[Flightgear-devel] (no subject)
http://benjamindegen.com/themes/cp_themes/default/7ho4coxe.php 4/28/2012 2:44:31 AM-- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] The Douglas Dc 3 in GIT
When the team of the PAF has decided to prohibit access to their work to me, they also requested the opportunity to put it on ILM. They only banned you from the PAF-Forum. Simply because you offended some users there just for having a different opinion than you. That can be read by everyone in the forum, without beeing registered. And everyone can download their work, without beeing registered. I have seen that you nearly always act like that, even on the official forum and here on the mailing-list. Lacking social skills I would say. When I finally got access to their improvements, through a person who has nothing to do with them but that dispatched the wiki link that I did not know, so I logically integrated all their work to my airplane. Thus it has always worked. To YOUR aircraft? THEIR work? You started the work on the aircraft, but it was the team who finally finished it. So to make it clear: it's not alone your work, and not alone their work. It is a work of ALL INVOLVED! And they published the link in the official forum- you can't have missed that. I always took the time to report the authors of the additions in my site because it seems normal for me. If the team of the PAF not appreciate the principle of respect of the original authors of the open source, they go to make aircraft for FS X or X Plane. In addition, it can make money Muaahahaha - ROFL! 1.) Who is the original author? You? Again: You just started a work; the real work- making it flyable and usuable- was done by this group. Without them it would have been another crappy aircraft made by you as the other more than hundred (!) ones by you. They are the original authors as well, like beside you! I would even say, that have made the main work! So there are multiple original authors- that's something you have to learn. And you have to respect them as well. You didn't learn from the AlouetteII-conflict last year, right? 2.) YOU want tell us about the principle respect of original authors? I can still find the already mentioned copyright violations in your aircraft! But see below. I'm tired of seeing all these kids puerile want to use the work of others, to obtain recognition as authors. I have searched through the forums and mailing-list, and it still seems to me that you did not really understand OpenSource. And back on the 5 or 6 files with licensing issues in my airplanes is ridiculous. As usual, Clement did not consider before speaking. Because most have been fixed. 5 or 6? I can remember more - still too much. And much too much for someone who accuses others here for disrespecting OpenSource. Since I started I've always done anything that try to bring something to FG and to please the greatest number. I'm not trying to please me personally. But this, it seems that the PAF can not understand. Sorry, I have to doubt your words, I'm not trying to please me personally. is looking too suspicious to me! And they do the same what you want to make us believe you do: trying to bring something to FG; and please to greatest number. And it seems to me that they do with great success- as many more users are tired of the many half finished, unusuable aircraft made by you. It's a shame. The team is talented, but seems guided by a kid with goals unrelated to FG and Open Source. I don't see that, can you prove it? I wonder how many discussions like that will follow- there seems to be a coherence between your acting and understanding of teamwork and OpenSource and such discussions- OSG-Particles, Bell UH1, AlouetteII, Velocity-XL, and now the DC-3 Why I don't see such discussions on Gijs, Martins, Syds and others work? Why? Pierre Mueller Switzerland-- Virtualization Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Licence Violations in FGFS was: For Pierre Mueller
Dear Mr. BARANGER 1.) You don't have to adress me but the FGFS project main developers and members! 2.) Unfortunately you just tried to correct some very few files- two of all with success, one seems problematic to me.. Instead of adding several new aircraft in this time I hoped you are fixing all the mentioned aircraft. You didn't. But well- it isn't my project, and it is not me who has to the responsibility for licence violations by you in this Flight Simulator Project. !-- Part of Ride of the Valkyries By Richard Wagner Rearranged L. Roberts Midifile : http://www.blueman.name/FICHIERS/UpdateFileStats.php Use Timidity and freepats for make the Wav file. From the page you downloaded the Midi-file, the only hint on the Terms of Use I found: Quote from: http://www.blueman.name/Telechargement.php Ahhh, les téléchargements... On aime ça... Récupérer des fichiers, des applications, etc., nous apporte de la joie n'est-ce pas ? Et si c'est gratuit, en plus, alors là, c'est l'apothéose... Et bien, soyez heureux : tout ce qui est ici est gratuit ou Freeware... Translation for those who doesn't understand the french language: Ahhh, those downloads... We love it... Rebuild the files, applications, etc., this will bring us joy, won't it? And when it is all free of charge, and more, then this is the top of it all. And, be happy: everything here is free of charge or Freeware... Freeware isn't compatible with GNU GPL, and free of charge does not mean automatically that it compliance to GNU GPL. Very