On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 09:07:04 -0500 (CDT)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Melchior FRANZ writes:
>> Wow, what a beautiful model. Shiny blue steel, perfectly
>>animated.
>> Many thanks!
I'd be interested to know what is being talked about.
Screen shot?
Jon
__
To answer my own question about templates, some compilers
need to see the template definition "in each translation
unit in which it is used". So, I put the template function
definition in the header and now it works. Very nicely, in
fact. I am happy.
Jon
_
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002 14:48:49 -0400
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Lowering flaps does cause a very nasty pitching moment during
>low-speed maneuvers on a C172 (i.e. approach, when you're too close to
>stall-speed and too close to the ground already) -- not as nasty as
>what you desc
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 12:56:42 -0500 (CDT)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hal has quite a few of his more interesting flying
>stories posted to
>his web page (including the one about the bonanza crash.)
>
> http://stoenworks.com/Aviation%20home%20page.html
Stoenworks aviation
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002 13:05:01 -0400
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Gene Buckle writes:
>
> > > "forked-tail doctor killers" That's a good one.
> >
> > That's the name given to the V tail Bonanza.
>
My boss (at the time) and I flew into Oshkosh one year in
the early 80's in a V-
On Fri, 31 May 2002 13:51:49 -0700
Dave Tessman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Is there any interest in space flight simulation out there?
I don't think it's ruled out, at all. There are at least
two issues I can see:
1) FlightGear might have to modify the visuals approach it
is currently usin
On Thu, 30 May 2002 13:57:41 -0700 (PDT)
Gene Buckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It's generally accepted in the flight simulator community
>that trying to
>get two out-the-cockpit views on the same computer is a
>Bad Idea(tm).
I might modify your statement to read: two individual
video cards
On Thu, 30 May 2002 14:14:13 -0600
"Boslough, Mark B" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Thanks Jon,
>
>Mine are both single head, the Geforce 3 is AGP and the other
>is PCI. Maybe that's the problem. I always run with the heads-up
>display anyway so the panel problem probably would not be an issue
>
On Thu, 30 May 2002 13:57:09 -0600
"Boslough, Mark B" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I am attempting to run flightgear under Windows 2000 on a
>machine with 2
>monitors. My primary monitor is driven by a Geforce 3,
>and my second one is
> ...
>MX, so I don't think it is a video driver problem.
On Wed, 29 May 2002 10:05:07 -0700
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>last night. It has a dumb (Asus P5A) ATX motherboard that doesn't
>know how to power on following a power loss (it comes up in soft-off
You sure you don't have a BIOS setting for that? I've got
one on my m/b. Maybe you n
On Tue, 28 May 2002 10:04:12 -0700
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hopefully I got the conventions right. The point being not that
>YASim's coordinate system is inherently better**, but that making the
>joystick inputs match the coordinate sense is possible with a right
>handed coordinat
On Thu, 16 May 2002 09:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
Alex Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Actually storing the data to file is already supported in
>FGFS, I believe.
FWIW, JSBSim logs its FDM data in a configurable manner.
See the bottom of the X-15 config file, for isntance, as
well as FGOutput.c|h.
On Thu, 16 May 2002 18:46:16 +0200
Christian Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Christian said:
>> > (Note: degrees are still valid as they are
>>*internationally* well known.
>> > slugs aren't)
Alex responded:
>> Yes they are ... each country's definition depends on
>>local climate and fa
On Thu, 16 May 2002 09:48:06 -0500 (CDT)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> ... and the SI unit for temperature is Kelvin, no?
>>:->
>
>So what is the SI unit for direction/heading? Certainly
>they wouldn't overload unit names, right? :-)
One of the worst things about met
On Wed, 15 May 2002 12:52:39 -0400
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have no objection personally to doing everything in SI -- I'm
>Canadian, so I'm very used to metric.
