Re: [Flightgear-devel] Graphics load
On 3 Apr 2006, at 09:26, Ralf Gerlich wrote:thinking more about the issue and trying to get some distance to the "whohoo!"-attitude of some of the CLOD-papers I read in the last weeks, I'm more and more coming back to the conclusion "simple is beautiful". Perhaps we'd be best off slicing our tiles into subtiles - without essentially changing the layout of scenery directories, just the format of the .btg.gz-files - and provide several statically reduced versions of these subtiles. One approach I'm tempted to view as reasonable is described in [1]. However, this would result in increased storage requirements for scenery. As it was mentioned yesterday, full scenery already takes 13Gb compressed, some of the 10x10 tiles are already well over 50MB and our detailed 3x3 degree South Germany scenery is already at over 20MB compressed. I suspect that further increasing scenery size is calling for trouble. I'm pretty convinced at this point that the long-term solution is to use impostors for tiles in the middle distance - of course this means getting the RenderTexture code working reliably. To me this has the nice property that the low-end graphics hardware with no render-to-texture support can carry on drawing the current tiles with no changes, and people with RTT simply get a higher draw distance without (hopefully) too much impact - you can almost regard the impostors as a fancy way of generation a real-time skybox, though of course they aren't arranged that way. Naturally you still pay the cost of keeping the tile geometry and textures in memory /somewhere/, so it's a good solution where performance is fill-rate or geometry-throughput limited; if the cap is memory or IO bandwidth, it won't help, whereas static-LODd tiles would, at least a bit.James -- Java is, in many ways, C++--
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Multiplayer radar
On Sunday 02 April 2006 15:15, Lee Elliott wrote: I occurred to me that if the multiplayer aircraft positions were exposed in the property tree it would be pretty (well, relatively) easy to to make a working radar instrument. You mean something like the Lightning (and Crusader) already have? :-) Actually, I haven't had the time to test it much but I suspect something has gone slightly wrong with the Lightning radar when showing up MP aircraft - it was definitely working correctly for AI planes but the MP feature was a bit of a rushed add-on. I still need to add many more possible returns, because in MP there is of course no guarantee that the first three planes in the tree are going to be the closest ones and so the radar is fairly useless. There is also a simple 3d model bug where the returns are under some circumstances visible even through the rubber boot. Let me know if you test it and find that it's definitely broken, Cheers, AJ --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Graphics load (was Possible contribution for someone)
Ralf Gerlich wrote: Hi, Paul Surgeon schrieb: Well I think the best bang for the buck would be via some sort of terrain LOD mechanism. Using primitives to draw every single feature just isn't going to scale well. Terrain LOD and primitives for every feature is not necessarily a contradiction. At least there's progressive meshes, which can be used for TINs. A texture based approach like MSFS where the ground textures are generated on the fly from vector data would be even better. Very low poly count but high complexity. I have to agree with the original poster - FS2004 looks much better FS2004 looks better in many areas. However, I found the blurriness of ground features on FS200x quite unrealistic and very dissatisfactory. A little blurriness would not hurt in many areas. I still have to find a river in reality with as sharp edges as in FlightGear ;) When generating textures, one could do real curves and low resolution is a cheap way to make banks smooth. Roads and Railways are a different matter. but at least for the latter, curves would really look much nicer. Nine --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Reminder: upcoming v0.9.10 release
I would like to do the official v0.9.10 release this week. I hope to make the official tarballs earlier in the week so that ready to run binaries can start appearing by the end of the week. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG ftp for scenery problems
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 00:53:12 -0400, Rob wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Is it possible we could use bittorrent as an alternate means of distributing the world scenery? This seems to be the P2P protocol of choice that NASA and several Linux distros now use for distributing very large files. Maybe we could use it too? ..I fetched knoppix-5.0dvd (3.88G) that way and I am _not_ impressed. On 4/2/06, Arnt Karlsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2 Apr 2006 21:39:41 +0100, Justin wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Just out of interest i know FG scenery for the world is about 13Gb in tgz format. ..correct: a45:/var/www/cK# du -sh /mnt/FlightGearScenery/pub/fgfs/Scenery-0.9.* 13G /mnt/FlightGearScenery/pub/fgfs/Scenery-0.9.10 13G /mnt/FlightGearScenery/pub/fgfs/Scenery-0.9.7 a45:/var/www/cK# ll /mnt/FlightGearScenery/pub/fgfs/Scenery-0.9.10 \ |wc -l 512 ..pick all one by one with: a45:/var/www/cK# cat /mnt/FlightGearScenery/cmd.FG.Scenery wget -nH -np -m --passive-ftp \ ftp://ftp.de.flightgear.org/pub/fgfs/Scenery-0.9.10 a45:/var/www/cK# -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...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. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG ftp for scenery problems
Rob Oates wrote: Is it possible we could use bittorrent as an alternate means of distributing the world scenery? This seems to be the P2P protocol of choice that NASA and several Linux distros now use for distributing very large files. Maybe we could use it too? I have no problem if someone wants to start a bittorrent server from one of the FG mirrors. I don't think I can do it from the main flightgear ftp server though. The university goes out looking for bittorrent traffic (and other commonly abused protocols) and then they immediately think I'm downloading movies or music or warez or south park episodes. So they are very skittish of anything like bittorrent running around here, but if someone else wants to set something up, they are very welcome. Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Graphics load (was Possible contribution for someone)
Hi, Christian Mayer schrieb: Stefan Seifert schrieb: A little blurriness would not hurt in many areas. I still have to find a river in reality with as sharp edges as in FlightGear ;) When generating textures, one could do real curves and low resolution is a cheap way to make banks smooth. FlightGear draws line features like rivers with their own triangles. They are not on the texture for the sourrounding area and thus they can't be blured into the sourrounding. The point with blurring in MSFS is that they draw their roads onto a ground texture, which of course has limited resolution only. This also makes smooth river backs etc. easier, but also introduces a lot of possibly unwanted blurriness. But I definitely agree that it'd be great to have banks on rivers, roads and railroads. I'm not a pilot in RL an therefore don't have much VFR experience, but from the aerials I've seen I would think that roads, rivers, etc. are most generally recognised from above due to a wider stripe of changing vegetation on their sides. As Paul put it (although he meant it sarcastically): FlightGear is a development platform and therefore we could as well try different approaches...thinking again, this might well fail due to those qualified enough to do it having already too much on their back. Ah, well...;-) Cheers, Ralf --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] XML files, FC4, FG ver. 0.9.9 (pre-compiled, from the FG web site).
