Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: CVS simgear : error during compilation
Le dimanche 18 décembre 2005 à 17:30 +0100, Georg Vollnhals a écrit : Hi Gerard, please don't tell the author my secret .. I have the Crusader hidden and do fly it only with care that the public don't notice :-) Thank you for this nice aircraft, I hope for all the other users that it will be available for all within the next time! Georg EDDW That is exactly what i did when i removed my Crusader from CVS because i could not offer to the community a full functional naval AC. Cheers The author is glad to know your secret. Here snapshots about Panel (it is close to the US upgraded version F8-K, waiting for the french one) fully functional with navigation aid and 3D instruments. http://ghours.club.fr/Crusader-Panel-bynight.jpg http://ghours.club.fr/Crusader-Panel-byday.jpg Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: CVS simgear : error during compilation
Le dimanche 18 décembre 2005 à 18:13 +0100, Christian Mayer a écrit : -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Gerard ROBIN schrieb: The author is glad to know your secret. Here snapshots about Panel (it is close to the US upgraded version F8-K, waiting for the french one) fully functional with navigation aid and 3D instruments. http://ghours.club.fr/Crusader-Panel-bynight.jpg http://ghours.club.fr/Crusader-Panel-byday.jpg That looks awesome! BTW: do the mirrors work? CU, Christian Funny, :=) That could be an other non useful add on into FG, like some which are done in the running time. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: CVS simgear : error during compilation
Le dimanche 18 décembre 2005 à 18:54 +0100, Christian Mayer a écrit : -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Gerard ROBIN schrieb: That could be an other non useful add on into FG, like some which are done in the running time. All we need is the possibility to render the main screen to a texture. This could give us mirrors, cameras in missles, etc. pp. Doesn't even the A380 have a camera in its vertical tail wing? The drawback is a reduced frame rate... (but this can easily be done optional) CU, Christian I remember, when i worked on graphics devel with Amiga system, we talked about picture in picture, it is a good process. Let us wait for betters days. :=) Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: CVS simgear : error during compilation
Le dimanche 18 décembre 2005 à 19:38 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Georg Vollnhals for this general severe problem after my opinion. Then we could think about an official new version release. And to be honest, when I am thinking of a 1.0.0 version release from user side, it should have some really missing features as Melchior, cmetzler, Paul and others have already suggested. But it seems that the train can't be stopped before the broken bridge .. Regards Georg Gerard ROBIN schrieb: Le dimanche 18 décembre 2005 à 03:14 +0100, Melchior FRANZ a écrit : Thanks Melchior for your answer. That is the opportunity to say: I wonder about these addons to FG, are these new functionalies useful ? more than a good review and correction of errors and disfunctions within FG. How many users are still using 0.98 because they cannot use 0.99 Wasn't it forecast to deliver a GOOD 0.99 FLIGHTGEAR ?, our existing one is not accurate. May be the development team don't remember the big discussions we had (USER) after getting the 0.99 FG buggy. Some of them where shocking to see how many people did not try one of the prereleases. I am shocking to see they don't listen to the USERS Cheers 0.9.9 windows installed here, and worked right out of the box, as did fgrun. Fgrun needed a little updating to make it work a bit better with MP; Fred did that, and it's fine now. I don't see any bug reports here or on the devel list. It also compiled and ran right out of the box under Cygwin. If it hadn't everyone would have certainly heard about it from me. What's your beef? Perhaps we could help if you told us the problem. Vivian Sorry Vivian, i know you are not involvedabout: 0.99 is not right= only one example i have described error about weather scenario and 3d clouds, is it solved? NO it is not. Nobody can say 0.99 is right. Instead of it we get new addons with compilation errors. Where is the forecast quality ? -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Complaints about v0.9.9 (was: CVS simgear : error during compilation)
Le dimanche 18 décembre 2005 à 16:39 -0600, Curtis L. Olson a écrit : Gerard ROBIN wrote: Sorry Vivian, i know you are not involvedabout: 0.99 is not right= only one example i have described error about weather scenario and 3d clouds, is it solved? NO it is not. Nobody can say 0.99 is right. Instead of it we get new addons with compilation errors. Where is the forecast quality ? This is pretty disrespectful to the person who put in a lot of work to advance 3d clouds to the point that they are. Yes, there is more work to be done with 3d clouds, but open-source development is not an all or nothing thing. The fact that you cite this as your first (best?) example of the problems with v0.9.9 leads me to believe you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of open-source development and the history of 3d clouds in flightgear. There is a reason that 3d clouds are not yet the default ... that is implicite recognition that they aren't finished yet. But, they are interesting enough to include so people can play around with them and enjoy them. So you pointed out that the clouds are still unfinished. We all know that. The 3d cloud author will do more work on them when he has a chance I'm sure. Why don't we move on to more useful and constructive discussions? Perhaps you wish to help make the 3d clouds better and have some questions about getting started? That would be a productive discussion. Since you seem to have a misunderstanding of the open-source culture, let me say this again. It is the people who make positive contributions to the project who get to make all the decisions and who get to 'lead' the project in whatever direction they take it. People who do nothing Sure i do nothing, and i will do nothing, BYE but complain, well they do nothing but complain, and that gets old after a while. Regards, Curt. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] CVS simgear : error during compilation
For the first time, i get an error during compilation of Simgear if g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../simgear -I../.. -I/home/devel/usr/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT -MT logstream.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/logstream.Tpo -c -o logstream.o logstream.cxx; \ then mv -f .deps/logstream.Tpo .deps/logstream.Po; else rm -f .deps/logstream.Tpo; exit 1; fi rm -f libsgdebug.a ar cru libsgdebug.a logstream.o ranlib libsgdebug.a make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/devel/devel-prog-fgCVS/1217/SIMGEARCVS/source/simgear/debug' Making all in misc make[3]: Entering directory `/home/devel/devel-prog-fgCVS/1217/SIMGEARCVS/source/simgear/misc' if g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../simgear -I../.. -I/home/devel/usr/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT -MT sg_path.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/sg_path.Tpo -c -o sg_path.o sg_path.cxx; \ then mv -f .deps/sg_path.Tpo .deps/sg_path.Po; else rm -f .deps/sg_path.Tpo; exit 1; fi sg_path.cxx: In member function ‘void SGPath::create_dir(mode_t)’: sg_path.cxx:203: erreur: ‘subdir’ was not declared in this scope make[3]: *** [sg_path.o] Erreur 1 -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Fwd: Re: [Flightgear-users] CVS simgear : error during compilation]
Message transféré De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] À: Gerard ROBIN [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sujet: Re: [Flightgear-users] CVS simgear : error during compilation Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2005 21:18:19 +0100 I've just tried to compile CVS simgear under slackware x86_64. Exactly the same error. It was o.k. yesterday(my last compilation). . . make[2]: Entering directory `/tmp/simgear-20051217/simgear/misc' if g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../simgear -I../.. -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -Os -fPIC -mtune=athlon64 -msse2 -D_REENTRANT -MT sg_path.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/sg_path.Tpo -c -o sg_path.o sg_path.cxx; \ then mv -f .deps/sg_path.Tpo .deps/sg_path.Po; else rm -f .deps/sg_path.Tpo; exit 1; fi sg_path.cxx: In member function `void SGPath::create_dir(mode_t)': sg_path.cxx:203: error: `subdir' undeclared (first use this function) sg_path.cxx:203: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in.) make[2]: *** [sg_path.o] Error 1 Regards Jacek. Dnia sobota, 17 grudnia 2005 20:31, napisałeś: For the first time, i get an error during compilation of Simgear if g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../simgear -I../.. -I/home/devel/usr/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT -MT logstream.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/logstream.Tpo -c -o logstream.o logstream.cxx; \ then mv -f .deps/logstream.Tpo .deps/logstream.Po; else rm -f .deps/logstream.Tpo; exit 1; fi rm -f libsgdebug.a ar cru libsgdebug.a logstream.o ranlib libsgdebug.a make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/devel/devel-prog-fgCVS/1217/SIMGEARCVS/source/simgear/debug' Making all in misc make[3]: Entering directory `/home/devel/devel-prog-fgCVS/1217/SIMGEARCVS/source/simgear/misc' if g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../simgear -I../.. -I/home/devel/usr/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT -MT sg_path.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/sg_path.Tpo -c -o sg_path.o sg_path.cxx; \ then mv -f .deps/sg_path.Tpo .deps/sg_path.Po; else rm -f .deps/sg_path.Tpo; exit 1; fi sg_path.cxx: In member function ‘void SGPath::create_dir(mode_t)’: sg_path.cxx:203: erreur: ‘subdir’ was not declared in this scope make[3]: *** [sg_path.o] Erreur 1 -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Helicopter Controls
Le mercredi 14 décembre 2005 à 13:32 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a
écrit :
Hello Josh:
Using the keyboard, which keys are for what controls? To give some
examples:
Initial hover at 2-3 metres on from lift off
Acceleration and deceleration
Coming to hover from say 130kts
Autorotation
Moving sideways on the horizontal.
All these manoeuvres are straight forward, but I believe that I am
missing something of which keys control which aspect of the operation.
I have manipulated every key on the board to try to figure out the
possible scenarios. Maybe it is because I am using a French keyboard!
Thank you,
Martin
Hello Martin,
I can answer about French Keyboard, nothing specific coming from it, but
the usual difficulties we have against every AC.
