Dear
Jim,
you state
that "With the 1903 they
trussed it all up so that only the trailing edges warped, making it even
more aileron like."
We also
have the smithsonian museum drawings from the 1903 flyer. The inboard wing is
trussed up but the outboard wing does not have any truss cables
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Geoff Reidy writes:
The major problem I have with fgfs is that I seem to hit a race
condition where all graphics and sound stop for extended periods of time
(up to about 30 secs), long enough for autopilot (or me!) to lose
control and the plane will always crash.
During
I've just been trying to compile a current CVS update of both SimGear and
FlightGear. Simegear builds properly, but FlightGear falls over in
src/Main with:
fg_init.cxx: In function `bool fgInitSubsystems()':
fg_init.cxx:1046: no matching function for call to `SkySceneLoader::Load
(string, double,
Marcel Wittebrood [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Dear Jim,
you state that With the 1903 they trussed it all up so that only the
trailing edges warped, making it even more aileron like.
We also have the smithsonian museum drawings from the 1903 flyer. The
inboard wing is trussed up but the
This definitely looks like a version mismatch between
simgear/flightgear. Make sure you've build the latest simgear-cvs and
then check all the dumb stuff, like you installed it, you don't have
extra older versions of simgear floating around your hard drive,
etc. etc.
Regards,
Curt.
Jon
Jim Wilson writes:
Thanks. It's getting there. I'm still trying to figure out from Orville's
description how the elevator mecahnism works (for animation). Might need to
go down to Owl's head again to take a another look at their replica. Still
thinking about wing warping... (hints to
Hehe, if you start out with a fairly stable approach and are pretty
close already, the autopilot seems to hold the Wright Flyer right on
the glide slope. ATC was complaining a bit about my 33 kt. (full
throttle) approach speed though ...
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hehe, if you start out with a fairly stable approach and are pretty
close already, the autopilot seems to hold the Wright Flyer right on
the glide slope. ATC was complaining a bit about my 33 kt. (full
throttle) approach speed though ...
Jim Wilson wrote:
...
I'll see if I can do that over the next few days. Time is limited these days.
The company I work at does 80% of their business this month and next (see
http://www.kelcomaine.com to find out why). ...
From a couple of the pictures there I assume the during the off season
On Thursday 17 October 2002 10:34 am, Jim Wilson wrote:
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hehe, if you start out with a fairly stable approach and are pretty
close already, the autopilot seems to hold the Wright Flyer right on
the glide slope. ATC was complaining a bit about my 33
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, John Check wrote:
Hahah, a GC for that would be an hour glass
and a spirit level.
--
Jon Stockill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I'm guessing that Ay / Az is roughly proportional to Fy / Fz so these
two methods won't be exactly the same, but should be similar enough.
Well, a classic rule of physics is F = m.a (force = mass x
acceleration) and that applies to the directions of the force and
On Thursday 17 October 2002 2:43 pm, Jon Stockill wrote:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, John Check wrote:
Hahah, a GC for that would be an hour glass
and a spirit level.
Thanks, I knew there had to be another peice.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, John Check wrote:
Hahah, a GC for that would be an hour glass
and a spirit level.
Hmmm... I did a google on spirit level wright flyer and nothing came up.
Any idea what it looks like?
Best,
Jim
C. Hotchkiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Jim Wilson wrote:
...
I'll see if I can do that over the next few days. Time is limited these days.
The company I work at does 80% of their business this month and next (see
http://www.kelcomaine.com to find out why). ...
From a couple of the
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Jim Wilson wrote:
Hmmm... I did a google on spirit level wright flyer and nothing came up.
Any idea what it looks like?
I was actualyl joking, but now you come to mention it, it probably would
have been quite handy for them keeping the wing level :-)
--
Jon Stockill
John Check [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thursday 17 October 2002 10:34 am, Jim Wilson wrote:
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hehe, if you start out with a fairly stable approach and are pretty
close already, the autopilot seems to hold the Wright Flyer right on
the glide slope.
