Re: ..OT: [Flightgear-devel] Recording NMEA data playing back ?
Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 16:37:14 + (UTC), Martin wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: P.S.: For my dimploma 'thesis' I built a 2D-filter for thermal ..url? Sorry, this was 'closed source' development at a local company, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
I wrote Sent: 15 July 2004 22:16 To: 'FlightGear developers discussions' Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire I wrote Sent: 09 July 2004 09:53 To: 'FlightGear developers discussions' Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire David Megginson wrote Sent: 09 July 2004 00:24 To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Vivian Meazza wrote: There should also be a version with the legacy code, and that does fly (or rather, does for me), although the performance is a bit down. I don't think that there is an error in the code, but I'll double check with the legacy version Thanks. It's a beautiful model, by the way. Thanks for that - I have an upgraded version with a more accurate cockpit nearly ready to go. There is a real Spitfire based at my home airport -- I actually gave up my parking place for it during our Fly Day a couple of weeks ago. It's normally over on the south field, but I love watching it take off when it's at our end of the airport. If only the plane had an extra seat ... I've tested the CVS version (legacy propeller/engine code) under FGFS 0.9.4 (windows version). Flies OK. 'Evidence' attached. I can't test under CVS source code: frame rate too slow on my computer, which I will upgrade in the very near future. Perhaps that will solve the problem, or, more likely, since I'm doing it myself, I'll lose all the data and take 2 weeks to recover! Back up with an upgraded machine - 2.8 Mhz P4, 512 Ram, Gforce 5200. I've rebuilt Cywin, and FGFS-CVS. I've just copied the latest version of the Spitfire from FGFS-0.9.4, where it was working, after a fashion, to FGFS-CVS. All the files. Now it won't fly, as David pointed out. Back to the drawing board! Regards Vivian Solved (I think) Replace this line in spitfire.xml control-input axis=/controls/engines/engine[0]/propeller-pitch control=PROPPITCH src0=0 src1=1 dst0=0.2 dst1=0.95 / with this one control-input axis=/controls/engines/engine[0]/propeller-pitch control=PROPPITCH src0=0 src1=1 dst0=0.2 dst1=0.8 / I don't know why. I suppose something has changed in the cvs version of YASim. Andy could explain perhaps. I'll send a revised model into Curt for cvs later, when I have reached a suitable point in my upgrade to the cockpit. Probably after the weekend. Regards Vivian ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
Vivian Meazza wrote: Back up with an upgraded machine - 2.8 Mhz P4, 512 Ram, Gforce 5200. I've rebuilt Cywin, and FGFS-CVS. I've just copied the latest version of the Spitfire from FGFS-0.9.4, where it was working, after a fashion, to FGFS-CVS. All the files. Now it won't fly, as David pointed out. Back to the drawing board! I already started to wonder if the Spitfire was more of a hype than anything else (and even started to wonder if I was such a lousy pilot) :-D Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] How FlightGear handles 3ds
Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: Bump. So, is my idea a good one or a bad one? There doesn't seem to be much response... There has been some discussion related to this off-line. No conclusions where drawn yet. Part of the problem is that we need some one to do the coding, and then we need to convince the plib list to include them. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
Erik Hofman wrote Sent: 16 July 2004 08:44 To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Vivian Meazza wrote: Back up with an upgraded machine - 2.8 Mhz P4, 512 Ram, Gforce 5200. I've rebuilt Cywin, and FGFS-CVS. I've just copied the latest version of the Spitfire from FGFS-0.9.4, where it was working, after a fashion, to FGFS-CVS. All the files. Now it won't fly, as David pointed out. Back to the drawing board! I already started to wonder if the Spitfire was more of a hype than anything else (and even started to wonder if I was such a lousy pilot) :-D You didn't try it in 0.9.4 then? It's really easy to fly, but a little difficult to get off the ground neatly, possible though. Landing's a doddle, providing that there's no crosswind. Spitfires were NOT designed for runways. Anyway, it now works in CVS, and I'm tackling the sound right now. Let me know how you get on, and we'll leave a judgment on lousy pilots 'til later :-) Regards Vivian ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] This quarter, production Fokker 70 should resume!
