Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-07 Thread James Turner
On 7 Apr 2010, at 03:36, Ron Jensen wrote: I like the idea of using some standardized properties under /sim/realism/ and retrofitting all aircraft to respect start-dark or something similar. I am also firmly against turning on aircraft to aircraft collisions. Aircraft-aircraft collisions

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-07 Thread Arnt Karlsen
On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 20:05:45 -0400, David wrote in message j2m75cb920c1004061705w741c4696k17ba1147ec6ba...@mail.gmail.com: On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Peter Brown smoothwater...@adelphia.net wrote: In terms of simplicity, I would like to offer a suggestion of using one (or more) of

[Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-07 Thread Jörg Emmerich
As a long-hour ATC I really got p. (sorry) mad about those planes popping up on the active during heavy traffic - but it is also obvious that this happens mostly because of just following the default - as soon as they know how to do it better they do better (or go somewhere else). So I suggest

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread Martin Spott
David Megginson wrote: 1. it's normal to have a plane sitting on the runway threshold with the engine idling 2. it's normal to have a plane sitting in a parking spot on the apron with the engine off 3. it's *not* normal to have a plane sitting on the runway threshold with the engine off

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread James Turner
On 6 Apr 2010, at 20:35, Martin Spott wrote: Except in the case of an accident or mechanical failure, you would *never* be sitting on the threshold with your engine off, especially at a big airport like KSFO (unless you wanted to give your plane and yourself a 747-sized colon exam). I think

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread David Megginson
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:06 PM, James Turner zakal...@mac.com wrote: My concern is touching the dreaded position init code, which is already baroque and complex. There's also the question of guessing a parking position when we don't have parking stand data - eg picking a point some distance

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread Peter Brown
On Apr 6, 2010, at 7:06 PM, James Turner wrote: On 6 Apr 2010, at 20:35, Martin Spott wrote: Except in the case of an accident or mechanical failure, you would *never* be sitting on the threshold with your engine off, especially at a big airport like KSFO (unless you wanted to give your

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread Peter Brown
On Apr 6, 2010, at 7:27 PM, David Megginson wrote: On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:06 PM, James Turner zakal...@mac.com wrote: My concern is touching the dreaded position init code, which is already baroque and complex. There's also the question of guessing a parking position when we don't have

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread Curtis Olson
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 6:27 PM, David Megginson wrote: OK, here's my suggestion: *all* aircraft start with the runway threshold with the engine idling, unless the user has overridden that. Engine on/off is a decision that it doesn't make sense leaving to individual aircraft designers, since

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread James Turner
On 7 Apr 2010, at 00:27, David Megginson wrote: OK, here's my suggestion: *all* aircraft start with the runway threshold with the engine idling, unless the user has overridden that. Engine on/off is a decision that it doesn't make sense leaving to individual aircraft designers, since it's a

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread David Megginson
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Peter Brown smoothwater...@adelphia.net wrote: In terms of simplicity, I would like to offer a suggestion of using one (or more) of the parking positions at airports with (current) parking positions.   If the user spawns at an airport without any preset parking

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread Peter Brown
On Apr 6, 2010, at 8:05 PM, David Megginson wrote: On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Peter Brown smoothwater...@adelphia.net wrote: In terms of simplicity, I would like to offer a suggestion of using one (or more) of the parking positions at airports with (current) parking positions. If

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread dave perry
On 04/06/2010 06:05 PM, David Megginson wrote: On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Peter Brownsmoothwater...@adelphia.net wrote: In terms of simplicity, I would like to offer a suggestion of using one (or more) of the parking positions at airports with (current) parking positions. If

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-06 Thread Ron Jensen
On Wed, 2010-04-07 at 00:06 +0100, James Turner wrote: I've started creating some properties under /sim/realism (mostly booleans for the moment), with the expectation that at some point we can create a GUI, and also use some Nasal to batch-configure the individual settings for different

[Flightgear-devel] Issue with default starting scenario

2010-04-05 Thread David Megginson
I temporarily moved my .fgfsrc file and .fgfs/ directory to see what a new user sees on first startup, and I think what's there is not the best idea (unless there's still some local configuration that I'm missing): 1. it's normal to have a plane sitting on the runway threshold with the engine