Hi: In an attempt to understand the xml-based property tree, I've been comparing, for example, the vastly different attitude indicators used on the c172p vs. the Citation-II. I haven't been able to account for this difference in any of the files or when browsing the properties during simulation runs. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks, Steve Miller --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] A320 nose gear steering
I recently tried to steer the A320 on the ground, it was nearly impossible. AJ pointed out that the max-steer angle was set to 5 deg, while that of the 737 for example is 35. I don't know if it's a typo or not but changing it to 35 makes the A320 steerable again. I'm not sure if it's the correct value though. Regards, Julien
[Flightgear-devel] Re: A320 nose gear steering
I actually just found that out: http://www.janes.com/transport/news/jawa/jawa000824_n_2.shtml It says the nose gear deflection is +-75deg, i tried it out and it works great. Julien
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reminder: upcoming v0.9.10 release
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 08:01 -0500, Curtis L. Olson wrote: I would like to do the official v0.9.10 release this week. I hope to make the official tarballs earlier in the week so that ready to run binaries can start appearing by the end of the week. Regards, Curt. Curt, At the risk of repeating myself, TACAN is broken for everything but the carriers. Replacing the two files below makes it work perfectly. Can someone submit them to CVS before the 0.9.10 release _please!_ Last month I suggested a change[1] to TACAN_freq.dat and carrier_nav.dat to enable TACAN to work on the proper channels. I'd like to see this go in so the F4E I'm working on can use the TACAN. Since it seems the sourceforge list stripped the attachments they are on my webserver: http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/TACAN_freq.dat.gz and http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/carrier_nav.dat.gz [1] http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9643858forum_id=1919 Thanks, Ron --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: A320 nose gear steering
here it is, patched to 75deg. Regards, Julien --- A320.xml 2006-04-03 12:25:20.0 -0400 +++ A320.xml 2006-04-03 11:47:42.0 -0400 @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ rolling_friction 0.02 /rolling_friction spring_coeff unit=LBS/FT 10 /spring_coeff damping_coeff unit=LBS/FT/SEC 5000 /damping_coeff -max_steer unit=DEG 5 /max_steer +max_steer unit=DEG 75 /max_steer brake_group NONE /brake_group retractable1/retractable /contact
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reminder: upcoming v0.9.10 release
Ron Jensen wrote: At the risk of repeating myself, TACAN is broken for everything but the carriers. Replacing the two files below makes it work perfectly. Can someone submit them to CVS before the 0.9.10 release _please!_ Last month I suggested a change[1] to TACAN_freq.dat and carrier_nav.dat to enable TACAN to work on the proper channels. I'd like to see this go in so the F4E I'm working on can use the TACAN. Since it seems the sourceforge list stripped the attachments they are on my webserver: http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/TACAN_freq.dat.gz and http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/carrier_nav.dat.gz [1] http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9643858forum_id=1919 I don't know anything about the TACAN's, hopefully someone who does know something about these can take a look today. Thanks, Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] XML files, FC4, FG ver. 0.9.9 (pre-compiled, from the FG web site).
Hi Steve, You picked two airplanes whose 3D instruments are not straight forward. The c172p's entire 3D panel is its 2D panel mapped onto a rectangle. The magic is done in Aircraft/c172p/Models/c172p.xml everything between panel and /panel. The Citation-II is one unified model, all the bits and pieces are in Aircraft/Citation/Models/Citation-II.ac. You can open this file with blender or ac3d. The animations are contained in Aircraft/Citation/Models/Citation-II.xml starting around line 1185. Look at the attitude ball in the Aircraft/a4/Models/attitude.xml. It's a separate instrument and therefore easier to deal with... Have fun, Ron On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 11:24 -0400, Stephen Miller wrote: Hi: In an attempt to understand the xml-based property tree, I've been comparing, for example, the vastly different attitude indicators used on the c172p vs. the Citation-II. I haven't been able to account for this difference in any of the files or when browsing the properties during simulation runs. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks, Steve Miller --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Real photo scenery
Just thought id share this link with Rob if its any help ? http://www.alanmoar.flyer.co.uk/ Justin Smithies --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] OT: ebay
Ima Sudonim wrote: I'm not defending what this person is doing, For the record: there's absolutely nothing wrong with what this person is doing. Providing duplication services for free software is a useful service (although apparently not useful enough to get a bid) and one worth supporting. So long as the seller doesn't misrepresent the item (the pictures of physical cockpits in the listing had me a little worried) or claim authorship, then this is entirely within the bounds of the license. The only suggestion I would have is that they be more active and let us know about this sort of thing; it's normally considered courteous to let someone know before trying to sell their software. :) Andy --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: A320 nose gear steering
Quoting Julien Pierru : I actually just found that out: http://www.janes.com/transport/news/jawa/jawa000824_n_2.shtml It says the nose gear deflection is +-75deg, i tried it out and it works great. Do you have a patch ? -Fred -- Frédéric Bouvier http://frfoto.free.fr Photo gallery - album photo http://www.fotolia.fr/p/2278 Other photo gallery http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/ FlightGear Scenery Designer --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0944bid$1720dat1642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reminder: upcoming v0.9.10 release
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 11:29 -0500, Curtis L. Olson wrote: Ron Jensen wrote: At the risk of repeating myself, TACAN is broken for everything but the carriers. Replacing the two files below makes it work perfectly. Can someone submit them to CVS before the 0.9.10 release _please!_ Last month I suggested a change[1] to TACAN_freq.dat and carrier_nav.dat to enable TACAN to work on the proper channels. I'd like to see this go in so the F4E I'm working on can use the TACAN. Since it seems the sourceforge list stripped the attachments they are on my webserver: http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/TACAN_freq.dat.gz and http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/carrier_nav.dat.gz [1] http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9643858forum_id=1919 I don't know anything about the TACAN's, hopefully someone who does know something about these can take a look today. Thanks, Curt. Thanks for the reply! Vivian Meazza responded on the thread mentioned above: However, much as I hate to fix one hack with another, this does seem to be a good fix for the problem. Basically, FGFS TACAN works by looking up the tuned channel number in TACAN_freq.dat, getting the assciated frequency and looking that up in carrier_nav.dat and nav.dat. Each TACAN channel has several frequencies associated with it; DME, VOR/ILS, Airborne, and Ground. The current TACAN_freq.dat uses numbers derived from the TACAN Ground frequencies, however they don't jibe with the numbers used in nav.dat. My change makes TACAN_freq.dat use the numbers we associate with VOR/ILS so when the lookup into nav.dat occurs the correct stations are returned. Example: HIF uses TACAN channel 49X ( http://www.airnav.com/navaids ) Old system gets it wrong: Navaids$ zgrep 49X TACAN_freq.bak.gz 049X10100 Navaids$ zgrep 10100 nav.dat.gz 3 02.910944 104.101000 89 11400 130 0.000 VPT Pulau Tioman VOR-DME 12 02.910944 104.101000 89 11400 130 0.000 VPT Pulau Tioman VOR-DME New system gets it right: Navaids$ zgrep 49X TACAN_freq.dat.gz 049X11120 Navaids$ zgrep 11120 nav.dat.gz | grep HIF 12 41.120503 -111.963681 4806 11120 40 0.000 HIF Hill TACAN Thanks again, Ron --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] weather updates
