RE: [Flightgear-devel] Problem: unrealistic YASim stalls
quoteI understand that many higher-performance aircraft can have quite violent (and even unrecoverable) stalls, as can some trainers like the Traumahawk/quote I have to disagree with that quote.. I did the first 40 hours of my training in a Tomahawk, and I was never able to get a wing to drop.. I know they added some little strips on the leading edge of the wings about half way down to help cause a mild stall before a full fledged stall would occur. The worst stall I have been involved with was in a Cessna 172 where the right wing dropped extremely quickly to about 75 degrees, while my instructor was trying to show me how docile the 172 is. I am not sure if he had to much left rudder or something, but it wasn't very docile. I personally have not had any problems in the following aircraft during any type of stall. Just remember to keep them coordinated and you should never have any problems. Piper Tomahawk Warrior Archer Arrow Cessna 172 172RG Ryan ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Grey panel with Radeon 7500 and dri drivers stillthere.
FWIW, the grey panel with the Radeon 7500 and the DRI drivers still persists despite the patch to fix this behaviour with the ATI binary drivers. I can add that when I run with 3d panel (--aircraft=c172-3d), I can see both the dials and indicators on the cockpit, but the indicators jitter a lot, and it's quite hard to read them. I can confirm exactly the behaviour reported by other users: 1) running default aircraft, the cockpit is entirely blank 2) reducing cockpit size using 's' key, dials appear but indicators are not shown (ATI Radeon 64 VIVO with drivers from gatos.sf.net, XFree 4.2.0 on RedHat Linux 8 with kernel 2.4.18) Albert ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Radio frequency range: min/max/wrap
Julian Foad writes: For those of us with a two-button mouse it's a little awkward; I've configured Xwindows to emulate a middle button when I press both together. It should be very easy to add action areas over the actual displayed digits -- that way, even one-button-mouse Mac types can be happy. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Radio frequency range: min/max/wrap
Norman Vine writes:
Actually I was thinking about writing self documenting code
ie something like
// virtual base class
class FGProperty : public SGPropertyNode {
FGProperty () = 0 ;
}
// type specific derived classes for each property 'type'
class FGInt : public FGProperty {
}
class FGBool public FGProperty;
class FGDouble public FGProperty;
class FGString public FGProperty;
etc..
then
class SomeSystem : public FGSubsystem
{
.
private:
FGBool* _serviceable;
FGDouble* _rpm;
FGDouble* _pressure;
FGDouble* _suction;
};
Sure -- that sounds relatively harmless, and adds the advantage of a
bit of extra compile-time type checking.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Radio frequency range: min/max/wrap
Norman Vine writes: GoF book?? esoteric geek speak :-) http://hillside.net/patterns/DPBook/DPBook.html If you can't dazzle em with Nah, it's just shorter than typing DESIGN PATTERNS: ELEMENTS OF REUSABLE OBJECT-ORIENTED SOFTWARE or the Gamma/Helm/Johnson/Vlissades book all the time. For C++ programmers, the GoF book is as familiar as KR book is/was for C programmers -- I wouldn't expect anyone to be dazzled by the abbreviation. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] What's in the job jar?
Quoth Michael Bonar: Hi David. I get a Forbidden error when I try to reach that link. Terribly sorry. The link should have been http://www.more.net/~david/FlightGear-0.9.1/html/ I turned on about every option available, and also built the graphical class hierarchy. Regards, David K. Drum [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Modification Project
Hi, Some one must have had a great time: http://www.dlsproductions.com/fg/ Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] PATCH: validation of XML: materials.dtd etc.
