Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reducing AI Model complexity
Rob wrote: However, would the one stated above prevent models which use submodels for wing-flex effects from appearing to have wings? (Wait... are there any such models, or are the wings animated components of the main model?) A much bigger problem are those aircraft (like my 744) that are split into several models, for easy maintenance/development. Wings, fuselage, gear area all seperate models, with seperate animation files... Cheers, Gijs _ Download gratis emoticons voor Messenger http://www.rulive.nl/aspx/emoticons.aspx-- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reducing AI Model complexity
Stuart Buchanan a écrit : Providing a higher granularity of control would be tricky but not impossible - I guess you could define a list of model names that are to be loaded completely... could it be done per callsign, like the ignore chat message check box, with maybe a command line option to set specific callsign in the load detailled group? In case of formation flight (or dual control) we know the others callsign we want to have detailled planes, and not to load others models is sometimes good for the (not) induced lag, this can make possible formation aérobatics without too much lag from model loading. my two cents... jano -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 48, Issue 2
Hello Emmanuell, Heikos Mail wasn't an attac. He just noted that the fdm is actually broken and he offered his help. I prefer to revert to the last version of the fdm, even if some coordinates are wrong. The resulting flight characteristic is correct. Best regards, Maik P.S.: the uh1 has a stabilizer bar which i have simulated using a third rotor (it produces no lift) Original-Nachricht Datum: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 18:46:19 +0200 Von: BARANGER Emmanuel embaran...@free.fr An: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Betreff: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 48, Issue 2 Message: 4 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 23:57:48 + (GMT) From: Heiko Schulzaeitsch...@yahoo.de Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG - Helicopter FAA - AATD To: FlightGear developers discussions flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID:741574.96640...@web23204.mail.ird.yahoo.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hi, The UH1 was the one with the most realistic flightmodel. Unfortunately as helijah corrected the fuselage shape in YASim, he broke the whole balance settings. Tensors and CoG seems not right anymore, visible as the whole aircraft is turning on ground with stopped engine. That didn't happen before. I don't find the time right now to look and fix it, but maybe in 2-3 weeks unless someone other is faster. Regards Heiko. I'm sorry, but this kind of attacks wearies me. I actually changed the work of HHS. But not for the worse, but simply to make it logical and usable. And I show you the results to prove it. http://helijah.free.fr/uh1-fdm.png Maik, if you accept, without question, the presence of a third rotor in an UH-1 FDM, then I have nothing more to say. But it will still show me its usefulness. Best regards. Emmanuel -- BARANGER Emmanuel http://helijah.free.fr -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Sicherer, schneller und einfacher. Die aktuellen Internet-Browser - jetzt kostenlos herunterladen! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/chbrowser -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] FW: Reflection Map
Heiko Yup - it does - I had to adjust some of the levels, but it works fine. Ah, I see. Great to hear- this will push us a bit higher. Any weather will do - we need all sorts. Fine- it is just because my camera don't like rain.;-) I'm certified unfit for work this week so I can't go out yet, but next week it should be possible. I just realized we went off-list on this one, sorry. This is going to cost you a whole box of mugs: ftp://ftp.abbeytheatre2.org.uk/fgfs/Shader/LightningF1-2.png ftp://ftp.abbeytheatre2.org.uk/fgfs/Shader/B737-mapping-noise.png :-). Abated only by a supply of excellent environment maps. Tim Moore says he hopes to get the patch into SG later today. Vivian P.S. Tim Moore didn't quite make it :-( -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] A380 tutorial issues
Hi, Was trying the A380 tutorial, and I noticed a property mismatch in the no-smoking switch check: error messageFlick no-smoking switch once on the overhead/message condition not-equals property/controls/switches/no-smoking/property value1/value /not-equals /condition /error However, the exit condition has: greater-than property/controls/switches/smoking/property value0/value /greater-than Changing no-smoking to smoking fixes it. Also, on the cockpit display, the DEPARTURE and ARRIVAL light seem to be reversed? And btw, I'm probably dumb but I can't find the HDG button? :( Thanks. Pigeon. -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A380 tutorial issues