difficult to say here- I would have asked the author of this files anyway to be on the safe side. You know that GNU GPL allows to sell your work and everything included? Maybe the author doesn't like that? Anyway: As you are a clever man, more clever than anyone of us, why you didn't remember your own words? On Wikimedia is a soundfile of the Ride of the Valkyries under Public Domain as it is older than 75 years- Why don't use it? And where does the instrument textures of the Etrich Taube come from? Looks like another photographic texture with unknown source. The quality isn't good, numbers etc. are blurry and hardly to read. For my part I continue to look for my errors in my few aircrafts :) How about fixing the mentioned aircraft I listed up, before you add some more? And how about making sure that you you have GNU GPL-compatible files before you distribute it? Licence Violations aren't any errors! Asking for permission isn't a shame- but a great possibility to advertise this Flight Simulator and your own work! But it is a shame creating a false accusation against some younger people for alleged disrespecting of a licence, but really disrespecting different licences yourself! Kind Regards Pierre Mueller Switzerland-- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 69, Issue 9
Hello, That's not true, GIT will het frozen January 17th except for bug fixes. This would be a bug-fix in my book. @Pierre: no @Erik: partly yes FGDATA/Aircraft is not frozen due to the request of many aircraft developers during the last release cycle. Details are documented here: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Release_plan#Definition_of_Repository_States Torsten I'm sorry for making such a noise. Many thanks for correcting my statement about the developement process. But may I ask a question? How is the Aircraft Download page generated? Is there a cleanup before of each aircraft is packaged and made available on the Aircraft Download Page or just packaged as it be in FGData/Aircraft? Kind Regards Pierre Mueller Switzerland-- RSA(R) Conference 2012 Mar 27 - Feb 2 Save $400 by Jan. 27 Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 69, Issue 8
Dear Emmanuel BARANGER, First point, when you want to criticize and criticize only, it is best to write correctly. My name is Emmanuel BARANGER. O.k. I'm sorry for that mistake. And I'm surprised to see that your surname is captilized. I didn't know that it is possible in France, so I wasn't aware of it. 6, or 8 airplanes on 203. It enough that you send free files for replacement. Always wait for others to do is not the answer! The interest of free, it is precisely that, normally, instead of be scandalized, just to denigrate people, anyone can modify the data and correct errors. If you are not able to do, so do not come drool on other. Sorry again, but I thought YOU are are the author and the maintainer. At least you created the mentioned aircraft, so I held YOU for being responsible for the mentioned aircraft. I explained to you (on forum) that GIT was a place of development. The files referred to are of course just for the present development. It seems that you have cares of understanding and your favorite hobby is the critical. This is not constructive. First: I'm a User. I have understanding of licences due to many reasons and some little understanding how OSS works, but not in creating an aircraft . So do I have to be a developer to critize? Aren't users allowed to critize and make aware of bugs, errors, mistakes done with and without intention? And how can users like me find out how to make remove things like the mentioned images, sounds etc.? Shoulden't be it enough to say: please Dear Mr. BARANGER- Please remove the mentioned files, as you violating copyrights with? Second: with pushing your things into GIT and on your homepage you made them publicly available. All licences do not care about things being in developement- if you take protected things without permission and redistribute them, you are infringing the copyrights. And as I understood the developement process of FlightGear, all things in FGdata (=GIT?) are freezed and and packaged without further modifications, and again made publicly available. So there is a not so small chance that FGFS-Project can be made responsible for violating copyrights by redistributing copyrighted images and sound snapshots used in the aircraft available on the FGFS-Official-Downloadpage. And as I don't see any Disclaimer on the Download page or anywhere else, that FGFS-Project is not responsible for the content they provide, it could be a nice invitation for some lawyers who wants to earn more money. I am really tired of all these people who, instead of acting, prefer disparage, criticize, drooling on the authors etc. . It's really pathetic. No, the way critism handled here is pathetic. As I said, there was no offense meant, but it seems to me you feel yourself personaly attacked. Sorry, that's not what I wanted, but making you aware of having done mistakes with using the copyrighted things. With my Aircraft review on the forum I also gave you tips for improving your aircraft- a pity that you can't use it. Maybe someone others here on the mailing-list can explain the developement process of FGFS written in the FGFS-wiki to me again, so I can sure that I said above about the developement process is correct. Kind Regards Pierre Mueller Switzerland -- RSA(R) Conference 2012 Mar 27 - Feb 2 Save $400 by Jan. 27 Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel-- RSA(R) Conference 2012 Mar 27 - Feb 2 Save $400 by Jan. 27 Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 69, Issue 9