It is a bit of a shameless plug, but it's for my own interest :-D Found at http://www.luchtzak.be/article4876.html It is the intention that this trimester the production of Fokker 70 planes is resumed. This is anounced by the commercial director Ruud Kleinendorst from Rekkof today (8 April) in the German newspaper Handelsblatt. Rekkof (Fokker backwards) want to bring in the first place the Fokker 70 back on the market. About that the venture has already far-reaching contacts with several airline companies. One of these airlines is, according to Rekkof, Air France-KLM, which has serious interests in the renewed Fokker 70. KLM doesnt confirm this, but says as current user (whith fifteen F100's and twenty F70's) that they are following future developments with big interest. Also airlines such as Lufthansa and SAS were already connected in the rumour circuit with Rekkof. According to Rekkof the regional jets needed up to the year 2022 will be around 5100 planes in the category 'smaller'. The venture hopes twenty per cent of this market will be in the hands of Fokker 70 and Fokker 100 jets. According to the new plane manufacturer 900 planes from the Fokker JetLine will be sold between 2006 and 2025, or 45 planes per year. Rekkof is already a year in negotiation with several component suppliers, among with the British engine manufacturer Rolls-Royce. This company produced JetLine engines up to 1997 and were the driving forces behind the Fokker aircraft. A initial capital is needed of 150 millions euro, plus an order file of fifty airplanes. The planes will be built, if everything continues, in Lelystad, The Netherlands. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Next release of FlightGear
I've started doing some of the pre-release work for FlightGear-0.9.5 (which is the next release.) That means I'd like to do our official next release in the next week or two. Please take a few minutes to download the tar balls and test this pre1 release. Please! This is our quality control so if no one tests the pre releases and reports problems, they will end up in the final release. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Next release of FlightGear
The file or folder /site/ftp.flightgear.org/flightgear-ftp/Source/FlightGear-0.9.5-pre1.tar.gz does not exist. Did anyone encounter this problem? Regards, Ampere On July 16, 2004 11:34 am, Curtis L. Olson wrote: I've started doing some of the pre-release work for FlightGear-0.9.5 (which is the next release.) That means I'd like to do our official next release in the next week or two. Please take a few minutes to download the tar balls and test this pre1 release. Please! This is our quality control so if no one tests the pre releases and reports problems, they will end up in the final release. Regards, Curt. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Next release of FlightGear
Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: The file or folder /site/ftp.flightgear.org/flightgear-ftp/Source/FlightGear-0.9.5-pre1.tar.gz does not exist. Did anyone encounter this problem? Most likely sunsite hasn't sync'd it's mirror yet. You can always go direct to ftp://ftp.flightgear.org Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Next release of FlightGear
Curt and others, Just a quick question: Does this mean, we're entering a feature-freeze period now? The reason I'm asking is that I have some upates for the traffic manager that I was planning to clean-up a bit and submit by the end of the weekend. This new code, while humble in size, is going to be a big step forward because it eliminates the dependency on predefined flightplans, and thus allows for much more flexibility in creating Traffic files. I'm also in the process of creating some sample traffic patterns for the 737, going in and out of KSFO, based on the current United Airlines time table. I'd also like to see these included in the new version (and they depend on the new code), because it would liven up the dynamic scenery around KSFO quite a bit. As an aside, just after the release of 0.9.4, I reported two segfaults occurring randomly after prolonged FlightGear use (approx 8-10 hours of run time). One of those I managed to track down, but the other one never really got much attention. Would people downloading and testing the prereleases be willing to run FlightGear for extended periods of time (preferably from within gdb, so that we can try to find some evidence whether or not this bug is still there and find some evidence about it's nature? Any thoughts? Cheers, Durk On Friday 16 July 2004 17:34, Curtis L. Olson wrote: I've started doing some of the pre-release work for FlightGear-0.9.5 (which is the next release.) That means I'd like to do our official next release in the next week or two. Please take a few minutes to download the tar balls and test this pre1 release. Please! This is our quality control so if no one tests the pre releases and reports problems, they will end up in the final release. Regards, Curt. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Next release of FlightGear
Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: The file or folder /site/ftp.flightgear.org/flightgear-ftp/Source/FlightGear-0.9.5-pre1.tar.gz ^^ does not exist. Simply put a de. in there, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Next release of FlightGear
Durk Talsma wrote: Curt and others, Just a quick question: Does this mean, we're entering a feature-freeze period now? Yes, I apologize for not being 100% clear ... I'm juggling way too many things this summer, but I'm still trying to get a release out. The reason I'm asking is that I have some upates for the traffic manager that I was planning to clean-up a bit and submit by the end of the weekend. This new code, while humble in size, is going to be a big step forward because it eliminates the dependency on predefined flightplans, and thus allows for much more flexibility in creating Traffic files. I seem to see a huge memory leak when leaving FG running for a long time. I suspect it is within the AI system somewhere, but I haven't really worked hard at verifying this. I am leaning towards having the AI system toggled off by default in the official release unless we can get to the bottom of this in the next couple days. I'm also in the process of creating some sample traffic patterns for the 737, going in and out of KSFO, based on the current United Airlines time table. I'd also like to see these included in the new version (and they depend on the new code), because it would liven up the dynamic scenery around KSFO quite a bit. As an aside, just after the release of 0.9.4, I reported two segfaults occurring randomly after prolonged FlightGear use (approx 8-10 hours of run time). One of those I managed to track down, but the other one never really got much attention. Would people downloading and testing the prereleases be willing to run FlightGear for extended periods of time (preferably from within gdb, so that we can try to find some evidence whether or not this bug is still there and find some evidence about it's nature? I haven't had a chance to do long runs of FG in the last couple weeks, but if there are segfaults floating around, we should attack them aggressively. Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] FW: [Mapserver-users] Seek GPS mobile service experiment participants
