--- Innis Cunningham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if we are
more a non military sim lets put this HUD rubbish to
bed.
Unless everyone can agree that FG must be a civilian
only sim I see little reason why we should not add
features that support the military style aircraft.
The only time you
Hi Oliver
Oliver C.
On Saturday 06 November 2004 13:53, Innis Cunningham wrote:
Hi All
Just had a look on the seedwiki at the aircraft todo list.
Who wrote that rubbish.
Please do me a favour and don't call my work rubbish.
Okay.But I guess you know now what it feels like to have
your work,as
Hi Paul
Paul Surgeon writes
--- Innis Cunningham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if we are
more a non military sim lets put this HUD rubbish to
bed.
Unless everyone can agree that FG must be a civilian
only sim I see little reason why we should not add
features that support the military style
On November 7, 2004 06:09 am, Paul Surgeon wrote:
Why not have both? My 3 year old PeeCee has plenty of
horse power left and a flying aircraft without a pilot
looks rather odd to me.
If people don't like eye candy then let's make a way
to switch it off but why take the eye candy away from
Ampere K. Hardraade wrote :
So if the todo list is to be realisitic should it
not contain only the
things that are missing on the real
aircraft not a list of things that are neither
available yet in FG (eg
lighting) or never part of the real aircraft in the
first place.
Lighting is
Ampere K. Hardraade writes:
Until someone writes a bone class that allows us to model characters more
easily (using XML), having pilots in the cockpit is not going to happen.
I don't know what XML has to do with it
anyway see
$PLIB / demos / exposer / src / bones.XXX
Norman
Ampere wrote:
Until someone writes a bone class that allows us to model characters more
easily (using XML), having pilots in the cockpit is not going to happen.
Ever used the Hunter, Seahawk, Comper Swift ?
It's not easy, but it can be done.
Vivian
Fred wrote:
Lighting is important. How can one use FG for night
training at the moment if you can't see the ground
properly? Why even bother with runway and taxiway
lights then?
I would love to see decent lighting added.
There isn't much we (as modellers) can do about this. =(
If
Vivian Meazza a écrit :
Fred wrote:
Lighting is important. How can one use FG for night
training at the moment if you can't see the ground
properly? Why even bother with runway and taxiway
lights then?
I would love to see decent lighting added.
There isn't much we (as modellers) can do
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-devel-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frederic Bouvier
Sent: 07 November 2004 20:31
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] The Rant
Vivian Meazza a écrit :
Fred wrote:
Lighting
On November 7, 2004 03:12 pm, Norman Vine wrote:
Until someone writes a bone class that allows us to model characters more
easily (using XML), having pilots in the cockpit is not going to happen.
I don't know what XML has to do with it
anyway see
$PLIB / demos / exposer / src /
Ampere K. Hardraade writes:
On November 7, 2004 03:12 pm, Norman Vine wrote:
Until someone writes a bone class that allows us to model characters more
easily (using XML), having pilots in the cockpit is not going to happen.
I don't know what XML has to do with it
anyway see
Hmm, I don't think that will do. White numerals by day, illuminated by red
at night, and black faces. I was thinking of making the white figures
semi-transparent with a selectable white (non-emissive) /red (emissive)
background. Unless you would care to do a demonstration of another method...
Fred wrote:
Hmm, I don't think that will do. White numerals by day, illuminated by
red
at night, and black faces. I was thinking of making the white figures
semi-transparent with a selectable white (non-emissive) /red (emissive)
background. Unless you would care to do a demonstration of
of things that are neither available yet in FG (eg
lighting) or never part of the real aircraft in the first place.
End of Rant.
Cheers
Innis
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear
On Saturday 06 November 2004 13:53, Innis Cunningham wrote:
Hi All
Just had a look on the seedwiki at the aircraft todo list.
Who wrote that rubbish.
Please do me a favour and don't call my work rubbish.
How many 747's,737's,DC10 and the like have you seen with
HUD's.So why is it
Oliver C. wrote:
The fact that FlightGear doesn't have aircraft lightning support doesn't
matter.
Any idea if.someone is working on this? Landing at night without lights
is quite frustrating. Almost as frustrating as the lack of aircraft
shadows (no, there is no need for a cannon like OpenRT
17 matches
Mail list logo