About Helicopters main functions are:
start the engine with }(right bracket, on french keyboard it is
aerobatic to get it) and you will notice after some seconds the rotor
rotates to get the right RPM.
stop the engine with { (left bracket, on french keyboard it is
aerobatic to get it)
power ( collective) is like AC throttle but reversed down = UP up =
DOWN
Nothing else different.
Cheers
--
Gerard
___
Flightgear-users mailing list
Flightgear-users@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] 0.9.9 Runtime error on Ubuntu Amd64 version
Le mercredi 14 décembre 2005 à 13:54 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello Gerard: For your understanding and mine. You can use experienced (experience) for experimented. The noun experience has two meanings: I am an experienced pilot or I experienced some good times in France! Vous êtes un pilot très expérimenté (you are a very experienced pilot). Martin Thanks Martin, i forgot my English learned at school. In spite of these errors i am understood. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Official FG Snapshot
Le lundi 12 décembre 2005 à 17:50 -0600, Dave Culp a écrit : Ah yes, forgot about that one. Here are two more screenshots with shadows and more spherical contrail elements as Gerard suggested. I think it looks better without the contrails. Anyway these are posted for amusement only. I don't expect to get the contrails looking nice any time soon. (They do look nice from a suitable distance and angle :) I'll try the billboard idea next. http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-004.jpg http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-005.jpg Some longer-range shots: http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-006.jpg http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-007.jpg http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-008.jpg BTW, with 5 contrails going at once there are about 635 AI objects in the contrails. Dave Sure contrail with distance and angle are nice. About model within shadow, it is not easy to get a got effect, the shadow is not smooth ( that is the process). -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] 0.9.9 Runtime error on Ubuntu Amd64 version
Le mardi 13 décembre 2005 à 13:29 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : I downloaded 0.9.9 source code and compiled on this AMD64 3000+ computer, with Ubunut for Amd64 version. The compilation is fine. But the application quit after loading scenary objects. The error is: *** glibc detected *** double free or corruption (!prev): 0x09f8ce70 *** I have the latest CVS backpackage, FG and SG. Hi. If you're confident you built things OK and are still getting this error, then I suggest you post it to the developers' list, where the developers are more likely to see it and respond to it. I'm about to switch to an AMD64-based machine, and FG is supposed to run on AMD64 just fine; so I'm curious to see if you can get this fixed. -c Why developers don't read user-mail! You just teach something new. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Official FG Snapshot
Le lundi 12 décembre 2005 à 10:58 -0600, Dave Culp a écrit : On Monday 12 December 2005 08:37 am, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Hello Dave http://flightgear.org/Gallery-v0.9.9/Link/A6_F8refuel.html If i had been informed about your wish, i could have tried to do a better one. :=) Don't know how you can top that one. I've been experimenting with your method to make some screenshots of the KC-135 (Innis' version with some added things by me) and Erik's F-16: http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-001.jpg http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-002.jpg I wish my modeling skills were better, especially when it comes to texturing. I'm getting better all the time, though :) Dave Yes i love, the second one is very impressive. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Official FG Snapshot
Le lundi 12 décembre 2005 à 10:58 -0600, Dave Culp a écrit : On Monday 12 December 2005 08:37 am, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Hello Dave http://flightgear.org/Gallery-v0.9.9/Link/A6_F8refuel.html If i had been informed about your wish, i could have tried to do a better one. :=) Don't know how you can top that one. I've been experimenting with your method to make some screenshots of the KC-135 (Innis' version with some added things by me) and Erik's F-16: http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-001.jpg http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-002.jpg I wish my modeling skills were better, especially when it comes to texturing. I'm getting better all the time, though :) Dave Again, Just an idea, and a question. Does multi players could offer that kind of scenario ? -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Official FG Snapshot
Le lundi 12 décembre 2005 à 12:29 -0600, Dave Culp a écrit : On Monday 12 December 2005 11:40 am, Gerard ROBIN wrote: http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-001.jpg http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-002.jpg Yes i love, the second one is very impressive. Thanks. That one is nicely lit. Here's one more with contrails: http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-003.jpg The lighting isn't as good. I tried it with shadows enabled, but the contrails don't look good with shadows. Maybe I need to make them emissive. Dave Yes good too, about contrail i am not sure that cylinder shape is the best... may be very low poly sphere elliptical and asymetric without ends. (like egg laid, front and end cut ) Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: Re: Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D
Le dimanche 11 décembre 2005 à 13:57 +1000, Chris Wilkinson a écrit : Hi there, I just tried to fly from LFMO and I looked at the metar info from there. Here is my local Brisbane (YBBN) metar info... YBBN 110300Z 07010KT SCT032 29/20 Q1011 NOSIG Here is the metar for Orange Caritat (LFMO)... LMFO 082200Z 30007KT CAVOK 04/02 Q1021 As you can see the YBBN metar includes SCT032, indicating scattered clouds at FL032, which is what I see when I fly at YBBN (infact I see some cumulus when I look outside!). When I try LFMO I see ocean, as I haven't downloaded the local scenery yet!, but more importantly fgfs shows me what the metar tells it to show, ie. no clouds, since there are none reported in the LFMO metar info...swapping to 2D clouds I see the same 2D clouds as you do, at any airport. I sometimes lose 3D clouds when I change scenarios often, so that may be a bug to fix, but I still think its a good first attempt at a new feature... If you get cloudy conditions outside perhaps see what metar tells you. If you see stuff like BKN035, SCT032CB, OVC175, and similar then metar is telling you about clouds, otherwise it is not... Kind regards, Chris Wilkinson, Brisbane, Australia. Hello, Chris, Thanks for the answer, and the explanation, with METAR, i am familar with it, i use it permanently with two connection one through Metar FG the other through Meteo-France which is a private one (easy to get a comparison) Glad to hear you where taking off from LFMO (without scenery , if you want you could download it, the landscape on the airport East side is wonderful) which is a military airport. The error (which is now 4 months old) about FG has not been solved (the bug relationship between menu error and the missing 3Dclouds is close to) I guess we will continue longer with it probably not solved. For my personnal use, I am making some patchs which will activate METAR permanently with 3DClouds. :=) NB:The beach close to YBBN seems to be wonderful, is it ? Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Update MB339 PAN
Le dimanche 11 décembre 2005 à 15:11 +0100, Georg Vollnhals a écrit : Hi, just for your information, there is an actual update (cockpit ..) of the MB339 PAN aircraft of the University of Udine, Italy Now version 1.1 http://frecce3d.uniud.it/ Regards Georg Thanks for the Info, that AC is one of my favorite -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Some FG videos...
Le dimanche 11 décembre 2005 à 23:10 +1100, Pigeon a écrit : Hi all, Cooked up some FG videos for everyone's pleasure... http://pigeond.net/photos/flightgear/videos/ Perhaps in the future we could make some short video clips for little parts of various FG flying tutorials too. Pigeon. Nice, thanks, How did you get it ? (hardware, software, external connection) I am wondering, to record carrier landing with focus on landing gear reactions. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Some FG videos...
Le lundi 12 décembre 2005 à 01:31 +1030, George Patterson a écrit : On Sun, 2005-12-11 at 15:35 +0100, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Le dimanche 11 décembre 2005 à 23:10 +1100, Pigeon a écrit : Hi all, Cooked up some FG videos for everyone's pleasure... http://pigeond.net/photos/flightgear/videos/ Perhaps in the future we could make some short video clips for little parts of various FG flying tutorials too. Nice, thanks, How did you get it ? (hardware, software, external connection) I am wondering, to record carrier landing with focus on landing gear reactions. Hello, I was talking to Pigeon when he was recording those. The software that he used is Xvidcap. Apparently it will record the audio as well as capture the opengl images. George Ok, I will try again, I have had difficulties with it, that was with an older Config Thanks. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Some FG videos...