I wish that the U.S. had standardized on metric, and that
I had grown up on it, and that everything we use was b
Found this page interesting:
http://www.gamedev.net/reference/articles/article1817.asp
but does this do something that FlightGear doesn't already
do?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo
On Thu, 2 May 2002 11:16:02 -0400
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Clever. I like this idea.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 11:43:42 -0500 (CDT)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jon, it would also be nice if the user can directly or
>indirectly control CG position as well. This can greatly affect the
>performance of a plane and an instructor could throw in a tail heavy
>configurat
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 22:47:41 +0200 (MEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I think you would need a whole bunch of "input" CG's that go together to
>make one "output" CG. The static CG of the aircraft (that of the
>airframe itself) is just one of those input CG's. Its position is given
>by the manufac
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 13:14:49 -0700 (PDT)
Tony Peden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I think a fixed reference point on the aircraft that
>has nothing to do with the center of gravity would be
>much better. Less potential for confusion that way.
And that could be the initial CG. If we provide a
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 15:25:58 -0400
"Norman Vine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jon S Berndt writes:
>>
>>Yes. The one foggy point in my mind is what problems (if
>>any) might be associated with a floating CG (i.e. from
>>fuel burnoff, etc.).
>
>
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 13:10:21 -0500
Michael Selig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Pertaining to the question about where the target spot is
>located, i.e. what the viewer code uses as the "reference
>point" for centering the model on the screen. This point
>should be the aircraft c.g. The reas
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002 09:33:00 -0500 (CDT)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ok, now isn't this very interesting. There is definitely some
>confusion going on here. I agree with Jim, it's not the fault of the
>viewer code.
>
>Ignoring the issue of the CG possibly moving during the s
On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 20:31:51 +0200
Arnt Karlsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Do flying saucers have windows?
>>
>> Word has it they use Linux, actually.
>
>..how about the one that came down in Roswell, NM? ;-)
Where do you think Linus Torvalds came from ...
C'mon! You *know* that's not
On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 16:28:12 -0500 (CDT)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I just took the latest 3D Cessna 310 u3a (in cvs) for a
>spin and wow!
>I hadn't looked at this for a while and it's really
>looking nice.
Are you referring to the exterior or interior? Screen
shot?
Jon
On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 20:04:35 +0200
>On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 09:24:15 -0400,
>"Dawn Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Thank you for all the help you've given me over the past
>>year.
>
Arnt Karlsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>..this, and similar announcements should, inho, be posted
On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 10:23:18 -0500 (CDT)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm not saying this isn't an area that shouldn't be cleaned up, but I
>am saying that it needs to be done ***very*** carefully.
This shouts for a decent set of regression tests, to me -
some carefully thoug
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 23:07:16 +0200
"Cameron Munro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm interested in this too, there is a part-done JSBsim model of the
>PA28 myself and the Cameron Moore were working on awhile back but never
>got round to the details. This might prove to be the incentive needed to
On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 14:08:00 -0500
Michael Selig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ah ... thank you ... I see it now. The fact that
>"CLadot" gets included on the fly is pretty neat. As our
We wanted the ability to add whatever we wanted to for
aero coefficients. One could do lateral or long
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 18:52:24 +0200
Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>make[4]: Entering directory
>make[4]: *** [JSBSim.o] Error 1
>
>quickstep: 18:51:57 ~> gcc --version
>2.95.3
Yep, we're aware of it.
I'll fix this when I get home. We use the max/min
functions in other parts of JSBS
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002 23:43:03 +0200
"Frederic Bouvier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>With the JSBsim model, I don't see the decrease of AoA at stall. Instead,
>the plane keeps it AoA with the stick completely pulled. It does not
>swivel around its CG like a real plane !
I'll try and have a look t
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002 12:45:47 -0400
"Paul Deppe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Windoze developers - What tool(s) are you guys using to
>edit .rgb files?
IIRC, won't Gimp for Win32 handle those? Seems to me I've
opened those before.
