Re: [Flightgear-devel] SGWayPoint, SGGeod
On 10 Jun 2009, at 20:55, Torsten Dreyer wrote: The ridge_lift is now also using the SGGeodesy methods, making the code much cleaner, too. A word of caution - looking at the code, it seems like you're mixing geocentric (SGGeoc) and geodetic (SGGeod) co-ordinates. I haven't looked at the code in detail, just the cvs diff, though. Yeah - I was hoping nobody would have noticed ;-) Here is my petty excuse: The original code uses the geodetic properties /position/XXXitude-deg for geocentric calculations of other positions by applying heading and distance and used the result as geodetic positions to get ground elevation. Since this was a quite complex formula, nobody noticed. Now, it is obvious just by looking at the class names SGGeoc and SGGeod. I will do some performance tests to see how much cpu power it costs to convert from SGGeoc to SGGeod before fetching ground elevation and I will calculate the error in the calculation of the slopes if the systems are mixed. Consequently one could ask, if spheric trigonometry is adequate for short distances up to 2000m (6500ft) or if it is acceptable that earth can be assumed to be flat for short distances. This could spare many cpu cycles at the price of small displacement of the probes. I'll check this, too. For now, there is a note in the source, that this mixture is by intention, not by accident. Torsten -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] SGWayPoint, SGGeod
On 11 Jun 2009, at 09:52, Torsten Dreyer wrote: Since this was a quite complex formula, nobody noticed. Now, it is obvious just by looking at the class names SGGeoc and SGGeod. Another good reason for using SGGeoc and SGGeod, I think. I will do some performance tests to see how much cpu power it costs to convert from SGGeoc to SGGeod before fetching ground elevation and I will calculate the error in the calculation of the slopes if the systems are mixed. Consequently one could ask, if spheric trigonometry is adequate for short distances up to 2000m (6500ft) or if it is acceptable that earth can be assumed to be flat for short distances. This could spare many cpu cycles at the price of small displacement of the probes. My guess is, for something like ridge lift, you could convert the input position(s) from geodetic to geocentric, along with any other input lon/lat values, and then do all your internal computations in geocentric. As you say, it's cheaper, and sufficiently accurate over the kind of distances you care about However, I also feel that many of the concerns about the performance of geodetic computations and conversions date from quite a few years ago. While I don't think we should be wasteful, and they are numerically heavy to work with, Mathias' helpers hide the complexity, and I would be surprised if the computations are more than noise on a profile run, compared to the FDMs, rendering and so on. I'd say use whichever is easiest, and cleanest, for you. James -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] SGWayPoint, SGGeod
Hi, On Thursday 11 June 2009 12:03:10 James Turner wrote: However, I also feel that many of the concerns about the performance of geodetic computations and conversions date from quite a few years ago. While I don't think we should be wasteful, and they are numerically heavy to work with, Mathias' helpers hide the complexity, and I would be surprised if the computations are more than noise on a profile run, compared to the FDMs, rendering and so on. In former years the conversions were done using an iteration method. I do not know the exact convergence speed of that method but that was roughly O(something with altitude). Also the constant in that O-term was considerable. When I remember right, the iteration method converged *very* slow at bogous altitudes. And this made fg hang in some cases. Since some time we have a closed formula for the conversion that needs some trigonometric stuff, some divisions and some square roots. I have never really compared the iteration against the closed formula. But given the code I had in mind, I believe that this closed formula is about that amount of computation you had to do for few of the iteration steps the iteration method had needed. And the closed formula is O(1). So that conversion function is expected to be faster because of the algorithmical changes and because of the growth in computation power of current cpu's ... I would also not expect that to have a measurable impact on performance. ... we have very different performance problems that - when solved - push such a simulation to very different speeds. I'd say use whichever is easiest, and cleanest, for you. As long as you don't do thousands or more of them per frame this is probably the way to go. Greetings Mathias -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Generic fcs,nas
Hi list, I noticed the Generic fcs.nas, and an update to it, going through on cvs-logs and a potential problem occurs to me... Although it's called Generic, I noticed that it seems to be specifically for helis. Assuming that fixed-wing and LTA FCSs will someday turn up, perhaps it might be a good idea to think in terms of either re-naming the current 'Generic' FCS so that it's clearly a generic Heli FCS, or re-designing the 'Generic' FCS so that it is modular, with truly generic modules, applicable to any type of vehicle, and separate vehicle type-specific modules. LeeE -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [bug?] Embedded Nasal no longer executed on model loading?