On Thursday 17 October 2002 3:46 pm, Jim Wilson wrote:
John Check [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thursday 17 October 2002 10:34 am, Jim Wilson wrote:
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hehe, if you start out with a fairly stable approach and are pretty
close already, the autopilot
Jim Wilson writes:
Hmmm... I did a google on spirit level wright flyer and nothing came up.
Any idea what it looks like?
Probably like one oops two of these
one aligned with the wing and one aligned with the body
http://www.stanleylondon.com/inclinometer.htm
Norman
On Thursday 17 October 2002 3:50 pm, Jim Wilson wrote:
Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, John Check wrote:
Hahah, a GC for that would be an hour glass
and a spirit level.
Hmmm... I did a google on spirit level wright flyer and nothing came up.
Any idea what it
The UIUC folks did a very good job on the flight dynamics. My gut
feeling is that this is probably very close in terms of performance to
the original.
Yep, you have no chance to gain terrain with '--random-wind' enabled ;-)
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002 21:31:08 +0100 (BST),
Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Jim Wilson wrote:
Hmmm... I did a google on spirit level wright flyer and nothing
came up. Any idea what it looks like?
I was actualyl joking, but now you
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, John Check wrote:
You're right, let's go analog. Sundial and a plumb bob ;D
I think you'd have problems setting your sundial from the sun compass, or
the sun compass from the sundial, or oh dear
I'd suggest damping the plumb bob too - a large water tank should do.
Jon Stockill wrote:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Jim Wilson wrote:
Hmmm... I did a google on spirit level wright flyer and nothing came up.
Any idea what it looks like?
A glass of brandy?
I was actualyl joking, but now you come to mention it, it probably would
have been quite handy for them
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
What I would like to propose for people's consideration, is the idea
of taking each of FlightGear's component libraries and converting them
to the LGPL license. The top level wrapper code (i.e. whatever is in
src/Main) would remain GPL.
Well, it doesn't matter what
Martin Spott writes:
The UIUC folks did a very good job on the flight dynamics. My gut
feeling is that this is probably very close in terms of performance to
the original.
Yep, you have no chance to gain terrain with '--random-wind' enabled ;-)
I'll grant that crosswind landings
Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Jim Wilson writes:
Hmmm... I did a google on spirit level wright flyer and nothing came up.
Any idea what it looks like?
Probably like one oops two of these
one aligned with the wing and one aligned with the body
about putting as much as possible under LGPL. At first I thought that
sounded like betrayal, but now I'm thinking it sounds good. It would
allow companies who sell a product to include part or (essentially) all
of Flight Gear in their product. They would still have an obligation to
Yes.
Even back in the early days when FlightGear was just starting out, I
thought it would be pretty great if someday I could get paid to work
on FlightGear full time. So far no one has stepped up to the plate
and offered to cover my salary simply for the pleasure of assisting an
open source project.
Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Jim Wilson wrote:
Hmmm... I did a google on spirit level wright flyer and nothing came up.
Any idea what it looks like?
I was actualyl joking, but now you come to mention it, it probably would
have been quite handy for them
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
come along once in a while. As can be expected, anything that would
pay me or anyone else to work on FlightGear would most likely need
some sort of financial incentive. FlightGear would have to satisfy
some need they are trying to fullfill.
Like the
No one commented on my last runway lights message so I figured I'd
send some more picts of the latest:
http://www.flightgear.org/tmp/rwy_lights3.jpg
http://www.flightgear.org/tmp/rwy_lights4.jpg
http://www.flightgear.org/tmp/rwy_lights5.jpg
http://www.flightgear.org/tmp/rwy_lights6.jpg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
*drools over keyboard*
Very nice. But can you see the pole and light assemblies at daytime? :-)
Thanks,
David
- --
If you give someone a program, you will frustrate them for a day. If you teach
them how to program, you will frustrate them for a
33 matches
Mail list logo
