inside of the panel.xml file, the Logic tag sets a
Handler property to System_AS1000, this refers to a Javascript file handling
the reversionnary logic. This file had two bugs that will be fixed for SU12,
the first one was about not implementing correctly the Electric logic defined
for each instrument in the panel.xml, the second one was about replacing the
MFD with the PFD screen when it fails. If you can’t wait for the fix, you can
still define a new javascript file (e.g System_AS1000_piper.js), reference it
within the Handler property, duplicate the System_AS1000.js code and edit it
to your needs. 2. PFDs should be separated if you want the correct
behavior
In your panel.cfg file, AS1000_PFD_1 and AS1000_PFD_2 textures are
referencing the same HTML instance. So PFD_2 is a literal mirror of PFD_1.
If PFD_1 fails/is turned_off, PFD_2 also fails/turns_off because they are the
same. Defining the PFD_2 Instrument within panel.xml is not useful in that
case. You should had a second VCockpit, for the second texture and set the
Index to 2.

      1. [VCockpit01]
  2. size_mm=1024,768
  3. pixel_size=1024,768
  4. texture=AS1000_PFD_1
  5. background_color=42,42,40
  6. htmlgauge00=NavSystems/WTG1000/PFD/WTG1000_PFD.html?Index=1, 0, 0, 1024,768
  7.  
  8. [VCockpit02]
  9. size_mm=1024,768
  10. pixel_size=1024,768
  11. texture=AS1000_PFD_2
  12. background_color=42,42,40
  13. htmlgauge00=NavSystems/WTG1000/PFD/WTG1000_PFD.html?Index=2, 0, 0, 1024,768
  14.  
  15. [VCockpit03]
  16. size_mm=1024,768
  17. pixel_size=1024,768
  18. texture=AS1000_PFD_3
  19. background_color=42,42,40
  20. htmlgauge00=NavSystems/WTG1000/MFD/WTG1000_MFD.html,0,0,1024,768

Conclusion : I’ve tried all those fixes in your plane package and it seems
to be working properly on my side. Don’t hesitate if you have other questions
or misunderstandings. Have a nice day, Eran

Hi @eidar , Many thanks for your message and
confirmation. I am glad to hear you guys found the issue, Working Title
advised me they don’t support independent units at this time so I replicated
what was done with the Cessna Caravan, basically the units always mirror I did
try it before hehe. But in terms to simulate the power outage yes I have done
your suggestion number 2 a few weeks back. Regarding the System_AS1000 I think
my product will be released prior to SU12 being available for general public
access, therefore would it be possible to share the fix with me so I can
implement it on my side (how to correct the bugs)? I am also not clear how to
do this:

      1. reference it withing the Handler property

Can you share the steps to perform this task in the panel.xml? remember we
still don’t have any documentation about these things (HTML / JS, Coherent) so
we are unable to do such stuff unless we have some samples to look at inside
MSFS core airplanes, I don’t think we have any doing this at the moment right?
Best, Raul