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 17:58 +0100, Justin Smithies wrote: is it possible to make the weather check for updates more often than 1 hourly ? Is there a file that can be modified or prop tree variable ? Justin Smithies I believe the metar data is only updated hourly at the source so there is no point to polling more often. Sanity check might be nice, though. Last week my local airport was reporting 128 knot cross winds! Happend to be the exact instant I was trying to run my very first Nasal script. It took me awhile to figure out it wasn't a programming error on my part 8^) --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: A320 nose gear steering
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 18:24 +0200, Frederic Bouvier wrote: Quoting Julien Pierru : I actually just found that out: http://www.janes.com/transport/news/jawa/jawa000824_n_2.shtml It says the nose gear deflection is +-75deg, i tried it out and it works great. Do you have a patch ? 5 degrees seems to be the default out of aeromatic http://jsbsim.sourceforge.net/ Ron --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: weather updates
* Justin Smithies -- Monday 03 April 2006 19:11: But if your flying would it not be possible you could be in a differnet region under an hour that has different weather conditions. FlightGear checks once every minute for the nearest station and if it has changed, updates weather accordingly. If the nearest station has not changed, then it still updates every 15 minutes anyway. That's more than enough, as the quickest stations on NOAA update around every 30 minutes. m. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] weather updates
But if your flying would it not be possible you could be in a differnet region under an hour that has different weather conditions. I would have thought as most of us use adsl that the option to chage this would be better. Why else does x-plane and fs2004 have this option ? Justin Smithies On Monday 03 April 2006 18:04, Ron Jensen wrote: On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 17:58 +0100, Justin Smithies wrote: is it possible to make the weather check for updates more often than 1 hourly ? Is there a file that can be modified or prop tree variable ? Justin Smithies I believe the metar data is only updated hourly at the source so there is no point to polling more often. Sanity check might be nice, though. Last week my local airport was reporting 128 knot cross winds! Happend to be the exact instant I was trying to run my very first Nasal script. It took me awhile to figure out it wasn't a programming error on my part 8^) --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Graphics load (was Possible contribution for someone)
On Monday 03 April 2006 15:37, Ralf Gerlich wrote: The point with blurring in MSFS is that they draw their roads onto a ground texture, which of course has limited resolution only. This also makes smooth river backs etc. easier, but also introduces a lot of possibly unwanted blurriness. Currently FS9 (2004) uses a ground texture resolution of 4.8m/pixel. I believe from what the MS developers have said on their blogs and the AVSIM forums that the next version (FSX) will be using 1.2m/pixel which is pretty close to what we have in FlightGear at the moment. Paul --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] weather updates
For example Dyce EGPD to Edinburgh EGPH does not take 1 hour and if you look at the ftp://weather.noaa.gov/data/observations/metar/stations/ site and view their weather data they are totally different. So being able to choose when the the system updates would be much better as you could easily be within range of a different weather station. Regards, Justin smithies On Monday 03 April 2006 18:11, Justin Smithies wrote: But if your flying would it not be possible you could be in a differnet region under an hour that has different weather conditions. I would have thought as most of us use adsl that the option to chage this would be better. Why else does x-plane and fs2004 have this option ? Justin Smithies On Monday 03 April 2006 18:04, Ron Jensen wrote: On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 17:58 +0100, Justin Smithies wrote: is it possible to make the weather check for updates more often than 1 hourly ? Is there a file that can be modified or prop tree variable ? Justin Smithies I believe the metar data is only updated hourly at the source so there is no point to polling more often. Sanity check might be nice, though. Last week my local airport was reporting 128 knot cross winds! Happend to be the exact instant I was trying to run my very first Nasal script. It took me awhile to figure out it wasn't a programming error on my part 8^) --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] weather updates
Oh, that. It does do that, at least mine does that, in fact there is a metar seam on very short final into my favorite runway ( 14 at KHIF ) The weather changes at random spots between the middle marker and halfway down the runway based on how fast the metar data comes off the 'net... Are you using --prop:/environment/params/real-world-weather-fetch=true ? Where are you flying? Ron On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 18:11 +0100, Justin Smithies wrote: But if your flying would it not be possible you could be in a differnet region under an hour that has different weather conditions. I would have thought as most of us use adsl that the option to chage this would be better. Why else does x-plane and fs2004 have this option ? Justin Smithies On Monday 03 April 2006 18:04, Ron Jensen wrote: On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 17:58 +0100, Justin Smithies wrote: is it possible to make the weather check for updates more often than 1 hourly ? Is there a file that can be modified or prop tree variable ? Justin Smithies I believe the metar data is only updated hourly at the source so there is no point to polling more often. Sanity check might be nice, though. Last week my local airport was reporting 128 knot cross winds! Happend to be the exact instant I was trying to run my very first Nasal script. It took me awhile to figure out it wasn't a programming error on my part 8^) --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Reminder: upcoming v0.9.10 release
