Hi guys, just joined the mailing list yesterday. Could you guys please tell
me where to start. I'm a full-time programmer, and I'm a member of the
Friends of the South African Air Force Museum, which means I have endless info
on hundreds of aircraft we have there, eg.
Douglas DC-3 Dakota
William Earnest writes:
I also noted the prop continues at about 30 rpm with the engine
shut off and no cranking.
That will be either an FDM issue or a physical-reality issue. It
takes a while for the prop to spin down in any case, and it may not
spin down at all in flight if it keeps
Danie Heath writes:
Hi guys, just joined the mailing list yesterday. Could you guys please tell
me where to start. I'm a full-time programmer, and I'm a member of the
Friends of the South African Air Force Museum, which means I have endless
info on hundreds of aircraft we have there,
The JSBSim make file seems to be looking for src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cpp but
it actuslly exists as src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cxx renaming or symlinking the
file allows compilation to continue.
--
Jon StockillPublic Key: C6BD585D
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The JSBSim make file seems to be looking for src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cpp but
it actuslly exists as src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cxx renaming or symlinking the
file allows compilation to continue.
No. This was explained yesterday, too. JSBSim.cpp has been removed from the
FlightGear tree. JSBSim.cxx is
OK, after discovering that my original implementation was horribly
buggy, I have now committed a better version of the normalized control
surface position code to JSBSim and FG cvs. There is a new set of
properties for these:
/surface-positions/flap-pos-pct
/surface-positions/elevator-pos-pct
Hi,
Just to let evrybody know,
My ISP has mayor problems at the moment (actually for two days now) so I
can't read my mail, or read it sometimes. If you expect a reply from me,
please be patient.
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
The JSBSim make file seems to be looking for src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cpp but
it actuslly exists as src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cxx renaming or symlinking the
file allows compilation to continue.
No. This was explained yesterday, too. JSBSim.cpp has been
* David Megginson -- Thursday 28 February 2002 13:10:
* Danie Heath writes:
Hi guys, just joined the mailing list yesterday. Could you guys please tell
me where to start. I'm a full-time programmer, and I'm a member of the
Friends of the South African Air Force Museum, which means I have
On Thu, 2002-02-28 at 05:04, Jon Stockill wrote:
The JSBSim make file seems to be looking for src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cpp but
it actuslly exists as src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cxx renaming or symlinking the
file allows compilation to continue.
Please do the following:
rm -f src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cpp
* Jon Stockill -- Thursday 28 February 2002 14:28:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
No. This was explained yesterday, too. JSBSim.cpp has been removed from the
FlightGear tree. JSBSim.cxx is required. You need to do a CVS update of your
FlightGear tree.
I had just before
No. This was explained yesterday, too. JSBSim.cpp has been removed from
the
FlightGear tree. JSBSim.cxx is required. You need to do a CVS update of
your
FlightGear tree.
I had just before compiling.
However compilation *still* stops with:
c++: JSBSim.cpp: No such file or directory
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Jon Stockill -- Thursday 28 February 2002 14:28:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
No. This was explained yesterday, too. JSBSim.cpp has been removed from the
FlightGear tree. JSBSim.cxx is required. You need to do a CVS update of
Today I built airport scenery from CVS and seen runway lights
WOW!
looks great but I suggest not to use one Material section LIGHTS in airport
file
maybe we should use LIGHTS VASI, LIGHTS EDGE .
it works perfectly under linux but runway lights is only points not quads
with lightmaps
Also I
Jon S. Berndt writes:
The JSBSim make file seems to be looking for src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cpp but
it actuslly exists as src/FDM/JSBSim/JSBSim.cxx renaming or symlinking the
file allows compilation to continue.
No. This was explained yesterday, too. JSBSim.cpp has been removed from the
David Megginson wrote:
William Earnest writes:
I also noted the prop continues at about 30 rpm with the engine
shut off and no cranking.
That will be either an FDM issue or a physical-reality issue. It
takes a while for the prop to spin down in any case, and it may not
spin down at
On Thu, 2002-02-28 at 06:16, David Megginson wrote:
Tony Peden writes:
OK, after discovering that my original implementation was horribly
buggy, I have now committed a better version of the normalized control
surface position code to JSBSim and FG cvs. There is a new set of
Roman Grigoriev writes:
Today I built airport scenery from CVS and seen runway lights
WOW!
looks great but I suggest not to use one Material section LIGHTS in airport
file
maybe we should use LIGHTS VASI, LIGHTS EDGE .
it works perfectly under linux but runway lights is only points not
Tony Peden writes:
I certainly like the idea of having some sort of units indicator
on every property name, though I agree risk of breakage is high
in this case.