fyi -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Changqing Zhou Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 2:57 PM To: MapServer Subject: [Mapserver-users] Seek GPS mobile service experiment participants This message is not directly related to map server; but it may be interesting to this GIS community. I apologize if you feel this message is irelevant to the mission of the mailing list. I am a gradute student in computer science major from the University of Minnesota. We are doing a very interesting project to research the new GPS mobile services. We are seeking people to participate our exciting experiment to test out the GPS phone, the wireless services and the personal place discovery software. We hope this study will generate some design guidelines for mobile GPS applications development. In the experiment, we will give you a GPS phone and ask you to carry it for 3 weeks. Each day, we ask you to write down the places you have been to. At the end, we would like to do an interview with you to hear your experiences. If you are interested in participating, please contact me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] We however are only seeking people in Minneapolis metro area. Enclosed please find a word document that contains more detailed info. I appreciate your help. Best Regards, Changqing Zhou PhD Student Computer Science University of Minnesota [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Personal Place Discovery You are invited to be in a research study of software that learns people personal places. You were selected as a possible participant because you meet the requirements of the study, simply that you spend time in and move around between different places. We ask that you read this form and ask any questions you may have before agreeing to be in the study. This study is being conducted by: Changqing Zhou, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, The University of Minnesota --- Background Information: --- The purpose of this study is: Our research group at the University of Minnesota is carrying out an experimental test of a new type of mobile phone service. We're developing software that can learn people's personal places. By a personal place, we mean a location that is meaningful and significant to a person - like your home or office, grocery stores you go to, your church or synagogue, and so on. Once software can learn places, there is a whole range of new services we can offer, such as place-enhanced Instant Messaging (IM). --- Procedures: --- If you agree to be in this study, we would ask you to do the following things: We'll give you a mobile phone to carry with you wherever you go - you'll keep the phone for three weeks. The phone uses the Global Positioning System (GPS) to find your position at frequent intervals and sends the information to a location tracking web server. Your personal data will be kept safe and private! They will be stored on a server and accessible only through a login ID and password known only to you and the experimenters. Each day, you'll also write down a list of the places you've been in. After the two weeks of data collection are finished, we'll run our place learning software on your data. We'll then arrange a time for you to evaluate how well the software worked and get your general feedback on the system and experiment. We can do the evaluation in our lab, at your office, or in another convenient place. At this time, you'll also return the mobile phone. Important note: if you experience technical problems with the mobile phone during the course of the study, please contact us immediately. You will not be financially liable for a lost or damaged phone. - Risks and Benefits of being in the Study: - There are no significant risks or benefits of participation. - Compensation: - Participants in the study will be entered into a drawing for a $25 Amazon.com gift certificate. We will give away at least 4 gift certificates, and we anticipate including 30 participants in the study. Confidentiality: The records of this study will be kept private. In any sort of report we might publish, we will not include any information that will make it possible to identify a subject. This means that we won't use your name, any private or identifiable place names you enter, or the actual location of any of your personal places. Research records will be stored securely and only researchers will have access to the records. -- Voluntary Nature of the Study: -- Participation
[Flightgear-devel] Turn Coordination
does anyone know of the equations that are used to determine how coordinated a turn is? I notice in the hud view mode there is a coordinated turn gauge, and in the distant modes, there is also a coordinated turn indicator. thanks ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
Curtis L. Olson wrote: I want to bring a new subject before the group. In the past we have discussed potential income sources for the FG project, so I think it's fair to discuss another option since the opportunity has introduced itself today. There is a company that makes hardware (3d glasses, head tracker, voice recognition, joysticks, gaming chairs, etc.) that is of potential interest to flight sim enthusiasts. If we put banner adds on our web site, and one of our visiters clicks through and buys something from this company (being referred from our site) then we would get a 10% commission from the sale. I believe there is some flexibility in the design of the banner so perhaps we could have some input so it's not *too* obnoxious. (?) But any way you cut it, putting advertisements on our web site will change the look and feel of our web site and probably influence the impression our project projects to the world ... Is this a direction we want to explore? It wouldn't have to be a permanent thing. I think we could choose to end the arrangement at any time. We stop referring potential customers ... no more commissions for us ... I think it's that simple. Any thoughts? Any strong feelings? We get a pretty good chunk of daily hits so we do have some referring power to swing around. What do you think? Wrong way down the slippery slope? Good idea? I'll buy anything with Curt's personal AAA*** rating? Would it be a single company or a space broker ? Would you be able to control the content of the advertisement ? I am not opposed if it is related to aviation or computing. -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
