Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 310 flaps?
David Megginson wrote: Erik Hofman writes: I know that the DC-3 has inner and outer flaps, but is it true that you cannot see the DC-3 flaps from the top as well? That's correct. I looked it up in a book, and for the inner flaps you don't see the flaps from above. Are the outer flaps visible from above? It shouldn't be too much work to fix up the 3D model. No, What I first thought were the outer flaps turned out to be (part of) the ailerons. Both inner and outer flaps aren't visible from above. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear first impression
Danie Heath wrote: I finally got the sim running. Here's my first impressions * Ground texturing excellent, except taxiways and ramps We are aware of that. But nobody had been able to create new ones ;-) * I've only seen the default aircraft, but I will start development of hi-res aircraft as of now. That's a good thing. One thing to consider is the number of polygons, which we think shouldn't bee too high because of the hardware we want it to run on. * Aircraft handling not too bad. We're (they are) working on it. * Gauges of quite high quality Flightgear is not up to top standard yet, but from what I've seen and heard, I'm incredibly impressed. I'm glad to have joined you guys, and Good to see some new developers joining lately. Welcome. looking forward to some nice developments. As a fan of anti-Microsoft bans, I can't wait to screw Bill Gates and his company with this amazing piece of software. Hmmm. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Plane above the runway
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 It appears that the plane is above the runway at least with the c172. David -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8gfQmF2H7v0XOYBIRAvWbAJ9aN6YmdPWSU7csgRP6GEyrSoP48wCggFIH PNQauPIfCh1Kn6bI9juBmAY= =gs/k -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear first impression
On Sunday 03 March 2002 04:56 am, you wrote: Danie Heath wrote: I finally got the sim running. Here's my first impressions * Ground texturing excellent, except taxiways and ramps We are aware of that. But nobody had been able to create new ones ;-) * I've only seen the default aircraft, but I will start development of hi-res aircraft as of now. That's a good thing. One thing to consider is the number of polygons, which we think shouldn't bee too high because of the hardware we want it to run on. Also, there is currently a bug in the model loader that is preventing the default model from being smoothed. * Aircraft handling not too bad. We're (they are) working on it. * Gauges of quite high quality Flightgear is not up to top standard yet, but from what I've seen and heard, I'm incredibly impressed. I'm glad to have joined you guys, and Good to see some new developers joining lately. Welcome. looking forward to some nice developments. As a fan of anti-Microsoft bans, I can't wait to screw Bill Gates and his company with this amazing piece of software. Hmmm. I haven't heard that 'tude in a while either. FWIW Danie, we have our share of developers who are windows guys. Anyway, looking forward to your contibutions. TTYL John ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
re: [Flightgear-devel] Plane above the runway
David Findlay writes: It appears that the plane is above the runway at least with the c172. It's very hard to get it exactly right. The problem is that both JSBSim and YASim sample only one ground position for the elevation under all gear, but nearly every surface in FlightGear slopes at least slightly. That means that when you look from the right, the wheels might appear to be floating 6 in above the ground, while from the left, the wheels might appear to be sunk 6 in underground. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear first impression
John Check writes: That's a good thing. One thing to consider is the number of polygons, which we think shouldn't bee too high because of the hardware we want it to run on. Also, there is currently a bug in the model loader that is preventing the default model from being smoothed. If he's not using the latest CVS, the default model he's referring to might be the yellow and blue glider. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
re: [Flightgear-devel] Plane above the runway
David Megginson writes: David Findlay writes: It appears that the plane is above the runway at least with the c172. It's very hard to get it exactly right. The problem is that both JSBSim and YASim sample only one ground position for the elevation under all gear, but nearly every surface in FlightGear slopes at least slightly. That means that when you look from the right, the wheels might appear to be floating 6 in above the ground, while from the left, the wheels might appear to be sunk 6 in underground. Also, with out shadows and other depth cues, the scene is often too 'ambiguous' for us to properly judge the relative placement of objects in the scene: http://vision.psych.umn.edu/www/people/cindee/glueimages.html Another thing that might be helpful is if the FDM's would report the amount of each gear compression to FlightGear so that could be animated (and hopefully keep the tires above the ground.) Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear first impression
Danie Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: forward to some nice developments. As a fan of anti-Microsoft bans, I can't wait to screw Bill Gates and his company with this amazing piece of software. OT We have a lot to thank Bill Gates for, including the way he (especially) and others got under Richard Stallman's (and others) skin with their shrink-wrap revolution. We owe Bill a debt of gratitude for making sure that open source became a popular idea, even for windows users and developers. :-D Mainly it's just fun to work on something great that's unencumbered by business goals. Welcome! /OT Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] ancient 'ascii' scenery format
