By George Pabon 1302748
#502280 Hi everyone,

I've been using VATSIM for over a week and love it. It worked great with X-plane and the IXEG 737. I also tried vPilot with FSX and PMDG's 777 and it worked great. I decided to try PSX 10, Xview, X-plane 10.45, and XSquawkBox. Both origin and destination controllers couldn't see my transponder on the ground. Once I got airborne, the transponder worked fine for a flight until I cleared the runway. The destination controller asked me if I turned off the transponder, but I didn't. Any ideas on how to force the transponder to operate on the ground with this setup?

Thanks,

George
By Christopher Collins 1304731
#502288
George Pabon 1302748 wrote:Hi everyone,

I've been using VATSIM for over a week and love it. It worked great with X-plane and the IXEG 737. I also tried vPilot with FSX and PMDG's 777 and it worked great. I decided to try PSX 10, Xview, X-plane 10.45, and XSquawkBox. Both origin and destination controllers couldn't see my transponder on the ground. Once I got airborne, the transponder worked fine for a flight until I cleared the runway. The destination controller asked me if I turned off the transponder, but I didn't. Any ideas on how to force the transponder to operate on the ground with this setup?


Uh, please don't.

XView + XSB are known to not play nicely - The big problem is that XView bypasses the aircraft model in XPlane and so practically no data makes it into XSB to report to the network. It results in all sorts of strangeness for the controllers.

Whilst I would like to work with the XView developer to fix it, I don't actually have the time right now to chase him up and try to work out how we can make it work. (I do have PSX so I do know what you're talking about).
By Roger Harris 851201
#520492 Hi guys. 18 months since the last post in this thread.

Has any progress been made on this? I was on the point of buying PSX when my researches showed up this problem. I want to use Xplane 11 as the visuals for PSX and fly that way on VATSIM. Any further developments?

Thanks,

Roger.