On Friday 16 July 2004 22:02, Curtis L. Olson wrote: I want to bring a new subject before the group. In the past we have discussed potential income sources for the FG project, so I think it's fair to discuss another option since the opportunity has introduced itself today. There is a company that makes hardware (3d glasses, head tracker, voice recognition, joysticks, gaming chairs, etc.) that is of potential interest to flight sim enthusiasts. If we put banner adds on our web site, and one of our visiters clicks through and buys something from this company (being referred from our site) then we would get a 10% commission from the sale. I believe there is some flexibility in the design of the banner so perhaps we could have some input so it's not *too* obnoxious. (?) But any way you cut it, putting advertisements on our web site will change the look and feel of our web site and probably influence the impression our project projects to the world ... Is this a direction we want to explore? It wouldn't have to be a permanent thing. I think we could choose to end the arrangement at any time. We stop referring potential customers ... no more commissions for us ... I think it's that simple. Any thoughts? Any strong feelings? We get a pretty good chunk of daily hits so we do have some referring power to swing around. What do you think? Wrong way down the slippery slope? Good idea? I'll buy anything with Curt's personal AAA*** rating? Thanks, Curt. IMO, money exists and until there's either a well thought out alternative, or no further need for it, you might as well try to get along with it. However, there is a degree of implied endorsement and association so I think that anything 'endorsed' in this way should be checked for quality to ensure that it doesn't give the project a bad name. Considering this specific example, I'd suggest that some thought is given to the issue of compatibility between the product and FG i.e. they should send you samples so you can ensure that it all works with FG and is up to FG's quality and standards;) LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 16:02:31 -0500 Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any thoughts? Any strong feelings? We get a pretty good chunk of daily hits so we do have some referring power to swing around. What do you think? Wrong way down the slippery slope? Good idea? I'll buy anything with Curt's personal AAA*** rating? I haven't been around long and haven't done much of anything yet, but my personal opinion is that this is a very good idea. 1. I doubt the money figures would be huge, but any is better than none. It's unfair (and even ridiculous) that people like you who spend most of the time keeping the project going are also people coughing up personal money for things like keeping the website up. 2. The typical banner ad is not that obtrusive these days. Furthermore, I suspect it's a small group that would be at the web page frequently enough to find the banner ads annoying (viz. the project developers and the most active users). And I dunno about IE, but most Linux browsers these days have the ability to Block all images from site www.companybuyingadsonflightgearsite.com, so a visitor can turn off the banner ads if desired. 3. If the terms are that the deal can be cancelled without paying a penalty of any sort, then if we try it and it sucks horribly, we bail. 4. It's not porn being advertised; it's stuff that's relevant to the population of visitors to some degree. I don't mind so much seeing ads for stuff I might actually find interesting. Yes, not having to run banner ads for money would be better; but as a trade for some money for the project, I think it'd be a good thing. My only concern is the accounting of it. I presume that you'd have to take them at their word as to whether someone who clicked through then purchased something while there? -c -- Chris Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (remove snip-me. to email) As a child I understood how to give; I have forgotten this grace since I have become civilized. - Chief Luther Standing Bear pgpJbjMFqIYfm.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
On July 16, 2004 05:17 pm, Frederic Bouvier wrote: Would it be a single company or a space broker ? Would you be able to control the content of the advertisement ? I am not opposed if it is related to aviation or computing. -Fred What he said. If we do go ahead with this idea, would it also be a good idea to offer our advertisment space for free to aviation forums such as www.airliners.net in return for free advertisment space on their site? Regards, Ampere ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
Lee Elliott wrote: IMO, money exists and until there's either a well thought out alternative, or no further need for it, you might as well try to get along with it. Clever way to put it. :-) However, there is a degree of implied endorsement and association so I think that anything 'endorsed' in this way should be checked for quality to ensure that it doesn't give the project a bad name. Considering this specific example, I'd suggest that some thought is given to the issue of compatibility between the product and FG i.e. they should send you samples so you can ensure that it all works with FG and is up to FG's quality and standards;) Yes, in my most recent reply to this company, I asked specifically about FG support (and support for operating systems not owned and operated by MS.) It's not necessarily clear from their web page exactly how their products interface with the computer and how they work ... hopefully we can get a bit of a better handle on that before we proceed. In terms of quality here is what they proposed which seems reasonable since we face a chicken/egg problem here. They don't want to send free hardware to any random person that applies for their program and promises to post an add on their site. So they propose that we run an add for a week or two or however long it takes to generate a couple sales. Once that happens, then they feel their risk of loss is minimized and they would be willing to send a sample or two of something for review. It seems like a reasonable approach. They aren't unwilling to send a sample, but they don't want to be taken advantage of. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