Le dimanche 11 décembre 2005 à 17:30 +0100, Georg Vollnhals a écrit : Pigeon schrieb:Hi all, Cooked up some FG videos for everyone's pleasure... Hi, the Nimitz... takeoff video is great to demonstrate what FG is capable now! This one (and other of this quality) should be on FlightGears site - only argument against this could be the size of videos. Regards Georg EDDW ^^ Hello, Georg Not so bad to give your Favorite Airport :=) which gives us some ideas. -- Gerard LFPO ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D (Gerard ROBIN)
Le vendredi 09 décembre 2005 à 18:02 +1000, Chris Wilkinson a écrit : Hi there, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Again an other example which demonstrate the bad results with 3D Clouds. If we want to suit to reality, 2D is the only one solution. http://ghours.club.fr/Clouds-2D-3D.jpg Your screenshot is taken from below at a fairly tight FOV. That is not a good screenshot to compare clouds with since your camera looks almost straight up (with scattered clouds you are less likely to see a cloud looking straight up). Try this one... http://users.tpg.com.au/blobster/fgfs-clouds.jpg Each shot uses the exact same view and weather scenario, but with 3D clouds on and then off. Thats a more sensible external view to use in my opinion, because it allows you to see the aircraft, ground, sky, and clouds, all together in perspective. The 3D clouds are not perfect (I'd love for them to cast shadows on the ground and my aircraft!), but its a good start for so early on... Kind regards, Chris Wilkinson, Brisbane, Australia. OK The result is not bad for every situations. With my specific example Elevation ft 5697 scattered thickness 600 we must have some clouds. I did use that FOV mainly to show we had nothing, and you can believe me i had nothing, not any cloud ( from the side and from below) You did not say which values you had, when taking your snapshot, this very important for a good comparison. I worry to conclude 3D clouds are beautiful but no yet realistic. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D (Gerard ROBIN)
Le vendredi 09 décembre 2005 à 18:02 +1000, Chris Wilkinson a écrit : Hi there, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Again an other example which demonstrate the bad results with 3D Clouds. If we want to suit to reality, 2D is the only one solution. http://ghours.club.fr/Clouds-2D-3D.jpg Your screenshot is taken from below at a fairly tight FOV. That is not a good screenshot to compare clouds with since your camera looks almost straight up (with scattered clouds you are less likely to see a cloud looking straight up). Try this one... http://users.tpg.com.au/blobster/fgfs-clouds.jpg Each shot uses the exact same view and weather scenario, but with 3D clouds on and then off. Thats a more sensible external view to use in my opinion, because it allows you to see the aircraft, ground, sky, and clouds, all together in perspective. The 3D clouds are not perfect (I'd love for them to cast shadows on the ground and my aircraft!), but its a good start for so early on... Kind regards, Chris Wilkinson, Brisbane, Australia. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D (Gerard ROBIN)
Le vendredi 09 décembre 2005 à 18:02 +1000, Chris Wilkinson a écrit : Hi there, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Again an other example which demonstrate the bad results with 3D Clouds. If we want to suit to reality, 2D is the only one solution. http://ghours.club.fr/Clouds-2D-3D.jpg Your screenshot is taken from below at a fairly tight FOV. That is not a good screenshot to compare clouds with since your camera looks almost straight up (with scattered clouds you are less likely to see a cloud looking straight up). Try this one... http://users.tpg.com.au/blobster/fgfs-clouds.jpg Each shot uses the exact same view and weather scenario, but with 3D clouds on and then off. Thats a more sensible external view to use in my opinion, because it allows you to see the aircraft, ground, sky, and clouds, all together in perspective. The 3D clouds are not perfect (I'd love for them to cast shadows on the ground and my aircraft!), but its a good start for so early on... Kind regards, Chris Wilkinson, Brisbane, Australia. Again, i just get a new example with some snapshots which should answer to your request, Chris Just an indication , these are coming from Metar ( i do use it everytime ) may be a BUG Somewhere. 2DClouds is OK http://ghours.club.fr/2DClouds.jpg 3DClouds is wrong http://ghours.club.fr/3DClouds.jpg Are you convinced ? Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D (Gerard ROBIN)
Le vendredi 09 décembre 2005 à 18:02 +1000, Chris Wilkinson a écrit : Hi there, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Again an other example which demonstrate the bad results with 3D Clouds. If we want to suit to reality, 2D is the only one solution. http://ghours.club.fr/Clouds-2D-3D.jpg Your screenshot is taken from below at a fairly tight FOV. Oh sorry to come back again on the topic i did not take care of your remark about fairly tight FOV . Do you mean that between 90 and 100 is a tight FOV ? (the snapshot was 95) For a normal use i have 50 That snapshot covered a very large area SNIP Kind regards, Chris Wilkinson, Brisbane, Australia. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D (Gerard ROBIN)
Le vendredi 09 décembre 2005 à 11:54 +0100, Christian Mayer a écrit : - SNIP I think the 3D clouds are a great start. One has to remember that they are only looking like cumulus clouds. There they are doing a great job. Cumulus should be there when necessary, and only a full blue sky. A great Job which must be improved according to the Metar reality, 2D Clouds do it perfectly. That question is not new it is now 4 months old. For other types of clouds there the 2D clouds could be better suited. E.g. at least around here it's very seldom that we've got Cumulus clouds and rain. CU, Christian Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] full screen mode taked forever to update
Le vendredi 09 décembre 2005 à 23:41 +, David Luff a écrit I've seen that before with FG compiled against glut/freeglut on Linux - going to fullscreen mode breaks the hardware acceleration (binary nvidia drivers). I'm compiling against sdl now, and that works fine fullscreen. It's also possible to get an unadorned fullscreen window without using --enable-fullscreen by using kstart under kde. Cheers - Dave Probably not fully true, With Linux and NVIDIA GPU , FG compiled against glut, gives me good results with --enable-fullscreen -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Carrier Elevators
Le vendredi 09 décembre 2005 à 17:50 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello Gerard: Usual question, can I get them to operate on Windows? Thank You Martin Hello Martin, Sorry for that coming late answer, User-Mailing seemed to have some rest during 24 hours. Well the answer is: I was talking about the last CVS update, which need to be compiled. I guess you have not any tool to do it. As far as any other official release will not be delivered, you will not be able to get profit from these updates. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D (Gerard ROBIN)
Le samedi 10 décembre 2005 à 12:00 -0500, Ampere K. Hardraade a écrit : On December 9, 2005 09:35 am, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Again, i just get a new example with some snapshots which should answer to your request, Chris Just an indication , these are coming from Metar ( i do use it everytime ) may be a BUG Somewhere. 2DClouds is OK http://ghours.club.fr/2DClouds.jpg 3DClouds is wrong http://ghours.club.fr/3DClouds.jpg Are you convinced ? Cheers -- Gerard I think your graphic card is not compatible with 3D Clouds. I get that on my ATI 9200SE as well: when I enable 3D Clouds, the sky becomes clear. Ampere Probably a question of friends relationship between 3DClouds and my Nvidia 6600 GT (not the last of the lasts, but not so old), according to their feeling sometime the graphics card host 3DClouds and sometime angry against the weather, does not. , ouha we are far away from any technical explaination. Thank for the answer. That problem is not new, every time i use Metar, i am living in a country where the weather is often fair , only some scattered cumulus. only one layered clouds an airport is close to (LFMO) and Metar data are coming from it. These condition are the best to check the quality of our FG 3Dclouds vs 2Dclouds. I said, in august on the devel-mail, that bug, i never got a right answer, so i continue using 2Dclouds. I do use 3DClouds only when it is necessary to have a beautiful Snapshot --only for (your) the eyes--(Bond, my name is Bond) :=} Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Helicopter Controls
Le dimanche 11 décembre 2005 à 11:24 +1300, dene maxwell a écrit : I'm going to give a helicopter a try. I understand the physics of a helicopter, the rotor provides downward thrust and the speed and pitch of the rotor control the amount of thrust and because of the torque of the main rotor a tail rotor is needed. this gives the impresion there are alot of this to control. Iintuatively I'd say the joystick is used for direction control, the throttle is for engine speed. What controls pitch and tail rotor? A url to some basic flight instructions would be appreciated and/or keyboard mappings for the other important controls. Any recommendations on a nice forgiving model to try first time? :-) Dene The best example , is the existing BO 105 (from Melchior) you may learn many from it. If you schedule to do one it is many light Helos which could be developped. FDM Yasim seem to be enable to answer correctly for heavy or medium helo. I have in my box two helicopteres which are waiting for a better FDM (As330 PUMA, an CH53 SeaStallion). Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Helicopter Controls
Le dimanche 11 décembre 2005 à 12:06 +1300, dene maxwell a écrit : Le dimanche 11 décembre 2005 11:24 +1300, dene maxwell a écrit : I'm going to give a helicopter a try. I understand the physics of a helicopter, the rotor provides downward thrust and the speed and pitch of the rotor control the amount of thrust and because of the torque of the main rotor a tail rotor is needed. this gives the impresion there are alot of this to control. Iintuatively I'd say the joystick is used for direction control, the throttle is for engine speed. What controls pitch and tail rotor? A url to some basic flight instructions would be appreciated and/or keyboard mappings for the other important controls. Hi, Thanks for the recommendation, downloading now :-) What controls pitch and tail rotor? A url to some basic flight instructions would be appreciated and/or keyboard mappings for the other important controls. regards, Dene I am not an expert, if you look at, in detail the bo105.xml file you will understand better than i can explain The commands are For Tail Rotor /controls/flight/rudder /controls/engines/engine[1]/throttle For Main Rotor /controls/flight/aileron /controls/flight/elevator /controls/engines/engine[1]/throttle -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: Re: Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D (Gerard ROBIN)
Le dimanche 11 décembre 2005 à 09:45 +1000, Chris Wilkinson a écrit : Hi there, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Today's Topics: 3. Re: Re: Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D (Gerard ROBIN) (Gerard ROBIN) Hi Gerard. The 2D shot is better in that instance because there *are* some clouds. I wonder if the metar data in your location is broken? I unplug DSL here due to frequent storms when not using the PC, and if I forget to plug it back in before starting fgfs I get the same with 3D clouds... Thanks for the answer, No problem about DSL connection, i can check it in real time because of an other permanent connection on Metar (which makes me to insist on the better results of 2DClouds). It is a problem into FG itself, and because i do not hope any answer which will solve the Bug, i am making some patch in my FG to solve it on my side , up to the developer to solve the error on their side. If they want. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D Info to devel-team