Hi, On Tuesday 09 June 2009 22:10:32 Vivian Meazza wrote: It seems embedded Nasal has broken again. The doors of Hangar 1 at KNUQ stay shut (and mp-carrier doesn't work). Can you double check the last few days' changes to model handling in SimGear? Definitely broken by an upload on 07 Jun. Reverting to 06 Jun fixes it. Ok, I have reverted a change from that date. It works for the hangar doors for me. So could you please double check if this is sufficient for all issues? Thanks and sorry! Mathias -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Smoothing issues on some models
Several models have developed smoothing problems, including at least one that I originally did years ago. The current 747-400 looks fantastic, by the way, but it could look _a lot_ better with almost no effort. About 5 or 6 years ago the AC3D developer added a crease parameter to the ac3d file format. This crease parameter defaults to 30 degrees. This crease angle represents the angle between the normals of two adjacent polygons. For those who don't know, normals are lines that are perpendicular to the face of a polygon projected in the direction where the light is reflected (e.g. the non-transparent side). You don't see them but their coordinates are used during rendering. Our model loader splits the connecting vertices if the angle between adjacent normals is equal to or more than the crease setting (that defaults to 30). This creates the appearance of a sharp crease between the adjacent polygons (actually triangles) in OpenGL. This is helpful when you want a sharp edge. Previously it would be critical to split the vertices manually in ac3d if you wanted a crease to show. The default crease value in ac3d is a problem for fuselages in particular. The default crease of 30 degrees is quite shallow. Basically if you default to 30 then a smooth curve on a fuselage requires a minimum of 4 polygons separating surfaces that are 90 degrees apart. A lot of the models just don't have that many polygons. Even if they do have that many polygons the shape of the fuselage can still lead to adjacent polygons whose normals are over 29.99 degrees apart. The result is a crease shows up where it doesn't belong. The whole crease concept really falls apart (this is a jab at ac3d) with shapes like you'd have on a zeppelin or dh-82 where the creases go lengthwise but the polygons that represent the curves should smooth. The crease feature in AC3D is convenient but it ultimately reduces the flexibility some modelers think they have. You can always set the crease to 180 and split your vertices manually. We, in our loader, are defaulting the crease value to something like 60 degrees for the case where ac3d files do not contain crease data (most of the older ones do not). As these models are updated though, all the crease values are defaulted to 30 and suddenly creases start showing up where they never were before. The 747 for example, has a sharp line down the center of the fuselage top and bottom as well as several undesirable creases elsewhere. For those who are modeling and are not bothering with setting the crease value now (and letting it default to 30) I would strongly recommend removing all the lines from the ac files that contain the word crease before committing them to CVS. I think you will really enjoy the improved appearance of your work. Best, Jim -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Emission animation broken?