I have updated materials.dtd and materials.xml so that they (almost) validate together using xmllint which comes with libxml: xmllint --dtdvalid materials.dtd -noout materials.xml The only bit that doesn't quite work is the params section which is allowed to contain arbitrary element tag names. I have defined its content as type ANY but xmllint complains that the tags in it are not known. Is there a way to define the contents of that element as not to be validated? Do people think that provision of DTDs for other parts (or the whole) of the property system is practical and useful? Anybody started? One important aspect is to make sure they actually get checked. We don't use a validating parser and I don't believe we can easily do so. I propose a Makefile in the base package where make check checks the DTDs and anything else that we can automate. The one attached checks the syntax of all the XML files in the base package and validates materials.xml against its DTD. Run it with: make --keep-going check to get past the errors (-- not allowed in comments) in some aircraft files to see the results for the DTD. I fixed one easy instance of the -- in comment error in an engine configuration file; patch attached. The others are harder to fix. - Julian # Consistency checks for the Flight Gear Base Package XMLLINT = xmllint -noout check: check-xml check-xml: check-xml-syntax check-xml-dtds check-xml-syntax: find . -name '*.xml' | xargs $(XMLLINT) check-xml-dtds: xmllint --dtdvalid materials.dtd -noout materials.xml .PHONY: check check-xml check-xml-syntax check-xml-dtds Index: materials.dtd === RCS file: /home/cvsroot/FlightGear/FlightGear/materials.dtd,v retrieving revision 1.1 diff -u -3 -p -d -r1.1 materials.dtd --- materials.dtd 2001/12/28 22:37:57 1.1 +++ materials.dtd 2003/01/05 23:10:20 @@ -8,10 +8,15 @@ properties in materials.xml. -- !ENTITY % colours r?, g?, b?, a? +!ENTITY % prop-attlist alias CDATA #IMPLIED -!ELEMENT PropertyList (material+) +!ELEMENT PropertyList (params?, material+) +!-- The params section contains arbitrary tag names which will be referred +to by alias attributes. -- +!ELEMENT params ANY !ELEMENT material (name+, texture, wrapu?, wrapv?, mipmap?, xsize?, ysize?, - light-coverage?, ambient?, diffuse?, specular?, emissive?) + light-coverage?, ambient?, diffuse?, specular?, emissive?, + shininess?, object-group*) !ELEMENT name (#PCDATA) !ELEMENT texture (#PCDATA) !ELEMENT wrapu (#PCDATA) @@ -24,6 +29,15 @@ properties in materials.xml. !ELEMENT diffuse (%colours;) !ELEMENT specular (%colours;) !ELEMENT emissive (%colours;) +!ELEMENT shininess (#PCDATA) +!ELEMENT object-group (range-m, object+) +!ELEMENT range-m (#PCDATA) +!ATTLIST range-m %prop-attlist; +!ELEMENT object (path+, coverage-m2, heading-type) +!ELEMENT path (#PCDATA) +!ELEMENT coverage-m2 (#PCDATA) +!ATTLIST coverage-m2 %prop-attlist; +!ELEMENT heading-type (#PCDATA) !ELEMENT r (#PCDATA) !ELEMENT g (#PCDATA) !ELEMENT b (#PCDATA) Index: materials.xml === RCS file: /home/cvsroot/FlightGear/FlightGear/materials.xml,v retrieving revision 1.35 diff -u -3 -p -d -r1.35 materials.xml --- materials.xml 2002/11/26 04:04:32 1.35 +++ materials.xml 2003/01/05 23:10:21 @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ ?xml version=1.0? +!-- !DOCTYPE PropertyList SYSTEM materials.dtd -- !-- @@ -2614,8 +2615,6 @@ Shared parameters for various materials. xsize500/xsize ysize500/ysize light-coverage2000.0/light-coverage - xsize500/xsize - ysize500/ysize ambient r0.19/r g0.55/g Index: Engine/engIO470M.xml === RCS file: /home/cvsroot/FlightGear/FlightGear/Engine/engIO470M.xml,v retrieving revision 1.1 diff -u -3 -p -d -r1.1 engIO470M.xml --- Engine/engIO470M.xml2002/03/07 06:09:21 1.1 +++ Engine/engIO470M.xml2003/01/05 23:10:32 @@ -10,9 +10,9 @@ MAXTHROTTLE: maximum throttle setting (as before) MINTHROTTLE: minimum throttle setting (as before) -- -!--- +!-- From: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:FoqW4cX9V6UC:www.skywagonranch.com/TDS/TCDS/E-273.DOC+Continental+O-470-M+spechl=en +-- FG_PISTON NAME=IO470D MINMP 6.5
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Modification Project
Erik Hofman wrote: Hi, Some one must have had a great time: http://www.dlsproductions.com/fg/ A very interesting page! I think we should look closely on their conclusion in their reflection: In conclusion, the FlightGear flight simulator is a very nice flight sim package that offers great features (for free), but very poor extensibility with very few user-friendly tools and source code that is geared towards a particular operating system (Linux) instead of being truly cross-platform. For the purposes of modifying FlightGear for other types of simulations or for virtual prototyping, I recommend choosing a different software package. CU, Christian -- The idea is to die young as late as possible.-- Ashley Montague ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Modification Project
