On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 16:43:13 +0200, Paul Surgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I say pull the package in question. If the author wants to distribute it on
his own site then that is fine with me but as it stands it looks like we
endorse what is in that package.
I'd rather upset one contributor than
I'm going to be taking a short break from the FlightGear, SimGear, and
TerraGear mailing lists to help me focus on finding new customers to
build up my XML consulting business back up (and to do lots of real
flying, of course). I'll still be using FlightGear for practice and I
will keep up to
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:33:37 +, Dave Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I think the main problem will be simulate drops on wind screen and
windscreen wipers.
My question here: When does pilots use them(whipers)? only on take-off and
landing or on route too?
Thanx in advance
Most
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:38:49 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would tend to agree with you with one exception. The default C-172 is
very functional, but it is not our best model. A nice thing about
including multiple aircraft is you can see some different nice things
that
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 14:42:40 -, Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Probably I've got this wrong, but isn't the c-172 our most refined/realistic
flightmodel? My impression of yasim, from using it for the p51d, but not as
an aero engineer, is that getting an aircraft working is about 2
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:35:53 +0100, Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. The responsible person should be asked to *immediately* remove the
offending religious content.
2. If he refuses (which the GPL lets him), he should not be given any
further support. He should be banned
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:06:13 +, Dave Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any way to get a compensated 'TAS' output to drive the ASI because I
*think* the B1900D's ASI is compensated (but I must check)
I'd be pretty incredibly surprised to see an ASI doing that. Some
ASIs do have a
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:02:20 +0100, Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that we have an aircraft download page I think that should be all
that gets included.
I just realized that the list didn't include any helicopter.
All the best,
David
--
http://www.megginson.com/
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:07:22 -, Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also I think I would have considered cutting the c310, even though it
is the only light twin. The u3a cockpit was my very first 3D project and it
really isn't too spiffy. It would be very nice to have a civilian c310
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 19:26:57 +, Lee Elliott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've got to disagree with you regarding linking to non-GPL'd
aircraft. The best a/c I've seen for M$FS have been done by
people who want to ensure that their work remains free (as in
free beer) but also want to make
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:05:18 +, Lee Elliott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the user community will stomp out that kind of thing
pretty fast, whatever we do about linking. It looks very
newbie and shareware-ish.
Heh! - Sorry, but I'm not sure exactly which bits will get
stomped out
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:36:42 +0200, Paul Surgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then some scumbag comes along and collects a whole lot of these free
contributions, removes the credits, labels them as his own work, puts them
onto a CDs and sells them for $30 - 50 profit.
This has happened several
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:02:10 +, Dave Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the authors released their work as GPL those low lifes wouldn't even
have to change the credits and what sort of recourse would the authors have
then?
The authors would have no recourse then.
Note that he said
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:08:38 +, Lee Elliott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While it can make things difficult, or even impossible, one can't
force people to use a licence. One can't tell people what to
do...
I don't think anyone has suggested that, except to set it up as a
strawman to argue
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 00:20:57 +0200, Paul Surgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure GPL can work in some scenarios but if your market is 1000 copies and you
charge $50 for your product you can't possibly afford to license your work as
GPL and expect to keep food on the table for your kids to eat.
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:53:33 -0500, Josh Babcock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to see a golden age or WWII multi engine, but I guess the DC3 isn't
ready for prime time yet. I'm also *cough* working on a B29, but I haven't
touched it in months. I was in the middle of getting a Yasim
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:57:48 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
c172, c172-le, c172p, c172r, c172x - I don't have the energy to sort out
the dependencies so throw it all in.
We should try to sort them out and include just the C172p by default
-- in any case, you should be able to
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:18:50 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. No adds at all on the main/front page of our site. Adds only on the
subpages.
Pro: good first impression on new users; con: kills nearly all of your
potential traffic.
2. I've had mixed results filtering out
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 10:44:23 +0200, Paul Surgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The 3 letter FAA airport codes have been prepended with a K but they never
used to be.
e.g. C83 now equals KC83
Canada has done that officially -- all Canadian airport codes are now
four-letter ICAO codes starting with
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 15:12:57 +0100, Christian Mayer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I only want class A to be an interface that tells everybody what to
expect from it's derivated classes. And one of these things is, that
every child must have a member that is called foo and has one
parameter of
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 20:59:23 +, Dave Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I then spent 2 hours trying to work out what this huge 3 runway
centre-intersecting airport with full runway lighting and PAPIs was. ;-P
It looks like the runways are fairly large in real life as well:
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:18:18 +0100, Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For that you would need METAR sets for several stations and for several
moments in time. It would have to support recorded weather for a flight
from, let's say, KSFO to KJFK. I don't see a way to integrate something
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:01:28 +0100, Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* David Megginson -- Wednesday 12 January 2005 14:34:
You can download all the world's METARs as one big file.
