Re: [Flightgear-devel] YASim config files
David Megginson wrote: Since we have the YASim FDM in the FlightGear source tree, it makes sense to add Andy's four config files to the base package. Right now, YASim looks for the config files in $FG_ROOT/Aircraft; that's probably going to be a bit confusing, since the JSBSim models are in subdirectories in the same location. How about $FG_ROOT/Aircraft-yasim/, parallel with $FG_ROOT/Aircraft-uiuc? Works for me. That's what I would have picked anyway. I just thought it would be kinda presumptuous to start adding directories to the base package. :) The following patch to YASim.cxx changes the directory search path, and all will be well. Andy --- YASim.cxx 2001/12/06 06:34:31 1.33 +++ YASim.cxx 2001/12/06 18:31:50 @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ // Build a filename and parse it SGPath f(globals-get_fg_root()); -f.append(Aircraft); +f.append(Aircraft-yasim); f.append(fgGetString(/sim/aircraft)); f.concat(.xml); readXML(f.str(), *_fdm); -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Compiler Compliance and Coding Conventions (was: Another YASim source drop)
Andy Ross writes: And it wasn't a windows.h problem, but instead with cygwin. FYI THIS IS MORE THEN A CYGWIN PROBLEM Following sniped from http://lxr.linux.no/source/include/linux/ctype.h?v=2.4.13 1 #ifndef _LINUX_CTYPE_H 2 #define _LINUX_CTYPE_H 3 4 /* 5 * NOTE! This ctype does not handle EOF like the standard C 6 * library is required to 7 */ 8 9 #define _U 0x01/* upper */ 10 #define _L 0x02/* lower */ 11 #define _D 0x04/* digit */ 12 #define _C 0x08/* cntrl */ 13 #define _P 0x10/* punct */ 14 #define _S 0x20/* white space (space/lf/tab) */ 15 #define _X 0x40/* hex digit */ 16 #define _SP 0x80/* hard space (0x20) */ 17 Cheers Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Compiler Compliance and Coding Conventions (was: Another YASim source drop)
I'm not quite sure how things got out of hand this time, but they sure did... Norman Vine wrote: Andy Ross wrote: OK, clearly I have to cut out the microsoft stuff. So noted. And it wasn't a windows.h problem, but instead with cygwin. And the no-underscore-followed-by-capital-letter-symbols rule is new to me, and I broke it. Equally noted. FYI THIS IS MORE THEN A CYGWIN PROBLEM Eeep. So noted. :) I honestly though I was being conciliatory there; did you get to the end where I posted the new code with all the suggested patches? In case not, just for the record: I'm am sorry -- truly, deeply sorry -- that I used _P as a variable name. It was wrong. It was in violation of the language standard. It conflicts with macros of the same name defined in many places, including the ctype.h distributed both with cygwin and linux. I am equally sorry that I blamed the problem on namespace pollution when it was my own ignorance of the language standard that was to blame. This was thoughtless and irresponsible. Really, I'm not sure how much farther I can back off. You are right. I am wrong. Can we stop this? You *are* picking on me, aren't you? :) Oh yeah, and try flying around with the YASim planes and tell me what you think and want changed. Andy -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buildings or planes?
