Hi, In our Math department we are rapidly replacing Matlab (commercial and VERY expensive !) with Octave (GNU Open Source). I wonder: wouldn't it be a better to make a connection to an Open Source project like Octave instead ?
Matlab is squeezing lot's of money out of people. They try to connect just about anything to their software so that users won't even consider using anything else (apart for those who pay the bills ;-). But I don't think that FlightGear - as an outstanding Open Source project - should co-operate in making this nasty company even more powerful ... Even Airbus seemed to be fed up with the Matlab tax-collectors and started developing their own Open Source Matlab-clone already some years ago : SciLab. BTW: this reminds me of another nasty company ;-) Bye, Kees Lemmens On Wednesday 06 April 2005 18:38, Curtis L. Olson wrote: > There is some good news (I hope on this front.) I have spoken with one > of the lead matlab/simulink developers, and we have discussed ways to > improve FlightGear <=> matlab interoperability. I believe the next > version of simulink (and FlightGear) will have some improvements here, > although I don't know all the specific details of how future > maintanance would work. (And I don't know enough about matlab to make > any sort of guesses.) > > Regards, > > Curt. > > Melchior FRANZ wrote: > >* Lara Esteban -- Tuesday 05 April 2005 14:23: > >>I'm new to this group and I'd like to ask you some questions. > > > >Hi & welcome. > > > >>I'm developing an automatic flight control system for helicopters as > >> a final year project. I'd like to link matlab/aerosim blockset with > >> flightgear but I haven't been able to do it with the newest version > >> of flightgear. Nervertheless, I've tried with an old version (v > >> 0.9.2) and it is possible with airplanes but I can't install any > >> helicopter. > > > >I haven't used matlab, but this question comes up regularly. > > Unfortunately we have no influence on which fgfs version the matlab > > module works with. (I would find it a good idea if the responsible > > people kept it compatible with the last version, which wouldn't be > > *that* hard.) > > > >And unfortunately, you can't even check out old 0.9.2 helicopter code, > > because that was introduced in the next version: 0.9.3. :-( > > > >BTW: the helicopter FDM is still unfinished and lacks important > > features: > > http://baron.flightgear.org/pipermail/flightgear-devel/2003-October/0 > >21940.html Only the bo105 FDM config is usable. (bell206, as350, and > > ch47 are IMHO not even worth to try.) > > > >We give what help we can, but aren't really competent for matlab > > specific problems. Maybe you could ask the authors of matlab/aerosim? > > > >Or you could try to get matlab to output the data in a way that you > > can feed into the current version of fgfs (via network/telnet/etc.) > > > >m. > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Flightgear-users mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users > >2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d _______________________________________________ Flightgear-users mailing list [email protected] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
