Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 20:07:10 -0500, David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Was this in PLIB 1.6, again? The alpha transparency is fine using the CVS plib. I'm pretty sure it was CVS plib. -- Roy Vegard Ovesen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Frederic Bouvier wrote: Was this in PLIB 1.6, again? The alpha transparency is fine using the CVS I am using the CVS plib and I am seeing this bug. That's interesting -- is anyone else seeing this problem? All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
David Megginson wrote: Frederic Bouvier wrote: Was this in PLIB 1.6, again? The alpha transparency is fine using the CVS I am using the CVS plib and I am seeing this bug. That's interesting -- is anyone else seeing this problem? No, not for IRIX, not for Linux. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re:[Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
David Megginson wrote: Frederic Bouvier wrote: Was this in PLIB 1.6, again? The alpha transparency is fine using the CVS I am using the CVS plib and I am seeing this bug. That's interesting -- is anyone else seeing this problem? I don't know for the original bug reporter, but I am using Windows and NVIDIA if it is of any importance. -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re:[Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Frederic BOUVIER wrote: I don't know for the original bug reporter, but I am using Windows and NVIDIA if it is of any importance. That could matter -- I'm using Linux and NVIDIA. Do you have trouble with transparencies anywhere else? Do other people using Windows and NVIDIA see a white rectangle behind the panel in the pa28-161? All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
* David Megginson -- Friday 12 March 2004 15:29: That's interesting -- is anyone else seeing this problem? All needles are OK. The only bug that I see is the non-transparent attitude 'needle': http://members.aon.at/mfranz/pa28.jpg The SGI image seems to be OK, though (and I'm an SGI image expert :-). I'll look into plib ... m. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re:[Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
David Megginson wrote: Frederic BOUVIER wrote: I don't know for the original bug reporter, but I am using Windows and NVIDIA if it is of any importance. That could matter -- I'm using Linux and NVIDIA. Do you have trouble with transparencies anywhere else? Do other people using Windows and NVIDIA see a white rectangle behind the panel in the pa28-161? I don't have any problem elsewhere with transparency. The original poster was suggesting that it has to do with the color depth of the image. I guess Melchior use Linux and he post a screenshot of what I am seeing. -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Melchior FRANZ wrote: All needles are OK. The only bug that I see is the non-transparent attitude 'needle': http://members.aon.at/mfranz/pa28.jpg Yes -- I have that problem as well -- it has something to do with drawing order. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
* Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 12 March 2004 15:59: All needles are OK. The only bug that I see is the non-transparent attitude 'needle': http://members.aon.at/mfranz/pa28.jpg The SGI image seems to be OK, though (and I'm an SGI image expert :-). I'll look into plib ... Yep, looks very much like a plib bug. Are you others sure that it works for you? :-] m. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
* David Megginson -- Friday 12 March 2004 16:21: All needles are OK. The only bug that I see is the non-transparent attitude 'needle': http://members.aon.at/mfranz/pa28.jpg Yes -- I have that problem as well -- it has something to do with drawing order. No. plib has a bug: it doesn't recognize grayscale images with alpha layer yet. See ssgLoadSGI.cxx:301, where the alpha information is wrongly written to the blue layer, while the alpha layer is disabled. :-] m. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
David Megginson wrote : Melchior FRANZ wrote: All needles are OK. The only bug that I see is the non-transparent attitude 'needle': http://members.aon.at/mfranz/pa28.jpg Yes -- I have that problem as well -- it has something to do with drawing order. I am confused. We were speaking about this issue, weren't we ? I am quoting the original text again : David Megginson wrote: Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote: Another thing that I noticed about the pa28 panel was the plane in the TC was not transparent where it should be. The rgb file did have an alpha channel but because the file was only 256 colors the alpha channel was not transparent in FlightGear. It was OK when I opened it in AC3D, but not in FlightGear. Converting the file to 24bit colour solved this, but I think that this is a bug, perhaps in plib. Was this in PLIB 1.6, again? The alpha transparency is fine using the CVS plib. -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 12 March 2004 15:59: All needles are OK. The only bug that I see is the non-transparent attitude 'needle': http://members.aon.at/mfranz/pa28.jpg The SGI image seems to be OK, though (and I'm an SGI image expert :-). I'll look into plib ... Yep, looks very much like a plib bug. Are you others sure that it works for you? :-] No, I was under the impression the author meant something else. I do see this one. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