Lee Elliott wrote Sent: 16 July 2004 22:18 To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site? On Friday 16 July 2004 22:02, Curtis L. Olson wrote: I want to bring a new subject before the group. In the past we have discussed potential income sources for the FG project, so I think it's fair to discuss another option since the opportunity has introduced itself today. There is a company that makes hardware (3d glasses, head tracker, voice recognition, joysticks, gaming chairs, etc.) that is of potential interest to flight sim enthusiasts. If we put banner adds on our web site, and one of our visiters clicks through and buys something from this company (being referred from our site) then we would get a 10% commission from the sale. I believe there is some flexibility in the design of the banner so perhaps we could have some input so it's not *too* obnoxious. (?) But any way you cut it, putting advertisements on our web site will change the look and feel of our web site and probably influence the impression our project projects to the world ... Is this a direction we want to explore? It wouldn't have to be a permanent thing. I think we could choose to end the arrangement at any time. We stop referring potential customers ... no more commissions for us ... I think it's that simple. Any thoughts? Any strong feelings? We get a pretty good chunk of daily hits so we do have some referring power to swing around. What do you think? Wrong way down the slippery slope? Good idea? I'll buy anything with Curt's personal AAA*** rating? Thanks, Curt. IMO, money exists and until there's either a well thought out alternative, or no further need for it, you might as well try to get along with it. However, there is a degree of implied endorsement and association so I think that anything 'endorsed' in this way should be checked for quality to ensure that it doesn't give the project a bad name. Considering this specific example, I'd suggest that some thought is given to the issue of compatibility between the product and FG i.e. they should send you samples so you can ensure that it all works with FG and is up to FG's quality and standards;) I agree with Lee, even if he has his tongue in is cheek. We should go for it, but there is an element of endorsement here. Are we (or is Curt) satisfied that the products on offer are of a suitable standard, and is the company's record OK? Regards, Vivian ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
On Friday 16 July 2004 22:41, Curtis L. Olson wrote: Lee Elliott wrote: IMO, money exists and until there's either a well thought out alternative, or no further need for it, you might as well try to get along with it. Clever way to put it. :-) However, there is a degree of implied endorsement and association so I think that anything 'endorsed' in this way should be checked for quality to ensure that it doesn't give the project a bad name. Considering this specific example, I'd suggest that some thought is given to the issue of compatibility between the product and FG i.e. they should send you samples so you can ensure that it all works with FG and is up to FG's quality and standards;) Yes, in my most recent reply to this company, I asked specifically about FG support (and support for operating systems not owned and operated by MS.) It's not necessarily clear from their web page exactly how their products interface with the computer and how they work ... hopefully we can get a bit of a better handle on that before we proceed. In terms of quality here is what they proposed which seems reasonable since we face a chicken/egg problem here. They don't want to send free hardware to any random person that applies for their program and promises to post an add on their site. So they propose that we run an add for a week or two or however long it takes to generate a couple sales. Once that happens, then they feel their risk of loss is minimized and they would be willing to send a sample or two of something for review. It seems like a reasonable approach. They aren't unwilling to send a sample, but they don't want to be taken advantage of. Regards, Curt. Sounds reasonable. Best see what the following time-zones think though;) LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
Curtis L. Olson schrieb: I want to bring a new subject before the group. [...] If we put banner adds on our web site, and one of our visiters clicks through and buys something from this company (being referred from our site) then we would get a 10% commission from the sale. I believe there is some flexibility in the design of the banner so perhaps we could have some input so it's not *too* obnoxious. (?) As soon as someone gets some money out of a volunteered project, chances are that it causes bad blood. So I think we should make sure that this isn't likely to happen. One way I can think of, is to publish reliably the income and how it is used. (And for bigger spendings have a poll) (*) I definitely trust Curt to handle our money very well - and I don't want to give anyone the chance to cause trouble just by being jealous. On the other hand I've got no problems with banner ads, as long as they aren't annoying. I.e. *no* pop up and -if possible- no blinking or even animations. Additionally, if we could test their hardware and know that it works well with FG we can IMHO even put an official recomendation on our page. CU, Christian (*) The other way I can think of is to create a real foundation - but there's very much non-coding work related with that. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
Speaking as a user/contributor - not as a member of the project, so this is just my personal opinion: Assuming there are no Linux drivers, how would they feel about GPL'd ones? Personally, while I much prefer GPL software and would really like it if they did GPL a Linux driver, I'm not completely down on close-source stuff either - you pays your money and takes your choice. It wouldn't bother me either if someone associated with the FG community developed closed-source drivers for their h/w. While it would mean that FG couldn't distribute the drivers, at least it would mean that Linux drivers were distributed with the h/w, which would have to be a good thing. And of course, I'd expect that if someone did do some closed-source drivers they'd get paid for it. Like I say - just my personal opinion. LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Turn Coordination
sonny hammaker wrote: does anyone know of the equations that are used to determine how coordinated a turn is? Side force (along the y axis) = 0. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: Not a good idea (was Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?)