I can change everything in FlightGear and the base package, but I'm
worried about breaking people's private config files,
Yeah, I haven't yet found a good set of rudder pedals. The
Thrustmaster ones I use are adequate, but have a *lot* of slop in the
center section. Fine control is difficult to impossible. And the
lever arms are just rubbing plastic on plastic, so they're very
sticky.
There's a CH Products
Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Ah! That doesn't appear to be zapped by make clean
Nope but make clean-deps does. Maybe we should include that in the cvs
building instructions?
Best,
Jim
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
- normalized position of ailerons
- normalized position of flaps
- normalized position of elevators
- normalized position of rudder
What about speed brakes/spoilers ?
These are getting quite common on some of the faster planes like
Mooney's...
What about cowl flaps?
JW
Well, leaving them as they are certainly won't be a problem for the
current developers -- the units for those have been percent for as long
as I can remember. And percent are non-dimensional, so no units
indicator is probably just as correct as -pct or -nd or whatever.
How about having a
On Thu, 2002-02-28 at 08:19, John Wojnaroski wrote:
- normalized position of ailerons
- normalized position of flaps
- normalized position of elevators
- normalized position of rudder
What about speed brakes/spoilers ?
These are getting quite common on some of the faster
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Tony Peden writes:
I certainly like the idea of having some sort of units indicator
on every property name, though I agree risk of breakage is high
in this case.
I can change everything in FlightGear and the base package, but I'm
worried
What about cowl flaps?
All of my experience is with jets, what exactly are cowl flaps?
For aircooled engines, the flaps either constrain the airflow into
the engine compartment, or constraint it coming out of the compartment.
The C172RG has them underneath behind the gear.
Flaps are open at
So my question is: where do I submit a patch? Here on the list, or do I
mail it directly to one of the FlightGear elders?
If it is a small patch (200 lines), stick it on the list for the rest of us.
You also need to send the whole file(s) to Curt so he can inspect, bless and
apply to the
Alex Perry writes:
What about cowl flaps?
All of my experience is with jets, what exactly are cowl flaps?
For aircooled engines, the flaps either constrain the airflow into
the engine compartment, or constraint it coming out of the compartment.
The C172RG has them underneath behind the
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 05:35:42PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I've been lurking on this list for a few days now and I have a question.
When I grabbed the FlightGear CVS tree things didn't compile out of the
box, because plib and metakit couldn't be found. I did have them, but
Alex Perry writes:
Hmm, I suppose I really ought to take some consideration of this
into the CHT model. Are these a manually operated thing?
It depends, of course. On the C172RG, it is a vertical moving lever
just to the right of the elevator trim, with no automation. Newer
aircraft
So Alex Perry says:
If it is a small patch (200 lines), stick it on the list for the rest
of us.
Cool, here it is. I also took the liberty of lining up some of the other
comment strings, so the configure --help output looks a little nicer.
Hope this isn't going to wrap in the transmission...
Tony Peden wrote:
David Megginson wrote:
Tony Peden wrote:
I certainly like the idea of having some sort of units indicator
on every property name, though I agree risk of breakage is high
in this case.
I can change everything in FlightGear and the base package, but I'm
Matthew Law writes:
3-D Model
-
- normalized position of ailerons
- normalized position of flaps
- normalized position of elevators
- normalized position of rudder
What about speed brakes/spoilers ?
That's a good point, but I'm listing only what we're actually
Tony Peden writes:
All of my experience is with jets, what exactly are cowl flaps?
They're flaps around the front of the nacelle -- when you open them,
they produce extra drag (less than gear or flaps) and route more air
over the engine for cooling; when you close them, you cut the drag but
Andy Ross writes:
I agree in general. I'd suggest the use of -fraction or somesuch
instead of -pct if the range is 0:1, as it is for most of these
properties currently.
An earlier suggestion was -n for normalized, which is probably the
most accurate (and has the advantage of brevity).
What about cowl flaps?
All of my experience is with jets, what exactly are cowl flaps?
JW
Mine too.