Jon
___
Flightgear
This month's issue (MAY 2002) of C/C++ User's Journal
contains the article: "The Boost.Threads Library". The
issue focuses on multithreading.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightge
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 13:00:00 -0500
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That's actually becoming a bit of a problem -- I couldn't use FGModel
>for the 3D model either because JSBSim had already taken it. As Andy
>keeps reminding us, it would be a good idea to put JSBSim and possibly
>SimG
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 13:00:00 -0500
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jon S Berndt writes:
>That's actually becoming a bit of a problem -- I couldn't use FGModel
>for the 3D model either because JSBSim had already taken it. As Andy
>keeps reminding us, it
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 12:58:57 -0500
"Norman Vine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I guess I was just trying to point out that IMHO we shouldn't adopt
>the JSBSIM::FGPosition class as is in that it has in the more general
>enviroment of FGFS xtra baggage ...
Oh, I certainly agree - I didn't mean to i
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 12:11:43 -0500
"Norman Vine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Yes BUT ... your FGPosition is what I would call FGRigidBody
>ie you have velocity and acceleration terms
>IMHO the class heirarchy should be something like
Given any 100 people, you'll get 400 different FDMs. :-)
Our
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 10:10:10 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How about something simple like FGPosition or FGPos ... I thought of
>it so it gets my vote. :-)
>
>Curt.
We thought of it three years ago (FGPosition). It's
already in JSBSim.
:-)
Jon
___
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002 10:27:44 -0500
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Here's something more interesting (and Canadian) -- what about landing
>a Beaver or Otter on a large (i.e. 5km x 5km) moving ice floe during
>the spring thaw up north?
What kind of crazy place is this "Can ada"? I've
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 16:36:18 -0500
"Norman Vine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Boost has lots of good stuff and FWIW the Boost team does a
>VERY good job of insuring compiler, STL and machine independance
>see the compiler, platform and stdlib subdirectories in
>the distribution
Yes, they appea
On Thu, 04 Apr 2002 23:26:06 +0200
Christian Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>And IMHO an additional dependancy might be much worse than a event
>manager that's a bit more flexible. But I don't know yet.
That's what I thought initially. But, I guess I shouldn't
rain on Bernie's parade and so
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 21:24:06 -
"Jim Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> believe. What are you doing with the way FDMs are
>> instantiated?!
>>
>
>Absolutely nothing. But if your mulitple FDM instances can publish
>position/orientation data into a seperate property tree location for
>ea
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 15:18:02 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jon S Berndt writes:
>Bernie wanted this included so he could rewrite the
>flightgear event manager class to be a bit more flexible.
>
>I'm usually not an advocate of jumpi
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 15:03:33 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hopefully Bernie Bright can address this, although he is running on
>Australian time so I don't know how soon we'll here from him.
I looked at it a few weeks ago and tossed out the idea
that it might be usefu
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 20:50:18 -
"Jim Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've been working toward this sort of thing slowly severing the ties
>between the model code and the viewer so that we can have multiples of
>both. The new viewer interface will make it possible to have multiple
>FDM's a
On Thu, 04 Apr 2002 14:03:10 -0500
Justin Palamar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello, flightgear devolpers, this is my first message to
>this list, so please excuse any question that may sound
>'stupid', I'm just a newbie.
We all remember when we were newbies - no question is
stupid. This *an
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 18:44:23 -0500
"Norman Vine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>My take on this is that all we need is a 'fixed' position ie 'Center of
>Geometry' returned by the FDM. This fixed position can be anywhere
>on the AirFrame and it needs to be described more exactly in the
>individua
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 17:29:42 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jon S Berndt writes:
>I think this boils down to let's have the FDM worry about where the
>plane is, and let's have FlightGear worry about where the current view
>point i
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 16:26:57 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The FDM defines some aribitrary reference point (i.e. on the firewall)
>and provides the lon/lat/elev of that point.
We provide the lat/lon/elev of the current _CG_.