On Friday 16 July 2004 23:45, David Megginson wrote: Curtis L. Olson wrote: But any way you cut it, putting advertisements on our web site will change the look and feel of our web site and probably influence the impression our project projects to the world ... Yes, it will make a significant difference to FlightGear and a lot of extra hassle for Curt. We'll look less like a friendly, volunteer Open Source project and more like a corporate Open Source startup. That may significantly change the kinds of volunteers we attract and the way we're treated by conference organizers and the press, as well as users' expectations of code stability, support, etc. People don't volunteer to help with corporate OSS projects like JBoss the same way that they contribute to, say, Mozilla, Apache, Linux, or FlightGear (and even JBoss doesn't have ads on its site, I don't think). It's hard to find any really friendly OSS projects with wide participation *and* ads on their site. When I was paying to keep the main SAX site at megginson.com and getting many thousands of hits each day, I was also briefly tempted to run ads to help cover expenses, but I realized that doing so would have changed the way people saw and used SAX. I'd suggest trying some different approaches: 1. Set up a PayPal voluntary donation button on FlightGear.org -- no one will mind that (but see tax issues below). 2. If you cannot cover expenses with the voluntary donations, set up a separate *.com site (flightgear.com was already taken, last I checked). You can use it to distribute extra information, set up forums, etc., and perhaps you can run ads and offer consulting services through it. 3. If you absolutely *must* run ads on flightgear.org, please use Google text ads and not banner ads. That last point is important. Managing an advertising account is a tricky job, and not one that you want to do on top of everything else. With Google ads, you know you'll get paid and you don't have to worry about the advertisers. Another important point is tax. FlightGear is not a legal not-for-profit organization, so I think that any ad revenue that comes in will have to go onto Curt's tax return, and he'll end up paying a big chunk of it to the government. The same is true for a PayPal donation button. So, in the end, my advice is not to do it. If you want to make a living or partial living from FlightGear, set up a separate commercial site and be prepared to learn about CRM, tax laws, incorporation laws, legal fees, insurance, NDA's, contracts, and all the other fun that comes with running your own small business. If you just want to cover expenses, try posting to the list with a subject line like Need new $500 hard drive, and I'm sure that a lot of us will be willing to pitch in. All the best, David These are good points. Glad it's not my call. LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Turn Coordination
This may help: http://regentsprep.org/Regents/physics/phys06/bcentrif/default.htm Regards, Ampere On July 16, 2004 04:26 pm, sonny hammaker wrote: does anyone know of the equations that are used to determine how coordinated a turn is? I notice in the hud view mode there is a coordinated turn gauge, and in the distant modes, there is also a coordinated turn indicator. thanks ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
Good morining, just dropping in from one of the other timezones ;-) I've also got some thoughts regarding this whole sponsoring idea, and to be direct: I do have to admit that I wouldn't have any problems with such a model, actually it's just a couple of days ago that I talked to other FlightGear users about similar ideas - indeed, even exactly the one mentioned by Curtis: having a company that sells flight simulator peripherals advertise on FlightGear.org - or even: -*now*, I know you guys are going to call me a pervert: ;-) WITHIN each particular FlightGear release, so that discussion - while being held privately - it was caused by Curtis' mail regarding FlightGear financing. Among these ideas I also suggested to set up some kind of BugZilla system or anything else for that matter, that supports feature requests by users and directly link such a system to some simple donation system, that way it might be pretty easy for users to make small donations like $ 5.00 and assign or even SPLIT their donation to certain feature request, e.g. users would want to to be able to say: I vote for feature request X by giving 2 bucks of overall 5 bucks donation to it The developers could then see which feature requests seem to be most urgent and also (financially) SUPPORTED by the community. Of course this whole thing would still be only OPTIONALLY available, but I do think that something like that might work - in particular if you think about features that professional users might need. You could even go one step further by offering companies to make custom adjustments to FlightGear, maybe even offer manufacturers of simulator peripherals to add support for their hardware to FlightGear - either provided they give out some samples or simply financially support FlightGear. Getting back to the X-Plane example that I mentioned meanwhile in some of my posts: the author of X-Plane is doing a great job in that regard, by offering specific customization - the result being that X-Plane is now also used by some MAJOR aviation companies for _serious_ work. And now, I do of course remember the argument being made that FlightGear is not supposed to become everybody's swiss army knife, well I think as soon as there is financiall support involved it would be perfectly acceptable - in particular if parts of the necessary work could really be directly used for FlightGear itself, so that other users might benefit from it, speaking of adding support for certain simulator hardware, this would definitely be the case. I *suppose* FlightGear developers could also easily adapt FlightGear in a manner to allow more extraordinary features, this also to attract even another target audience - professional users. So, getting back to FlightGear, I do think it is quite a good idea to advertise for such companies or products which might directly benefit a FlightGear user, simulator hardware stores OR EVEN -manufacturers (!) are certainly in that range. And also I do agree that there should of coure be some previous experience with the hardware being offered BEFORE anything is recommended, just to make sure that people aren't buying stuff that e.g. isn't even supported under linux. Also, I like the idea of samples being sent in in order for FlightGear evaluation. Of course there should be remarks added to those products currently not being sufficiently supported by FlightGear, maybe based on the referrer id to the company's page or anything like that. But all visitors from the FlightGear pages should definitely get the necessary information, possibly they should really use the referrer information in order to display certain additional information. That way you could prevent users buying stuff (also with the motivation to HELP FlightGear)just in order to learn later that the stuff they purchased doesn't even work with FlightGear. THIS would of course be extremely frustrating and should be prevented by all means. So, if the said company itself is not willing to send out any hardware BEFORE there are purchasements being made, they should be asked to do the necessary examination and test the hardware themselves, in order to verify if there are any problems with certain hardware components. Getting even more extreme, one might ponder about offering that said company to integrate their webpage address or even company logo directly into some of the future official FlightGear releases. I am sure simulator hardware company would be interested in a deal such as that one. Also, I do remember that X-Plane itself displays CHPRODUCTS' and NVIDIA's internet addresses during startup...I would really doubt that the author doesn't get anything in return for that ;-) But I am not even talking about modifying FlightGear's splash screen in such a way, even though personally, I really wouldn't have any problems with anything like that at all - I understand that this is an opensource project and that there needs to be financial support: for an egoistic user it's all
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Next release of FlightGear
I've got an error during compiliation: -DPKGLIBDIR=\/usr/share/FlightGear/share/FlightGear\ -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT -c -o viewer.o `test -f viewer.cxx || echo './'`viewer.cxx source='viewmgr.cxx' object='viewmgr.o' libtool=no \ depfile='.deps/viewmgr.Po' tmpdepfile='.deps/viewmgr.TPo' \ depmode=gcc3 /bin/sh ../../depcomp \ g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../src/Include -I../.. -I../../src -I/usr/share/simgear/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/local//include -DPKGLIBDIR=\/usr/share/FlightGear/share/FlightGear\ -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT -c -o viewmgr.o `test -f viewmgr.cxx || echo './'`viewmgr.cxx make[2]: *** No rule to make target `fg_os.cxx', needed by `fg_os.o'. Stop. make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/share/FlightGear/source/FlightGear-0.9.5-pre1/src/Main' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/share/FlightGear/source/FlightGear-0.9.5-pre1/src' make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 Regards, Ampere On July 16, 2004 11:34 am, Curtis L. Olson wrote: I've started doing some of the pre-release work for FlightGear-0.9.5 (which is the next release.) That means I'd like to do our official next release in the next week or two. Please take a few minutes to download the tar balls and test this pre1 release. Please! This is our quality control so if no one tests the pre releases and reports problems, they will end up in the final release. Regards, Curt. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: Not a good idea (was Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?)