* Frederic BOUVIER -- Friday 12 March 2004 16:24: I guess Melchior use Linux and he post a screenshot of what I am seeing. plib bug. I'm working on a fix. m. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re:[Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:03:00 -0500, David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Frederic BOUVIER wrote: I don't know for the original bug reporter, but I am using Windows and NVIDIA if it is of any importance. That could matter -- I'm using Linux and NVIDIA. Do you have trouble with transparencies anywhere else? Do other people using Windows and NVIDIA see a white rectangle behind the panel in the pa28-161? The image of the TC that Melchior linked to was exactly what I saw too. In addition I saw that the clock face was also white outside of the face circle. I opened both the rgb files in Paint Shop Pro and noticed that they both had only 256 colors, and all the other rgb files had 16 million colors. It seemed that only the rgb files with 256 colors had the transparency problem. If I opened the 3-d instruments in AC3D the transparency would be OK _for the 256 color images_. I'm using Windows, Cygwin and nvidia. -- Roy Vegard Ovesen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Frederic BOUVIER wrote: Another thing that I noticed about the pa28 panel was the plane in the TC was not transparent where it should be. The rgb file did have an alpha channel but because the file was only 256 colors the alpha channel was not transparent in FlightGear. It was OK when I opened it in AC3D, but not in FlightGear. Converting the file to 24bit colour solved this, but I think that this is a bug, perhaps in plib. I misread, and saw the panel was not transparent where it should be. Apologies for the confusion. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Melchior FRANZ wrote: No. plib has a bug: it doesn't recognize grayscale images with alpha layer yet. See ssgLoadSGI.cxx:301, where the alpha information is wrongly written to the blue layer, while the alpha layer is disabled. :-] Ah -- that explains what's going on here. I had thought that the problem was with the whole panel, not just that pesky problem with the TC. Thanks, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
David Megginson wrote: Update of /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models In directory baron:/tmp/cvs-serv6690/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models Modified Files: pa28-161.ac panel.rgb Added Files: bench-back.rgb glareshield.rgb Log Message: Added textures for the back bench (not right yet) and the glareshield. This aircraft gets really nice. Did you know that you employ the default outside texture (the one with orange stripes) at really funny places ? For an example look at the inner side of the co-pilot's door, look at the front of the cowling :-) Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Martin Spott wrote: This aircraft gets really nice. Thanks. The big breakthrough was my finally learning to use Blender to make the textures (such as the panel plastics and screws) as well as the geometry -- using a good 3D modeller with a bit of lighting can make even a ham-fisted dolt like me look like an artist. Thanks to Andy, too, for his work on YASim. There are still some borderline problems (such as propwash in a power climb), but on balance YASim allows this model to fly remarkably like a real Piper Warrior II. Did you know that you employ the default outside texture (the one with orange stripes) at really funny places ? For an example look at the inner side of the co-pilot's door, look at the front of the cowling :-) Yes: I haven't set the UV explicitly for all the faces yet, so there are some weird default texture patterns in places -- I'm working through the plane a little bit at a time so that the task isn't too daunting, but I've already switched to it as my default aircraft (rather than the 172p). Some day, the whole interior will look passably nice, but for now, I'm concentrating on the parts you see looking straight-forward while flying. My next big hurdle is figuring out how to model radios in 3D. I'll make a separate posting on that. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Martin Spott writes: David Megginson wrote: Update of /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models In directory baron:/tmp/cvs-serv6690/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models Modified Files: pa28-161.ac panel.rgb Added Files: bench-back.rgb glareshield.rgb Log Message: Added textures for the back bench (not right yet) and the glareshield. This aircraft gets really nice. I'll second that - it really is good. It looks really good, and at high resolutions the frame rate is much better than the default - I've seen 60 (pa28) vs. 30 (c172) at some locations and resolutions. One bug though - I don't see the instrument needles under Linux with an NVidia card. I thought you simply hadn't done them, until I saw them under Cygwin with an ATI card. I see the large tilting plane in the turn co-ordinator, and the AI, but none of the more 'needlish' needles. I've got no idea what the problem is. It also seems a lot easier to bleed off speed and/or height on approach by throttling back cf. the default Cessna. I would imagine they're both similar in that respect in real life, as a pilot of both can you (David M) give us some idea of which you think is more representative of real world behaviour? Once again, very nice model :-) Cheers - Dave ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
