On Wednesday 02 July 2003 22:51, Norman Vine wrote:
Hmmm... got me
Is this when running autogen.sh ?
No, I only ran autogen.sh the first time I downloaded the CVS
I only ran make this time.
(on linux I found I only needed to run autogen.sh when there has been a new
dir added... not
Darrell Walisser wrote:
Well, you could do that, but I don't think it will help much. The scene
itself doesn't really have that many vertices to begin with (I think
normally less than 7000, IIRC). LOD will help increase detail with
minimum performance impact though (but we
ll still be
Hi Willy
Dont know if this has anything to do with it but when I built my version of
cygwin there was a problem with perl 5.8 and I had to build using 5.6.That
was about 4 months ago .I have not updated since because I could not be
bothered with the hassle of making cygwin use the older
Norman Vine writes:
Curiously the commandline flag '--visibility=' still works but
changing the property '/environment/visibility' in the RunTime Property
Tree Browser doesn't
The command-line --visibility option no longer sets
/environment/visibility directly.
All the best,
Innis Cunningham writes:
If this is not the case could someone tell me what the property is that
provides this information then I can finish off a guage I have.
It shouldn't be hard to publish the current radial (which is not
necessarily the same as the magnetic direction to the station).
David Megginson writes:
Norman Vine writes:
Curiously the commandline flag '--visibility=' still works but
changing the property '/environment/visibility' in the RunTime Property
Tree Browser doesn't
The command-line --visibility option no longer sets
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Innis Cunningham writes:
If this is not the case could someone tell me what the property is that
provides this information then I can finish off a guage I have.
It shouldn't be hard to publish the current radial (which is not
necessarily the
I have a couple of questions that I am not sure of about the
calculation of target heading. is the nav heading the heading from the north
or the difference between our aircrafts and the navigation points heading
angles and is the nav radial the angle between the aircraft to the
Jim Wilson writes:
I think the RMI needles always point to the VOR or ADF that they
are tuned to. Not 100% sure about that.
You're correct. I guess that we are not modelling any RMIs right now.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/
David Megginson writes:
I think the RMI needles always point to the VOR or ADF that they
are tuned to. Not 100% sure about that.
You're correct. I guess that we are not modelling any RMIs right now.
No, I see that the property is there, but it's being screwed up a bit
by
Hi Guys
To model the RMI or RDMI guage for jet transport aircraft(and many others
FAIK)the property tree needs to out put the bearing to the station in
degrees.The ADF currently does this but only the active ADF.To make a
fathfull guage you need the output in degrees for both the 12
Hi Folks
With regard to texture sizes for instrument guages is it better(less
demanding on the CPU/graphics card)to have a lot of small textures, or is it
better to put them all on one large texture, or does it not matter.
Cheers
Innis
I have a couple of questions that I am not sure of about the
calculation of target heading. is the nav heading the heading from the north
or the difference between our aircrafts and the navigation points heading
angles and is the nav radial the angle between the aircraft to the waypoint
Mehmet Velicangil writes:
I have a couple of questions that I am not sure of about the
calculation of target heading. is the nav heading the heading from
the north or the difference between our aircrafts and the
navigation points heading angles and is the nav radial the angle
between
Hi all
I have made this script to run FlightGear.
You can use it if you like, it should run on most systems, but I wont
guarantee that ;)
Also you can add it to CVS if you want to..
You can get it here..
http://24.121.17.106/fgfs/misc/fgfs-start.sh.txt
Save it as fgfs-start.sh and chmod
The current VOR radial (the FROM indication) should now appear
correctly in the property /radios/nav[*]/radials/actual-deg property.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing
On Thursday, July 3, 2003, at 01:00 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 21:41:58 +0800
From: Innis Cunningham [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Texture Sizes
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Hi
WillyB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hope you all like it, it saves me from editing my .fgfsrc file all the time
and remembering all the the command line options I usully use.
Nice. You still can save a bit of work on maintaining the script by
replacing the manually edited aircraft selection list.
