Hello,
Georg Vollnhals schrieb:
Hi Ralf,
thank you and all the Lake Constance Team Members for improving that
wonderful piece of (scenery) cake for VFR flyers.
I just managed due to lack of freetime to make a freeflight around LOIR
(to the south and north) and could clearly see what you
Vassilii Khachaturov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Surely that's a beneficial change, so please submit, whether you're
talking about just the ATCutils module cleanup or of something with
a wider scope.
i haven't seen my previous patches (the message was blocked because of
its size and it was
reply from David
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:55:31 -0400
From: David Megginson
To: Vassilii Khachaturov
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [BUG] tmp-ly disable buggy mag compass jamming code
(fwd)
On 23/10/05, Vassilii Khachaturov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i've sent
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Robin Peel wrote:
Paul:
In general, X-Plane only supports water runways at designated seaplane
bases, not as additions to terrestrial airports (I forget the reason, I am
afraid). I will look into whether they can be added back.
I do recall that PHNL has this
http://caliban.lbl.gov/fgfs_patches/flightgear.diff
Great work. I wonder if there is a way to profile fg/sg for this kind
of inefficiencies somewhere in a tight loop.
A couple of comments:
diff -u -r1.43 AIBase.hxx
--- src/AIModel/AIBase.hxx 15 Oct 2005 14:55:51 - 1.43
+++
Just wondering if anyone (pos historically) has driven physical instruments
using FlightGear on Linux.
I'm thinking the analog variety (ASI AI ALT etc) from the likes of SimKits.
Obviously the SimKits stuff couldn't work directly because their proprietary
software to drive the CCU is for
Dave Martin wrote:
Just wondering if anyone (pos historically) has driven physical instruments
using FlightGear on Linux.
I'm thinking the analog variety (ASI AI ALT etc) from the likes of SimKits.
Obviously the SimKits stuff couldn't work directly because their proprietary
software to
On Tuesday 25 October 2005 14:07, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
For the FAA Level 3 FTD certified sims I work with, we draw the
instruments on an LCD screen, then place a panel cutout with bezels on
top of that. Fools a *lot* of people into thinking they are real, even
though they aren't.
I did
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
[...] The simkits stuff are driven by standard servos,
right? So you could get a little PIC board to run your servos and take
position commands in from the serial port ... then you just need to send
the data out the serial port from FG (with perhaps a small amount
Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
http://caliban.lbl.gov/fgfs_patches/flightgear.diff
Great work. I wonder if there is a way to profile fg/sg for this kind
of inefficiencies somewhere in a tight loop.
Ok, these changes have been committed. It's quite extensive but I'm
rather pleased with them.
Just thought I'd mention a couple things.
1) Some of the aircraft panel instruments display z-fighting even at the
higher depth buffer setting...
# grep Depth XFree86.0.log
(**) NVIDIA(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32
(--) Depth 24 pixmap format is 32 bpp
...and I'm wondering if there's
Jim Wilson wrote:
2) Raindeer in the santa model should be spelled reindeer. It might be a
common misspelling but it is still a misspelling ;-)
Ehr Alright, but only because it's you who mentioned it.
I could have called it rendier instead as it's called in Dutch, but I
chose to call it
On Tuesday 25 October 2005 14:07, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
For the FAA Level 3 FTD certified sims I work with, we draw the
instruments on an LCD screen, then place a panel cutout with bezels on
top of that. Fools a *lot* of people into thinking they are real, even
though they aren't.
Just
Dave Martin wrote:
Just another quick thought on this idea. (I'd like to try it)
If I've got my facts right, a standard gauge is about 3 1/8inch (approx 80mm)
diameter mount. So does that suggest a 19inch or 20inch LCD screen for the
c172-610x panel?
I don't recall the exact dimensions
For the FAA Level 3 FTD certified sims I work with,
we draw the
instruments on an LCD screen, then place a panel
cutout with bezels on top of that.
How are you driving the panel? From the same box as
the cockpit view (multiple FG instances?)or by using
multiple machines?