I Just want to give an information which can help to solve that error: Step 1/ start FG with --enable-real-weather-fetch and 3DClouds activated, if you are lucky you will get some 3DClouds. Step 2/ look at the menu weather scenario, you will get : weather source = none Step 3/ modify it and select METAR, 3DClouds vanish (if you had some) and you will get 2DClouds. Here it is impossible to get back to 3DClouds OR AN ALTERNATIVE Step3 / select fair weather , you get 3D Clouds, Step4 / get back to none or METAR Here it is impossible to get back back to 3DClouds Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Carrier Elevators
Le jeudi 08 décembre 2005 à 08:38 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard Glad to hear that the elevator property works for you, Gerard. I'm with Josh on this one. Because we are running short of keys, and this is not a flight related function, I'm not planning to assign a key to the elevator function. I'm planning this to be a menu feature along with existing turn into wind menu item. This policy at least has the merit of consistency. There are more potential menu items - set base course and speed etc. If you want to assign a key locally, or on a per ac basis, go right ahead. Atm there is only 1 raise/lower function, so all the lifts move together, or not at all. Here, for the Nimitz, I have 2 lifts operated by the property, and 2 are static. Specifying lifts by number would be a possible enhancement. Right now I'm tracking down a bug in the launchbar code so it's not going to be soon, if at all. Vivian Hello Vivian Yes working perfectly, i have configured every elevators working, and declared every related components onto the carrier solid, so it is possible to get into the hangar without any difficulties. No problem about global action on every elevators dedicated to a carrier, the property do that perfectly. I consider that new function very useful regarding the taxiing faclities on Airports, now we have it on (and into) carrier. The next step, would be to have the JBD raised (may be when Launched Bar engaged). Thanks Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Clouds 2D better than Clouds 3D
Le dimanche 04 décembre 2005 à 19:32 -0200, Rodrigo Flores a écrit : In my opinion..rain without 3D clouds is more realistic. - Hello, You remember my previous messages about clouds 2D versus 3D When it was raining http://ghours.club.fr/Rain-Vs-Clouds.jpg Again an other example which demonstrate the bad results with 3D Clouds. If we want to suit to reality, 2D is the only one solution. http://ghours.club.fr/Clouds-2D-3D.jpg Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Spitfire Sim
Le jeudi 08 décembre 2005 à 22:29 +, AJ MacLeod a écrit : On Thursday 08 December 2005 22:04, Paul Duncan wrote: Was just doing a little web surfing and found this. Unfortunately its not gonna be for Flightgear, but its interesting nonetheless. http://www.aeroplaneheaven.com/HFL_SPITC.htm It is interesting, but the Spit and Seafire we already have are already pretty impressive both to look at and fly and have been for quite some time now... Fully detailed Merlin under the bonnet is all very well, but not really something that affects flying the model - so long as it sounds right, I'm happy :-) AJ Sure details are mainly for the pleasure to do it and for the eye, not for the flight sim I have some FS 2004 AC converted to FG which show engine details when the bonnet is open. We are able to do it (should be animation selected only when necessary) Vivian model is nice, may be, in the future an extension of it, with that trainer model (hello Vivian) Do we know how many real Spit trainers where built ? Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Spitfire Sim
Le jeudi 08 décembre 2005 à 15:38 -0800, Paul Duncan a écrit : --- Gerard ROBIN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vivian model is nice, may be, in the future an extension of it, with that trainer model (hello Vivian) Do we know how many real Spit trainers where built ? Not sure, but one is still flying and I believe another is being restored. Is there a C-130 for Flightgear, and if so, has anyone landed and taken off from the Nimitz using it? Paul ~ No It is not any C-130 flyable for FlightGear Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] AI Aircraft
Le vendredi 09 décembre 2005 à 02:30 +0100, Robicd a écrit : FWIW, FlightGear cvs, now has support for realistic taxiway following, and I've also started building a ground network for KSFO. In addition, I'm working on a traffic pattern editor, so hopefully the traffic situation at KSFO will improve drastically in the next few months. In case you like the idea of AI moving cars around the airport, you can get a couple of 3d car models at http://www.geocities.com/robitabu/ I am playing around with some 3d low-poly (not very low :-) cars; I release them as GPL, just because I like FGFS and that's a requirement for large distributon. I will add some more in the next future, a few trucks, some simple buses, maybe a train too, I already started thinking about populating a train station and the idea of a train moving on a railway that passes near airport areas using some kind of AI is intriguing me; but I don't know anything at all about AI, I can help building up the 3d models, that's all, and that's what I like doing by now :-) Ok, it's not strictly FlightSimulator related but I am getting the idea that FGFS could become more then that; it's potentials let me think it can be a World Simulator, putting together various aspects of reality simulations; having various software development fields combining into big and complementary projects is the spirit of nowadays OpenSource software, right?. Just an idea :-) Roberto Thanks for these nice little cars -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] Carrier Elevators
Hello Vivian, Carrier elevators are working perfectly (CVS update). We only need to define a Key Binding for toggle property property/ai/models/controls/elevators/property which key could be used ? NB: on my side, i have defined a temporary one = $ 36 thanks -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Carrier Elevators
Le mercredi 07 décembre 2005 à 19:27 -0500, Ampere K. Hardraade a écrit : On December 7, 2005 06:17 pm, AJ MacLeod wrote: On Wednesday 07 December 2005 22:56, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Carrier elevators are working perfectly (CVS update). We only need to define a Key Binding for toggle property property/ai/models/controls/elevators/property which key could be used ? I think a menu might be an appropriate way to control that sort of thing. I actually have a menu entry ready for it, but haven't actually got round to using it yet :-) No reason not to have both, of course. Cheers, AJ I think the control should be a hot spot beside the elevator. Ampere OK, which elevator would be involved ? on Nimitz we have 4 on others may be less may be more. I did not think when asking about key that could be a big problem. We have a property, we have a function, which open possibilities on every carriers and others ship to handle and carry AC. I do not ask more. Within my naval aircrafts development i will include a specific key which bind with that property (elevators) if one do not like it he could fly with an other AC :=) Cheers. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Second asking about very slow full screen
Le mercredi 07 décembre 2005 à 19:08 -0600, Curtis L. Olson a écrit : your video card capacity already, there might not be a big enough chunk available for the newer larger window (since most of your cards memory is already allocated.) But if you start out full screen you often can find big enough chunks. Im pretty sure --enable-fullscreen is for 3dfx cards. Try --enable-game-mode Actually --enable-fullscreen is for use with an SDL based FlightGear, --enable-game-mode is for a Glut based FlightGear. Regards, Curt. Today I can use --enable-fullscreen with GLUT without any difficulties, I have had difficulties with an older configuration (Linux and graphics card) only with AI activated (carrier + tanker). Probably depends on the graphic card. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] full screen mode taked forever to update
Le lundi 05 décembre 2005 à 18:39 -0500, tj a écrit : I am new to flight-gear and I have a question concerning full screen mode. I am running Linux witht eh latest nVidia drives for GeForce 4 MX integrated. My X screen size is 1280x1024. When I start flight gear normally and get a wndow everything works fine. But, when I start --enable-fullscreen it brings up the splash screen, fokker triplane, piper cub, etc in a window and gives its loading messages. Then it goes full screen with loading scenery objects and then takes a couple of minutes to put the cockpit, etc on the screen. But, then screen updates take over 30 seconds to appear on the screen form input movement. Plus it seems to be jumping, skipping a number of frames. Any idea as to what is wrong with full screen mode. tj Not sure the answer is right for you, I have had that problem, in the past, when i activated AI scenario. As far i remember it was with FG 0.9.8 nVidia 5200 and Linux FC2. Full screen did not work, and the same window size geometry worked. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Adding roads to scenery
Le samedi 03 décembre 2005 à 11:04 +1300, dene maxwell a écrit : Thanks for that. I have looked around for the FGSD win32 executable, I found the source Thank you Fred, The download numbers were interesting, would suggest win32 is a more popular platform than I was led to believe ;- Yes sometime win32 is very popular, depend on the know how of the developer about FGSD only Windows release is working. On the Linux side it is crazy :=( Once I've modified the scenery I'd like to be able to offer it back for everyone to enjoy..do you know or can suggest the best way to do this? Dene -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] 3D Clouds or Not 3D Clouds (When it is rainning)
Hello, Here a double snapshot which makes me to ask that question: which is the most realistic one? I guess it is that one without 3D clouds. If yes, is it possible to get a better result with 3D Clouds ? (density was default 100%) http://ghours.club.fr/Rain-Vs-Clouds.jpg Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Nimitz at Night
Le mardi 29 novembre 2005 à 19:10 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello and an Open Question to All: Flying at night offers a little reality when you cannot see beneath you or the horizon. Flying by instruments alone etc. What is nice about this, at night, are the approach and runway lights and the sense of achievement having had a smooth landing. Can some one add navigation lights to the Nimitz and the deck lights as well? This would make a big difference in when off the mirror lights. Thanks in advance You are right Martin that is missing, May be it is on the Vivian to do list I have tried to land at night, that was ever catastrophic. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le lundi 28 novembre 2005 à 10:49 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello you two! Can you let me in on this? On Windows, can I add another carrier and set up the TACAN as you describe? Regards Martin Hello Martin, My personal configuration is not fair to be used in a generic way (because i have made many modifications and done addons). I may try to build something which suit to your wishes , let me see before what will be offered in a next cvs release. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Carrier Deck (v098a)
