On Thursday 15 January 2009 18:18:05 Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Stuart Buchanan -- Thursday 15 January 2009:
[+26 liveries]
My view is that they should be kept with the aircraft.
Of course, liveries should generally be kept with the aircraft.
But how many? Do 50 liveries for an aircraft make
I fetch the newest source code from FlightGear cvs repository.
But I compile failed. Error messages like these:
2e:\flight gear cvs\source\src\traffic\schedule.cxx(582) : error C2039:
'distanceNm' : is not a member of 'SGGeoc'
2e:\flight gear cvs\simgear\simgear\math\sggeoc.hxx(26) :
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 2:39 PM, 黄志勇 hzy5...@163.com wrote:
I fetch the newest source code from FlightGear cvs repository.
But I compile failed. Error messages like these:
2e:\flight gear cvs\source\src\traffic\schedule.cxx(582) : error C2039:
'distanceNm' : is not a member of 'SGGeoc'
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Csaba Halász csaba.hal...@gmail.com wrote:
More valgrind fixes. Includes the previous one.
Fred, thanks for the commit.
Unfortunately I forgot about the boost pumps, so here is a follow-up.
--
Csaba/Jester
Index: src/Aircraft/controls.cxx
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Durk Talsma d.tal...@xs4all.nl wrote:
One thing to consider is that with OSG, we can consider merging real
aircraft, and their AI counterparts back into a single aircraft (IIRC, LOD
management is much better in OSG than it was in PLIB).
I am all for that. It
Csaba/Jester:
Oh, Yes, I didn't fetch newest SimGear sources!
Thanks for your help!
在2009-01-17，Csaba Halász csaba.hal...@gmail.com 写道：
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 2:39 PM, 黄志勇 hzy5...@163.com wrote:
I fetch the newest source code from FlightGear cvs repository.
But I compile failed. Error
While you're talking about the C310: When I'm trying to load the
c310dpm-3d, I'm getting the following error:
Could not open file: [...]/data/Aircraft/c310/c310ap.xml
Segmentation fault
This is easy to cure by commenting the AP-related lines in 'c310.xml'
(done), nevertheless I'm surprised to
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Martin Spott martin.sp...@mgras.net wrote:
nevertheless I'm surprised to see a missing XML config file
segfaulting the entire simulation (current CVS, Linux AMD64).
I am not :)
--
Csaba/Jester
Index: src/FDM/JSBSim/models/FGFCS.cpp
Hi Folks --
I suppose you've heard about the Airbus A320 that ditched
in the Hudson river, in the shadow of downtown Manhattan, on
Thursday. As crashes go, it must be considered a success,
since there were no fatalities and almost no serious
injuries.
Around here it has received
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Martin Spott martin.sp...@mgras.net wrote:
Vikas N Kumar wrote:
Below is the patch to allow Sun Studio 11 compilers to compile SimGear
on Solaris 10 for SPARC cleanly.
Would anyone be (seriously!) willing to deal with Solaris/SunStudio
portability issues
Hi Folks --
I suppose you've heard about the Airbus A320 that ditched
in the Hudson river, in the shadow of downtown Manhattan, on
Thursday. As crashes go, it must be considered a success,
since there were no fatalities and almost no serious
injuries.
Around here it has received
So, how about it? Who is serious about going down that
road?
I am , for one, which is why I dont get the apperent need to impress the
general user community... I didn't think we were creating a game here...
I'm currently more interested in getting the glass cockpits to behave
realistically , but
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
Many of you recall the hijacked airliner than ran out of fuel ten or
fifteen years ago. The resulting ditching didn't turn out so well, with most
people drowning. That was on the ocean near the shore. In the recent case,
it appears that
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 6:00 PM, syd adams adams@gmail.com wrote:
So, how about it? Who is serious about going down that
road?
I am , for one, which is why I dont get the apperent need to impress the
general user community... I didn't think we were creating a game here...
I'm currently
Csaba Hal??sz wrote:
I have never been near a solaris machine, but sure, post errors and we'll see
:)
Thanks for your offer, no obligation implicated ;-)
I put the output of 'make -k' here:
http://foxtrot.mgras.net/static/SimGear_SunStudio11.log.bz2
Apparently most of the error messages
syd adams wrote:
Input is always appreciated , with facts and docs to back it up , but not
the its wrong because I say so kind of help ...
Well put !
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
On 01/17/2009 05:16 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
http://www.atcflightsim.com/index.html
If I may be permitted to answer in kind:
http://www.atcflightsim.com/pricing.html
--
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 6:30 PM, John Denker j...@av8n.com wrote:
On 01/17/2009 05:16 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
http://www.atcflightsim.com/index.html
If I may be permitted to answer in kind:
http://www.atcflightsim.com/pricing.html
You are expecting a complete cockpit enclosure,
Curtis Olson wrote:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 6:00 PM, syd adams adams@gmail.com wrote:
So, how about it? Who is serious about going down that
road?
I am , for one, which is why I dont get the apperent need to impress the
general user community... I didn't think we were creating a game
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 7:00 PM, John Wojnaroski cas...@mminternet.comwrote:
Or for that matter
http://www.lfstech.com/index.html
Good point. :-)
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/
--
This
Curtis Olson wrote:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 6:30 PM, John Denker j...@av8n.com wrote:
On 01/17/2009 05:16 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
http://www.atcflightsim.com/index.html
If I may be permitted to answer in kind:
http://www.atcflightsim.com/pricing.html
You are expecting
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Martin Spott martin.sp...@mgras.net wrote:
Csaba Hal??sz wrote:
I have never been near a solaris machine, but sure, post errors and we'll
see :)
Thanks for your offer, no obligation implicated ;-)
I put the output of 'make -k' here:
On 01/17/2009 05:47 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
You are expecting a complete cockpit enclosure, instruments, radio hardware,
instructor station software, plush seat, and FAA certification for free?
The FAA doesn't certify a software application (well unless you are looking
at a PCATD and even
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 7:54 PM, John Denker j...@av8n.com wrote:
On 01/17/2009 05:47 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
You are expecting a complete cockpit enclosure, instruments, radio hardware,
instructor station software, plush seat, and FAA certification for free?
The FAA doesn't certify a software
On 01/17/2009 10:11 PM, Alex Perry wrote:
Procedural trainers are useful and the FAA has a minimum specification
(PCATD) which determines how much fidelity is needed to ensure a net
positive training value for the student. FlightGear does not
currently meet that standard.
Agreed. But is it
Hi Tim,
On Sunday 11 January 2009 21:07:25 Tim Moore wrote:
I propose that the 1.9.1 release be made from these maint branches. This
would let progress continue in CVS while hopefully achieving some stability
in a maintenance release. If current committers would like write access to
these
Interesting post by John Denker...
While I have no real comment about the Airbus issue (other than to say
that is was a great job of piloting a stricken aircraft), I can comment
on the status of a project to get Flight Gear FAA-certified.
As several of you may know, four of us are working on a
27 matches
Mail list logo