Curtis L. Olson Ron Jensen wrote: At the risk of repeating myself, TACAN is broken for everything but the carriers. Replacing the two files below makes it work perfectly. Can someone submit them to CVS before the 0.9.10 release _please!_ Last month I suggested a change[1] to TACAN_freq.dat and carrier_nav.dat to enable TACAN to work on the proper channels. I'd like to see this go in so the F4E I'm working on can use the TACAN. Since it seems the sourceforge list stripped the attachments they are on my webserver: http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/TACAN_freq.dat.gz and http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/carrier_nav.dat.gz [1] http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9643858forum_id=1 919 I don't know anything about the TACAN's, hopefully someone who does know something about these can take a look today. TACAN is not actually broken. Due to the way the nav.dat file is constructed, if you want to use TACAN in conjunction with Atlas, then the existing TACAN data works. If you want to use TACAN with real maps, then you need the data provided by Ron. Since most people do not have access to real maps, but do have access to Atlas, then I propose we leave it the way it is, but make Ron's data available for those that want it. Regards, Vivian --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0944bid$1720dat1642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Real-time flight information
Buchanan, Stuart wrote: Hi All, I was doing a bit of digging around with tools like flight-aware - http://flightaware.com/ - which provide tracking of all IFR flights in the USA. It's quite cool, as you can watch specific planes track across a map, along with their actual altitude, assigned altitude and speed. Obviously their information has to come from some federal source. It turns out that this is the FAA's Aircraft Situation Display to Industry - http://www.fly.faa.gov/ASDI/asdi.html. Now it gets interesting: Say we had access to real-time flight information for every IFR flight in the USA. We could use that as the basis for our AI flights. I don't think the resolution would be sufficient for the actual take-off and landing, but given that we'd want to integrate human-controlled planes at that point anyway, no great loss. Even if we only had the dump from a single day, it would provide a pretty interesting basis to build an AI flight database. You can get data from this in two ways: 1) Contact a vendor. Unfortunately it looks like all the vendors are commercial, so you'd have to pay them. 2) Become a vendor yourself. This being the USA (where the government doesn't fleece you for services you've already paid for through tax), the only cost to this is paying for a T1 link and installing your own router plane in the FAA facility. Quite neat, but I doubt a T1 is cheap. Anyone think this information would be useful? I doubt any vendor would allow us just to download their data for our own use, but with a suitable begging letter, they might consent to giving us a dump of a days worth of data. This would be a really cool thing to pursue if someone had the resources to do this. If we could figure out exactly what the cost would be, maybe we could come up with some minimal usage charge just to cover costs. Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] AP messed up? agl-hold vs. terrain-follow
There seems to be a problem with terrain following: - the keyboard binding (Ctrl-t) uses terrain-follow - the AP dialog uses agl-hold - half of the aircraft use terrain-follow - the other half uses agl-hold - Generic/generic-autopilot.xml uses agl-hold m. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG ftp for scenery problems
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 16:57:37 +0200, Christian wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Curtis L. Olson schrieb: Rob Oates wrote: Is it possible we could use bittorrent as an alternate means of distributing the world scenery? This seems to be the P2P protocol of choice that NASA and several Linux distros now use for distributing very large files. Maybe we could use it too? I have no problem if someone wants to start a bittorrent server from one of the FG mirrors. I don't think I can do it from the main flightgear ftp server though. The university goes out looking for bittorrent traffic (and other commonly abused protocols) and then they immediately think I'm downloading movies or music or warez or south park episodes. ..and rightfully so, amule has a search function and the first 2 boxes I looked at, had ahem copyrighted music etc in when I fetched K5dvd, the second time I looked, everybody behaved like I was RIAA or BSA or FBI or something. ..bottom line is FG _is_ a MSFS competitor, and distributing anything FG on P2P where it is possible to find any law shark fodder, allows Microsoft bleeding us dry making us pay a lawyer to tell the judge to toss out the case everydamned time they find (or lure in) some dork with stolen binaries, music etc. Assuming he does every time, that still bleeds us dry paying our lawyer, to have the judge make Microsoft pay us costs and damages, he will wanna hear the case, and we can only pray for Groklaw coverage. Average price for this kinda litigation is US$ 3mill. .._if_ we go the P2P way, we would need to scare off anyone who isn't squeaky clean, by turning them into RIAA, BSA, FBI etc or face litigation. So they are very skittish of anything like bittorrent running around here, but if someone else wants to set something up, they are very welcome. IIRC you only need to offer the torrent files for the data. The torrent files are just a few kilobytes big and are transfered by nomal HTTP (or FTP if you whish). The allow the BitTorrent client to look for the correct data in the torrent network. Someone somewhere has to offer the files with a BitTorrent client though (otherwise you can't get the .torrent files...). Setting up a BitTorrent client that continusly offers the data helps for availability, but isn't necessary. ..I just learned bittorrent is a bit different to a|e|xmule p2p, I used amule to fetch Knoppix, and the wise approach is do it on a _dedicated_ machine in a DMZ. Anyone here with experience on _both_ bittorrent and *mule? -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...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. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] weather updates
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 20:09:24 +0200, Paul wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Monday 03 April 2006 19:11, Justin Smithies wrote: But if your flying would it not be possible you could be in a differnet region under an hour that has different weather conditions. I would have thought as most of us use adsl that the option to chage this would be better. Why else does x-plane and fs2004 have this option ? Justin Smithies I think FS2004 uses 15 minutes because the data comes from a Jeppesen source which has more frequent updates and not from the NOAA source which is updated hourly. I may be wrong about Jeppesen having more frequent updates but they are definately the data supplier. ..finally an use for MSFS2004: use it 0 to fetch that data and 1 serve it the way we want it 'till 2 we find out how to read it fresh from the source. ;o) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...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. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] 737-300 re-entry question (JSBSim)
I set the AP altitude-hold target higher and higher, and now I'm flying with Mach 1.00 at 250,000 ft, and I'm a bit worried about heat problems once I started the landing procedure. vspeed ist constant at 2012. Contrails are shooting ahead ... even faster than the 737 ... I'm no 737 expert, but that doesn't look right. Does JSBSim have an atmosphere model? :-) m. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] collision detection.
Any possiblity of collision detection in the near future ? I.e. instead of the aircraft falling through the ground it just stop dies explodes whatever. Also would it be a big job to stop the aircraft going through 3d models as if they were ghosts ? Cheers Justin Smithies --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures update ...