David Luff wrote: I'll second that - it really is good. It looks really good, and at high resolutions the frame rate is much better than the default - I've seen 60 (pa28) vs. 30 (c172) at some locations and resolutions. The old (2D) panel code seemed to be the real killer, since I'm using much more geometry and much bigger textures in the PA-28-161. One bug though - I don't see the instrument needles under Linux with an NVidia card. I thought you simply hadn't done them, until I saw them under Cygwin with an ATI card. I see the large tilting plane in the turn co-ordinator, and the AI, but none of the more 'needlish' needles. I've got no idea what the problem is. I used geometry for the needles, and they must just be too narrow to show up. It's strange, because I also use Linux+NVIDIA (GeForce2Go), and the needles do show up on my system at 1600x1200. In any case, I'll be switching to bigger quads with textures for the needles soon, and they should pop up then. It also seems a lot easier to bleed off speed and/or height on approach by throttling back cf. the default Cessna. I would imagine they're both similar in that respect in real life, as a pilot of both can you (David M) give us some idea of which you think is more representative of real world behaviour? They are different in this respect, though in most others, the 172 and Cherokee are comparable. The real Skyhawk glides forever in the flare, while the Warrior has the aerodynamic characteristics of a brick when you chop power (especially with full flaps). That has its advantages -- for example, ATC can squeeze me in for an approach ahead of an Airbus or 737, and I can keep up 120 kias almost right to the runway and still touch down with the stall horn blaring. In a 172, I'd be touching down in the next county if I tried that trick (or at least, I'd have to use some pretty viscious slips). When I first started flying the Warrior, I had a tendency to drop it in from a 6 in to a foot up, since the flare decayed so fast compared to a 172. First, I learned to recover by adding a bit of power to ease the touchdown, then I learned the different technique for a smooth landing without power (DON'T give up your airspeed too soon). Apparently, some Cessnas are like this as well -- the most common damage history for a Cessna 182 is a bent firewall from a hard, nose-first touchdown. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:10:30 +, David Luff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One bug though - I don't see the instrument needles under Linux with an NVidia card. I thought you simply hadn't done them, until I saw them under Cygwin with an ATI card. I see the large tilting plane in the turn co-ordinator, and the AI, but none of the more 'needlish' needles. I've got no idea what the problem is. I too, experienced this, no needles in the instruments. I use a NVidia card under Cygwin. After installing the cvs version of plib, the needles appeared (I used to have plib 1.6.0). Another thing that I noticed about the pa28 panel was the plane in the TC was not transparent where it should be. The rgb file did have an alpha channel but because the file was only 256 colors the alpha channel was not transparent in FlightGear. It was OK when I opened it in AC3D, but not in FlightGear. Converting the file to 24bit colour solved this, but I think that this is a bug, perhaps in plib. -- Roy Vegard Ovesen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004, David Megginson wrote: I used geometry for the needles, and they must just be too narrow to show up. It's strange, because I also use Linux+NVIDIA (GeForce2Go), and the needles do show up on my system at 1600x1200. In any case, I'll be switching to bigger quads with textures for the needles soon, and they should pop up then. I didn't get them here either, but the compass housing also exhibited a few problem, and so I suspect the cause of all this is plib merging vertices - I can't remember the limit I've got set at the moment. -- Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote: I too, experienced this, no needles in the instruments. I use a NVidia card under Cygwin. After installing the cvs version of plib, the needles appeared (I used to have plib 1.6.0). Ah, yes -- the last official PLIB version has a bug (I can hardly consider it a feature) where anything smaller than 1cm gets squished together. The same bug makes knobs and other small 3D objects come out funny. Another thing that I noticed about the pa28 panel was the plane in the TC was not transparent where it should be. The rgb file did have an alpha channel but because the file was only 256 colors the alpha channel was not transparent in FlightGear. It was OK when I opened it in AC3D, but not in FlightGear. Converting the file to 24bit colour solved this, but I think that this is a bug, perhaps in plib. Was this in PLIB 1.6, again? The alpha transparency is fine using the CVS plib. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