I'm quite
Buchanan, Stuart wrote:
How are you driving the panel? From the same box as
the cockpit view (multiple FG instances?)or by using
multiple machines?
I'm quite interested in the possibilities of
multi-display setups, but it feels a bit excessive to
have a box just dedicated to displaying a
A really good setup requires the following:
* The server, displaying the panel and running the FDM.
* A dual core machine for every display as a slave to the main server.
Erik
What is the reason for using a dual-core machine for each 'out the window'
view?
(Asking out of ignorance)
--
Erik Hofman wrote:
Update of /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/FlightGear/src/ATC
In directory baron:/tmp/cvs-serv30924/src/ATC
[...]
* Use const string rather than string in function calls when appropriate.
[...]
I have the impression that the changes to the FlightGear subtree didn't
make it into CVS
On Tuesday 25 October 2005 15:34, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
There are adjustments in the proper place on the panel. I'm just a
software guy, so I don't know all the hardware tricks that are being
done. But I do know the end result has a nice solid feel and is very
convincing.
Curt.
Well, I
Jim Wilson wrote:
Just thought I'd mention a couple things.
1) Some of the aircraft panel instruments display z-fighting even at the
higher depth buffer setting...
# grep Depth XFree86.0.log
(**) NVIDIA(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32
(--) Depth 24 pixmap format is 32 bpp
...and I'm
Buchanan, Stuart wrote:
How are you driving the panel? From the same box as
the cockpit view (multiple FG instances?)or by using
multiple machines?
I'm quite interested in the possibilities of
multi-display setups, but it feels a bit excessive to
have a box just dedicated to displaying a
Dave Martin wrote:
Well, I think I could get the adjusters in place (experimentation time)
My next question would have to be (bear with me) Does FreeGLUT support
multiple mice yet?
Alternatively, does FreeGLUT rely on X11 for it's mouse definitions. I think I
may have found a method in
Dave Martin wrote:
What is the reason for using a dual-core machine for each 'out the window'
view?
It allows you to load the scenery without seeing glitches or hick-ups in
the rendering thread.
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Martin Spott wrote:
I have the impression that the changes to the FlightGear subtree didn't
make it into CVS - at least they didn't appear on checkout. Am I the
only one who misses these changes ?
I guess so, the CVS changelog was sent out to me by mail.
Erik
On Tuesday 25 October 2005 16:45, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
We are using multiple machines, one for each display. My feeling is
that if it is a bit excessive, it is only a small bit excessive and I
can put up with it. :-) You are welcome to try running a multiheaded
machine (with support for
Dave Martin wrote:
Unfortunately my total lack of software development skills and apparent
numerical dyslexia would preclude this. That is, unless now or in the future
enough people might become interested in doing this (I may not code but I'm
quite the engineer when it comes to physical
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Update of /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/FlightGear/src/Main
In directory baron:/tmp/cvs-serv17258
Modified Files:
metar_main.cxx
Log Message:
I guess there was something in Alex' patch that wasn't all that fortunate.
Index: metar_main.cxx
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:08:06 -0700, Andy wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I would like to make a case for non-threading from the standpoint of
simplicity. We have had (and probably still have) some extremely
subtle and extremely difficult to track bugs in our
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:59:31 +0100, Dave wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Just wondering if anyone (pos historically) has driven physical
instruments using FlightGear on Linux.
I'm thinking the analog variety (ASI AI ALT etc) from the likes of
SimKits. Obviously the SimKits stuff
Vassilii Khachaturov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://caliban.lbl.gov/fgfs_patches/flightgear.diff
Great work. I wonder if there is a way to profile fg/sg for this kind
of inefficiencies somewhere in a tight loop.
A couple of comments:
diff -u -r1.43 AIBase.hxx
---
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Dave Martin wrote:
Well, I think I could get the adjusters in place (experimentation time)
My next question would have to be (bear with me) Does FreeGLUT
support multiple mice yet?
Alternatively, does FreeGLUT rely on X11 for it's mouse definitions.