Hi Rob! First of all let me thank you for your contribution. I've been experimenting with textures in FGFS myself for a while and I know how hard it is to get to such quality textures. So keep up the good work ;-) When I had a first look at the textures I initially liked them better than the default textures. After that I also shared the opinon of Melchior and Georg about the images. I specially modified them with increased contrast and other adapitions which actually made them look worse. That means more like in MS-FS 2002, which looks unnatural to me. So being unsatisfied with that, I reverted to the default-set. It's true that the default textures are sharper and have more contrast, but I feel your textures do look and mix better after all. But of course they're not perfect yet. For example the crop textures don't actually show crop and look more like grassland / prairie. It could look a bit more like this for southern Germany: http://www.akermann.org/fgfs/mixedcrop.jpg [The picture is of a unknown source, so it may not be distributed.] The city textures are OK and do suit my local surroundings better than the original ones, which look kinda american. I like the town texture from the default set better, since it isn't as dense as yours and has more vegetation. However, since it's not available in hires, yours does look better in the simulation. Shrub, sand and tundra textures are definately an improvement while I still would like to see better ones for forests and deciduous areas. So much to my comments.. Since I've also been playing with textures, I thought I might also contribute the better ones I created. I did use textures from various sources and so it's not possible to share all of them for copyright reasons. A source I found very useful is NASA's Website: http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/ . You can find a texture-pack containing my snow, galcier and packice images here: http://www.akermann.org/fgfs/fg_phototex_ma.tgz I would be happy to see them included in your set ;-) Another issue I was thinking about is Copyright. As far as I could see, you are not distributing your textures with any copyright notice. This is ok for sharing it in the community, but actually you should name the original source and terms of use in a file somewhere, even if they are in the public domain. And if the textures are used as official set, this will be a MUST. I have provided a file for my files and you could just add your lines to it (I actually already added your name in the header). Mark Georg Vollnhals wrote: Rob Oates schrieb: New scenery update! Hopefully this gets everyones blessing :) Hi Rob, hi all! I am very glad you are such an engaged contributer to FlightGear and have seen that you are improving your skills during the work. But I am sorry to say - after testing your latest work - that these textures should not be the default FlightGear textures for the next release. 1. They are not universal or generic world-wide They might fit for US-America but absolutely not for the local area of Northern Europe. The old textures were not best possible but fit much more better if I compare it. 2. General quality is poorer And the new textures are POOR IN CONTRAST especially in the areas where the satellite made his shots through clouds. This is also the main reason I am not satisfied. Poor contrast gives the impression of poor color display (not wrong color display). The old textures have more contrast and better colors. 3. Structure sizes wrong? One can also discuss wheather the size of the displayed structures (fields, houses) are as they should be, especially comparing the different textures against each other. THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR ME as I just take the old ones. But the impression a newcomer to FlightGear will have at first glance is important and therefore we should provide the new textures as an alternative to the old ones, not as the default. Rob, hat up for your work. But please understand that I frankly and free tell my opinion. If something replaces really good stuff in the FlightGear default package then it should be of higher quality than the old materials. You have not reached this point now with your work after my opinion. Keep on working. Get better basic photos free from cloud disturbances and more universal. Improve your graphic skills. Show us what you are able to. Accept for now your textures are a good alternative but are not able to hit the old ones. Georg EDDW Anyways, Thanks for everyone's input. These textures are really looking good! -Rob Oates --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 737-300 re-entry question (JSBSim)
Melchior FRANZ wrote: I set the AP altitude-hold target higher and higher, and now I'm flying with Mach 1.00 at 250,000 ft, and I'm a bit worried about heat problems once I started the landing procedure. vspeed ist constant at 2012. Contrails are shooting ahead ... even faster than the 737 ... I'm no 737 expert, but that doesn't look right. Does JSBSim have an atmosphere model? :-) Damn, I've been flying the 737 for a year now and could not do that. But maybe I just didn't try hard enough. But it's no problem with the Concorde or an F16. But beware: a little higher, and you won't come back. Even without thrust you accelerate endlessly and rise and rise. Nine --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] collision detection.
On 03/04/06, Justin Smithies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any possiblity of collision detection in the near future ? I.e. instead of the aircraft falling through the ground it just stop dies explodes whatever. Collision detection and explosion animation are two different things. With JSBSim, better collision detection is, if I remember correctly, simply a matter of defining more contact points around the aircraft body (e.g. in the nose, the end of the empennage, the wingtips, etc.). I don't remember how it works in YASim. An explosion animation is cute, but usually inaccurate. It doesn't hurt to have some way to show that the plane is damaged, though. Also would it be a big job to stop the aircraft going through 3d models as if they were ghosts ? I think it would be a big job, but we'll have to do it sooner or later. All the best, David -- http://www.megginson.com/ --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0944bid$1720dat1642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG ftp for scenery problems
p2p isn't that evil :) .._if_ we go the P2P way, we would need to scare off anyone who isn't squeaky clean, by turning them into RIAA, BSA, FBI etc or face litigation. it's what you do with it that is :D BitTorrent, and peer-to-peer (P2P) are protocols, like HTTP and EMail. It is true that they can be used to share files illegally, but the same is true of HTTP. http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/faq.php#bt1 Bittorrent is faster when it comes to distributing large files. Also it doesn't have a search engine (though some clients do, but it's not the same as eMule). -Rob
Re: [Flightgear-devel] collision detection.
explodes whatever. Also would it be a big job to stop the aircraft going through 3d models as if they were ghosts ? Cheers Justin Smithies As far as I know this his is only true for a) random scenery objects (buildings, etc.), automatically placed by FG b) AI objects with flightplan c) user constructed models *without* hardened surfaces (very rare to find) (and which I personally hate not for your argument but because you cannot land on with the helicopter) d) flying the UFO e) maybe any other unknown a/c without contact points??? If you hit a normal scenery model there is no explosion - your a/c just stucks in the model and you have to reset FG. But this is on my experiences with only the BO105 (trying to land on very small areas you find on user objects, so you'll hit a vertical edge by accident) or some aircraft I used to fly as near on the nap of the earth as I could (simulating some strategies I know from the cold war time when it was the only possibility to survive ... or land in Moscow with a small plane coming from western countries). Regards Georg EDDW --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: 737-300 re-entry question (JSBSim)
* Stefan Seifert -- Monday 03 April 2006 21:49: Melchior FRANZ wrote: flying with Mach 1.00 at 250,000 ft, a little higher, and you won't come back. I reached ~310,000 ft, but an unexpected shortage of fuel forced me down again (with Mach 1.5). m. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures update ...