Le lundi 28 novembre 2005 à 08:09 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : dene maxwell Hi guys, I placed Nimitz (v098a) in my local harbour (Wellington, New Zealand) at -41.246433 LAT, 174.886783 LONG, heading 198. The took off from NZWN on runway 34. Very enjoyable flight except the deck of the Nimitz under FGv098a doesn't seem solid. Was only using the Cessna 172P does this make a difference? encourage you to try this scenario... see a bit of New Zealand too...LOL. Cheers Dene Yes with 00.9.8 you do not get a solid material onto Nimitz, it is only working with the generic static 3D model which are randomly situated in the scenery (not easy to find). It was necessary for FG 0.9.8 to use a specific patch, and to rebuild FG, it is an other story for you. Or to include Nimitz as static Model into the scenery (FlightGear/data/Scenery/Objects) that was working right for me. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le lundi 28 novembre 2005 à 13:53 +0100, Gerard ROBIN a écrit : Le lundi 28 novembre 2005 à 10:49 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello you two! Can you let me in on this? On Windows, can I add another carrier and set up the TACAN as you describe? Regards Martin Hello Martin, My personal configuration is not fair to be used in a generic way (because i have made many modifications and done addons). I may try to build something which suit to your wishes , let me see before what will be offered in a next cvs release. Cheers CONTINUED Hello Martin, About TacAN with FG 0.9.9 you can use only one Code attached to Nimitz (predefined 29Y). With Vivian i was talking about the last CVS Update. Sorry Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] RE:Segmentation fault, version 0.9.9
Le lundi 28 novembre 2005 à 21:05 +0100, olaf a écrit : Hi again I used the version, which was released on 17. november. Is this the final version ? Thanks for helping bye olaf Mine is 2005-20-11 dated -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] Scenery 0.9.9 Airport LFPO (Paris Orly) is wrong
Hello to French people and others. Scenery 0.9.9 Airport LFPO is wrong: The runway axis is beside the Aircraft axis. And the AC Standby on the grass (not very good for B747) Some time ago i did say that error with 0.9.8. Nobody seems to be interested. I did rebuild that scenery and everything is right for me. NB: i offered my new rebuild, i never got any answer. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Scenery 0.9.9 Airport LFPO (Paris Orly) is wrong
Le lundi 28 novembre 2005 à 22:45 +0100, Valérie et Vincent a écrit : Bravo ;-)) It seems that europe is not very well represented. I did never flew above our capital, but I can tell that not (so) far away from my home, in Pisa neither la torre pendente nor Piazza dei Miracoli and not even the superb duomo, or at least the batistero are present. I do not even think that Firenze, Siena or San Giminiano are there. But may be, one day when I have the time I will do as you did. So, thanks Gérard ! Vincent. Gerard ROBIN a écrit : Hello to French people and others. Scenery 0.9.9 Airport LFPO is wrong: The runway axis is beside the Aircraft axis. And the AC Standby on the grass (not very good for B747) Some time ago i did say that error with 0.9.8. Nobody seems to be interested. I did rebuild that scenery and everything is right for me. NB: i offered my new rebuild, i never got any answer. Cheers Thanks for the answer and the funny remarks. I am a bit disappointed because Airports representation are full in the main FG Topics Mains Airports LFPO and others must be correctly represented in the scenery. I do not understand why that error continue to be there, i gave the information in June, i rebuilt that scenery, i offered it. Nothing is done with the 0.9.9 Scenery. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] error in airport data
Le lundi 28 novembre 2005 à 14:00 -0800, Andy Ross a écrit : Carsten Hoefer wrote: Yes it's this airport. I do live next to it and any plane starting on 36 would fly directly over my flat. The official airport site states, that runway 18 is only allowed in this direction. The key words being in this direction. Runway 36 is still presumably allowed (maybe even preferred) for landings, which would pass over the wooded area to the south of the city. I'm willing to bet that if you were to look at the south end of the runway, you would find a bit 36 painted on it. Basically, it sounds like you are asking the FlightGear/X-Plane airport database to understand that takeoffs are not allowed on runway 36 and therefore place the aircraft on some other runway at startup, which is something is just isn't prepared to do. Airport policy is a political issue, not a simulation thing. The runway definitely exists, even if takeoffs are disallowed. Andy What can be said when the AC is out of the Runway ? See the other thread : Scenery 0.9.9 Airport LFPO (Paris Orly) is wrong Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Scenery 0.9.9 Airport LFPO (Paris Orly) is wrong
Le lundi 28 novembre 2005 à 22:57 +, Jon Stockill a écrit : Gerard ROBIN wrote: I do not understand why that error continue to be there, i gave the information in June, i rebuilt that scenery, i offered it. Nothing is done with the 0.9.9 Scenery. Airport updates need to be sent to Robin Peel. That way they are fixed at source, and everyone benefits from them. Curts scenery builds use the latest version of Robins database. Jon Sorry we are not talking the same error. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] error in airport data
Le mardi 29 novembre 2005 à 00:32 +, David Luff a écrit : Gerard ROBIN writes: What can be said when the AC is out of the Runway ? See the other thread : Scenery 0.9.9 Airport LFPO (Paris Orly) is wrong This looks at first glance like a mismatch between the generated scenery and the apt.dat.gz file in the data package. Cheers - Dave Yes, When i discovered that error (with 0.9.8) it was concluded = the 0.9.8 Scenery don't use the the last Robins database. So i rebuilt it and i got a good Airport (completed, the previous version was not) We have , i have the last database, I conclude that scenery (0.9.9) has not been built with the last database, we continue to live with that error. I think apt.dat.gz is right , the airport is right. Chhers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le dimanche 27 novembre 2005 à 17:54 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Vivian Meazza wrote I don't have cvs access, so I can't do better, Sorry Vivian Gerard, the patch is in cvs. I would like hear how you get on. Vivian As soon as i can i will test it ( may be late in the night, many things to do before i am installing FC4 on an other computer ) at least you will get the answer to morrow morning. Thanks Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le dimanche 27 novembre 2005 à 17:54 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Vivian Meazza wrote Gerard Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 15:58 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard Gerard, the patch is in cvs. I would like hear how you get on. Vivian Sooner than i thought, A first answer each Ship find and use his own TACAN code, not any mixing. Nimitz = 29Y (KSFO) CdG = 26X (LFMN) Seems all right. I will later on test it with an other Ship in different places, and mainly try to get by AC from one ship to the other ( no i will not go from KSFO to LFMN, i will ask the Pacha of CdG to go to KSFO) Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Graphics Cards for FG
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 06:49 +0100, Arnt Karlsen a écrit : On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 03:40:10 +0100, Gerard wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: In addition I should have 256k Video Mem ..you mean 256M. And, word is 128M cards will perform better unless you go for the very top end 256M cards, less in-card overhead or somesuch. Sure , M and not k, you understood what i wanted to say (it was 3 am when i wrote that mail) ..seriously, this wee log snippet tells you what you need and not. (II) RADEON(0): CP in BM mode (II) RADEON(0): Using 8 MB GART aperture (II) RADEON(0): Using 1 MB for the ring buffer (II) RADEON(0): Using 2 MB for vertex/indirect buffers (II) RADEON(0): Using 5 MB for GART textures (II) RADEON(0): Memory manager initialized to (0,0) (2048,8191) (II) RADEON(0): Reserved area from (0,1536) to (2048,1538) (II) RADEON(0): Largest offscreen area available: 2048 x 6653 (II) RADEON(0): Will use back buffer at offset 0x240 (II) RADEON(0): Will use depth buffer at offset 0x300 (II) RADEON(0): Will use 69632 kb for textures at offset 0x3c0 (II) RADEON(0): Render acceleration enabled (II) RADEON(0): Using XFree86 Acceleration Architecture (XAA) You are right, i did not say that very often mainly during AC Model devel i have in // Gimp, Blender, AC and FG running. I think the internal Graphics memory is out with only 128 M ..if you run 1600x1200x24bpp, you get 85MB's for textures. ..ok, 2048x1536x24bpp is heavy for a K6-2 450MHz box. ;o) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/src/brlcad-7.6.4 $ glxgears 184 frames in 5.0 seconds = 36.800 FPS 184 frames in 5.0 seconds = 36.800 FPS 184 frames in 5.0 seconds = 36.800 FPS 184 frames in 5.0 seconds = 36.800 FPS 184 frames in 5.0 seconds = 36.800 FPS [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/src/brlcad-7.6.4 $ You are right with glxgears the graphic card fly (more than 3500 fps), glxgears is not a good test not representative of the performances That card is AGPX8 That card needs more electric power, you must buy a minimum of 500 watts supply. ..and 1x for this old box, my other agp box is a PII 300. ;o) Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Graphics Cards for FG
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 15:51 +0100, Gerard ROBIN a écrit : snip (II) RADEON(0): Will use back buffer at offset 0x240 (II) RADEON(0): Will use depth buffer at offset 0x300 (II) RADEON(0): Will use 69632 kb for textures at offset 0x3c0 (II) RADEON(0): Render acceleration enabled (II) RADEON(0): Using XFree86 Acceleration Architecture (XAA) You are right, i did not say that very often mainly during AC Model devel i have in // Gimp, Blender, AC and FG running. ^ I meanAC3d I think the internal Graphics memory is out with only 128 M ..if you run 1600x1200x24bpp, you get 85MB's for textures. . snip Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Flight Deck taxiing and launch
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 08:57 +0100, Mathias Fröhlich a écrit : On Freitag 25 November 2005 22:14, MPCEE French Bureau wrote: Yep! It was the launch bar not attached. It is difficult to note when it is attached. As I am landing with the 'wires, I taxi to a catapult, but it is very much trial and error to know you are in a catchment area. There is a little trick with mounting the launchbar. It is *required* to have very few relative movement of the gear relative to the surface to establish that connection. That is if you want to press L make sure that you are exactly above the catapult, apply the brakes to make sure you dont move anymore and then press L. You will notice that the aircraft is pulled slightly into its nosegears spring. And we could add,: When the launchbar is activated , you may depress the break, and operate full throttle, the AC being stopped by the launcbar f That compressed gearspring helps to keep the aircraft on the deck as long as the gear is attached to the cat. That produces a negative angle of attack. When the launchbar is released, that compressed spring pushes the nose into the wind and helps getting a sufficient angle of attach suficiently fast. It is very realistic I have not found the way, on how to record a movie file (without any external recorder), to show these characteristics That is how the launchbar systems on /modern/ aircraft (F14,F18,A4...) typicaly work. The real life Seahawk has a slightly different mounting scheme. Looking forward to more models with the modelled modern scheme ... :) Well, my F-18 and the Crusader (I hope so, it is a great thing!) will hopefully arrive at some time in flightgear .. Your F-18 Hornet must come now, i did notice that someone else is planning to make a F-18. Will it be two F-18 into the FG Hangar ?. About Crusader no problem as soon as we will have a FG cvs release able to process carrier landing (jsb fdm), Crusader will come. Greetings Mathias Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 15:58 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard I'm investigating. Thanks for the feedback. Meanwhile could you run log-level=debug, and see if you can see what is going on? I think I've found the bug, and an update to cvs has been forwarded. I haven't tested it as well as I would like, because we seem to have a bug in cvs under Cygwin, which I'm now investigating. Vivian No, problem , i had not yet tested with debug the previous one. I'lltry that new one, and will give you a feed back. Thanks -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Concorde Update Error (v.2.1.)