I think I may
Erik Hofman
Martin Spott wrote:
I have the impression that the changes to the FlightGear subtree didn't
make it into CVS - at least they didn't appear on checkout. Am I the
only one who misses these changes ?
I guess so, the CVS changelog was sent out to me by mail.
Erik
I'd
Vivian Meazza discovered:
AIFlightPlan.cxx:69: error: passing `const std::string' as `this' argument
of `std::basic_string_CharT, _Traits, _Alloc std::basic_string_CharT,
_Traits, _Alloc::operator=(const _CharT*) [with _CharT = char, _Traits =
std::char_traitschar, _Alloc =
Andy Ross
Vivian Meazza discovered:
AIFlightPlan.cxx:69: error: passing `const std::string' as `this'
argument
of `std::basic_string_CharT, _Traits, _Alloc
std::basic_string_CharT,
_Traits, _Alloc::operator=(const _CharT*) [with _CharT = char, _Traits
=
std::char_traitschar, _Alloc
Alex Romosan a écrit :
this change is okay. i am not sure what you mean by marking the
method to be const but if it's this:
inline const Point3D GetPos() const
that would mean it acts on a const object which is what we want anyway
(but not necessarily). so can we apply this patch as well:
Vivian Meazza wrote
Andy Ross
Vivian Meazza discovered:
AIFlightPlan.cxx:69: error: passing `const std::string' as `this'
argument
of `std::basic_string_CharT, _Traits, _Alloc
std::basic_string_CharT,
_Traits, _Alloc::operator=(const _CharT*) [with _CharT = char,
_Traits
Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I attach a diff against CVS - HEAD which I applied to get CVS to compile
under Cygwin. It may not be the best or preferred way to do it, but the
patch works here, so far as I can see.
diff -u -w -b -r1.11 AIFlightPlan.hxx
--- AIFlightPlan.hxx25 Oct
On Tue, October 25, 2005 5:18 pm, John Wojnaroski said:
The boards Curt refers to were specifically designed for a 747
simulator. They will read analog, discrete inputs, rotary encoders but
are not designed to drive anything other than digital signals. Would
need a bit more design and
From: Harald JOHNSEN
Jim Wilson wrote:
Just thought I'd mention a couple things.
1) Some of the aircraft panel instruments display z-fighting even at the
higher depth buffer setting...
# grep Depth XFree86.0.log
(**) NVIDIA(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32
(--) Depth 24
On Dienstag 25 Oktober 2005 21:33, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
I am not a big fan of functions that return pointers or references on
their current state. That leads to mysterious errors when the object
goes out of scope before the pointer or the reference. I think this kind
of optimisation is very
Alex Romosan asked
Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I attach a diff against CVS - HEAD which I applied to get CVS to compile
under Cygwin. It may not be the best or preferred way to do it, but the
patch works here, so far as I can see.
diff -u -w -b -r1.11 AIFlightPlan.hxx
Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The function in AIFlightPlan.cxx was not defined in AIFlightPlan.hxx so far
as the compiler was concerned.
It now compiles and runs OK
i don't understand. does the cvs version compile or do you still have
to make those changes to get it to compile?
Alex Romosan asked:
Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The function in AIFlightPlan.cxx was not defined in AIFlightPlan.hxx so
far
as the compiler was concerned.
It now compiles and runs OK
i don't understand. does the cvs version compile or do you still have
to make those
Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alex Romosan asked:
Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The function in AIFlightPlan.cxx was not defined in AIFlightPlan.hxx so
far
as the compiler was concerned.
It now compiles and runs OK
i don't understand. does the cvs version
Why are the bells commented out in raindeer-sound.xml?
They do sound cute.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
John Wojnaroski wrote:
Dave Martin wrote:
Unfortunately my total lack of software development skills and
apparent numerical dyslexia would preclude this. That is, unless now
or in the future enough people might become interested in doing this
(I may not code but I'm quite the engineer when
i tried to make sure accessor functions which return by reference act
on const objects. also replaced some iterators with const_iterator
and a few return/pass by reference that were missed the first time
around:
Index: src/AIModel/AIAircraft.hxx
47 matches
Mail list logo