Wow, those textureslook great! I'll definately include them into the texture pack later today :) Also, thanks for the copyright file, I'll append the list of my files and include it with the texture pack. -Rob On 4/3/06, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another issue I was thinking about is Copyright. As far as I could see,you are not distributing your textures with any copyright notice. This is ok for sharing it in the community, but actually you should namethe original source and terms of use in a file somewhere, even if theyare in the public domain.And if the textures are used as official set, this will be a MUST. I have provided a file for my files and you could just add your lines toit (I actually already added your name in the header).MarkGeorg Vollnhals wrote: Rob Oates schrieb: New scenery update! Hopefully this gets everyones blessing :) Hi Rob, hi all! I am very glad you are such an engaged contributer to FlightGear and have seen that you are improving your skills during the work. But I am sorry to say - after testing your latest work - that these textures should not be the default FlightGear textures for the next release. 1. They are not universal or generic world-wide They might fit for US-America but absolutely not for the local area of Northern Europe. The old textures were not best possible but fit much more better if I compare it. 2. General quality is poorer And the new textures are POOR IN CONTRAST especially in the areas where the satellite made his shots through clouds. This is also the main reason I am not satisfied. Poor contrast gives the impression of poor color display (not wrong color display). The old textures have more contrast and better colors. 3. Structure sizes wrong? One can also discuss wheather the size of the displayed structures (fields, houses) are as they should be, especially comparing the different textures against each other. THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM FOR ME as I just take the old ones. But the impression a newcomer to FlightGear will have at first glance is important and therefore we should provide the new textures as an alternative to the old ones, not as the default. Rob, hat up for your work. But please understand that I frankly and free tell my opinion. If something replaces really good stuff in the FlightGear default package then it should be of higher quality than the old materials. You have not reached this point now with your work after my opinion. Keep on working. Get better basic photos free from cloud disturbances and more universal. Improve your graphic skills. Show us what you are able to. Accept for now your textures are a good alternative but are not able to hit the old ones. Georg EDDW Anyways, Thanks for everyone's input. These textures are really looking good! -Rob Oates --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel---This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting languagethat extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___Flightgear-devel mailing listFlightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: 737-300 re-entry question (JSBSim)
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 22:52:45 +0200, Melchior wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: * Stefan Seifert -- Monday 03 April 2006 21:49: Melchior FRANZ wrote: flying with Mach 1.00 at 250,000 ft, a little higher, and you won't come back. I reached ~310,000 ft, but an unexpected shortage of fuel forced me down again (with Mach 1.5). ..and no stalls up there??? ;o) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...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. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG ftp for scenery problems
Bittorrent is faster when it comes to distributing large files. Also it doesn't have a search engine (though some clients do, but it's not the same as eMule)...ok, details or urls so I can form an informed opinion?- Sorry I should have posted this: BitTorrent transfers are typically very fast, because all nodes in a group concentrate on transferring a single file or collection of files. While the original eDonkey2000 client provided little leech resistance, most new clients have some sort of system to encourage uploaders. eMule, for example, has a credits system whereby a client rewards other clients that upload to it by increasing their priority in its queue. However, the nature of the eDonkey2000 concept means download speeds tend to be much more variable, although the number of available files is far greater. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bittorrent#Comparison_to_other_file_sharing_systems also from my own experience, Bittorrent is much faster than eMule. -Rob
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG ftp for scenery problems
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:30:39 -0400, Rob wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: p2p isn't that evil :) ..agreed ;o) , however Microsoft is: http://groklaw.net/ .._if_ we go the P2P way, we would need to scare off anyone who isn't squeaky clean, by turning them into RIAA, BSA, FBI etc or face litigation. it's what you do with it that is :D ..keep in mind Microsoft has the funds to sell the press, legislators, bureaucrats, law enforcement, the electorate and the comsumers any kinda image they like to sell. Our only defense is, remain so squeaky clean we can tell anyone the truth under oath and have the judge swat Microsoft flat. BitTorrent, and peer-to-peer (P2P) are protocols, like HTTP and EMail. It is true that they can be used to share files illegally, but the same is true of HTTP. http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/faq.php#bt1 ..we still might wanna do our own thing, like serve scenery, weather and multiplayer data out with hangared planes, call it FG-hangar or something, and pick what we like from BTeM etc. Bittorrent is faster when it comes to distributing large files. Also it doesn't have a search engine (though some clients do, but it's not the same as eMule). ..ok, details or urls so I can form an informed opinion? -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...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. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Taxiway signs, howto?
Hi, I've seen there's some code to get taxyway signs with simple ascii files (http://www.flightgear.org/Gallery-v0.9.8/Link/KSJC-signex4.html), does that still work? Where can I know more? I'd like to make some taxyway signs for EDDF airport (http://www.flight-gear.de/index.php?option=com_smfItemid=15topic=92.0); I first started modelling some rough textured panels with Blender, then I've discovered I can do without that. I hope the code is still released with FG. Roberto --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] collision detection.
Justin Smithies a écrit : Any possiblity of collision detection in the near future ? just try the bo105, it crashes on ground and looks distroyed after that :) I.e. instead of the aircraft falling through the ground it just stop dies explodes whatever. Also would it be a big job to stop the aircraft going through 3d models as if they were ghosts ? Cheers Justin Smithies --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0944bid$1720dat1642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] collision detection.