Most VOR receivers and indicators have a clever little trick -- if you
tune them to the reciprocal of your current radial, they will display
a TO flag and reverse the needle sense, greatly simplifying
navigation towards a VOR. If your VOR indicator is displaying 90
TO, however, it's
On Thursday 03 July 2003 10:24, Martin Spott wrote:
Nice. You still can save a bit of work on maintaining the script by
replacing the manually edited aircraft selection list. For example:
AIRCRAFT=`fgfs --show-aircraft | awk '{print $1}'`
i=1
echo Choose your Aircraft - The default is c172p
Darrell Walisser schrieb:
Hi Folks
With regard to texture sizes for instrument guages is it better(less
demanding on the CPU/graphics card)to have a lot of small textures, or
is it
better to put them all on one large texture, or does it not matter.
If you know all the textures will be used at
On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 20:52:49 +0200
Christian Mayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO we should require a card with TL setup as minimum, i.e. GeForce
class. And they should be able to handle a reasonable texture size.
I totally disagree with this idea. Lots of life left in TNT2s. It's not good
Richard A Downing FBCS schrieb:
On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 20:52:49 +0200
Christian Mayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO we should require a card with TL setup as minimum, i.e. GeForce
class. And they should be able to handle a reasonable texture size.
I totally disagree with this idea. Lots of life
Christian Mayer wrote:
So go for big texture sizes.
Although my O2 can handle one texture to be up to 1024Mb, somehow I
would choose to put as many instrument(s) parts into one 256x256 texture
for the panel instruments. And if needed use a second or third texture.
Erik
WillyB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's just say that this script is the present development of my bash
scripting skills, but i keep trying to learn more as I go along.
You did a good start by building a script that looks 'clean' and easy to
read,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's
Erik Hofman schrieb:
Christian Mayer wrote:
So go for big texture sizes.
Although my O2 can handle one texture to be up to 1024Mb, somehow I
would choose to put as many instrument(s) parts into one 256x256 texture
for the panel instruments. And if needed use a second or third texture.
As
Jim:
Do we still have an issue with aa hard reference point between the 3D model
and the FDMs?
I've been thinking about this some more, and I think we might be able to
supply the location of the 0,0,0 point in the FDM structural frame, in which
the aircraft is defined. Would this be helpful?
Alex Perry writes:
From the point of view of learning what VOR and NDB systems do,
actually trying to fly a holding pattern on either type of station
rapidly shows what the needles do ... and why ... for the contrast.
In some ways, I find the NDB holds easier. The ADF works just as well
On Thursday 03 July 2003 21:52, Christian Mayer wrote:
Richard A Downing FBCS schrieb:
On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 20:52:49 +0200
Christian Mayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO we should require a card with TL setup as minimum, i.e. GeForce
class. And they should be able to handle a
Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Jim:
Do we still have an issue with aa hard reference point between the 3D model
and the FDMs?
Yes...well YASim always had one just by the nature of how it's configured.
It'd be good to have a standard.
I've been thinking about this some more, and I
Often times upgrading one part means going to a whole new computer,
such as when the new part isn't supported by the motherboard, OS,
or something else. With laptops it's often impossible to upgrade
anything but RAM and disk. This means that a $50 graphics card
isn't really available to everyone
Hello!
Just got done flying around KSFO for about an hour w/ one of my sons, the 11
yr old via networked flightgears :)
What a Blast!
He asked me to ask you guys if you would make some guns for his airplane
becuase he wants shoot dad down! He was on my tail and had me dead to rights
a few
The autopilot localizer is broken now that this other issue has been fixed.
I just wanted to post for previous authors this before going deeper.
Relevant code is listed below. According to the comments, the first bit of
code refers to determining radial position, and the other refers to
David Megginson writes:
David Megginson writes:
I think the RMI needles always point to the VOR or ADF that they
are tuned to. Not 100% sure about that.
You're correct. I guess that we are not modelling any RMIs right now.
No, I see that the property is there, but it's
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Agreed the naming is not 100% clear and the code needs better
documentation, but it appears that nav_radial is the radial the nav is
tuned to (or the localizer heading if it's an ILS.)
nav_heading is the current direction to the nav aid.
It appears
Christian Mayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At those cheap prices I can expect the people to upgrade when there's a
need for it. [...]
I already noticed that there's a new culture on this planet that implies
continuosly upgrading of everything that is upgradable. But I think it's not
a good
Kris Feldmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW Erik, does your box use an R5k or R10k (cpu)?
The CPU type itself does not make very much difference when you look at
FlightGear. Erik's box easily outperforms a fully equipped Octane MXI
that only has a 195 MHz CPU,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user
37 matches
Mail list logo