I think we should look closely on their conclusion in their reflection: In conclusion, the FlightGear flight simulator is a very nice flight sim package that offers great features (for free), but very poor extensibility with very few user-friendly tools and source code that is geared towards a particular operating system (Linux) instead of being truly cross-platform. For the purposes of modifying FlightGear for other types of simulations or for virtual prototyping, I recommend choosing a different software package. CU, Christian Hmm. I didn't see this. Right away I wonder about two things: 1) Their motivations. 2) Their true qualifications that might lend credibility to their conclusions. Funny, I sort of feel that I've had better experience trying to run FlightGear on Windows. I'll have to look closer at their web page. Maybe. Doesn't sound like they offer much in the way of objective analysis. Do these guys have any idea what FlightGear is being used for? Jon smime.p7s Description: application/pkcs7-signature
RE: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Modification Project
Jon Berndt writes: I think we should look closely on their conclusion in their reflection: In conclusion, the FlightGear flight simulator is a very nice flight sim package that offers great features (for free), but very poor extensibility with very few user-friendly tools and source code that is geared towards a particular operating system (Linux) instead of being truly cross-platform. For the purposes of modifying FlightGear for other types of simulations or for virtual prototyping, I recommend choosing a different software package. CU, Christian Hmm. I didn't see this. Right away I wonder about two things: 1) Their motivations. 2) Their true qualifications that might lend credibility to their conclusions. 3) Their past experiences with other software which might color their future expectations. (I get the impression that if there isn't an easy to use gui based tool to do something, we automatically get poor marks in that area.) That may be fair criticism, or not, depending on where you are coming from. Funny, I sort of feel that I've had better experience trying to run FlightGear on Windows. I'll have to look closer at their web page. Maybe. Doesn't sound like they offer much in the way of objective analysis. Do these guys have any idea what FlightGear is being used for? Right, I don't want to be too critical ... they are certainly entitled to form an opinion based on their experiences. They also may be giving us poor marks in the area of cross-platform portability for not doing everything natively on every platform ... there again, that may be fair criticism or not depending on where you are coming from. They say some nice things in there too, and we need to stand up and take our criticism like adults, they clearly spent quite a bit of time investigating FlightGear ... Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Modification Project
Curt wrote: Right, I don't want to be too critical ... they are certainly entitled to form an opinion based on their experiences. They also may be giving us poor marks in the area of cross-platform portability for not doing everything natively on every platform ... there again, that may be fair criticism or not depending on where you are coming from. They say some nice things in there too, and we need to stand up and take our criticism like adults, they clearly spent quite a bit of time investigating FlightGear ... I agree, of course, but a high amount of time spent trying to write a quality piece doesn't always *result* in a quality piece. We've been critiqued before, and when it is done competently it is a great help. However, their final remarks led me to believe they wanted something handed to them and didn't expect to actually get their hands dirty, and also that they didn't look very closely at what others have done with FlightGear - even though that information is linked from the home page. Jon smime.p7s Description: application/pkcs7-signature
[Flightgear-devel] ./configure doesn't find SimGear when using --with-simgear=wherever
Just checked out the latest sources of both FlightGear and SimGear from
CVS. SimGear built fine (after configuring with
--prefix=/home/johan/install), and it installed fine as well in
/home/johan/install.
Configuring FlightGear with --with-simgear=/home/johan/install fails
however. The reason is that while the path is successfully added to
EXTRA_DIRS, EXTRA_DIRS is not used when looking for SimGear. So at
least from the configure script's point of view, EXTRA_DIRS (and thus my
--with-simgear switch) is ignored.
The solution is to change line 129 of configure.ac (inside the case
statement) from...
EXTRA_DIRS=$EXTRA_DIR1 $EXTRA_DIR2
... to...
EXTRA_DIRS=${EXTRA_DIRS} ${EXTRA_DIR1} ${EXTRA_DIR2}
This makes configure go through for me.