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 16:20:36 -0400, David wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 03/04/06, Justin Smithies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any possiblity of collision detection in the near future ? I.e. instead of the aircraft falling through the ground it just stop dies explodes whatever. Collision detection and explosion animation are two different things. With JSBSim, better collision detection is, if I remember correctly, simply a matter of defining more contact points around the aircraft ..maybe a contact point class? Lines, shapes, etc? Or simply inside the original airframe? And made it thru it for ammo etc? body (e.g. in the nose, the end of the empennage, the wingtips, etc.). I don't remember how it works in YASim. An explosion animation is cute, but usually inaccurate. It doesn't hurt to have some way to show that the plane is damaged, though. ..play it safe: Have our Rowan Atkinson go I'm afraid the Muslims were right. in Purgatory. ;o) Also would it be a big job to stop the aircraft going through 3d models as if they were ghosts ? I think it would be a big job, but we'll have to do it sooner or later. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...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. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG ftp for scenery problems
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Arnt Karlsen schrieb: ..and rightfully so, amule has a search function and the first 2 boxes I looked at, had ahem copyrighted music etc in when I fetched K5dvd, the second time I looked, everybody behaved like I was RIAA or BSA or FBI or something. A knife can be used to create some very fine food or to murder someone - so is a knife a bad tool? You should not mix the tool with the actions it's used for. P2P technology is perfectly legal (TCP/IP itself is a P2P technology). The problem arises when people distribute conent where they don't have the licences to distribute (like most MP3s or movies). When you distribute GPLed content or you own content (where you issue any distribution licence to yourself) your action is perfectly legal and no RIAA, BSA or FBI can do you any harm. Please note: with P2P you are still only offering files that *you* have decided to offer. Noone from the outside can make you offer illegal files. (But you usually offer files that you are downloading or have been downloading - so you should never download an illegal file) ..bottom line is FG _is_ a MSFS competitor, and distributing anything FG on P2P where it is possible to find any law shark fodder, allows Microsoft bleeding us dry making us pay a lawyer to tell the judge to toss out the case everydamned time they find (or lure in) some dork with stolen binaries, music etc. Assuming he does every time, that still bleeds us dry paying our lawyer, to have the judge make Microsoft pay us costs and damages, he will wanna hear the case, and we can only pray for Groklaw coverage. Average price for this kinda litigation is US$ 3mill. It does not matter how (HTTP, FTP, P2P) we distribute FlightGear - as long as the whole content is legaly licenced under the GPL. That we are an competitor to MSFS, X-Plane or even Falcon 4.0 is totaly irrelevant in this case. ..I just learned bittorrent is a bit different to a|e|xmule p2p, I used amule to fetch Knoppix, and the wise approach is do it on a _dedicated_ machine in a DMZ. Anyone here with experience on _both_ bittorrent and *mule? You should always run any processes that allow incoming traffic in a DMZ. Curt could ask his network administrator for permission to run the BitTorrent client on the same machine that runs the Web-Server. Then both can offer the same files without storage overhead. And any reasonable network admin should be happy about that, as it can promise to cut down the download traffic a lot! CU, Christian -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32) iD8DBQFEMZ2flhWtxOxWNFcRAmFVAJ41dUT5Cl69armBMMuMid6Sl2dHVwCeN6Bw Lk42pmL6WaRdgrDvwFQ0gCs= =LuVm -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] collision detection.
David Megginson wrote: Collision detection and explosion animation are two different things. With JSBSim, better collision detection is, if I remember correctly, simply a matter of defining more contact points around the aircraft body (e.g. in the nose, the end of the empennage, the wingtips, etc.). I don't remember how it works in YASim. Pretty much the same, except that you get contact points generated for you at the tips of all the surface and fuselage objects. It's been my experience that this works really well, so there's no configuration file hook for adding your own. I think the original report might have been that you can bury a fast moving aircraft under the ground. The 100 Hz granularity of the FDM computations isn't able to detect the exact moment of collision. That's a much harder issue to solve; you'd have to extrapolate backwards to make it work. Andy --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG ftp for scenery problems
On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 00:11:44 +0200, Christian wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Arnt Karlsen schrieb: ..and rightfully so, amule has a search function and the first 2 boxes I looked at, had ahem copyrighted music etc in when I fetched K5dvd, the second time I looked, everybody behaved like I was RIAA or BSA or FBI or something. A knife can be used to create some very fine food or to murder someone - so is a knife a bad tool? You should not mix the tool with the actions it's used for. P2P technology is perfectly legal (TCP/IP itself is a P2P technology). The problem arises when people distribute conent where they don't have the licences to distribute (like most MP3s or movies). When you distribute GPLed content or you own content (where you issue any distribution licence to yourself) your action is perfectly legal and no RIAA, BSA or FBI can do you any harm. ..you forget why we have Groklaw.net: Microsoft litigation _will_ hurt us in the short run, even if we win in the long term. Until we make it to the perfect world you envision, we have to make sure we can win _any_ case Microsoft and its proxies throws our way. That means we need to tell our lawyer that P2P indeed is legal, so he can tell the judge, we cannot expect them to know this today. Keep in mind a lot of people does believe P2P is illegal because of the abuse of it, and, because RIAA et al lobbyies to have P2P banned. Please note: with P2P you are still only offering files that *you* have decided to offer. Noone from the outside can make you offer illegal files. (But you usually offer files that you are downloading or have been downloading - so you should never download an illegal file) ..bottom line is FG _is_ a MSFS competitor, and distributing anything FG on P2P where it is possible to find any law shark fodder, allows Microsoft bleeding us dry making us pay a lawyer to tell the judge to toss out the case everydamned time they find (or lure in) some dork with stolen binaries, music etc. Assuming he does every time, that still bleeds us dry paying our lawyer, to have the judge make Microsoft pay us costs and damages, he will wanna hear the case, and we can only pray for Groklaw coverage. Average price for this kinda litigation is US$ 3mill. It does not matter how (HTTP, FTP, P2P) we distribute FlightGear - as long as the whole content is legaly licenced under the GPL. ..aye. That we are an competitor to MSFS, X-Plane or even Falcon 4.0 is totaly irrelevant in this case. ..in a lawsuit, this easily _becomes_ relevant. ..I just learned bittorrent is a bit different to a|e|xmule p2p, I used amule to fetch Knoppix, and the wise approach is do it on a _dedicated_ machine in a DMZ. Anyone here with experience on _both_ bittorrent and *mule? You should always run any processes that allow incoming traffic in a DMZ. Curt could ask his network administrator for permission to run the BitTorrent client on the same machine that runs the Web-Server. Then both can offer the same files without storage overhead. And any reasonable network admin should be happy about that, as it can promise to cut down the download traffic a lot! ..and we can easily prove with the relevant traffic statistics. ;o) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...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. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] collision detection.
On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 16:04:30 -0700, Andy wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: David Megginson wrote: Collision detection and explosion animation are two different things. With JSBSim, better collision detection is, if I remember correctly, simply a matter of defining more contact points around the aircraft body (e.g. in the nose, the end of the empennage, the wingtips, etc.). I don't remember how it works in YASim. Pretty much the same, except that you get contact points generated for you at the tips of all the surface and fuselage objects. It's been my experience that this works really well, so there's no configuration file hook for adding your own. I think the original report might have been that you can bury a fast moving aircraft under the ground. The 100 Hz granularity of the FDM computations isn't able to detect the exact moment of collision. That's a much harder issue to solve; you'd have to extrapolate backwards to make it work. ..one way could be check if I avoid it and uh-oh, better speed up now so we know when we (get) hit. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...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. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
FW: [Flightgear-devel] collision detection.
