On Friday, February 7, 2003, at 03:57 am, Norman Vine wrote:
John A. Gallas
I was just wondering if the subroutine
SGRoute.distance_off_route() calculates accurate
results (or even reasonably usable results for
navigation in fgfs) for waypoints on a wgs84 system.
I've run some tests and it
Norman Vine writes:
This works fine for a 'map' but straight lines will not be great circles
which AFAIK is still the standard for *most* aviation 'charts', both
paper and electronic versions
It depends on scale. World Aeronautical Charts (1:1,000,000) and
VNCs/Sectionals (1:500,000)
James Turner writes:
On Friday, February 7, 2003, at 03:57 am, Norman Vine wrote:
John A. Gallas
I was just wondering if the subroutine
SGRoute.distance_off_route() calculates accurate
results (or even reasonably usable results for
navigation in fgfs) for waypoints on a wgs84
Hi
It looks like the Fokker 70 Jetliner, one of the flagship aircrafts of
the oldest aircraft manifacturer of the world, which sadly got bankrupt
in 1995, is about to get relaunched again:
http://www.rekkof.nl/fokker70/index_fokker_70.htm
This is especially good news for the dutch aircraft
Erik Hofman writes:
It looks like the Fokker 70 Jetliner, one of the flagship aircrafts of
the oldest aircraft manifacturer of the world, which sadly got bankrupt
in 1995, is about to get relaunched again:
http://www.rekkof.nl/fokker70/index_fokker_70.htm
This is especially good news
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I know someone was working on a JSBSim based 737, but I don't think
that has shown up in the base package yet. It would be nice to see a
few more of these smaller regional jets modeled in FlightGear.
The ERJ-135 (35 passenger) is one my favorites
For the cockpit view, it might be interested to add optional
acceleration effects to make up for the lack of full motion -- I think
I first noticed this trick in Battle of Britain. The FDMs already
publish the required information in the property tree:
/accelerations/pilot/x-accel-fps_sec
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 11:51:29 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the cockpit view, it might be interested to add
optional
acceleration effects to make up for the lack of full
motion -- I think
I first noticed this trick in Battle of Britain. The
FDMs already
publish the
John
I did simple gear handle for the c310-ifr panel if you or any-one want to use
it.
It should work on any of the 2d panels.
Thanks Paul
screenshot
http://members.verizon.net/~vze3b42n/gear.jpeg
package
http://members.verizon.net/~vze3b42n/gear.tar.gz
On Thursday, February 6, 2003, at 02:10 pm, David Megginson wrote:
I think that we can centralize this and make it invisible to JSBSim
and other suppliers of property values. Polling inside the property
manager makes sense, since
a) it will be done only on demand (when someone assigns a
Ok, that looks perfectly reasonable. I have added it to cvs.
Thanks,
Curt.
paul mccann writes:
John
I did simple gear handle for the c310-ifr panel if you or any-one want to use
it.
It should work on any of the 2d panels.
Thanks Paul
screenshot
[Chiming in because the subject is cool, and because I'm currently
stuck debugging a parser that is giving me fits and need a break.]
David Megginson wrote:
For the cockpit view, it might be interested to add optional
acceleration effects to make up for the lack of full motion -- I think
I
Andy Ross writes:
[Chiming in because the subject is cool, and because I'm currently
stuck debugging a parser that is giving me fits and need a break.]
David Megginson wrote:
For the cockpit view, it might be interested to add optional
acceleration effects to make up for the lack of
James Turner writes:
I think that we can centralize this and make it invisible to JSBSim
and other suppliers of property values. Polling inside the property
manager makes sense, since
a) it will be done only on demand (when someone assigns a listener to
a property),
Andy Ross writes:
I'd give this more general idea a shot first, before trying
axis-specific code.
The axis-specific stuff is easier for me to understand -- perhaps
someone with a stronger physics background could work with Jim to do a
generalized, spring implementation.
All the best,
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 13:29:34 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andy Ross writes:
I'd give this more general idea a shot first, before
trying
axis-specific code.
The axis-specific stuff is easier for me to understand --
perhaps
someone with a stronger physics background could
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Andy Ross writes:
I'd give this more general idea a shot first, before trying
axis-specific code.
The axis-specific stuff is easier for me to understand -- perhaps
someone with a stronger physics background could work with Jim to do a
Hmmm...not sure how that happened but this message got away from me half finished.
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Andy Ross writes:
I'd give this more general idea a shot first, before trying
axis-specific code.
The axis-specific stuff is easier for me to understand --
On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 09:43:59AM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
Why not just model the head as a highly damped spring? You'd need
to fiddle with the constants a little to make it look right, but once
it's fixed up it should work right for all heads. :)
Since this is simply a visual effect, let's
Jim Wilson writes:
My recommendation would be to model this head thing, probably in its own
class, and then publish data in the position or orientation path that the
viewer would read in.
We could have a class FGPilot with properties:
Which is just a 'classic' rigid body'
head
Curt
Thanks and if you want me to add it to the other c310-2d panels let me know.
Paul
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 15:00:41 -0500
James A. Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 09:43:59AM -0800, Andy Ross
wrote:
Since I imagine that a jet fighter can generate head motion due to
both linear acceleration and pitch I've included both terms for head
pitch.
The acceleration
I forgot another possible effect: spinal compression. This one, if
necessary, can almost certainly be considered as being uncoupled from
any head rotations.
delta z = z-accel / Kspine
Also, it may be that the equation for pitch of the head is too simple
as the two terms can cancel each other
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 15:21:20 -0500,
James A. Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I forgot another possible effect: spinal compression. This one, if
necessary, can almost certainly be considered as being uncoupled from
any head rotations.
delta z = z-accel / Kspine
Hi all,
I am new to Flight Gear, but not to flight
simulation, thats my line of business ;) Anyway I
would like to propose (and develop) a server or system
that can be used to manage the environment. What I
mean is that the scenario system manages:
* Other plans in the air, these can add
Hmm, that's odd. Out of the box, the version of the Mac joystick code
that is in CVS does not compile. As I reported to the plib group, if I
incorporate the non-CVS versions of jsMacOSX.cxx and js.h, I get the
following errors in the FlightGear joystick code:
ld: Undefined symbols:
At 2/7/03, David Megginson wrote:
For the cockpit view, it might be interested to add optional
acceleration effects to make up for the lack of full motion -- I think
I first noticed this trick in Battle of Britain. The FDMs already
publish the required information in the property tree:
27 matches
Mail list logo