David Megginson wrote: Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote: Another thing that I noticed about the pa28 panel was the plane in the TC was not transparent where it should be. The rgb file did have an alpha channel but because the file was only 256 colors the alpha channel was not transparent in FlightGear. It was OK when I opened it in AC3D, but not in FlightGear. Converting the file to 24bit colour solved this, but I think that this is a bug, perhaps in plib. Was this in PLIB 1.6, again? The alpha transparency is fine using the CVS plib. I am using the CVS plib and I am seeing this bug. -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Jim Wilson wrote: Actually, it isn't that. It is just the location that the camera points to. You don't want it pointing at the nose. So add the entry below to the external views in your xml wrapper that track the plane. The value is the distance in meters from the FDM reference point (the nose in this case). Usually something near the wing looks right. It does not need to be exact to anything in particular. This example was taken from p51d-yasim-set.xml: view n=1 config target-z-offset-m archive=y type=double3.949/target-z-offset-m /config /view Thanks -- that did the trick. The plane is actually flying well, and I'm starting to feel tempted to go back and do more work to make it a fully-usable alternative to the [EMAIL PROTECTED]@#na 172 -- after all, it would be nice for users to be able to fly a light single with the wings in the right place, for a change. I wonder if we can model the broken air vent door on the pilot's side that blows -35 degC air on my feet when I'm flying in the winter. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
David Megginson wrote: Thanks -- that did the trick. The plane is actually flying well, and I'm starting to feel tempted to go back and do more work to make it a fully-usable alternative to the [EMAIL PROTECTED]@#na 172 -- after all, it would be nice for users to be able to fly a light single with the wings in the right place, for a change. I wonder if we can model the broken air vent door on the pilot's side that blows -35 degC air on my feet when I'm flying in the winter. Just come fly in my basement. I'll unhook the dryer vent for you. A few more updates to your piper would be cool. There are a couple missing details from the default C172 also such as mixture knob. I think I might be starting to get itchy to do a new release one of these days Curt. -- Curtis Olson Intelligent Vehicles Lab 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] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I wonder if we can model the broken air vent door on the pilot's side that blows -35 degC air on my feet when I'm flying in the winter. It's already there (parameter: --frostbite=mins where mins is number of minutes before you lose your toes). With that all you need is an old airconditioner and some dryer duct to make it work. I'd probably go for the --j3cub-with-the-door-open-on-a-sunny-day-in-hawaii option instead. Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Jim Wilson wrote: I wonder if we can model the broken air vent door on the pilot's side that blows -35 degC air on my feet when I'm flying in the winter. It's already there (parameter: --frostbite=mins where mins is number of minutes before you lose your toes). With that all you need is an old airconditioner and some dryer duct to make it work. I'd probably go for the --j3cub-with-the-door-open-on-a-sunny-day-in-hawaii option instead. Hmm. I'd go for the door open on a warm spring day in upstate New York, but to each one's own. The broken vent just compensates for the excessively hot (i.e. fry-an-egg-on-it) heat duct running down the middle of the floor. I manage to be pretty comfortable flying for a few hours with an outside air temperature of -35 degC or lower, when many pilots refuse to fly, though I have to qualify that: 1. In the winter, I'm always dressed for a long hike through the woods in case of engine failure, so I have boots, work socks, thermal undergarments, etc. 2. It gets a bit chilly alone in the cockpit after the sun goes down when the OAT is below -30 degC, though not enough for hat and mitts. The Ottawa Flying Club's new insurance policy forbids flying their planes below -25 degC (at altitude), which has kept them on the ground for a lot of the winter -- I'm glad I'm not a renter, or I wouldn't have been able to fly much. At -25 degC OAT, I actually have to turn my heater down a little to keep from baking, especially if there are a couple of other people in the plane. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