Any possiblity of collision detection in the near future ? I.e. instead of the aircraft falling through the ground it just stop dies explodes whatever. Also would it be a big job to stop the aircraft going through 3d models as if they were ghosts ? Cheers Justin Smithies JSBSim aircraft should have contact points defined in addition to the landing gear. Otherwise, if the gear is stowed when landing, the aircraft will fall through. Jon --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Re: 737-300 re-entry question (JSBSim)
* Stefan Seifert -- Monday 03 April 2006 21:49: Melchior FRANZ wrote: flying with Mach 1.00 at 250,000 ft, a little higher, and you won't come back. I reached ~310,000 ft, but an unexpected shortage of fuel forced me down again (with Mach 1.5). m. This kind of sucks. I'll have to try and take a close look at this one, pronto. Can you do this without the autopilot? Jon --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Graphics load (was Possible contribution for someone)
For starter, I think it would be best to switch to a more mature rendering engine. Ampere --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures update ...
Scenery Updated! Now includes Mark Akermann's updates to Glaicer, Snow, and Packice. :) I'll currently looking at changing the hue to the forest textures to match thenotherneuropean area.Mineseems to be a bit too emerald, and I think would be acceptable to makethem a little darker. -Rob
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Reminder: upcoming v0.9.10 release
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 19:18 +0100, Vivian Meazza wrote: Curtis L. Olson Ron Jensen wrote: At the risk of repeating myself, TACAN is broken for everything but the carriers. Replacing the two files below makes it work perfectly. Can someone submit them to CVS before the 0.9.10 release _please!_ Last month I suggested a change[1] to TACAN_freq.dat and carrier_nav.dat to enable TACAN to work on the proper channels. I'd like to see this go in so the F4E I'm working on can use the TACAN. Since it seems the sourceforge list stripped the attachments they are on my webserver: http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/TACAN_freq.dat.gz and http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/carrier_nav.dat.gz [1] http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9643858forum_id=1 919 I don't know anything about the TACAN's, hopefully someone who does know something about these can take a look today. TACAN is not actually broken. Due to the way the nav.dat file is constructed, if you want to use TACAN in conjunction with Atlas, then the existing TACAN data works. If you want to use TACAN with real maps, then you need the data provided by Ron. Since most people do not have access to real maps, but do have access to Atlas, then I propose we leave it the way it is, but make Ron's data available for those that want it. Regards, Vivian Hi Vivian, Atlas works with TACAN? How? A grep -R -i TACAN * in my Atlas source tree yields no hits. Is there a patch somewhere to add it in? I don't have any physical 'real' maps, just the data I get from the Internet at places like http://www.airnav.com/ or http://www.myafd.com . Here's how it works, go to our main airport KSFO http://www.airnav.com/airport/KSFO Look down to Nearby radio navigation aids, Oakland VORTAC is only 9.6 miles away, click its link: http://www.airnav.com/cgi-bin/navaid-info?id=OAKtype=VORTACname=OAKLAND Look at the Operational Characteristics: Frequency: 116.80 TACAN channel: 115X The way the current TACAN_freq.dat is built Oakland VORTAC works on FGFS 'TACAN' channel 081X. The same exercise can be ran on any of the VORTACs around KSFO http://www.airnav.com/cgi-bin/navaid-info?id=OSItype=VORTACname=WOODSIDE WOODSIDE VORTAC Operational Characteristics Frequency: 113.90 TACAN channel: 086X *FGFS* 'TACAN' channel: 052Y And with different web services: http://www.myafd.com/NavAid/SAU_VORTAC_SAUSALITO NavAid Facility ID: SAU Type: VORTAC Name: SAUSALITO Freqency: 116.20 TACAN Channel: 109X *FGFS* 'TACAN' channel: 075X Are you really suggesting we ignore the real-world, freely available navigation aid data in favor of incorrect data out of Atlas? Thanks, Ron --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures update ...
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 22:53 -0400, Rob Oates wrote: and I think would be acceptable to make them a little darker. Please don't make them darker. One of the thing I like about your texture set vs. the old one is I can actually make out details over forests its not all one black blob. See the mountains behind this screen shot: http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/fgfs-screen-ferriswheel.jpg Vs. your new, brighter textures: http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/fgfs-screen-ferriswheel2.jpg I can actually see to fly up the canyons now. Ridge crossing at mach 1 in my F4 is a blast :) --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: Taxiway signs, howto?
* Robicd -- Tuesday 04 April 2006 01:30: You need entries for the letters in materials.xml: [...] and entries like this in the *.stg files: [...] There's nothing like that in materials.xml and no Letter*.rgb in my FGFS installation. Should I create the Letters.rgb files by myself and then add appropriate entries in materials.xml? Sure. I didn't say you *have* these entries, but you *need* them. m. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures update ...
oh, not a problem then ^_^ -Rob On 4/4/06, Ron Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 22:53 -0400, Rob Oates wrote: and I think would be acceptable to make them a little darker. Please don't make them darker.One of the thing I like about yourtexture set vs. the old one is I can actually make out details overforests its not all one black blob.See the mountains behind this screen shot: http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/fgfs-screen-ferriswheel.jpgVs. your new, brighter textures: http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/fgfs-screen-ferriswheel2.jpgI can actually see to fly up the canyons now.Ridge crossing at mach 1in my F4 is a blast :)--- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting languagethat extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcastand join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642___ Flightgear-devel mailing listFlightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: 737-300 re-entry question (JSBSim)
* Melchior FRANZ -- Tuesday 04 April 2006 07:36: I didn't start on ground, but with this command line (relevant parts only): $ fgfs --aircraft=737-300 --airport=KSNS --altitude=3 --heading=320 --vc=440 --prop:/controls/gear/gear-down=false --timeofday=noon --disable-real-weather-fetch (Hmm ... not sure if I remember correctly, though.) This is a configuration that I've stored for extended approach training. I don't remember if I landed at KSFO first and took off again or set the AP immediately. Hardly relevant, but I set heading-hold to 90 degree and altitude-hold targets first to low altitudes (30,000 then 50,000 or something), then steadily increasing 80,000, 100,000, etc. until finally 500,000 ft. ;-) The reason why I don't remember exactly is that I had tried the 737 a few dozens of times with AP before that, because I was working on an improved version of the autopilot.xml dialog. m. --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