On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 22:44 +1100, Pigeon wrote: Hi, Was trying the A380 tutorial, and I noticed a property mismatch in the no-smoking switch check: error messageFlick no-smoking switch once on the overhead/message condition not-equals property/controls/switches/no-smoking/property value1/value /not-equals /condition /error However, the exit condition has: greater-than property/controls/switches/smoking/property value0/value /greater-than Changing no-smoking to smoking fixes it. Ah, good catch; there must be another logic error in there somewhere, because I have actually got through that section successfully. I'll have another look later. Also, on the cockpit display, the DEPARTURE and ARRIVAL light seem to be reversed? OK, I'm not sure where you mean here? do you mean the FMS input fields on the MCDU screen? Or do you mean once you get into the Active init flight plan, where you select the runways and SID/STAR, and the Departure and Arrival tabs (illuminated active tab) towards the top of the page? And btw, I'm probably dumb but I can't find the HDG button? :( That is the on the AFS control panel on the glareshield, the first knob left of the centre AP and FD buttons, click to push, middle click to pull (managed and selected modes respectively) Feel free to e.mail me off-list if you have some more questions. Cheers S. Thanks. Pigeon. -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A380 tutorial issues
Scott Hamilton wrote: On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 22:44 +1100, Pigeon wrote: Hi, Was trying the A380 tutorial, and I noticed a property mismatch in the no-smoking switch check: error messageFlick no-smoking switch once on the overhead/message condition not-equals property/controls/switches/no-smoking/property value1/value /not-equals /condition /error However, the exit condition has: greater-than property/controls/switches/smoking/property value0/value /greater-than Changing no-smoking to smoking fixes it. Ah, good catch; there must be another logic error in there somewhere, because I have actually got through that section successfully. I'll have another look later. Also, on the cockpit display, the DEPARTURE and ARRIVAL light seem to be reversed? OK, I'm not sure where you mean here? do you mean the FMS input fields on the MCDU screen? Or do you mean once you get into the Active init flight plan, where you select the runways and SID/STAR, and the Departure and Arrival tabs (illuminated active tab) towards the top of the page? And btw, I'm probably dumb but I can't find the HDG button? :( That is the on the AFS control panel on the glareshield, the first knob left of the centre AP and FD buttons, click to push, middle click to pull (managed and selected modes respectively) Feel free to e.mail me off-list if you have some more questions. Please keep it on-list as this cleared up a couple of things for me too - I just never got around to writing to the list. Best Regards Willie Fleming -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] link problem on new 64 bit system
I get the following error compiling fgfs. /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lopenal But /usr/lib64/libopenal.so.0 = libopenal.so.1 = libopenal.so.1.11.753. My .bashrc has the line export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib:/usr/lib64:/usr/local/lib:/usr/local/lib64:/usr/local/lib/osgPlugins so I don't see why ld is not finding -lopenal? New System: i7 with 6 GB ddr3, nvidia GTX260, Fedora 12 and plib-1.8.5, fresh cvs/svn of osg, SimGear, fgfs, data. Any help would be appreciated :-( Dave P. -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] link problem on new 64 bit system
On 04/03/2010 10:21 AM, dave perry wrote: I get the following error compiling fgfs. /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lopenal But /usr/lib64/libopenal.so.0 = libopenal.so.1 = libopenal.so.1.11.753. Note that libopenal.so (with no suffix) is not listed. My .bashrc has the line export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib:/usr/lib64:/usr/local/lib:/usr/local/lib64:/usr/local/lib/osgPlugins so I don't see why ld is not finding -lopenal? As a test (and, probably, a workaround) try installing a symlink with the name libopenal.so. This of course leaves two unanswered questions: 1) Why is libopenal.so missing from the out-of-the-box system? 2) Why was its absence not detected during the autoconfigure step? -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] link problem on new 64 bit system
I think a simple yum install openal-soft-devel should fix your issue. That will install the headers and libopenal.so. No need to do manual symlinking. At least, I don't need to do so, and I have practically the same setup... Good luck 2010/4/3, John Denker j...@av8n.com: On 04/03/2010 10:21 AM, dave perry wrote: I get the following error compiling fgfs. /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lopenal But /usr/lib64/libopenal.so.0 = libopenal.so.1 = libopenal.so.1.11.753. Note that libopenal.so (with no suffix) is not listed. My .bashrc has the line export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib:/usr/lib64:/usr/local/lib:/usr/local/lib64:/usr/local/lib/osgPlugins so I don't see why ld is not finding -lopenal? As a test (and, probably, a workaround) try installing a symlink with the name libopenal.so. This of course leaves two unanswered questions: 1) Why is libopenal.so missing from the out-of-the-box system? 2) Why was its absence not detected during the autoconfigure step? -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] link problem on new 64 bit system