When did this happen? I've got cvs from May 27 and it is working on the p51 panel. Jim On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 3:13 AM, Vic Marriott v...@macdream.net wrote: Hi All,Is there any work being done to fix the lack of 'Emission Animation'? Currently, to test any animated models which use /sim/time/utc/second, I have to resort to version 1.0.0. In view of the way things are being changed as FG progresses, it would be a shame if this previously available asset were to be left behind. Best regards, Vic -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Absolute (calendar) times in properties
Hi May I have miss something but I have in FG properties sim/time/gmt in the form 2009-05-16T12:08:16, sim/time/gmt-string as 12:08:16, and sub-trees sim/time/utc/... and sim/time/real/... containing year, day etc as integers. What problems to use this? With respect, Alex -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Absolute (calendar) times in properties
Alez Buzin wrote: May I have miss something but I have in FG properties sim/time/gmt in the form 2009-05-16T12:08:16, sim/time/gmt-string as 12:08:16, and sub-trees sim/time/utc/... and sim/time/real/... containing year, day etc as integers. What problems to use this? Working with purely numeric values is much easier to deal with in a portable, timezone- and localization-independent way, not only for internal handling but also if you're planning to interface with external applications. James is planning to record timestamps for takeoff and touchdown. Now, just think of a tool to track a pilot's flying time just one application that comes into my mind, don't know if James is aiming at such a use. Best regards, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Smoothing issues on some models
Jim, Long time no see! I agree with all you say, except the default crease angle is 45 degs in the latest version of AC3D. But even that is often too shallow. I find 61 degs a good default, and then adjust as required. Vivian -Original Message- From: Jim Wilson [mailto:j...@kelcoindustries.com] Sent: 11 June 2009 15:40 To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Smoothing issues on some models Several models have developed smoothing problems, including at least one that I originally did years ago. The current 747-400 looks fantastic, by the way, but it could look _a lot_ better with almost no effort. About 5 or 6 years ago the AC3D developer added a crease parameter to the ac3d file format. This crease parameter defaults to 30 degrees. This crease angle represents the angle between the normals of two adjacent polygons. For those who don't know, normals are lines that are perpendicular to the face of a polygon projected in the direction where the light is reflected (e.g. the non-transparent side). You don't see them but their coordinates are used during rendering. Our model loader splits the connecting vertices if the angle between adjacent normals is equal to or more than the crease setting (that defaults to 30). This creates the appearance of a sharp crease between the adjacent polygons (actually triangles) in OpenGL. This is helpful when you want a sharp edge. Previously it would be critical to split the vertices manually in ac3d if you wanted a crease to show. The default crease value in ac3d is a problem for fuselages in particular. The default crease of 30 degrees is quite shallow. Basically if you default to 30 then a smooth curve on a fuselage requires a minimum of 4 polygons separating surfaces that are 90 degrees apart. A lot of the models just don't have that many polygons. Even if they do have that many polygons the shape of the fuselage can still lead to adjacent polygons whose normals are over 29.99 degrees apart. The result is a crease shows up where it doesn't belong. The whole crease concept really falls apart (this is a jab at ac3d) with shapes like you'd have on a zeppelin or dh-82 where the creases go lengthwise but the polygons that represent the curves should smooth. The crease feature in AC3D is convenient but it ultimately reduces the flexibility some modelers think they have. You can always set the crease to 180 and split your vertices manually. We, in our loader, are defaulting the crease value to something like 60 degrees for the case where ac3d files do not contain crease data (most of the older ones do not). As these models are updated though, all the crease values are defaulted to 30 and suddenly creases start showing up where they never were before. The 747 for example, has a sharp line down the center of the fuselage top and bottom as well as several undesirable creases elsewhere. For those who are modeling and are not bothering with setting the crease value now (and letting it default to 30) I would strongly recommend removing all the lines from the ac files that contain the word crease before committing them to CVS. I think you will really enjoy the improved appearance of your work. Best, Jim -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Smoothing issues on some models
Hi, For those who are modeling and are not bothering with setting the crease value now (and letting it default to 30) I would strongly recommend removing all the lines from the ac files that contain the word crease before committing them to CVS. I think you will really enjoy the improved appearance of your work. that just helped me on a issue I had with the ec135 in FGFS I've never seen on my test renderings in Blender and yafaray. Thanks for that information! Kind regards HHS -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Smoothing issues on some models
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Jim Wilsonj...@kelcoindustries.com wrote: For those who are modeling and are not bothering with setting the crease value now (and letting it default to 30) I would strongly recommend removing all the lines from the ac files that contain the word crease before committing them to CVS. I think you will really enjoy the improved appearance of your work. Best, Jim I've used the crease setting to get a very passable rounded appearances on surfaces like landing gear struts using surprisingly low polygon counts. A tube with a cross section having only 8 vertices can give very pleasing results after you play with the crease setting a bit, to values like Vivian suggests. The application can have considerable effect on polygon counts. I learned this trick from examination of the A-10 model done by Lee Elliott I believe. -Gary, aka Buckaroo on MP -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] FlightGear presentation on the LinuxTag expo, June 24 - 27
Hi together, earlier revisions of the FlightGear web page had a feature to mention upcoming events a) as a small note on the main page (even though, errm, it's been mostly pushed aside into some remote corner by the omnipresent advertising ) and b) on a related 'events.html' page to carry more detailed information. Sadly, this feature seems to have vanished some time ago which is why I'd like to advertize the upcoming presentation of FlightGear at the LinuxTag expo with a rough sketch of the former 'events' page: http://mapserver.flightgear.org/events.html Please spread the information to whichever place you think is appropriate and feel invited to add a nicer look to the page ;-) Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Emission animation broken?