On Thursday 06 December 2001 8:47 pm, you wrote: Jeff wrote: So my question is: What is more important to FlightGear buildings or planes? For me? Neither: Aircraft carrier! Pretty sure Objects/Geometry/saratoga.obj is a carrier Adding a tail hook and catapult mechanism would be really, really simple, and a meatball (and VASI/PAPI) renderer wouldn't be too hard. A cockpit AoA indexer would be trivial (well, for someone with a knack for making pretty gauges -- I could make an ugly one). But there's got to be something to land on... That said, I'm sure other people have much more practical priorities. I'd guess that buildings and other ground stuff would probably top the list. In particular, bridges and radio towers are important landmarks (obstacles) for VFR (IFR) navigation. Having the Golden Gate, Bay Bridge and San Mateo bridge in the default scenery would be awfully cool. All of these are really obvious during approaches into SFO and OAK. Some of the SFO approaches go over the San Mateo bridge at something like 400 feet. Andy ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS broken
On Thursday 06 December 2001 05:45 pm, you wrote: It appears as if both the FGFS CVS and the JSBSim CVS files have a problem This is what I get from trying to link fgfs.exe ../../src/FDM/JSBSim/libJSBSim.a(FGFCS.o): In function `FGFCS::Load(FGConfigFile *)': /src/FlightGear/FlightGear/src/FDM/JSBSim/FGFCS.cpp:282: undefined reference to `FGKinemat::FGKinemat(FGFCS *, FGConfigFile *)' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status Did you do a cvs up -d ? This is a new set of files but I thought that Curt had gotten them into the Makefile.am so that make/g++ would have flagged it ... FYI I have 'fixed again' the 'goto Airport' and 'reset' operations and am trying to resync my stuff with the CVS so as I can get the code to Curt, but I would like to test against the latest just to make sure things are still working. FWIW The problem was related to the relatively new stuff introduced to bind the FDM to use properties values instead of 'C variables. It is great to have the flexibility the the properties give us but with the 'power' comes 'responsibilities'. ie you have to 'unbind' those properties that are 'bound' before freeing what they are 'bound' to or their behaviour is apparently undefined. Cheers Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Tony Peden [EMAIL PROTECTED] We all know Linux is great ... it does infinite loops in 5 seconds. -- attributed to Linus Torvalds ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buildings or planes?
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:58, you wrote: That said, I'm sure other people have much more practical priorities. I'd guess that buildings and other ground stuff would probably top the list. In particular, bridges and radio towers are important landmarks (obstacles) for VFR (IFR) navigation. Having the Golden Gate, Bay Bridge and San Mateo bridge in the default scenery would be awfully cool. All of these are really obvious during approaches into SFO and OAK. Some of the SFO approaches go over the San Mateo bridge at something like 400 feet. We need to think about how we are going to format these though. My personal preference would be the ability to create a FlightGear-Extended format that allows you to call the models, but have modifiers that allow time dependant scenery, and other procedural scenery stuff. I'd also like the abitlity to embedd all the models and textures and model config files, etc in a gzip file, because i don't like messy directories with millions of models in it. Thanks, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buildings or planes?
John Check wrote: Andy Ross wrote: For me? Neither: Aircraft carrier! Pretty sure Objects/Geometry/saratoga.obj is a carrier You're kidding, really? OK, I feel dumb. I've never touched the geometry side of fgfs, so any pointers would be appreciated. What can I use to look at this thing? I don't recognize wavefront .obj format (although it's ASCII at least -- big plus). I'm not a big modelling guy, so be gentle. I just need to figure out the coordinate system and where the deck plane and arrestor wires are. If plib supports it, then is Pretty Poly the best editor to use? Does ssg support API-side inspection of the geometry once it's loaded? (dumb question, I could just look it up...) Andy -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] c310 Panel
Anyone working on an airspeed dial? If not I'll make one, probably tomorrow. Also have made a tiny bit of progress on a 3D panel model...but it's at the point where it could be either a c310 or c172 with a little stretching here and there (given my 'experience' with AC3D there's a good chance I'll start over anyway). Any ideas on which is a better one to start with? Am leaning toward the c172 because if nothing else it'll have fewer items to position. Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] And the CVS change notifications?
All the CVS changes notifications about the fixing of JSB model of today (6 dec) are lost (well, at least none of them has been sent to me). Is the automatic CVS notification system failing? ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] c310 Panel
On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:59, you wrote: Anyone working on an airspeed dial? If not I'll make one, probably tomorrow. Also have made a tiny bit of progress on a 3D panel model...but it's at the point where it could be either a c310 or c172 with a little stretching here and there (given my 'experience' with AC3D there's a good chance I'll start over anyway). Any ideas on which is a better one to start with? Am leaning toward the c172 because if nothing else it'll have fewer items to position. Is anyone working on a 3D cockpit framework yet? David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] buildings or planes?