>The FDM really doesn't care about the a
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 20:47:57 -
"Jim Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If there is something that I need to use that comes
>from the FDM let me know what it is and how to use it.
> But I'm not going to be setting the eyepoint with FDM data (other than
>offseting it from the available ori
On Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:32:12 -0800
>> Something is overwriting the xyz offsets in the c172-3d-set.xml or
>> maybe it isn't reading that file? Those are defaults from
>> somewhere...probably from c172-set.xml.
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> replied:
>YASim _sets_ those offsets based on its ow
On Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:57:01 +0200
Quint Mouthaan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Delft in the Netherlands. I'm working a project in which we want to use
Can you tell us about your project? We always like to hear
about how FlightGear is being used. :-)
>FlightGear. The first thing we want to do
On 02 Apr 2002 15:45:18 -0500
Sam Varner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm working on an automotive simulator, http://vamos.sourceforge.net A
>while ago, Curt suggested that I try to make my car model work with
>FlightGear.
!!
> I'd like to start working on that now, but I don't know
>where to
What's the status of OpenGC integration with FlightGear? I
have a thought in mind for something it might be used for,
and I might be interested in trying it out.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailm
On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 16:10:50 -0500
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Here is a before picture of the DC-3 model in FlightGear:
>
> http://www.megginson.com/flightsim/dc3-unsmoothed.png
>
>Here is a shot from after my patch was applied:
>
> http://www.megginson.com/flightsim/dc3-smo
On Wed, 27 Mar 2002 23:08:59 +
Julian Foad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The SimGear root includes metakit-2.4.2-32.tar.gz.
> Version 2.4.3 is now available and fixes several
>potentially serious bugs. I'm not saying Flight Gear is
>affected by any of them (I have no idea) but I think it's
On Mon, 25 Mar 2002 12:15:56 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Jon asked:
>>
>> Does the same thing happen with the X-15 or C-182?
>
>The effect is there with the C182, although maybe just a tiny bit
>less. I don't see the effect at all with the X-15. That probably
>
On Mon, 25 Mar 2002 09:26:47 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What I'm seeing (and this behavior did change
>recently) is that the JSBSim C172 now requires
>significant rightaileron/rudder to hold straight level flight, even at
>full throttle, full speed, level flight
On 22 Mar 2002 15:35:12 -0800
Tony Peden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This commit also includes Jon's first cut at multi-fdm capability,
>essentially the ability to have two instances of JSBSim. One would be,
>say, the master aircraft while the other might be a bomb. The second
>instance would c
On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 22:40:07 -
"Jim Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There should be backup files in each folder (prefixed with .#).
Ummm, I'm not so sure about that. If CVS is able to merge
repository changes into your version of a file, no such
files are made. I believe these files a
On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 15:14:19 -0700 (MST)
Keith Wiley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I want to keep my flightgear project up to date, but I also want to be
>able to undo a cvs update if I decide I don't want to be using the version
>I end up with after a cvs update.
You'd be much better off doing a
Are we finding that inlining is unneccesary? I am
wondering if Tony and I need to un-inline most of our
currently inlined items? We have a lot of access methods
that simply return a private value. Those at least seem to
be classic cases for inlining. What's everyone else doing?
Jon
_
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002 22:55:23 +0100
Christian Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>So there used to be a lot of STL problems where Linux coders wrote non
>standard compliant STL code that brok on MSVC. (They are not really to
>blame as they have no chance to test their code on MSVC; and they are
>
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:17:20 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Oh well, I've only been flamed by RMS (but that should at
>least count for something, right?)
Are you kidding? If not, you can't get away with stopping
there. What's the story?
Jon
__
Someone here uses gcc on IRIX, right? Anything to mention
as far as how well it works there? Compatibility problems
with anything?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:41:55 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>What you're seeing is the fact that, when you add flaps, you increase
>the nose-down pitching moment of the wing. This happens,
>qualitatively, because most of the lift you add gets
>added at the back of the wing where
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:40:38 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Here's another ASCII diagram (please don't mock this one)
>to try to explain:
This is actually pretty good for an ascii diagram and it
shows where the misunderstanding is coming onto play.
