Here's one that's been bugging me for a while. I never seem to be getting proper terrain elevation hits off of .ac loaded models... things like buildings, bridges, aircraft carriers, etc.
I was looking at this tonight and I think I found the problem. The hitlist code wasn't handling the vertex order of triangle strips quite right. Shoot me, but the terrain just uses triangle fans. These were handled correctly. However, .ac models are optimized triangle strips which weren't being handled quite right. I *think* I have this fixed and will commit my change soon. Just for fun, I placed the saratoga off the san francisco coast a ways and was able to land on it. I might as well commit that minor change too so others can play ... just take off out of KSFO and fly a heading of about 300-305 (true). However, there is still an issue (and I will assert that it is a modeling issue perhaps?) The lines painted on the saratoga deck are actually done with raised polygons (by a foot or two) to avoid z-buffer fighting. However the terrain intersection code sees these raised lines so if you move across the deck and hit a line, the aircraft is suddenly become 1-2 feet under the reported surface, this generates excessive gear forces and triggers a crash. Dohhh!!!! The saratoga is extremely simplistic. Any one want to take a pass at building a spiffier aircraft carrier model? Ok, and for those of you that worry about these sorts of things, it's a statically placed, non moving aircraft carrier a) so I can find it and b) so I don't have to worry about sticking one DCS object to another. Now, off to see if I can land the seahawk ... Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities curt 'at' me.umn.edu curt 'at' flightgear.org Minnesota http://www.flightgear.org/~curt http://www.flightgear.org _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