So my question is: What is more important to FlightGear buildings or planes? I never made a 3D model of a plane before but AC3D looks so nice I think I could come up with something. Buildings. I can't see how any sane person could say Planes (I could be wrong, though ;-) I like to be PIC when I fly a simulator. I don't want to sit outside my plane and watch me fly it. The cockpit panels we have now are fine. The ground looks so barren. Adding buildings, IMHO, would increase the realism FAR more than adding aircraft models - which under normal circumstances you won't even see, anyhow, I would think. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] And the CVS change notifications?
Hmm. I got them. I don't know what could have happened. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Martin Olveyra Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:01 PM To: FlightGear Devel Subject: [Flightgear-devel] And the CVS change notifications? All the CVS changes notifications about the fixing of JSB model of today (6 dec) are lost (well, at least none of them has been sent to me). Is the automatic CVS notification system failing? ___ 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
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buildings or planes?
A man after my own heart. How about creating a small airport and jack it up 30 meters from the surrounding terrain? You'll get the same effect without getting seasick.. :-) Charlie H. Andy Ross wrote: Jeff wrote: So my question is: What is more important to FlightGear buildings or planes? For me? Neither: Aircraft carrier! ... -- There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. - J. Anderson ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Compiler Compliance and Coding Conventions (was: Another YASim source drop)
Andy Ross writes: :) Oh yeah, and try flying around with the YASim planes and tell me what you think and want changed. Pretty neat :-)) Haven't got to much more time to experiment to night but all of your planes seem to fly on my Cygwin box and I can teleport with 'reset' and 'goto airport' so it seems like YASim is here !! Kudos Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] CVS broken
Norman, did you track down your FGKinemat build problem? I'm not seeing it on any of my machines here. Curt. Norman Vine writes: Tony Peden writes: I guess we all need need to re-run automake autoconf ect ! Actually, Ross made it easier than that: ./autogen.sh make clean make Yes that is nice .. However I always build in an external directory and have to do it the old fashioned way. :-) FYI By building in an external directory I can use one set of source files for both MingW and Cygwin and not have OS mismatched files. Trick is to run aclocal; automake; autoconf in the source tree and configure; make in the object dir. I usually just run the configure; make part and it just works however you need to the automake thing when new files are added FWIW This is the 'approved gnu way' and helps keep source tree contamination to a minimum Cheers Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- 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] buildings or planes?
Jeff writes: Well, I am finally ready to start to make some 3D models for FlightGear. Went all out and purchased AC3D, I like it and it's a good fit for me! So my question is: What is more important to FlightGear buildings or planes? I never made a 3D model of a plane before but AC3D looks so nice I think I could come up with something. Don't have much time so I'll be vary slow to crank something out... You'll find that your first 3d models will take a lot of time just learning about 3d modeling, but as you get better, things will go a lot faster. From my limited 3d modeling experience, here's a couple tips. 1. Avoid T intersections ... they lead to cracks in the model. They are so tempting to put in, either for convenience or mistake, but if you ever let one slip though, you'll wish you hadn't, because the resulting cracking at the seam when the model is drawn in the sim will make it look bad. 2. Don't forget this is a 'real time' sim. We are on a polygon budget, and hey, it would be great to see your 15,000 polygon beautifully detailed model in all it's full glory, but something like that will ***kill*** frame rates ... especially if you want to duplicate buildings or aircraft or trees or whatever the object is. This is one of the real 'tricks' to 3d modeling and is what separates the masters from the wannabes ... building nice looking models out of minimal polygons. It is hard to do, but it's what we need for FlightGear. Low polygon count, but nice looking. I know that's like saying I want it fast, cheap, and reliable, but high polygon count models will kill us. And it really sucks having to reject something that someone's put a ton of work into becuase it is *too* detailed, especially when it's beautiful. 3. We also have a texture budget, so the fewer textures the better as well. If it's an object that will typically be viewed from a distance, you might be able to get away with a 32x32 texture rather than a 256x256 texture ... that sort of things saves a ton of texture ram. Again, that's where the 'art' part comes in and is another thing that sets the really good modelers and artists apart. (Note that I'm a really sucky 3d modeler myself and I don't even use my name and any derivation of the word 'art' in the same sentence.) Regards, 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] CVS broken
Curtis L. Olson writes: Norman, did you track down your FGKinemat build problem? I'm not seeing it on any of my machines here. YES Sorry I did not make that clear in my earlier message. BTW Expect a bunch of changes from me tomorow to get 'reset' and 'goto airport' 'kind of' working again Cheers Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] buildings or planes?
