Ok Eric
The T-38 animations are finished.Much easier to animate with no diehedrial
and sweep on the wings and tail.
I will winzip the file.Where should I email it to.There are three files the
.ac file the xml file and the texture for the conopy which I have added a
mask to so it is now
Innis Cunningham wrote:
Ok Eric
The T-38 animations are finished.Much easier to animate with no
diehedrial and sweep on the wings and tail.
I will winzip the file.Where should I email it to.There are three files
the .ac file the xml file and the texture for the conopy which I have
added a mask
On 9/18/03 at 11:25 PM Thomas Arendsen Hein wrote:
When updating from CVS I got a conflict in AILocalTraffic.cxx,
because I removed two obsolete lines in my patch which still are in
CVS.
The problem is, I forgot to attach my patch!
So here is another one which removes these two lines.
Thomas
Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Awesome view of Hurricane Isabel just touching the East Coast
of the US http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/gallery/
This evening the outer fringes of the storm were overhead here
on Cape Cod 42.3N 71.7W and was as spectacular a sunset as I
have ever
Erik Hofman wrote:
Hi
I have the following questions about FlightGear-0.9.2. Could you please
help me to post the following information to the development group?
The questions are as follows:
In FlightGear-0.9.2, the file size of fgfs.exe I download from website
is 2,656 KB, but the size of the
Erik Hofman writes:
Tests have shown
that in-lining code doesn't make a huge difference (actually the code
might become slower ...) but it decreased the executable tremendously.
IMO the jury is still out on this :-)
Compiling with minimal inlining *will* decrease compile times and
IIRC
I'm looking at adding the ability to animate the emissive color properties
of model objects. While it might seem unlikely that both emissive and alpha
blend would be used on the same object, maybe we should have a color
animation instead of a blend animation which can then have multiple property
Jim Wilson writes:
I'm looking at adding the ability to animate the emissive color properties
of model objects. While it might seem unlikely that both emissive and alpha
blend would be used on the same object, maybe we should have a color
animation instead of a blend animation which can
Norman Vine wrote:
Jim Wilson writes:
I'm looking at adding the ability to animate the emissive color properties
of model objects. While it might seem unlikely that both emissive and alpha
blend would be used on the same object, maybe we should have a color
animation instead of a blend
Norman Vine wrote:
Erik Hofman writes:
Tests have shown
that in-lining code doesn't make a huge difference (actually the code
might become slower ...) but it decreased the executable tremendously.
IMO the jury is still out on this :-)
Compiling with minimal inlining *will* decrease compile
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Norman Vine wrote:
Jim Wilson writes:
I'm looking at adding the ability to animate the emissive color properties
of model objects. While it might seem unlikely that both emissive and alpha
blend would be used on the same object, maybe we should have
Unfortunately, while the presets hierarchy brought some benefits, it
also broke saving and restoring flights. I think that it's time to
consider doing away with the presets hierarchy, and trying something
like this:
1. Make an in-memory copy of the property tree that we can revert to
when the
David,
I'm open to something more sensible, but let's proceed with caution.
I have a side project that is critically wired into the current
presets arrangement and I can't afford to have that broken, at least
not for very long. Hopefully if you do make changes you are willing
to work with me to
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
David,
I'm open to something more sensible, but let's proceed with caution.
I have a side project that is critically wired into the current
presets arrangement and I can't afford to have that broken, at least
not for very long. Hopefully if you do make changes you are
Hello all,
Once you've started FG, the tower views are permently fixed to the departure
airfield. Would it be difficult to optionally switch the tower views to the
destination airfield, when one is set in the AP waypoint list?
LeeE
___
On Fri, 2003-09-19 at 13:00, David Megginson wrote:
Unfortunately, while the presets hierarchy brought some benefits, it
also broke saving and restoring flights. I think that it's time to
consider doing away with the presets hierarchy, and trying something
like this:
1. Make an in-memory
Hi John,
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 10:50:24AM -0700, John Wojnaroski wrote:
Hi,
Over the course of the last year I've been trying to find simulation hardware
(MCP,EFIS,EICAS,etc) that works with Linux and would support open source programs
like FlightGear and OpenGC. All I could find was
Tony Peden writes:
/sim/startup/init/position-type : (latlon|airport|navaid|runway)
/sim/startup/init/altitude-type : (msl|agl|glidepath)
/sim/startup/init/orientation-type : (rph|runway)
/sim/startup/init/time-type : (utc|local|sunpos)
This sounds awful close to
Lee Elliott writes:
Hello all,
Once you've started FG, the tower views are permently fixed to the departure
airfield. Would it be difficult to optionally switch the tower views to the
destination airfield, when one is set in the AP waypoint list?
Hi Lee,
There is code in the ATC
On Saturday 20 September 2003 01:33, David Luff wrote:
Lee Elliott writes:
Hello all,
Once you've started FG, the tower views are permently fixed to the
departure
airfield. Would it be difficult to optionally switch the tower views to
the
destination airfield, when one is set in
Heads up aircraft designers!
I just committed a fairly significant change to both fgfs source and
data CVS repositories. This is another step towards making aircraft
self contained in their own subdirectory. The end goals is to be able
to install / remove / distribute aircraft that are entirely
21 matches
Mail list logo