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 21:21 +1300, T J a écrit : The newly updated Concorde (v.2.1.) has an error with the nose. On my computer, clicking on [ and ] does not move the nose up or down. Version 2.0 did not have this problem. Please can the developer fix this problem in a later release. Many Thanks You are right T.J. seems to be a Nasal error, I hope the Unknown author will solve it, because that AC becomes better and better, the FDM is wonderful. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Concorde Update Error (v.2.1.)
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 13:16 -0500, Ampere K. Hardraade a écrit : On November 26, 2005 12:46 pm, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 21:21 +1300, T J a écrit : The newly updated Concorde (v.2.1.) has an error with the nose. On my computer, clicking on [ and ] does not move the nose up or down. Version 2.0 did not have this problem. Please can the developer fix this problem in a later release. Many Thanks You are right T.J. seems to be a Nasal error, I hope the Unknown author will solve it, because that AC becomes better and better, the FDM is wonderful. Cheers Possible missing semi-colon in Concode-keyboard.xml, line 742 and line 752. TJ, adds a semicolon behind controls.stepFlaps(-1) and controls.stepFlaps(1) and see if that helps. Ampere Sorry Ampere, the error is more accurate, that nasal command is missing Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: Concorde Update Error (v.2.1.)
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 19:36 +0100, Melchior FRANZ a écrit : * T J -- Saturday 26 November 2005 09:21: The newly updated Concorde (v.2.1.) has an error with the nose. On my computer, clicking on [ and ] does not move the nose up or down. Version 2.0 did not have this problem. Please can the developer fix this problem in a later release. Many Thanks Apply this change to $FG_ROOT/Aircraft/Concorde/Nasal/Concorde-keyboard.xml (or update from cvs): m. Well the answer is coming from heaven, from an expert. That is the opportunity to notice the arrival of a new AC (we could see it into an old jsbsim news letter) That ACLockheed1049 (i guess it is Super G Constellation) seems coming from the same Author =Unknown That AC will be an other FDM reference. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Flight Deck taxiing and launch
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 18:39 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello All: On the flight deck with some power I find it difficult to turn with breaks etc, what with the carrier's perpetual motion. Also, when launching from catapult, full power, breaks off, presses 'C' and the Seahawk is thrusted at full power - backwards!!! Any comments as to the catapult settings and what to look for to rectify this? Thanks in Advance Martin Hello Martin, In spite of some remarks about the opportunity to taxis on the flight decks :=) With seahawk i have found a way, probably you did find it before me, keeping pressed the break (left or right according to the wish) to push the throttle to a hight value (probably more than it should be in reality) and the AC will begin to turn on the gear. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: Concorde Update Error (v.2.1.)
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 16:04 -0600, Dave Culp a écrit : On Saturday 26 November 2005 12:56 pm, Gerard ROBIN wrote: That ACLockheed1049 (i guess it is Super G Constellation) seems coming from the same Author =Unknown The mysterious author is Thierry Jacqmain. I don't know why he doesn't write to the lists. Maybe he got too much spam? Dave Congratulation to him, may be is the author of an other of my favorite Seaplane Boeing314 These 3 airplanes are documented and structured on the same scheme format. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Graphics Cards for FG
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 23:27 +0100, Arnt Karlsen a écrit : On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 05:16:26 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ..I still use an old ISA 256kB video card on my firewall, it can do 256 color VGA!!! ;o) Not a surprise, if we want to compete with oldies, i have a full operational PC 386, with a 16 kb graphics card, that pc is still in use to control measurement instrument (oscilloscope and sound analysis) -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 15:58 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard I think I've found the bug, and an update to cvs has been forwarded. I haven't tested it as well as I would like, because we seem to have a bug in cvs under Cygwin, which I'm now investigating. Vivian Hello Vivian May be i am wrong , i have not found any new update in cvs. the last one is tacan.cxx 25 Nov 2005 19:07:24 - 1.6 Thanks -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 21:36 -0500, Josh Babcock a écrit : Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: On November 24, 2005 12:46 pm, MPCEE French Bureau wrote: Hello Gerard: You know, the favourite for all the historians is the Fairy Swordfish, or commonly known as the Stringbag, carrying a Torpedo. As an afterthought, maybe the torpedo could be interactive, and then I could attack the Charles De Gaulle! This is exactly the reason why there should be no weapon in FlightGear. Ampere Yeah, really. I mean, attacking a US carrier seems sporting enough, but attacking those poor defenseless French sailors is just inhumane. Josh Hello Josh, I am getting surprised to know that attacking a US carrier seems sporting, virtual or real are sometime the same. FG is not a war game that is for virtual. In reality when the terrorists kill weeks after weeks US soldiers in Iraqi , you think it is sporting. I don't think so, i dislike to see these young men killed. Sorry i don't share your point of view. And thanks for the compliments, because we have some sailors very popular, woman and man who demonstrate courage when competing on their sail boat around the world. Sure they are defenseless against the tempest. Sure the sea is often inhumane (some of them are missing). Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] 0.9.9 FPS drop, just reporting
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 21:38 +0800, Innis Cunningham a écrit : Hi All I wunder if people could try the exercise of departing on 28R at KSFO hanging a right turn over the city then another right turn over KOAK and see if you get a sim freeze shortly after takeoff and then as you pass overhead KOAK.I seem to be getting a freeze sometime after takeoff doing a right turn and then again over KOAK. It seems after doing the circuit once it does not happen the secound time you fly the circuit.Same thing happened on takingoff at YSSY Sydney.Just seems to happen just after you have booted the sim. Cheers Innis I get that freeze mainly during Metar update (i guess). If it is any others cause it seems to be random event. In the past i got it more frequently (before some improvement made for scenery loading). Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 10:40 -0500, Josh Babcock a écrit : sail boat around the world. Sure they are defenseless against the tempest. Sure the sea is often inhumane (some of them are missing). Cheers Sporting means fair, as in it's sporting fight someone while they are standing, but it is not sporting to kick them when they are down. It's just an obligatory French military joke. We are obliged by law to make them here. Actually, I think that the French military is pretty competant. They just get a bad rap from typically getting into wars with slightly more competant armies (England, Germany, NVA). And then there was that Grand Armie thing that Napolean did. People always remember it when you start a land war in Asia in winter. Josh Don't you think , Everything is said? Don't try to grip yourself on some emergency rope. You are out of FG subject. For any others conversations, please use the private Mail -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 16:47 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard, Back on topic, I've just submitted some code for upload to cvs which allows TACAN to be fitted to 0, 1, or more carriers. So escorts carrying helos and TACAN will have to be designated carriers. (Might consider changing that if it causes major difficulties.) I've tested it here, and, of course it works. Any feedback would be much appreciated. Vivian All right, Vivian, thanks, No problem about Escort which is designated carriers i did it before (we can define a parkpos), i have in mind old First Class Cruiser she had Catapult and seaplane (Walrus). May be, the main overload is to have to include every ships in only one scenarionimitz_demo.xml/scenario A Nimitz near KSFO, and CdG near LFMN, and why not some other (HMS) in the Channel Different specifics scenarios reduce the number loaded. When we decide to start from KSFO we choose to load Nimitz only. When we decide to start from South of France we choose to load CdG only If we decide to start from England .and so on. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 17:29 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Different specifics scenarios reduce the number loaded. When we decide to start from KSFO we choose to load Nimitz only. When we decide to start from South of France we choose to load CdG only If we decide to start from England .and so on. I think that's the way to go. I tested it with 2 near KSFO - no problem here. We should perhaps think of something in the Far East, if anyone feels so inclined. V. Oh, everywhere in the world, could be available :=) And about helos some sea platforms. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 17:53 +, Jon Stockill a écrit : Gerard ROBIN wrote: Oh, everywhere in the world, could be available :=) And about helos some sea platforms. I've already tried that - I have positions for a whole bunch of north sea oil platforms - unfortunately the scenery code doesn't place models in tiles where there's no terrain - so they never show up. May be the best is to include it in the scenario, defined to be a carrier with parkpos and specific name . -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Flight Deck taxiing and launch