I updated a week ago and it works , it never appeared to be broken here. Are you referring to the ambient material changes ? That has changed ... Hi All,Is there any work being done to fix the lack of 'Emission Animation'? Currently, to test any animated models which use /sim/time/utc/second, I have to resort to version 1.0.0. In view of the way things are being changed as FG progresses, it would be a shame if this previously available asset were to be left behind. Best regards, Vic -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear presentation on the LinuxTag expo, June 24 - 27
Hey Martin, Feel free to submit an event description to me. Let me humbly suggest that that should be step #1, and the step #2 could be to complain if it isn't added. There is still certainly an events section on the main front page of the FlightGear web site, but lacking any future events, it only contains a link to a google calendar intended to list upcoming MP events. But lacking any event submissions, these areas remain largely blank. Thus, I eagerly await your event submissions as well as the event submissions of anyone else, and am slightly disappointed to see a complaint first before anything else. Best regards, Curt. On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Martin Spott martin.sp...@mgras.netwrote: Hi together, earlier revisions of the FlightGear web page had a feature to mention upcoming events a) as a small note on the main page (even though, errm, it's been mostly pushed aside into some remote corner by the omnipresent advertising ) and b) on a related 'events.html' page to carry more detailed information. Sadly, this feature seems to have vanished some time ago which is why I'd like to advertize the upcoming presentation of FlightGear at the LinuxTag expo with a rough sketch of the former 'events' page: http://mapserver.flightgear.org/events.html Please spread the information to whichever place you think is appropriate and feel invited to add a nicer look to the page ;-) Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re;Emission animation broken?
Are you referring to the ambient material changes ? I don't think so. I am trying to use particular seconds to switch illuminations on or off. Would it help if I showed the actual code I am using? Vic -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear presentation on the LinuxTag expo,
Hi Curt, Curtis Olson wrote: Feel free to submit an event description to me. Let me humbly suggest that that should be step #1, and the step #2 could be to complain if it isn't added. http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg21405.html Thus, I eagerly await your event submissions as well as the event submissions of anyone else, and am slightly disappointed to see a complaint first before anything else. Would you really like to have yet another discussion about your style of managing the FlightGear web site ? Kind regards, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Smoothing issues on some models
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Gary Neely grne...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Jim Wilsonj...@kelcoindustries.com wrote: For those who are modeling and are not bothering with setting the crease value now (and letting it default to 30) I would strongly recommend removing all the lines from the ac files that contain the word crease before committing them to CVS. I think you will really enjoy the improved appearance of your work. Best, Jim I've used the crease setting to get a very passable rounded appearances on surfaces like landing gear struts using surprisingly low polygon counts. A tube with a cross section having only 8 vertices can give very pleasing results after you play with the crease setting a bit, to values like Vivian suggests. The application can have considerable effect on polygon counts. I learned this trick from examination of the A-10 model done by Lee Elliott I believe. -Gary, aka Buckaroo on MP Yes, that's normal smooth shading. The purpose of crease is to actually cause a crease, not to prevent one. I just looked it up and if the setting, either an older ac3d file or bye deleting the lines from your ac file, the default being used is 61. That should be the default in your models unless you want a crease to show. Best, Jim -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear presentation on the LinuxTag expo, June 24 - 27
Curtis Olson wrote: There is still certainly an events section on the main front page of the FlightGear web site, but lacking any future events, it only contains a link to a google calendar intended to list upcoming MP events. You might want to add a bunch of developers and users into the list of people permitted to add items to the calendar. That will encourage it to be blank less ... -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [bug?] Embedded Nasal no longer executed on model loading?
On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Mathias Fröhlich wrote: Ok, I have reverted a change from that date. It works for the hangar doors for me. So could you please double check if this is sufficient for all issues? Thanks and sorry! Hi, No problem. Yes, it works again now (tried hangar doors and MPCarrier). Thanks! Cheers, Anders -- --- Anders Gidenstam WWW: http://www.gidenstam.org/FlightGear/-- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [bug?] Embedded Nasal no longer executed on model loading?