Both of them. It is ugly too see an empty airport. An airport filled not only with buildings but also with planes on ground would bring an airport to life. Next time you fly around look out the window. What do you see more of by far? In fact, for great distances you may not see any aircraft. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] CVS broken
Norman Vine writes: YES Sorry I did not make that clear in my earlier message. BTW Expect a bunch of changes from me tomorow to get 'reset' and 'goto airport' 'kind of' working again Ok, sounds good. I took a look at that yesterday and fixed one potential problem in simgear (actually the problem is in flightgear, but until that is fixed (tomorrow?) :-) I made the offending simgear routine do some additional checking for out of bounds conditions. Once I got that working I got lost in the property stuff. Glad to hear you had more time/patience than me. :-) Regards, 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] buildings or planes?
Next time you fly around look out the window. What do you see more of by far? In fact, for great distances you may not see any aircraft. You see aircraft three ways ... Yes, of course. You are kind of biased, though - given what you want to do with the sim. The scene - no matter which direction you look, is still almost entirely dominated by buildings. Aircraft even blend in with buildings. It's almost pointless to stick aircraft in there when we don't even have a tower, yet. Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] CVS broken
Curtis L. Olson writes: Norman Vine writes: BTW Expect a bunch of changes from me tomorow to get 'reset' and 'goto airport' 'kind of' working again Ok, sounds good. I took a look at that yesterday and fixed one potential problem in simgear (actually the problem is in flightgear, but until that is fixed (tomorrow?) :-) There are still a few problems that I don't really understand yet, such as occasionally you have to teleport to a new location before a successful reset and an occasional lighting glitch. But in general it is working, although repeated 'teleporting' seems to be exhausting memory again. 30 or so jumps on my machine I made the offending simgear routine do some additional checking for out of bounds conditions. OK - Thanks for mentioning that I'd better do a cvs up on SimGear too then before I submit this. Once I got that working I got lost in the property stuff. :-) Glad to hear you had more time/patience than me. :-) Oh just one of the 'joys' of being unemployed :-( Cheers Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] buildings or planes?
Martin Olveyra writes: It would be nice if the web page had a 3D model repository with a little screenshoot for each. see http://home.t-online.de/home/Wolfram.Kuss/ Cheers Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buildings or planes?
You see aircraft three ways ... Yes, of course. You are kind of biased, though Yeah, but think of it this way ... do you really think many people want to dogfight with C172s ? I mean, it's one thing to do a highres dogfight model of a fighter, or an aerobatic biplane ... ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] buildings or planes?
When did we get bullets, or collision detection? First things first. Collision detection (with bullets) is relatively easy. And anyway, I thought someone was implementing secondary aero bodies 8-) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] buildings or planes?
Hi everyone, I have been following this thread. Pretty sure Objects/Geometry/saratoga.obj is a carrier Yes, this would be cool.Definitely. Jon Jon, as pointed out by John, we already have an aircraft carrier. It is one with a ski-jump and 3 arrestor wires. We use it in our design work. Andy, You can see the carrier in FlightGear by giving the lat,lon,alt in ~scenery.objects.txt. Or use the 3dexplorer (windows only) shareware viewer. If you are interested I could send you the wavefront .obj file format specs. The carrier model is a simple low polygon one which I edit manually!!. It uses object coordinates with its (0,0,0) at waterline (or metacenter, there is no hull below waterline in this model). You can use 3dexplorer to convert it some format that PPE supports and then use PPE to edit. But I havent tried that. I'll be glad to help anyone who is interested in using it. Regards Ranga I've never touched the geometry side of fgfs, so any pointers would be appreciated. What can I use to look at this thing? I don't recognize wavefront .obj format (although it's ASCII at least -- big plus). I'm not a big modelling guy, so be gentle. I just need to figure out the coordinate system and where the deck plane and arrestor wires are. If plib supports it, then is Pretty Poly the best editor to use? Does ssg support API-side inspection of the geometry once it's loaded? (dumb question, I could just look it up...) _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