sim pilot feet-temp-c type=double-0.7/feet-temp-c /pilot /sim That should do the trick :) David Megginson wrote: Jim Wilson wrote: Actually, it isn't that. It is just the location that the camera points to. You don't want it pointing at the nose. So add the entry below to the external views in your xml wrapper that track the plane. The value is the distance in meters from the FDM reference point (the nose in this case). Usually something near the wing looks right. It does not need to be exact to anything in particular. This example was taken from p51d-yasim-set.xml: view n=1 config target-z-offset-m archive=y type=double3.949/target-z-offset-m /config /view Thanks -- that did the trick. The plane is actually flying well, and I'm starting to feel tempted to go back and do more work to make it a fully-usable alternative to the [EMAIL PROTECTED]@#na 172 -- after all, it would be nice for users to be able to fly a light single with the wings in the right place, for a change. I wonder if we can model the broken air vent door on the pilot's side that blows -35 degC air on my feet when I'm flying in the winter. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Update of /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models In directory baron:/tmp/cvs-serv27479 Modified Files: pa28-161.ac Added Files: pa28-161-01.rgb panel-tex01.rgb panel-tex02.rgb panel-tex03.rgb panel.rgb Log Message: This is some work I did on the Piper Warrior II a long time ago but never checked in. Hello David, I like your PA-28 very much, but I can't resist to note that there is one 'feature' that is really annoying (I must admit that this word is a bit too strong in this context !): At least in the outside views the aircraft rotate around its nose. It's difficult to tell if the cockpit view is correct but there are signs that it suffers from the same effect (this effect already existed before your recent changes). It would make the aircraft even prettier if this would get fixed. We'll have a fully IFR equipped (brand new) Warrior III in our flight school very soon (the decision doesn't make any sense to me, don't ask me why they didn't buy an Archer for this purpose). If anyone would be interested in some cockpit pictures I'll be able to provide them (although I'm convinced that David will be able to take all pictures he needs ;-) Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Martin Spott wrote: Hello David, I like your PA-28 very much, but I can't resist to note that there is one 'feature' that is really annoying (I must admit that this word is a bit too strong in this context !): At least in the outside views the aircraft rotate around its nose. It's difficult to tell if the cockpit view is correct but there are signs that it suffers from the same effect (this effect already existed before your recent changes). It would make the aircraft even prettier if this would get fixed. Thanks. I skipped most of the recent discussion on this point -- was there any consensus on how to set the aerodynamic centre point for a 3D model? We'll have a fully IFR equipped (brand new) Warrior III in our flight school very soon (the decision doesn't make any sense to me, don't ask me why they didn't buy an Archer for this purpose). If anyone would be interested in some cockpit pictures I'll be able to provide them (although I'm convinced that David will be able to take all pictures he needs ;-) I agree -- if I were doing it over again I'd buy an Archer rather than a Warrior, just to get that extra climb and gross weight (the speed difference is small). The cost of ownership should be similar, except for slightly higher fuel costs (which you can mitigate by using a lower power setting). All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs]CVS: data/Aircraft/pa28-161/Models
Hello David, I like your PA-28 very much, but I can't resist to note that there is one 'feature' that is really annoying (I must admit that this word is a bit too strong in this context !): At least in the outside views the aircraft rotate around its nose. It's difficult to tell if the cockpit view is correct but there are signs that it suffers from the same effect (this effect already existed before your recent changes). It would make the aircraft even prettier if this would get fixed. Thanks. I skipped most of the recent discussion on this point -- was there any consensus on how to set the aerodynamic centre point for a 3D model? Yes. JSBSim now features an item in our configuration file format that specifies the location of the VRP (Visual Reference Point) in the structural frame for the aircraft. The structural frame, as you may recall, is the frame in which the empty weight CG, gear locations, etc. are given in the JSBSim config file. The VRP is taken to be the forward most point on the aircraft -- assumed in almost all cases I can think of as being the tip of the nose - not including pitot tubes, etc. This would be the tip of the prop hub in the case of prop aircraft. As an example (not necessarily quantitatively correct) consider what I have done with the experimental C-172: AC_CGLOC 41.0 0.0 36.5 !-- Pilot -- AC_POINTMASS 180.0 36.0 -14.0 24.0 !-- Co-pilot -- AC_POINTMASS 180.0 36.0 14.0 24.0 AC_EYEPTLOC 37.0 0.0 48.0 AC_VRP -10.0 0.0 0.0 The above suggests that datum for the structural frame is nearer the pilot than the VRP. This is in JSBSim CVS, but the aircraft have not had their VRP set, yet. I also do not think the modeling rendering code has been set up to use this, yet. Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