Cheers //Johan
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Modification Project
On Sun, 5 Jan 2003 19:18:26 -0600, Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: They say some nice things in there too, and we need to stand up and take our criticism like adults, they clearly spent quite a bit of time investigating FlightGear ... ..I'll ask and cc here, look for http://www.dlsproductions.com/fg/; in the Subject: header. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] http://www.dlsproductions.com/fg/
Hi, ..in http://www.dlsproductions.com/fg/ you state: Everyone is encouraged to send me any feedback or point out my stupid mistakes via email. ..on your stupid mistakes: ;-) ..a: Below 2. Tutorials and Other Documents, you link to 2. FlightGear Display Module - Initial Analysis 3. How-to: Adding 3D Aircraft Models into FlightGear, by Rick George and Stephen Burns 4. How-to: Adding static objects (buildings) into FlightGear scenery 5. Simple user input configuration in FlightGear 6. How to add your own flight dynamics model (FDM) to control an aircraft, by Clarence Bakirtzidis 7. Documentation for a aircraft configuration frontend tool for FlightGear 8. The team's final report: Contains all the findings on FlightGear ...in an unreadable-for-web-browsers doc format, and... 9. Team presentation slides in an unreadable-for-web-browsers ppt file format. I believe these files can be easily converted to html and png or jpg format. Please elevate these files to the same high web site standard as in beautiful http://www.dlsproductions.com/fg/ . :-) ..b: You started from our 0.7.10 tarballs instead of our cvs trees. Our cvs trees gives full access to our development code and docs, as soon as it is (re)written and committed to cvs. Your choise effectively denied yourselves easy access to FG improvements. ..imho, the _only_ _good_ reason to start from a FG tarball, is to _fork_ FG, because you _disagree_ with the development going on in cvs, and _instead_ want to do something _else_, working from the FG codebase in the tarball you _choose_ to start from. This is a perfectly legal option under the GPL and a perfectly valid reason to fork. ..and, we get to pick the very best parts of your fork, back into FG, just like you think you did from 0.7.10 into your fork. ;-) We of course are interested in your FG modifications, url? :-) ..(my own first script bit of FG code is going to be an automagic install-or-update-everything-in-FG-from-cvs, unless someone beats me to it. Naw, first get that damned vpn server out the door and set up in my client's net, then do my about-damned-time thing.) ..1: Feedback on http://www.dlsproductions.com/fg/#results : I don't understand your reflections nor your conclusions below: However, the extensiveness of FlightGear's features is also its downside. ..??? Why? How? Some aspects of the system are poorly documented, and the supporting tools need a lot more improvement (for example, the terrain editors). ..FG _is_ under development. ;-) 0.7.10 is history, try our cvs. Like in many open-sourced projects, the source code for FlightGear takes quite a bit of effort to understand, and it shows the fact that apart from the developers themselves very few people would be able to spend the time to do any extensive modification. ..this can of course be improved, this is a product of your own background and that of whoever wrote the piece of code you read, and try to understand how it works if it does, and how the coder meant it to work (regardless of how it actually works), and of course a good choise of coding style, philosophy and strategy, tools etc, helps, and vice versa. ;-) In conclusion, the FlightGear flight simulator is a very nice flight sim package that offers great features (for free), but very poor extensibility ... ..??? We network, we have several fdm's, ok, we don't shoot yet, so Michael Selig networked with one sim that does shoot, for this TV show: http://dsc.discovery.com/anthology/unsolvedhistory/redbaron/redbaron.html ...what extensibility is missing??? ... with very few user-friendly tools and source code that is geared towards a particular operating system (Linux) instead of being truly cross-platform. ..chances are people tend to go for the superior tool setup, basing their choise on each systems merits. ;-) Ok, I like it, but, _how_ is our source code geared towards linux??? For the purposes of modifying FlightGear for other types of simulations or for virtual prototyping, I recommend choosing a different software package. ..??? Which software package _did_ you use, and why and what do you ask for from a better software package to modify FG??? -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Modification Project
On Sun, 2003-01-05 at 21:02, Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Sun, 5 Jan 2003 19:18:26 -0600, Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: They say some nice things in there too, and we need to stand up and take our criticism like adults, they clearly spent quite a bit of time investigating FlightGear ... ..I'll ask and cc here, look for http://www.dlsproductions.com/fg/; in the Subject: header. You're all taking this rather well, as far as I can tell... Thanks to Star Office 6 I was able to go through the slides, but most of it is repeated on the web site anyway. I am sure Open Office will have little problem opening it too. Overall the system structure and coding is poor - and reflects the checkered and disrupted development history I think they need to get the CVS version...But, they have not had complete access to commercial designs it seems, similer things happen there (case in point, Duke Nuke'm Forever). Documentation is poor and in many cases non-existent. What documentation are they referring to exactly? Any significant system changes or adaptations require C++ and Unix skill Not sure I understand this? Did they have to install a new kernel or new glibc? Adapting the system for more general use (e.g. multi-user/network simulation would be difficult and would require major rewrite. Really? How is multiplot working? They are looking for a comparison to MSFS 2002 imho. Strongly linked to the Unix/C++ development environment - limits broader appeal. Thought it was one standard still used quite a bit Unix/C++ makes a powerful environment. The system is difficult to work with due to the lack of a maintenance/management front-end. Tasks like adding and animating aircraft models; adding scenery etc. are difficult and fiddly. May have a point there at this time, however I am not holding this against FG as its still beta...Actually they made no point of its beta status. Its been left with one positive slide and one negative, should have ended with an errata. Personal thoughts: Where is that Hurricane? Looks like a potentially good model. Perhaps they should have waited until version 1.0 of Flight Gear came out and waited for a binary... -- Matthew Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