>
>+
>.\
>
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 15:29:05 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>We either have to have scenery code that understands funny gear
>trajectories or gear code that understands 3D collision
>detection.
We can be fairly simple. If you want to do articulated
F-18 gear, be my guest. All I wa
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:51:33 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm not quite sure what you mean by the 3D model. Assuming vertical
>gear compression is no closer to rendered reality than what we are
>doing now. You'll get a tilt, but not a physically correct one.
It will be better
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:42:27 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Sigh... grab a calculator. Type "2", then "0", then "sin". :)
>The answer to this question:
>
> How far from the original position is the tip of a gear strut at 20
> degrees of AoA (or bank, or whatever)?
>...is "34% of
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 23:01:59 -
"Jim Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Heh don't laugh. At LWCE Borland was giving away Kylix
>which is basically
>delphi ported to linux...and if i'm not mistaken that
>uses something like
>turbo pascal as its "language". It's what they call a
>RAD to
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:55:49 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What part of "assuming a flat ground" is not getting across? :)
I was trying to figure out where you got that 34% error
from.
>If you are willing to assume a flat ground, then you already *have* a
>valid and workable mo
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:45:35 -0800 (PST)
Gene Buckle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well from a strict user standpoint, this would be neat to have, especially
>the "thump" you get when crossing expansion joints on concrete runways. :)
I wonder if modeling this as a pure aural cue would be
enough
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:24:44 -0500
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If the FDM guys would like it, it would be very easy to add some extra
>fields to $FG_ROOT/materials.xml and make them available through the
>scenery code. For example, we could provide parameters for magnitude
>and
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:50:08 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>And even so, it's not the *position* of the gear tip that is the
>problem, it is the *direction* of the compression vector. An 20
>degree difference from vertical (not a terribly uncommon AoA for a jet
>touchdown, or bank
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:11:59 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ski jumps are an immediate counter example.
Modeling ski jumps are the one example I can think of -
the single special case - where this is important. [How
many terrain polygons will it take to accurately model a
ski j
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:55:10 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ... the gear extension angle and extension amount will move the
>lon/lat of the contact point. Perhaps the differences won't be
>significant enough to significantly change the resulting ground
> elevation?
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:15:04 -0500
"Norman Vine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Who better then the FDM to know the offsets of the points to test for
>contact. It certainly shouldn't be anything in the Scenery Module !!
>
>Norman
Yep. I think all we (FDM) need is a function that returns
the te
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:00:28 -0500
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>That's good news -- I'd like to encourge the FDM writers to query
>separately for each gear now, at least for the wheels and skids (crash
>points aren't as serious).
So, when querying, would we supply the lat/lon/ra
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 17:47:37 +0300
"Roman Grigoriev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi guys I implemented rendering Flightgear in black and white mode using
>Geforce rendering combiners here is a sample jpeg
>
>It's extremly usefull for simulating missile and bomb
>camera views or for helicopter s
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:44:07 -0500
>1) CHANGE THIS ASAP to at least print an error message
> or
>2) defend this hack publicly
Where is the code located?
>=
>
>There is some good news however
>
>After discovering that the above was responsible for
>unexplained crashing at star
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:25:28 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If anyone wants to take a look at the runway lighting
>work I've done
>so far here's what you need to do:
Any chance of posting a simple, representative, jpg?
Please?
Jon
_
>aerodynamics/Flight control(and so on) are not so easy to
>me. One of the so many problems is that
>How can I initialize the airplane in the air in a stable
>manner when JSBSim running in standalone mode?
>It seems that FGTrim can accomplish that. But I do NOT
>know how to use it!
Greetings!