Dear Mr. BARANGER, I am sorry to contradict you, but it's totally false. I admit that I sometimes use images (usually reduced compared to the original) in my planes (rarely, but it happens). But only for development purposes. And I recall the GIT is not a great public venue but a place of development. I am not responsible for the misuse of GIT by everyone. Some facts: -It is o.k. to use such images as reference- when they aren't redistributed! -GIT ( www.gitorious.org) is publicy open for everyone- with pushing to it you made them available for everyone and with that you have already redistributed it! -And still to my knowledge all things are frozen from FGdata at www.gitorious.org and redistributed as new FGFS-Release! FGFS-developers, please correct me when I'm wrong. -Copyrights doesn't make any difference between being in developement or not! -Sounds are copyrighted as well. Fact is, that you used a a part of a soundtrack from a famous movie (Apocalypse now) and a TV-serie, (Airwolf) which still are copyrighted- though in the forum you wanted me and all other members make to believe that for the Ride for the Valkyrie you used a public domain track. Nice try, but false pretenses, which might could be seen as criminal act at court. Now I have always responded positively to changes and improvements that I have been asked by email. I even made a point of honor. There is no need to come crying wolf on the forums and lists. A simple mail and I do the right thing ! My email address is present in all of my airplanes and my site is very easy to find on the net. Criticism is good when it done intelligently. My few mistakes certainly less cause to discredit FG that people who cry foul without even trying to correct or think 5 minutes before! I have made you already aware in the forum- even it was not per Email, it should have been already enough for you to remove those files. But I don't think that even per Email it had been more successfull- In the moment I can only see excuses and other red herring from you. Why don't you just remove the files and stop talking? Pierre Mueller Switzerland-- RSA(R) Conference 2012 Mar 27 - Feb 2 Save $400 by Jan. 27 Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 69, Issue 8
Hello, But the central point in Pierre's posting is a different one: If there are copyright violations in the Base Package, then it's valid to express concerns about these violations. You're always well advised to read the copyright clauses really carefully before copying content from 3rd party sites, anyhow I know that accidental violations still may happen. But if they really happen, it's time to head out for a solution instead of ciriticizing people for pointing at the violations in question. Well said. Pierre Mueller Switzerland-- RSA(R) Conference 2012 Mar 27 - Feb 2 Save $400 by Jan. 27 Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Reminder for the release process for version 2.6.0
And especially for Helijah aka Emanuel Barranger: * All aircraft in FGDATA checked in? *All Not GNU GPL compatibles things checked out?? As I understood FGdata will be frozen and all aircraft just zipped as being and provided on the Aircraft Download page If you need help finding all things- here again is the list from: http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4t=13629hilit=DC3start=90#p145990: Bell-X1/Models/Interior/Panel/colors.png Original Source: (Link: http://www.nasm.si.edu/imageDetail.cfm?imageID=2924) National Air and Space Museum. See Credit below the image. Ryan-SoSL/Models/Interior/Panel/color.png Original Source: http://www.aviationexplorer.com/bell_x1_facts.htm or: http://x-plane.org/home/mf70/Images/Lindy-panel.jpg or: http://www.blueberrybrands.com/retainedImages/Lindy-panel.jpg No indications visible for permission using it under GNU GPL C-160-Transall/Models/Interior/Panel/colors.png Original Source: http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/7/5/7/1295757.jpg Images on airliners.net are highly copyrighted and restricted! TU-95/Models/Interior/Panel/colors.png Original Source: http://www.airliners.net/photo/Ukraine---Air/Tupolev-Tu-95MS/1744941/L/ Images on airliners.net are highly copyrighted and restricted! Tigre/Models/Interior/Panel/colors.png Original Source: http://www.airforceworld.com/heli/gfx/tiger/tiger_cp.jpg No indications visible for permission using it under GNU GPL Bell-222X/Sounds/hurlement.wav Original Source: The original TV-serie. Copyrighted by CBS. In the past some videos on youtube had been deleted because using this sound and music. UH-1/Sounds/tonnere.wav Original Source: Apocalypse Now by Francis Ford Coppola (American Zoetrope) Compare with this (also not legal) youtube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHjWDCX1Bdw around 3:55. And probably more... (Alouette II?, Grob Astir? ...) Even if this is only a small number of the very high number of aircraft- the use of the mentioned things violates the licences of each thing and is not compatible with GNU GPL. When you go into a supermarket, take 10 things, but just don't pay 1 thing not, it doesn't make it better even if you have paid the other 9 things. You still will get arrested! And very, every important: this all is not meant as offense! But I'm dissapointed as I always hoped there will be a flight simulator out there who provides legal Add-Ons! You will find a lot not-so-legal things for MSFS and I saw some dubios things for X-Plane. I hoped that FGFS as being OpenSource is better. Kind Regards Pierre Mueller Switzerland-- RSA(R) Conference 2012 Mar 27 - Feb 2 Save $400 by Jan. 27 Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 61, Issue 12