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 18:39 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello All: On the flight deck with some power I find it difficult to turn with breaks etc, what with the carrier's perpetual motion. Also, when launching from catapult, full power, breaks off, presses 'C' and the Seahawk is thrusted at full power - backwards!!! Any comments as to the catapult settings and what to look for to rectify this? Thanks in Advance Martin Hello Martin, I hope you didn't forget to activate the LaunchBar upper case L before 'C' Sure it is not easy to taxi , and sometime the ground reaction is not right (probably to be fixed, in the source code). Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 18:52 +, Jon Stockill a écrit : Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Jon Stockill -- Friday 25 November 2005 18:53: unfortunately the scenery code doesn't place models in tiles where there's no terrain - so they never show up. What about delivering those with a tiny *.btg.gz that places a tiny island under the object, below sea level? I'm not sure you can - if you include a btg file then you won't get the default sea area at all. I *suspect* that the scenery loader just bails out on loading if it finds nothing in the terrain tree, rather than checking the objects tree too. I don't know if Melchior is right, My proposal gives the advantage to start from a specific platform. It can be easily defined in different AI scenario other than nimitz_scenario (we don't need TACAN)platform_demo.xml I have done it for a start point on the top of a Mountain (little area). Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Flight Deck taxiing and launch
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 22:14 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello Gerard: Yep! It was the launch bar not attached. It is difficult to note when it is attached. As I am landing with the 'wires, I taxi to a catapult, but it is very much trial and error to know you are in a catchment area. Seahawk: When applying flaps, in flight, the aircraft eventually dips down steeply, after anticipating her nose lifting as is normal. It's strange when you are approaching and the stress is always there, to see you dip violently with not much altitude to rectify the drop! Any ideas? Thank you Martin Martin, The area available to get the launch Bar attached is the axis of the catapult on the beginning of it (front gear and partly main gear on it, about the 1/3 front part of the AC). When action on L you should notice a little movement of the AC. About the flight characteristics of the AC only Vivian can answer. Each AC model has his own default and quality, and only the author can say. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Flight Deck taxiing and launch
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 17:49 -0500, Josh Babcock a écrit : Gerard ROBIN wrote: Hello Martin, I hope you didn't forget to activate the LaunchBar upper case L before 'C' Sure it is not easy to taxi , and sometime the ground reaction is not right (probably to be fixed, in the source code). Cheers I don't think you are ever supposed to taxi on a carrier deck, except possible to get out of the landing area. They hag GSVs for that. Josh Hey, cow boy Where do you find GSV operational onto our FG Nimitz. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 16:47 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard, Back on topic, I've just submitted some code for upload to cvs which allows TACAN to be fitted to 0, 1, or more carriers. So escorts carrying helos and TACAN will have to be designated carriers. (Might consider changing that if it causes major difficulties.) I've tested it here, and, of course it works. Any feedback would be much appreciated. Vivian Hello Vivian I am getting difficulties: First i try my configuration = CdG on Mediterranean sea and Nimitz on Pacific 1/ start FG on CdG with TACAN 26X TACAN working and with TACAN 29Y TACAN working !? 2/ i start on Nimitz with TACAN 29Y TACAN not working and with TACAN 26X not working Second modify my configuration = CdG on Mediterranean sea and Nimitz beside 1/ start FG on CdG with TACAN 26X or 29Y TACAN working 2/ start FG on Nimitz with TACAN 29Y or 26X TACAN working Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Graphics Cards for FG
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 14:42 +1300, dene maxwell a écrit : Thanks for the input...I'll pose this question...on the same platform but with a 6000 series card what improvement in frame rate would you anticipate? Dene Hello, Only an information I do have A 6600GT AGP with 128K mem GPU 500 MHZ MEM 900MHZ Running FG 1400X1050 and Atlas I get from 30 to 100 fps. I cannot use full anti aliasing only x2 (more the FPS decrease) To be comfortable with others applications mem 256K would have been better. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Graphics Cards for FG
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 15:10 +1300, dene maxwell a écrit : Thanks Gerard, Just so I understand; 6600GT AGP video card with 128k vram FG resolution 1400x1050 (with atlas) resulting frame rate is 30 to 100 fps but you'd like 256k main or video memory? what m/b chipset and OS are you running? Dene Dene OS Linux, CPU Athlon 3200 about memory i am not sure it is significant above 1 Gb i do have 3 Gb I had before a graphic card Nvidia 5200 the performances are multiplied by X 2.5 Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Graphics Cards for FG
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 03:26 +0100, Gerard ROBIN a écrit : Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 15:10 +1300, dene maxwell a écrit : Thanks Gerard, Just so I understand; 6600GT AGP video card with 128k vram FG resolution 1400x1050 (with atlas) resulting frame rate is 30 to 100 fps but you'd like 256k main or video memory? what m/b chipset and OS are you running? Dene Dene OS Linux, CPU Athlon 3200 about memory i am not sure it is significant above 1 Gb i do have 3 Gb I had before a graphic card Nvidia 5200 the performances are multiplied by X 2.5 Cheers In addition I should have 256k Video Mem That card is AGPX8 That card needs more electric power, you must buy a minimum of 500 watts supply. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Graphics Cards for FG
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 15:39 +1300, dene maxwell a écrit : Thanks Gerard, I will be running win 98se but your input about the improvement from 5000 series to 6000 series is interesting. What interface was the 5200, AGP,PCI-E or PCI? Dene Hello Dene PCI-E is new and very costly. And we cannot upgrade an existing computer. 5200 is AGP and as far i remember it was X8 with 128k video mem , i don't remember frequencies (i only remember i did overclocked it) With 98se you are limited with main memory , it is working up to 1Gb not more. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Graphics Cards for FG
Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 15:54 +1300, dene maxwell a écrit : This gets more interesting all the time!..:-) 500W PSU minimum nvidia 6000 series video with 256k vram AGP x8 that's your recommendation? Dene Probably a good choice, more (serie 7000) becomes very expensive. The difficulty with that serie (6000), is the big differences about frequencies for GPU and Memory, it is existing several cards which use the same GPU not the same frequencies and you must look at closely that detail, before buying. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Couple of questions
Le mercredi 23 novembre 2005 à 20:28 -0600, Larry a écrit : QUESTION #2 Why won't the autopilot work? I setup the Autoheading and the auto altitude and they both show on the left top of the screen when the HUD is on but the plane doesn't actually go to the heading nor does the altitude stay where I set it. I have clicked all the pertinant buttons in the AP setup as well as having added the waypoints. CTRL/H Doesn't do anything except remove and replace the heading at the top left of the HUD. Same with CTRL/A. Thanks What about QUESTION #2 up there?? :) Thanks Sorry i never use it, and cannot answer, i only use the specific AC autopilot on the panel when it is existing (like in reality) Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 09:03 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Here's the fuller reply I promised earlier. The code makes 2 assumptions: a. there is only one carrier in the environment (which I will change to allow more in the future). b. In the carrier_nav.dat file each carrier is assigned a unique frequency which corresponds to a TACAN channel. This will not change The code takes the channel # and searches for the corresponding frequency, then uses this frequency to search carrier_nav.dat. Using the first match it comes to (assumption b. above) it searches the property tree to find the name of the carrier (assumption a. above). If the name of the carrier found is a substring of the entry in carrier_nav.dat, then it has found a valid entry, and will measure range and brg. Some points to note: If the entry in carrier_nav.dat is: 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 CDG FNS Charles de Gaule TACAN then nameCharles de Gaule/name namede Gaulle/name or even namede/name all produce a valid entry. The entry is NOT enclosed in quotes. No en-name= entry_node-getStringValue(name, Nimitz); is not a mistake. If name/name is not specified, then it defaults to Nimitz. If name/name is specified then it uses that instead. As I said, it works here. If you set log-level=debug you might be able to see all this happening, as there are several debug points set within this code. Make sure you have a well-formed carrier_nav.dat, that it is gzipped, and name/name is correct. HTH. Let me know how you get on Vivian Vivian, OK working with CdeGaulle, only if: 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 CDG RFN CdeGaulle TACAN 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 NMZ USS Nimitz TACAN CdeGaulle on the first line, in that case Nimitz doesn't work TACAN is not activated If y do 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 NMZ USS Nimitz TACAN 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 CDG RFN CdeGaulle TACAN Nimitz working with TACAN CdeGaulle do not The AI name is not a problem typecarrier/type nameCdeGaulle/name pennant-numberR91/pennant-number NB:previously i did put the new one behind Nimitz, if we want TACAN working we can have only one carrier. Thanks Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Concorde Over Nimitz
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 15:37 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello All: The first over pass! When it is possible to have the instant replay, keeping Nimitz within the replay, I will take some more shots of a virtual landing for the FG Album. http://www.mpcee.com/concordeovernimitz.htm Enjoy! Martin Oh sorry, i get nothing, but a blank page Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Carrier
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 15:53 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello: Where can you write the command lines in Windows, for example when in the wizard, to place an aircraft on the cat' or, anywhere on the flight deck to do free take offs? Thank You Martin I can give an answer with command line usage: We have several start point defined: --parkpos=cat-1 --parkpos=cat2 --parkpos=park-1 I run fg with the following parameters --aircraft=seahawk -- carrier=Nimitz --parkpos=park-1 And we must taxi on the deck Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Carrier]