I would be able to clean up a *lot* of code if I could jettison support for the old 'ascii' scenery format. None of the scenery on the ftp server is in the old ascii format. It consumes more space to represent the same geometry, file loading is slower, it hasn't been updated to support newer features of flightgear (nor do I want to do this.) The code to support this format is messy, and continuing to support it is messy, and we could clean up a lot of this by just dropping support for the ascii format Is anyone still using this ancient file format? Does anyone have any objections to ending support in flightgear for it? Thanks, Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Autopilot update
Hi Curt, Wanted to make sure I was familiar with all the functions in the autopilot code before making a lot of changes. So to that end I did some work on the gui interface to the waypoint stuff and checked out the waypoint following to make sure it is still working. Description of changes: These changes add to the Add Waypoint dialog so that you can see the entire list in the pui dialog that you are adding to. Also made some minor changes so that the autopilot is now activated (toward first waypoint target heading) when a waypoint is added. Tar file of changed modules (current with CVS as of 03-03-2002 13:18): http://www.spiderbark.com/fgfs/autogui-20020303.tar.gz Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear first impression
Jim Wilson writes: OT We have a lot to thank Bill Gates for, including the way he (especially) and others got under Richard Stallman's (and others) skin with their shrink-wrap revolution. We owe Bill a debt of gratitude for making sure that open source became a popular idea, even for windows users and developers. :-D Hmm -- as I recall, it was ATT and Sun that got under Stallman's skin, especially when ATT started requiring a license for the Unix code. Microsoft was barely on the radar screen then, any more than, say, Nintendo is today for computer researchers. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
re: [Flightgear-devel] ancient 'ascii' scenery format
Curtis L. Olson writes: Is anyone still using this ancient file format? Does anyone have any objections to ending support in flightgear for it? I think that PPE has support for the old ASCII format but not the new binary one. Other than that, chuck it. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear first impression
Jim Wilson writes: Yes, originally, that's correct. Something to do with ATT and a printer driver, I think. I was just speaking of Bill...since back in those days the profile for Stallman's project was lower too. That is to mean lower than after the mid eighties, when desktop/workstation unix emerged, not to mention later with linux. The and others are significant. If it wasn't for Bill, linux probably would not be where it is today. Maybe, but I'd give the two Andys more credit than Bill. In the early 90's, Andy Tannenbaum was uncooperative enough that Linus decided to fork Linux rather than providing i386 patches to Linux (I was on the Minix list at the time); by the late 90's, Andy Grove's Intel made cheap desktop hardware powerful enough to provide a reasonable alternative to painfully overpriced servers from Sun, IBM, and (once upon a time) DEC. Strife with Microsoft gets Linux its press, but they're not really in competition -- you'd have to be nuts to try to build something like Google using WinNT or Win2K (heck, even Microsoft knows not to use Windows for HotMail), and you'd have to be almost as crazy to try to convince a big company to switch to Linux on the desktop. Microsoft may be lusting after the server market with its bigger margins, but they're not smart enough to get much of it above the workgroup level; Linux advocates may be lusting after the desktop with its high visibility and coolness factor, but it's probably too late to grab it, even if they weren't all bogged down into the KDE vs. Gnome wars. It's Sun and IBM that Linux is hurting, much more effectively than Microsoft ever could; IBM is trying an if-we-can't-beat-them-join-them campaign, but that doesn't change the fact that cheap Intel hardware running Linux in a cluster beats the stuffing out of any big iron from Sun or IBM by a couple of orders of magnitude (both in cost and performance). Google is a famous public example of this fact, but there are several private examples I've been involved with that are even more dramatic. It does Fortune 50 companies no good to make public noise about how important Linux is to their operations (they still need goodwill from the commercial vendors), but trust me, it's mission critical to at least one I've been involved with, and it's not Microsoft who's losing the sales. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Virtual Cockpit!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 17:32, you wrote: I spent most of today working on a virtual cockpit interface for the panel, and I'll be damned, it works! Umm, one problem. When you look down, the panel follows the bottom of the screen. Other than that it's great. We just need the interiors of the aircraft now. Thanks, David -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8grs7F2H7v0XOYBIRArtrAJ0X+ane8AzP/GLlE24yPvtxUKiTIwCeJVtJ GdjLSawJQGXVj1vs3grzgaU= =ttbI -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ancient 'ascii' scenery format
One thing to remember, once you leave the ASCII format, the platform's byte order becomes important. When you start storing data in binary format, you might want to use network format so the standard hton*() routines can be used. This probably seems obvious, but most of the network code I have seen assumes that all platforms share the same byte order (usually little-endian). Jonathan Polley On Sunday, March 3, 2002, at 03:08 PM, David Megginson wrote: Curtis L. Olson writes: Is anyone still using this ancient file format? Does anyone have any objections to ending support in flightgear for it? I think that PPE has support for the old ASCII format but not the new binary one. Other than that, chuck it. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ancient 'ascii' scenery format
Jonathan Polley writes: One thing to remember, once you leave the ASCII format, the platform's byte order becomes important. When you start storing data in binary format, you might want to use network format so the standard hton*() routines can be used. This probably seems obvious, but most of the network code I have seen assumes that all platforms share the same byte order (usually little-endian). Yes, the binary scenery format and loader should be endian aware. We have been running with the binary format for a year (at least?) so the endian issues should be already taken care of. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 310 Model