Cowl flaps are used to cool engines for ground operations,taxi, takeoffs and
landings when the engine is either at a high power setting or there is
insufficient airfow to cool the
I agree in general. I'd suggest the use of -fraction or somesuch
instead of -pct if the range is 0:1, as it is for most of these
properties currently.
An earlier suggestion was -n for normalized, which is probably the
most accurate (and has the advantage of brevity). Is there any
David Megginson wrote:
Andy Ross writes:
I agree in general. I'd suggest the use of -fraction or somesuch
instead of -pct if the range is 0:1, as it is for most of these
properties currently.
An earlier suggestion was -n for normalized, which is probably the
most accurate (and
snip
What about cowl flaps?
snip
And let's not forget the oil cooler doors on DC-6s etc :-) !
jj
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
David M. wrote:
An earlier suggestion was -n for normalized, which is probably the
most accurate (and has the advantage of brevity). Is there any
standard unit abbreviation that conflicts with that and is useful for
flight simulation?
I am not aware of a standard, currently. However, we
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 10:25:36AM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
Tony Peden wrote:
David Megginson wrote:
Tony Peden wrote:
I certainly like the idea of having some sort of units indicator
on every property name, though I agree risk of breakage is high
in this case.
I can change
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 01:31:47PM -0500, David Megginson wrote:
Alex Perry writes:
How about having a file that contains lines like this ...
/position/altitude-ft /position/altitude-m3.3
It creates a bunch of property nodes for aliasing with a scaling factor,
Tony Peden [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 10:25:36AM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
Tony Peden wrote:
David Megginson wrote:
Tony Peden wrote:
I certainly like the idea of having some sort of units indicator
on every property name, though I agree risk of breakage is
Very nice and helpful, thanks. BTW, the rotation and translation of
the model can bee found via QHull (convex hull, see my homepage), but
that is a package you have to install first.
Bye bye,
Wolfram.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
Jim Wilson wrote:
But if those settings don't represent a form of units--just arbitrary
values, why do they need a suffix? The suffixes were intended to
reflect units and make sense only when they mean something, like
knowing if the value is in feet or meters, degrees or radians, knots
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 07:38:39PM -, Jim Wilson wrote:
OK, if you really want to save percent for 0-100 quantities, how about
something a little shorter than -fraction, -ratio
(-fraction is perfectly good, just long)
But if those settings don't represent a form of units--just
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, Tony Peden wrote:
I hadn't been suggesting switching everything to metric, but now that
you mention it ...
Oh, no!
I have to admit - when I saw someone mention air pressure and in/Hg the
other day I thought it was a bad thing! Even us die hard imperial brits
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 09:33:20 -0500, David Megginson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've written up a quick mini-HOWTO on loading, positioning, and
animating 3D aircraft models in FlightGear. It's available
*temporarily* at the following location:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 08:00:49PM +, Jon Stockill wrote:
Now, feet, inches, miles, furlongs, etc are another matter :-)
Let's not go too far. Furlongs? Next you'll want us to start using
stones. :)
Actually, I'd like to see everything converted to metric in FG.
I never had a problem
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 16:13:34 -0500
James A. Treacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The prof would pose a question in one system and expect the answer
in the other. That borders on torture. I wish that all engineering
classes used metric only these days. Unfortunately, I'm sure it's not
the case.
Tony Peden [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
To me, no units specified does not automatically imply non-dimensional.
It means I still have to ask what the units are.
I haven't had this problem in trying to understand these values, but maybe
I've just been programming too long. :-)
To me, items
Paul Deppe writes:
Is there a way to update runway lat/lon's for an airport without
re-generating the associated scenery tile? A search of the FAQ leads me to
believe that you can't because of the requirement to calculate the
runway-scenery intersections. Is this correct?
I think that
Jim Wilson writes:
But if those settings don't represent a form of units--just
arbitrary values, why do they need a suffix? The suffixes were
intended to reflect units and make sense only when they mean
something, like knowing if the value is in feet or meters, degrees
or radians,
Jon Stockill writes:
Now, feet, inches, miles, furlongs, etc are another matter :-)
Why don't we give this thread a rest, then resume it in a fortnight?
I have half a stone of paperwork to get through first.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jon S Berndt writes:
Metric isn't perfect either - it's been sort of perverted
by ... I don't know who.