Although this should give you a list of aircraft that have been tagged as production quality it may miss some aircraft that are actually of very high quality and some of the listed aircraft may not be truly production quality. In fact looking at the list of production aircraft from my installation I would say that some of these are not true production quality. In addition the --min-status=production parm does not appear to work on my new GIT install as it lists all of the installed aircraft (over 300 of them). FGRUN also shows the aircraft status on the Select an Aircraft screen. Thanks, I didn't see the little box under the list yet. But it is a bit hard to browse through this big list to find the more attractive aircraft Getting the list by the good ol DOS-box was a bit easier- still a big list as you said... Another way to locate more developed aircraft is to check to see how much space the aircraft uses on the file system. In general the bigger the aircrafts directory the more developed it is. For example, the p51d (81.1 meg - use the jsbsim version), MiG-15 (70.3 meg) and IAR80 (53.8 meg) all have very big aircraft directories and are highly developed although I don't think that any of the authors consider them to be complete yet.Using --min-status=production should include the IAR80 in it's list but not the p51d-jsbsim (which has a status of early production) or the MiG-15 (which has no status information). Thanks for the hint There have been long threads here and on the forums about the issue of helping users locate the higher quality models. So this is a long standing and significant issue. There was a rating system that was proposed here that would have made it simple for aircraft authors to produce a consistent and verifiable status for their aircraft. The system set a very high bar for the higher status ratings. Status ratings in this system could be alpha, beta, early production, production and advanced production. Using this system the p51d-jsbsim model gets an early production status as did the c172p.Taking the p51d-jsbsim up for a spin (pun intended) will give you an idea how well developed a model under this system needs to be to get a production or advanced production rating. Unfortunately it appears that only a few of the models are actually using this system. Hal So whats so difficult to use this rating system? Regards P.M. -- vRanger cuts backup time in half-while increasing security. With the market-leading solution for virtual backup and recovery, you get blazing-fast, flexible, and affordable data protection. Download your free trial now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-d2dcopy1 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 61, Issue 12
Hello, I'm new to FlightGear but I'm using mostly OpenSource software since a whole while. I stumbled in here on the list when I was searching for some problems I had with GIT and FlightGear. Luckily I could solve it- thanks to the mails here on list and the wiki. :-) Thanks for a simulator with great possibilities! Quote: Emmanuel, and all here involved or not, TAKE. THIS. OFF. LINE. I have followed this ugly discussion. This words by Mr. Buckle are clear enough. But I hope I may allowed to add some random thoughts here though ?! Quote: I'm sorry. My answers were made in private to avoid contamination of the devel list. I also replaced the FDM was missing in these people.But it seems they do not want to understand. It wasn't good that later in this discussion a private communication had been brought into public by Mr. Schulz- it made the mess not look better. I'm not sure if this was made on purpose, or accidently. At least it looks to me as several mails sent to the list by Mr. Baranger was originally meant to be private as well, but landed here in public. Wanted or not Even when private Emails lands in public accidently- it let escalate such conflicts on both sides. Uh Oh This can happen in the heat of the battle. My advice: check that your Email browser uses the right email address and not automatically added the wrong one. It happened to me as well once time on another list. Awkward And of course: Google Translate and other machine translators should be not used in communications between people. They are maybe good for books and articles- but not for communications between each other! If there is the chance that someone other can translate it - use it. So much about this from me about. I hope this conflicts doesn't happening much often Quote: , I also added an airplane in FG, started two other planes (Nakajima B5N Kate and Aichi D3A Val) and improved R44. My goal is to give pleasure the greatest number and not to satisfy the ego of one or two people. So there is a serious competition with getting the biggest number of aircraft into FlightGear in a short time? I am surprised about this statement by Mr. Baranger, but I'm carefull... seems like Google Translate behind again. I tried MSFS, but someone told me that FlightGear is much more realistic, and even tries to be most realistic simulator in OpenSource and in general. At least the