On 04/03/2010 11:34 AM, John Denker wrote: On 04/03/2010 10:21 AM, dave perry wrote: I get the following error compiling fgfs. /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lopenal But /usr/lib64/libopenal.so.0 = libopenal.so.1 = libopenal.so.1.11.753. Note that libopenal.so (with no suffix) is not listed. My .bashrc has the line export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib:/usr/lib64:/usr/local/lib:/usr/local/lib64:/usr/local/lib/osgPlugins so I don't see why ld is not finding -lopenal? As a test (and, probably, a workaround) try installing a symlink with the name libopenal.so. Thanks John, this worked. This of course leaves two unanswered questions: 1) Why is libopenal.so missing from the out-of-the-box system? 2) Why was its absence not detected during the autoconfigure step? I had another problem that I missed. I copied the cvs source from another machine and configure for fgfs source did not have execute permissions after the copy. I had used an update/compile/install script for SimGear and fgfs and did not notice the permission error for fgfs ./configure. All is running (very fast) now. Dave P. -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reducing AI Model complexity
Gijs de Rooy wrote: A much bigger problem are those aircraft (like my 744) that are split into several models, for easy maintenance/development. Wings, fuselage, gear area all seperate models, with seperate animation files... I wasn't aware that we had any aircraft split up this way. However, having thought about this a bit more, I think there's a straightforward solution, which is to have a tag on the model to force sub-model loading for that model irrespective of the global setting. This could be set for the 747 and the dual-control aircraft. This would also remove the need to provide a separate list of aircraft to be loaded completely. The downside is that it brings us back to square one if everyone is flying the F14 ! -Stuart -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reducing AI Model complexity
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 3:30 AM, Gijs de Rooy gijsr...@hotmail.com wrote: Rob wrote: However, would the one stated above prevent models which use submodels for wing-flex effects from appearing to have wings? (Wait... are there any such models, or are the wings animated components of the main model?) A much bigger problem are those aircraft (like my 744) that are split into several models, for easy maintenance/development. Wings, fuselage, gear area all seperate models, with seperate animation files... Cheers, Gijs I'd like to second Gijs' concerns here. I build my models in sub-units partly to facilitate ease of maintenance and development, and partly for easy LoD range logic. My model units tend to be: airframe, external details (antennae, etc), external lighting rig, cockpit, instruments, cabin, propellers. IIf I understand the proposal right, I would be concerned about losing the propellers in an automatic AI implementation. I wonder if the proposed implementation might benefit from a new optional element within models that allows the developer to specify that the AI scheme must load the sub-model. For example: ... model nameCockpit/name pathAircraft/Goose/Models/Goose_Cockpit.xml/path /model model nameExternal Lights/name pathAircraft/Goose/Models/Goose_Lights.xml/path /model model namePropellers/name pathAircraft/Goose/Models/Goose_Props.xml/path force-ai-importtrue/force-ai-import /model ... This might solve Gijs' problem as well. Just a thought. -Gary aka Buckaroo -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reducing AI Model complexity
jean pellotier wrote: Stuart Buchanan a écrit : Providing a higher granularity of control would be tricky but not impossible - I guess you could define a list of model names that are to be loaded completely... could it be done per callsign, like the ignore chat message check box, with maybe a command line option to set specific callsign in the load detailled group? In case of formation flight (or dual control) we know the others callsign we want to have detailled planes, and not to load others models is sometimes good for the (not) induced lag, this can make possible formation aérobatics without too much lag from model loading. my two cents... That's an interesting idea. However, without looking at it in detail, I suspect that we set the callsign for the other aircraft after the AI model has been loaded, at which point it is too late. -Stuart -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reducing AI Model complexity