On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 23:53:51 +0100, Lee wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Friday 16 July 2004 23:45, David Megginson wrote: ...wisdom omitted... These are good points. Glad it's not my call. ..amen. ..they want banner ads, they ship us free hardware and pay us to write GPL drivers etc for it. No free hardware etc, no deal, there's more fish out there. ;-) ..I mean, there else do they go? ;-) We _can_ ask this much. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Next release of FlightGear
Oh, I forgot to mention, I installed simgear in /usr/share/simgear and tried to do the same with FlightGear in /usr/share/FlightGear. I used the following commands when I was compiling FlightGear: ./configure --prefix=/usr/share/FlightGear --with-simgear=/usr/share/simgear make (with the error showed up at the end) make install works, but fgfs is missing in /usr/share/FlightGear/bin Regards, Ampere On July 17, 2004 12:32 am, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: I've got an error during compiliation: -DPKGLIBDIR=\/usr/share/FlightGear/share/FlightGear\ -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT -c -o viewer.o `test -f viewer.cxx || echo './'`viewer.cxx source='viewmgr.cxx' object='viewmgr.o' libtool=no \ depfile='.deps/viewmgr.Po' tmpdepfile='.deps/viewmgr.TPo' \ depmode=gcc3 /bin/sh ../../depcomp \ g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../src/Include -I../.. -I../../src -I/usr/share/simgear/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/local//include -DPKGLIBDIR=\/usr/share/FlightGear/share/FlightGear\ -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT -c -o viewmgr.o `test -f viewmgr.cxx || echo './'`viewmgr.cxx make[2]: *** No rule to make target `fg_os.cxx', needed by `fg_os.o'. Stop. make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/share/FlightGear/source/FlightGear-0.9.5-pre1/src/Main' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/share/FlightGear/source/FlightGear-0.9.5-pre1/src' make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 Regards, Ampere On July 16, 2004 11:34 am, Curtis L. Olson wrote: I've started doing some of the pre-release work for FlightGear-0.9.5 (which is the next release.) That means I'd like to do our official next release in the next week or two. Please take a few minutes to download the tar balls and test this pre1 release. Please! This is our quality control so if no one tests the pre releases and reports problems, they will end up in the final release. Regards, Curt. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Next release of FlightGear
Correction: Not only is fgfs missing, but so are metar, terrasync, and (est-epsilon?). Regards, Ampere On July 17, 2004 12:42 am, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: Oh, I forgot to mention, I installed simgear in /usr/share/simgear and tried to do the same with FlightGear in /usr/share/FlightGear. I used the following commands when I was compiling FlightGear: ./configure --prefix=/usr/share/FlightGear --with-simgear=/usr/share/simgear make (with the error showed up at the end) make install works, but fgfs is missing in /usr/share/FlightGear/bin Regards, Ampere On July 17, 2004 12:32 am, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: I've got an error during compiliation: -DPKGLIBDIR=\/usr/share/FlightGear/share/FlightGear\ -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT -c -o viewer.o `test -f viewer.cxx || echo './'`viewer.cxx source='viewmgr.cxx' object='viewmgr.o' libtool=no \ depfile='.deps/viewmgr.Po' tmpdepfile='.deps/viewmgr.TPo' \ depmode=gcc3 /bin/sh ../../depcomp \ g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../src/Include -I../.. -I../../src -I/usr/share/simgear/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/local//include -DPKGLIBDIR=\/usr/share/FlightGear/share/FlightGear\ -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT -c -o viewmgr.o `test -f viewmgr.cxx || echo './'`viewmgr.cxx make[2]: *** No rule to make target `fg_os.cxx', needed by `fg_os.o'. Stop. make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/share/FlightGear/source/FlightGear-0.9.5-pre1/src/Main' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/share/FlightGear/source/FlightGear-0.9.5-pre1/src' make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 Regards, Ampere On July 16, 2004 11:34 am, Curtis L. Olson wrote: I've started doing some of the pre-release work for FlightGear-0.9.5 (which is the next release.) That means I'd like to do our official next release in the next week or two. Please take a few minutes to download the tar balls and test this pre1 release. Please! This is our quality control so if no one tests the pre releases and reports problems, they will end up in the final release. Regards, Curt. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Advertisements on the FG web site?
Curtis wrote: I want to bring a new subject before the group. In the past we have discussed potential income sources for the FG project, so I think it's fair to discuss another option since the opportunity has introduced itself today. There is a company that makes hardware (3d glasses, head tracker, voice recognition, joysticks, gaming chairs, etc.) that is of potential interest to flight sim enthusiasts. If we put banner adds on our web site, and one of our visiters clicks through and buys something from this company (being referred from our site) then we would get a 10% commission from the sale. I believe there is some flexibility in the design of the banner so perhaps we could have some input so it's not *too* obnoxious. (?) But any way you cut it, putting advertisements on our web site will change the look and feel of our web site and probably influence the impression our project projects to the world ... Is this a direction we want to explore? It wouldn't have to be a permanent thing. I think we could choose to end the arrangement at any time. We stop referring potential customers ... no more commissions for us ... I think it's that simple. Any thoughts? Any strong feelings? We get a pretty good chunk of daily hits so we do have some referring power to swing around. What do you think? Wrong way down the slippery slope? Good idea? I'll buy anything with Curt's personal AAA*** rating? If the intent is to simply provide advertising space that is one approach; OTH if the intent is to provide an endorsement (implied or direct) that the displayed hardware operates and is supported by the FG project that creates a wide range of issues related to design and development, testing and integration, support, and compatability over the life of the product and project. Not to mention the legal and tax implications of a non-profit organization operating in a commercial enterprise. Think long and hard before stepping off that cliff... Given a vote, in either case I would decline. Just too many potential headaches and time sinks. Regards John W. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