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 16:42:59 +0100 Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 15:53 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello: Where can you write the command lines in Windows, for example when in the wizard, to place an aircraft on the cat' or, anywhere on the flight deck to do free take offs? Thank You Martin Again because of a mistake. I can give an answer with command line usage: We have several start point defined: --parkpos=cat-1 --parkpos=cat2 (NO) IT IS cat-2 --parkpos=park-1 I run fg with the following parameters --aircraft=seahawk -- carrier=Nimitz --parkpos=park-1 And we must taxi on the deck Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 15:06 +0100, Gerard ROBIN a écrit : Vivian, OK working with CdeGaulle, only if: 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 CDG RFN CdeGaulle TACAN 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 NMZ USS Nimitz TACAN CdeGaulle on the first line, in that case Nimitz doesn't work TACAN is not activated If y do 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 NMZ USS Nimitz TACAN 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 CDG RFN CdeGaulle TACAN Nimitz working with TACAN CdeGaulle do not The AI name is not a problem typecarrier/type nameCdeGaulle/name pennant-numberR91/pennant-number NB:previously i did put the new one behind Nimitz, if we want TACAN working we can have only one carrier. Thanks Cheers Vivian, Well, going on further, i get something i cannot explain What i have said before, is right, ONLY, if we keep for it the AI filename nimitz_demo.xml I have tried to rename it cdg_demo.xml and instead of preferences (into AI parameters) scenarionimitz_demo/scenario i have modified to scenariocdg_demo/scenario Result TACAN again does not work. I don't understand -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Carrier]
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 16:58 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello Gerard: The command lines I understand, but where do I write them in Windows? For example, where in the wizard advance screen? The photo of Concorde and Nimitz is there, it is a htm extension. Regards, Martin Because i never use Windows : (being an happy man) , sorry i cannot give any help about FG wizard Yes i understand it is an htm extension, i do not get the picture which should be linked into it, only a blank screen :=( Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Carrier]
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 17:15 +0100, Gerard ROBIN a écrit : Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 16:58 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : snip Yes i understand it is an htm extension, i do not get the picture which should be linked into it, only a blank screen :=( Cheers Continued when i look at your html souce the picture is not included in it only the link to your home directory. So we get a blank page. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Carrier]
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 16:27 +, Jon Stockill a écrit : Gerard ROBIN wrote: Yes i understand it is an htm extension, i do not get the picture which should be linked into it, only a blank screen :=( From the start of the file served by that address: html xmlns:v=urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml xmlns:o=urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office xmlns:w=urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word xmlns=http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40; The rest of the page isn't exactly standard either. Not a surprise it is coming from Microsoft. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 16:46 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : OK Gerard, from your reports everything is working as it should. As I explained, it is assumed that each carrier has a unique TACAN frequency. Thus the code uses the first match it comes to. We've added a new carrier_nav.dat file to cvs: add 'FNS Charles de Gaulle' to the database with TACAN channel 026X You ought to be able to switch between the 2 using the channel selector in the drop down menu. Check it out and let me know if it doesn't work for you. You can only use nimitz-demo.xml because that’s hard coded - the software can't guess which random file name contains carrier info. It used to be called carrier-demo, and perhaps that's a better name for it. If you want 2 carriers (I've tried it and it works, sort of) add another entry/entry with all the data. Note: you will need to use wirewire-1a/wire etc, otherwise the code gets confused and marks no wires :-). I've asked Mathias to add it to his TODO list. I'd like any feedback you have on this one too. Vivian OK, I 'll start to build it, in fact i will have 3 ships both carriers and a destroyer which carry an helicopter (bo105), so i will try to implement 3 TACAN. Thanks Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 17:20 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard ROBIN Sounds good, I'll get on with allowing more than one ship in the TACAN code. I was about to start on HMS Victorious - looks like next year now. Vivian That will be Trafalgar battle :=) -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 18:46 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello Gerard: You know, the favourite for all the historians is the Fairy Swordfish, or commonly known as the Stringbag, carrying a Torpedo. As an afterthought, maybe the torpedo could be interactive, and then I could attack the Charles De Gaulle! I did not know, it is funny :=) We could worry if it was reality, because the royal french navy has had many difficulties with that only one carrier, during making and after making. :=( Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 18:41 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello: Can you make it ARK ROYAL, the version from 1965, after a major refit? It was then I was with Gannets on her. Oh the dreams continue! Thank you Martin I have looked at the Gannets photos and specifications, it is not an easy to draw AC, very interesting. To do it it could take many time. Cheers -- -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] install problem on SUSE 10
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 09:56 -0800, Dan Martin a écrit : Hello, Can anyone help me with a SuSe 10 install? Since I'm using a full install of all SuSe 10 packages, I only needed to download/install simgear package base package 0.99 source 0.99 Everything compiled fine and the first few loading splash screens come up fine, but then I get a freeglut error: --- fgfs opening file: /usr/local/share/FlightGear/data/Navaids/carrier_nav.dat /usr/local/share/FlightGear/data/Navaids/TACAN_freq.dat Initialising callsign using 'Aircraft/c172p/Models/c172p.xml' freeglut (fgfs): Failed to create cursor freeglut ERROR: Function glutSetCursor called without first calling 'glutInit'. Thanks, Dan Look at your freeglut version, you need version 2.2. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 20:15 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 18:46 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello Gerard: You know, the favourite for all the historians is the Fairy Swordfish, or commonly known as the Stringbag, carrying a Torpedo. As an afterthought, maybe the torpedo could be interactive, and then I could attack the Charles De Gaulle! I did not know, it is funny :=) We could worry if it was reality, because the royal french navy has had ^ many difficulties with that only one carrier, during making and after making. :=( Robespierre would be disappointed :-) Vivian Yes the French Navy continue to be named la royale. :=) -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 18:44 -0500, Josh Babcock a écrit : We could worry if it was reality, because the royal french navy has had ^ Robespierre would be disappointed :-) Vivian Yes the French Navy continue to be named la royale. :=) Does that come with cheese? Old Europe, old history, With cheese don't know, but sure Not with coca cola. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le mercredi 23 novembre 2005 à 08:32 +0100, Melchior FRANZ a écrit : * Larry -- Wednesday 23 November 2005 08:12: Where do I find the carriers? I tried doing fgfs --carrier=nimitz but it told me it couldn't find nimitz. :) http://www.seedwiki.com/wiki/flight_gear/aircraft_carrier_howto.cfm?wpid=209315 http://members.aon.at/mfranz/nimitz.jpg [22 kB] m. ___ To get a full operational aircraft carrier you need the FG CVS tree source and data (within some aircrafts , a4, hunter, seafire, may be i forget some others) The short keys are O/o hook down/up C catapult. With it you can start from the Nimitz with the following comand fgfs --aircraft=hunter --carrier=CVN-68 --parkpos=cat-1 Previously you must uncomment scenario nimitz_demo AI in preference.xml file Nimitz is situated not far from San Fransisco on Pacific. . ai enabled type=booltrue/enabled scenarionimitz_demo/scenario !-- scenarioaircraft_demo/scenario -- /ai -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le mercredi 23 novembre 2005 à 13:55 +0100, Gerard ROBIN a écrit : Le mercredi 23 novembre 2005 à 08:32 +0100, Melchior FRANZ a écrit : * Larry -- Wednesday 23 November 2005 08:12: Where do I find the carriers? I tried doing fgfs --carrier=nimitz but it told me it couldn't find nimitz. :) http://www.seedwiki.com/wiki/flight_gear/aircraft_carrier_howto.cfm?wpid=209315 http://members.aon.at/mfranz/nimitz.jpg [22 kB] m. ___ To get a full operational aircraft carrier you need the FG CVS tree source and data (within some aircrafts , a4, hunter, seafire, may be i forget some others) The short keys are O/o hook down/up C catapult. With it you can start from the Nimitz with the following comand fgfs --aircraft=hunter --carrier=CVN-68 --parkpos=cat-1 Previously you must uncomment scenario nimitz_demo AI in preference.xml file Nimitz is situated not far from San Fransisco on Pacific. . ai enabled type=booltrue/enabled scenarionimitz_demo/scenario !-- scenarioaircraft_demo/scenario -- /ai Oh sorry i copied an old Mail And Now you can do it is no CVS you can do it with FG 0.9.9 -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Le mercredi 23 novembre 2005 à 14:10 +0100, Melchior FRANZ a écrit : * Gerard ROBIN -- Wednesday 23 November 2005 13:55: To get a full operational aircraft carrier you need the FG CVS tree source and data You must have missed the 0.9.9 release!? Of course, you don't need FG CVS for full carrier operations. 0.9.9 is enough. fgfs --aircraft=hunter --carrier=CVN-68 --parkpos=cat-1 I prefer --carrier=Nimitz. m. That is only when we want to choose the place onto Nimitz park-1, cat-2 and others we can define into demo.xml (i have every catapults, and 2 extra parks) BTW: i have tried Hangar level not working. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