Gary Neely wrote: I'd like to second Gijs' concerns here. I build my models in sub-units partly to facilitate ease of maintenance and development, and partly for easy LoD range logic. My model units tend to be: airframe, external details (antennae, etc), external lighting rig, cockpit, instruments, cabin, propellers. IIf I understand the proposal right, I would be concerned about losing the propellers in an automatic AI implementation. I wonder if the proposed implementation might benefit from a new optional element within models that allows the developer to specify that the AI scheme must load the sub-model. For example: ... model nameCockpit/name pathAircraft/Goose/Models/Goose_Cockpit.xml/path /model model nameExternal Lights/name pathAircraft/Goose/Models/Goose_Lights.xml/path /model model namePropellers/name pathAircraft/Goose/Models/Goose_Props.xml/path force-ai-importtrue/force-ai-import /model ... This might solve Gijs' problem as well. Just a thought. Good thought :) My proposal above was something like this: force-ai-importtrue/force-ai-import model nameCockpit/name pathAircraft/Goose/Models/Goose_Cockpit.xml/path /model model nameExternal Lights/name pathAircraft/Goose/Models/Goose_Lights.xml/path /model model namePropellers/name pathAircraft/Goose/Models/Goose_Props.xml/path /model but that would load all the sub-models, while your suggestion would limit it to just the submodel selected. -Stuart -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reducing AI Model complexity
On Sat, 3 Apr 2010, Stuart Buchanan wrote: However, having thought about this a bit more, I think there's a straightforward solution, which is to have a tag on the model to force sub-model loading for that model irrespective of the global setting. This could be set for the 747 and the dual-control aircraft. Hi, If we are heading towards a solution that require the models to be updated is not better to go one or two steps further and try to devise a more satisfactory LOD mechanism for model loading? My suggestion would be a range animation that defers loading of it child model until it is within range. This animation node could be automatically inserted as the root of a AI/MP aircraft model to implement a selectable range for loading the model but could also be used within the model XML files to implement hierarchical LOD model loading (like our current range animation can be used for LOD control during rendering). Btw. some multiplayer features depend on that Nasal modules for a particular MP/AI aircraft is loaded at a larger than visual range, e.g. MP-Carrier, so defering model loading until the player is within the view frustum (as we did early on after the OSG migration) is also not a suitable solution. (Just in case we were heading back towards that.. :) Cheers, Anders -- --- Anders Gidenstam WWW: http://www.gidenstam.org/FlightGear/ -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A380 tutorial issues
OK, I'm not sure where you mean here? do you mean the FMS input fields on the MCDU screen? Or do you mean once you get into the Active init flight plan, where you select the runways and SID/STAR, and the Departure and Arrival tabs (illuminated active tab) towards the top of the page? Sorry I wasn't very clear (and I wouldn't know how to describe it :) Like in the tutorial, departing YSSY, arriving YMML: http://pigeond.net/~pigeon/flightgear/a380-001.png When I click on the DEPARTURE button, the screen shows: http://pigeond.net/~pigeon/flightgear/a380-002.png The heading shows ARRIVIAL. I suppose now I get it as I'm being at the DEPARTURE screen, and the ARRIVIAL is for me to goto the ARRIVIAL screen. Am I right? And same for the ARRIVAL screen: http://pigeond.net/~pigeon/flightgear/a380-003.png Is it supposed to be like that? Thanks again. Pigeon. -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A380 tutorial issues
On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 09:03 +1000, Pigeon wrote: OK, I'm not sure where you mean here? do you mean the FMS input fields on the MCDU screen? Or do you mean once you get into the Active init flight plan, where you select the runways and SID/STAR, and the Departure and Arrival tabs (illuminated active tab) towards the top of the page? Sorry I wasn't very clear (and I wouldn't know how to describe it :) Like in the tutorial, departing YSSY, arriving YMML: http://pigeond.net/~pigeon/flightgear/a380-001.png When I click on the DEPARTURE button, the screen shows: http://pigeond.net/~pigeon/flightgear/a380-002.png The heading shows ARRIVIAL. I suppose now I get it as I'm being at the DEPARTURE screen, and the ARRIVIAL is for me to goto the ARRIVIAL screen. Am I right? Yes that is correct, the description below describes why and how it can be fixed. But in summary, it was a little more complicated to leave the active tab text there as you move from tab to tab and page to page, so I just showed the available tabs and not the active tab. And same for the ARRIVAL screen: http://pigeond.net/~pigeon/flightgear/a380-003.png Is it supposed to be like that? OK, in real-life there are supposed to be two tabs; DEPARTURE and ARRIVAL, when a tab is active it has white text on a black background with a white outline, the other available tabs have white text on a grey background with a white outline. So this isn't as complete as we would like, the grey background is an object in the .ac file, the tab labels are text animations (and so are separate objects). We use a select animation to turn on and off the input fields, the input labels and the tab background + label depending on what page and tab is active. To be able to click on a tab to make that active, it needs to displayed; so thinking out loud, the active tab text label should be moved into a new select animation that is based just on the page and not the page + tab this would then leave the white text label there for the active tab and it will just have a black background from the layer below. S. Thanks again. Pigeon. -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