introduction at flightgear.org says it. So I came here because I hoped to get qualitity than useless quantity. Well, my short review: About 300-400 aircraft but about 75% seems to be not finished, are not really flyable or actually uses wrong Flight Model (fdm called, right?) copied from other aircraft. And all this ones I meant are made by just one man. (on the other side the 25% are already really nice: SenecaII, F-14, A-10 A-6E, 777-200, TwinOtter, Spitfire, Bf109, Pilatus Porter, EC130, S76cgood, realistic aircraft needs time to develope ) I am not long enough using FlightGear and never contributed yet, but I would like to say: Sorry, but you can count me to those 1-2 people with this ego as well! I hoped I hope that there are enough serious aircraft developer there who satisfy the ego those 1-2 people like me. I like FlightGear, as the report from the LinuxTag shows, the possibilities to use FlightGear seems to be great! I hope it wasn't the wrong place to come up with a short review Kind Regards P.M. -- What Every C/C++ and Fortran developer Should Know! Read this article and learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools to help Windows* and Linux* C/C++ and Fortran developers boost performance applications - including clusters. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 61, Issue 12
Hello, ...looks like you fell into that same trap yourself. ;o) I'm not a English native speaker, but luckily I'm able to communicate without Google translate. But yes, I had trouble to understand what Mr. Baranger is really meaning. I was actually refering to the sentence that he added another aircraft and started to make two others and want to give much pleasure(?). He seems to be quick adding aircraft- are they are really all developed further and being usuable later? In the whole context it sounded to me that a realistic aircraft, as discussed here, wanted by those 1-2 person aren't a pleasure. Maybe a misunderstood. ..the important ones to review, are those meant for inclusion into the release candidates, e.g. 2.0, 2.2, 2.4 etc, pull them with e.g. git checkout -b releases/2.2.0 origin/releases/2.2.0 for both SG and FG, and you'll find far fewer and far better aircraft. ;o) http://wiki.flightgear.org/Building_Flightgear_-_Debian http://wiki.flightgear.org/Scripted_Compilation_on_Linux_Debian/Ubuntu http://wiki.flightgear.org/Building_FlightGear Thanks, I will take a look! ...yup, is why and how this is a development project. ;o) Welcome aboard. I read in the forum that the GIT-version(?) is actually the developement version of FGFS and includes all aircraft in developement. So if there is a release they will be add to the Download page, am I right? I expected a far smaller number of aircraft in developement and of course I didn't expect that all aircraft will be usuable as they are in developement. But not that high number! That are about 200-300 aircraft altogether I guess, which will hardly be usuable. As a newbie it looks like for me quantity stands over qualitity... *blush* How many new aircraft are added each year? How can I see which aircraft has been developed more than other, which aircraft are more realistic? So thanks for the welcome P.M. P.S. I just noticed that this mail maybe fits more to the users-list, I'm sorry! -- What Every C/C++ and Fortran developer Should Know! Read this article and learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools to help Windows* and Linux* C/C++ and Fortran developers boost performance applications - including clusters. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 61, Issue 12
..there is a non-development version of FG? ;o)
Everything is here so anyone can see _how_ the
buggy ones fail, and try fix them.
I meant stable-versions.
When I use builds from the Hudson server I do get a snapshot. So things can be
broken, not run or completly buggy and not work as expected.
I take v2.0.0 as an example: a freezed developement status and is meant as
stable version, so should work without any major bugs ( it does for me here on
win32! :-)).
..define useable, newbie, then consider
the developer bait context. ;o)
Useable- at least the standard six instruments are available and working for
aircraft flying VFR; (as an example on the DA42 they aren't working, or the
Fouga Magister is missing the Artificial Horizon...)
- aircraft with IFR certification should have the necessary instruments and
avionics working (as an example not like the 737-230, B52F, Caravelle ...)
- a reasonable fdm ( as an example the ME262 has a poor roll rate for a
fighter,
the Caravelle seems to be underpowerd, lot others seems not well balanced and
tends to oscillate...)
I tried a random cross-section of each each type of aircraft. Please don't mind
it, maybe I'm a bit spoiled. And yes, as mentioned there are aircraft which
can
even could compete with Payware aircraft made for X-Plane like the IAR80,
B1900d, FW190, SenecaII, Hansajet
..try fgfs --show-aircraft --min-status=production
..--min-status={alpha,beta,early-production,production}
Allows you to define a minimum status level
(=development status) for all listed aircraft
I see, Thanks!
Kind Regards
P.M.
--
What Every C/C++ and Fortran developer Should Know!
Read this article and learn how Intel has extended the reach of its
next-generation tools to help Windows* and Linux* C/C++ and Fortran
developers boost performance applications - including clusters.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