David Megginson wrote: For some reason, the animations are not working with the YASim Cessna 310 model (despite the fact that the same kinds of animations work fine with the YASim DC-3). I cannot find anything obvious in the config file, but perhaps Andy could take a glance. It's not exporting any properties. :) I was lazy when I did the new XML files, and only did property exports for the aircraft that I could test visually. All that's necessary is to clone the control-output tags from the DC-3, which should be identical in all ways. I'll get a new one put together soon, if you don't want to do it yourself. Andy -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 310 Model
Andy Ross writes: It's not exporting any properties. :) I was lazy when I did the new XML files, and only did property exports for the aircraft that I could test visually. All that's necessary is to clone the control-output tags from the DC-3, which should be identical in all ways. I'll get a new one put together soon, if you don't want to do it yourself. I did it today. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 310 Model
It's not exporting any properties. :) I was lazy when I did the new XML files, and only did property exports for the aircraft that I could test visually. All that's necessary is to clone the control-output tags from the DC-3, which should be identical in all ways. I'll get a new one put together soon, if you don't want to do it yourself. I added the tags to the 747 file, but it appears the code is not exporting a value for the nose gear or the flap settings. Did a grep on flap-pos-norm, find the property in JSBSim but nothing in YASsim. Source was downloaded from CVS Sat afternoon. Regards JW ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Virtual Cockpit!
David Findlay wrote: Andy Ross wrote: I spent most of today working on a virtual cockpit interface for the panel, and I'll be damned, it works! Umm, one problem. When you look down, the panel follows the bottom of the screen. Other than that it's great. We just need the interiors of the aircraft now. Thanks, Er, hm? That sounds like you're describing the regular panel, not the virtual one. It should be fixed in space in front of the aircraft. Is it possible that you're trying to scroll it around with the existing scroll panel keys bound to the function keys? Those aren't appropriate in this context, you want to modify the view direction instead, via the /sim/view/goal-offset-deg and /sim/view/goal-tile-deg properties. My original patch included hints for getting this working using a hat switch. If the bug you were seeing was that the gauges were moving while the background stayed fixed, then this is the most likely explanation. That turned out to be a bug in the panel renderer that double-offseted the gauges when drawing them. David and Curt have a patch in the queue for this. Andy -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Plane above the runway
Curtis L. Olson wrote: David Megginson writes: David Findlay writes: It appears that the plane is above the runway at least with the c172. It's very hard to get it exactly right. Another thing that might be helpful is if the FDM's would report the amount of each gear compression to FlightGear so that could be animated (and hopefully keep the tires above the ground.) No problems there. YASim now reports this number in /gear/gears[n]/compression-norm (should be an OK choice, according to our rapidly evolving property conventions). The remaining problems are only bookkeeping. We need to make exactly certain that the FDM and the model agree on the placement of the gear and their direction of compression. Andy -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 310 Model
John Wojnaroski wrote: I added the tags to the 747 file, but it appears the code is not exporting a value for the nose gear or the flap settings. Can you post what you changed? I'm not sure from the above exactly which tags went where. Certainly, if you put the right tags in the right places, it should work. :) As with all bug reports: the more you can tell me, the more help I can give. Did a grep on flap-pos-norm, find the property in JSBSim but nothing in YASsim. Source was downloaded from CVS Sat afternoon. It's not there. The property interface is soft-coded. YASim is directed by its configuration file to put the specified control value in the specified place. So this: wing ... control-output control=FLAP0 prop=/surface-positions/flap-pos-norm/ /wing ... tells it to place the final FLAP0 setting for that wing (typically the inner/landing flap for most wing objects) into the specified property. Andy -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Virtual Cockpit!
There is another bug: when you look down in the cockpit and then hit 'v' (external view), the 3D aircraft model then fly vertically, the nose down ! It seems that the same transformation is applied to the cockpit and the 3D model. -Fred - Original Message - From: Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 7:31 AM Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Virtual Cockpit! David Findlay wrote: Andy Ross wrote: I spent most of today working on a virtual cockpit interface for the panel, and I'll be damned, it works! Umm, one problem. When you look down, the panel follows the bottom of the screen. Other than that it's great. We just need the interiors of the aircraft now. Thanks, Er, hm? That sounds like you're describing the regular panel, not the virtual one. It should be fixed in space in front of the aircraft. Is it possible that you're trying to scroll it around with the existing scroll panel keys bound to the function keys? Those aren't appropriate in this context, you want to modify the view direction instead, via the /sim/view/goal-offset-deg and /sim/view/goal-tile-deg properties. My original patch included hints for getting this working using a hat switch. If the bug you were seeing was that the gauges were moving while the background stayed fixed, then this is the most likely explanation. That turned out to be a bug in the panel renderer that double-offseted the gauges when drawing them. David and Curt have a patch in the queue for this. Andy -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