Napoleon.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul Deppe writes:
Is there a way to update runway lat/lon's for an airport without
re-generating the associated scenery tile? A search of the FAQ leads me to
believe that you can't because of the requirement to calculate the
runway-scenery intersections. Is this correct?
Currently we cut
Jon S Berndt wrote:
Metric isn't perfect either - it's been sort of perverted
by ... I don't know who. In my mind, mass is in kg. and
force is in Newtons.
That's correct.
Unfortunately, metric mass terms are
used to describe how much something weighs, i.e. a
force. This leads to almost
David,
Thanks, I've added this to the 'Docs' web page.
Curt.
David Megginson writes:
I've written up a quick mini-HOWTO on loading, positioning, and
animating 3D aircraft models in FlightGear. It's available
*temporarily* at the following location:
Also I read about special nvidia extension NV_point_sprite to work with
light points it can help with this
To be honest: You _don't_ mean this, do you !?
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
Jon S Berndt wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 23:25:47 +0100
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christian Mayer wrote:
Jon S Berndt wrote:
Metric isn't perfect either - it's been sort of perverted
by ... I don't know who. In my mind, mass is in kg. and
force is in Newtons.
That's
what happened to many of the sounds? I just updated
to the current cvs and there is no longer wind, cranking,
etc. Was that capability removed? I checked Sound/fg_fx.cxx
and much of the code has been taken out. Was it put
somewhere else or is it gone?
Thanks
Boslough, Mark B writes:
what happened to many of the sounds? I just updated
to the current cvs and there is no longer wind, cranking,
etc. Was that capability removed? I checked Sound/fg_fx.cxx
and much of the code has been taken out. Was it put
somewhere else or is it gone?
I
Erik Hofman wrote:
Jon S. Berndt wrote:
Erik Hofman wrote:
Christian Mayer wrote:
Jon S Berndt wrote:
In my mind, mass is in kg. and force is in Newtons.
That's correct.
Are you sure [...]?
See?
My bad
Oh, dear. Time for the whirlwind tour of unit conventions.
Can someone describe to me where the flaps are located on the body of
a Cessna 310? I haven't been able to see them clearly in any of the
photos I've found on the Web, and the two sets of 3-views I have don't
indicate them. The ailerons are on the outside of the trailing edge
of the wings,
Andy Ross writes:
Heh, bingo! First google site I tried:
http://www.photovault.com/Link/Technology/Aviation_General/TAGVolume04/TAGV04P03_09.jpg
Perfect -- that's just what I needed. So the flap will not be visible
at all from the top of the wing -- it's strictly underneath, as far
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Andy Ross writes:
Heh, bingo! First google site I tried:
http://www.photovault.com/Link/Technology/Aviation_General/TAGVolume04/TAGV04P03_09.jpg
Perfect -- that's just what I needed. So the flap will not be visible
at all from the top of
At 09:13 PM 2/28/2002 -0500, you wrote:
Can someone describe to me where the flaps are located on the body of
a Cessna 310? I haven't been able to see them clearly in any of the
photos I've found on the Web, and the two sets of 3-views I have don't
indicate them. The ailerons are on the outside
David Megginson wrote:
[snip]
We're also very interested in contributions from C++ coders -- there
are areas in FlightGear that still need an awful lot of work, and
perhaps more importantly, there are thousands of lines of existing
code that need to be reorganized to simplify the
from:
http://www.plausible.org/andy/yasim-planes-20020228.tar.gz
Base package folks: feel free to check these in whenever.
I was lazy editing the files, so only the 172 and DC-3 currently
export any properties via control-output tags. I did try these out
against David's (freakishly cool) model
Jon Stockill writes:
Now, feet, inches, miles, furlongs, etc are another matter :-)
Why don't we give this thread a rest, then resume it in a fortnight?
I have half a stone of paperwork to get through first.
0.5 stone = 7 lb = 3.178 kgabout 635 sheets.
Standard copy
I agree in general. I'd suggest the use of -fraction or somesuch
instead of -pct if the range is 0:1, as it is for most of these
properties currently.
An earlier suggestion was -n for normalized, which is probably the
most accurate (and has the advantage of brevity). Is there any
in order to run the code in CVS.
Get the new planes from:
http://www.plausible.org/andy/yasim-planes-20020228.tar.gz
Base package folks: feel free to check these in whenever.
I was lazy editing the files, so only the 172 and DC-3 currently
export any properties via control-output tags. I did
72 matches
Mail list logo