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 17:48:53 +0300
"Roman Grigoriev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>this is not suitable for me
>in addition I need to aply noise on this black and white
>image
Intriguing. Can you tell us what this is about? I have a
hunch.
Jon
___
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:27:16 -0800
"John Wojnaroski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are pilots who have both solid engineering
> backgrounds and advanced degrees and experience.
Such as test pilots. We could use a few "on-staff"! :-)
Jon
___
Fl
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:00:54 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I know for the general case an external graphing tool
>would be most useful (and I think Jon B. has stuff to do this already.)
Yes, it's a very useful command line tool that plots files
of CSV format (comma
57ESC[22m
> 13971 Segmentation fault
>
> 8-)
If this is your idea of a joke, I'm not laughing ...
:-)
[you *are* joking, aren't you?!?!]
Jon
-
> Another thing that might be helpful is if the FDM's would report the
> amount of each gear compression to FlightGear so that could be
> animated (and hopefully keep the tires above the ground.)
This can be done.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EM
> It's very hard to get it exactly right. The problem is that both
> JSBSim and YASim sample only one ground position for the elevation
> under all gear, but nearly every surface in FlightGear slopes at least
> slightly. That means that when you look from the right, the wheels
> might appear to
Didn't Curt do some work some time ago and figure out that it was the
propeller model?
Jon
- Original Message -
From: Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 3:55 PM
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [BUG] JSBSim: sudden plane crashes
> *
OK, another one on my list. Could be as simple as a gearing constant in teh
config file.
Jon
- Original Message -
From: David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 310 Model
> Curtis L. Olson
This is very likely the propeller for the C310 causing problems. My computer
should be repaired by the middle of this coming week, so I'll once again be
able to test things out. :-)
I may be able to build a script that reproduces it, though, in which case I
may get to it sooner.
Jon
- Origi
On Fri, 01 Mar 2002 12:24:42 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Erik Hofman wrote:
>> I've not seen any situation which might need it.
>Sure you have. On a real 172, moving the flaps lever from 0 to 30
>causes the flap motors to whine for 5 seconds (or whatever). Moving
>it from 0 t
On Fri, 01 Mar 2002 13:00:17 -0600
"Jon S Berndt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>We've always been able to model this kind of stuff,
>aerodynamically and control system-wise. My only concern
>about all this was that we are being asked to provide
>extra informa
On Fri, 01 Mar 2002 10:39:04 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>zero. The FDM needs, somehow, to provide this information to the 3D
>model, no? Or are you expecting the 3D model code to figure it out on
>its own from the /control tree? Wasn't the point of moving to
>/surface-posi
On Fri, 01 Mar 2002 09:43:30 -0800
Jon wrote:
>> Are we going to need to do this with each aircraft model? :-(
> >
>> Will we need to do this with flaps, slats, spoilers, elevons, etc.?
> >A left and right component for each one? :-( :-(
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You have to.
On Fri, 01 Mar 2002 09:21:44 -0800
Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oooh, actually I really like "-1".
I was pulling for
"-that_has_been_normalized_for_animation_purposes"
> Shorter and really obvious.
Are you the guy responsible for the Y2K "crisis"? ;-)
> Alas that it's too late.
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:54:48 -0800 (PST)
Alex Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>And, don't you want to be able to try flying the aircraft with the left
>flap unmovable (because the cable broke) and the right one moving ?
>It's a popular failure mode on C172 ...
Malfunctions are a ways down the
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 10:37:05 -0600 (CST)
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well, that particular source file is not entirely devoid
>of comments. Here's they doxygen html docs for SGBinObject:
That reminds me, I was going to ask you if you were
keeping up the documentation using D
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 07:15:14 -0800 (PST)
Tony Peden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>David,
>Have a look at c172.xml, you will need to add
>a right aileron FCS component to c310.xml
Are we going to need to do this with each aircraft model?
:-(
Will we need to do this with flaps, slats, spoilers,
401 - 500 of 614 matches
Mail list logo