Anders Gidenstam wrote On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Mathias Fröhlich wrote: Ok, I have reverted a change from that date. It works for the hangar doors for me. So could you please double check if this is sufficient for all issues? Thanks and sorry! Hi, No problem. Yes, it works again now (tried hangar doors and MPCarrier). Thanks! Yup, works here too, thanks, Vivian -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re;Emission animation broken?
yes that might give us an idea of what's happening. On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Vic Marriott v...@macdream.net wrote: Are you referring to the ambient material changes ? I don't think so. I am trying to use particular seconds to switch illuminations on or off. Would it help if I showed the actual code I am using? Vic -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Double sided in Blender
Hello All I am trying to build a hangar with Blender 2.48 not a hard task you might say but for some reason when I join two objects to one some of the sides become single sided that is they become transparent from one side in FG.If I leave them as separate objects they show double sided in FG.Does anyone know what I am doing wrong?. Cheers Innis _ Looking for a place to rent, share or buy this winter? Find your next place with Ninemsn property http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Edomain%2Ecom%2Eau%2F%3Fs%5Fcid%3DFDMedia%3ANineMSN%5FHotmail%5FTagline_t=774152450_r=Domain_tagline_m=EXT-- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Double sided in Blender
Innis, It sounds like some polygon normals are inverted. This is pretty common after joins. After doing a join on objects in Blender, select your object, go to Edit mode, and on the button bar find the Mesh Tools More menu. From there, select Draw Normals. The normal is a line perpendicular to the surface and extending outward from the center of the polygon in the polygon's facing direction. Generally you want all normals pointing out, indicating the facing sides are on the outside of the object. I suspect you'll find some normals are not pointed the right way. To fix this, you can select the problem polygons and then: Mesh Tools--Normals--Flip (also available from the specials key: w), or you can also try to recalculate all the normals to face outside, (ctrl-n in Windows). Usually ctrl-n does a pretty good job of resetting normals of simple objects in the right direction. Feel free to contact me off-list if I can be of more help. -Gary, aka Buckaroo on MP On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Innis Cunninghaminn...@hotmail.com wrote: Hello All I am trying to build a hangar with Blender 2.48 not a hard task you might say but for some reason when I join two objects to one some of the sides become single sided that is they become transparent from one side in FG.If I leave them as separate objects they show double sided in FG.Does anyone know what I am doing wrong?. Cheers Innis Find your next place with Ninemsn property Looking for a place to rent, share or buy this winter? -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Double sided in Blender
Thanks Gary I don't think that is it I have checked the normals and flip them to no avail. Correct me if I am wrong but if the object is double sided then you should not be able to see through it from one side.As I said before when the faces concerned are separate objects they show double sided in FG it is only when they are joined together that they become one sided. Cheers Innis Innis, It sounds like some polygon normals are inverted. This is pretty common after joins. After doing a join on objects in Blender, select your object, go to Edit mode, and on the button bar find the Mesh Tools More menu. From there, select Draw Normals. The normal is a line perpendicular to the surface and extending outward from the center of the polygon in the polygon's facing direction. Generally you want all normals pointing out, indicating the facing sides are on the outside of the object. I suspect you'll find some normals are not pointed the right way. To fix this, you can select the problem polygons and then: Mesh Tools--Normals--Flip (also available from the specials key: w), or you can also try to recalculate all the normals to face outside, (ctrl-n in Windows). Usually ctrl-n does a pretty good job of resetting normals of simple objects in the right direction. Feel free to contact me off-list if I can be of more help. -Gary, aka Buckaroo on MP On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Innis Cunninghaminn...@hotmail.com wrote: Hello All I am trying to build a hangar with Blender 2.48 not a hard task you might say but for some reason when I join two objects to one some of the sides become single sided that is they become transparent from one side in FG.If I leave them as separate objects they show double sided in FG.Does anyone know what I am doing wrong?. Cheers Innis Find your next place with Ninemsn property Looking for a place to rent, share or buy this winter? -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel _ Get the latest news, goss and sport Make ninemsn your homepage! http://windowslive.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=813730-- Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