Where? noaa.gov?
ftp://weather.noaa.gov/data/observations/metar/cycles/
All the best,
David
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:53:31 +0100, Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks! I'll let the metar proxy download the requested files from there
to $FG_HOME/metar/day/[0-9][0-9]Z.TXT and serve the most appropriate metar
data string to fgfs via the normal NOAA lookup mechanism (via HTTP).
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 21:12:05 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is actually a real feature. Your extreme manuevers have
discombobulated your attitude indicator and it takes several minutes for
the gyro to realign itself with gravity.
In aerobatic planes, it's possible to
I may not have a lot of readers, but my aviation blog is still the #1
search result for the phrase land and hold short on Google, pushing
aside more worthy pages like ones from AOPA and the FAA that actually
talk about land and hold short operations (oops!). I guess it's
because other parts of my
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:34:05 -0500, Ampere K. Hardraade
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Under /instrumentation/attitude-indicator, there is a property call caged.
Would that be what you are referring to?
Yeah -- we need to link that to something the user can get at (but
again, only for aerobatic
Currently, FlightGear (SimGear, actually) always sets visibility to
near-nil when the plane is inside a cloud layer -- obviously, the
right and proper solution is 3D clouds, but until we have that
working, or at least until we can detect whether the plane is actually
near the cloudy part of a
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 20:56:41 +0100, Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is due to a faulty SGSky::modify_vis() function. Actually it has
been broken since early 0.7.x as I recall it. I've never remembered to
look at it prior to a release, but I would recommend to fix that
function
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 13:59:28 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One issue to consider is that going to nil visibility (and not drawing
the cloud plane) hides when you pass through the cloud plane. When
the cloud plane intersects the near clip plane you get some ugly
artifacts.
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:20:45 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was just flying in the SFO area with the DHC2-F and flightgear crashed
with the following message:
Unknown exception in the main loop. Aborting...
Possible cause: Success
Anyone have any ideas? This is the
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 21:25:55 -, Vivian Meazza
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unknown exception in the main loop. Aborting...
Possible cause: Success
WAG - OpenAl?
I think it would have to be wrapped in a SimGear exception for that to
happen, but I'd have to double-check the code.
All
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 09:26:58 +, Matthew Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello again,
although my free time has been in short supply recently, I've been
plodding on with some Blender models. I've noticed a lot of the
tutorials available for blender use sub-surf techniques to get smooth
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 14:36:57 +, Matthew Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've just thought that I might be able to get a really nice smooth but
higher poly model by using nurbs surfaces to model half of the fuselage,
say. Then I'll convert it to a mesh and duplicate, mirror and join it
to
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 16:20:02 +, David Luff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can anyone who flies in the US tell me how prolific windsocks at GA
airports actually are. Currently we get one at each end of the runway by
default in the airport data, but I'm wondering if that's generally
overkill?
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:57:54 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People doing business in North America usually share the impression
that people 'over there' are commonly a lot more conservative when it
comes to aircraft engines. And they have a strong lobby: One of the
major
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 08:01:49 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what's the solution? We can't initialize any number of arbitrary
serviceable properties in the preferences.xml and I've always been
nervous about doing htat anyway. If we also can't do it in code, then
were are
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 15:02:22 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately the conversion produces horrible costs this might
lower in the future because the way the engine is being assembled is
going to be changed,
Lowering the conversion costs will help. Another
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 16:24:20 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Warrior will never have a load like the 'bigger' ones because it
lacks the reinfoced airframe, not matter which engine you mount,
Is the Warrior's airframe weaker than the Archer's or Arrow's?
All the best,
On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 15:57:17 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who is the keeper of this patch. Can someone send it to me in as
maintainer friendly a form as possible. If this can default to off, but
be enabled with some API call then I think we have a shot at getting it
into
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 16:12:27 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have heard rumors that the plib team is considering a new official
release in the near future. Are there any patches that FlightGear needs
that aren't commited to plib's cvs repository yet?
Is the alpha-order
On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 11:09:09 +0100, Gerhard Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The FADEC is easy as long as everything works normally. Things get more
complex if you want to model failures.
Right, but that's true of our piston engine models in general -- we're
not modelling stuck valves, fouled
On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 17:03:02 +0100, Christian Mayer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see no benefit in adding an dependancy to a library that effectively
can do the same as OpenGL - but only in software.
If OpenGL is too complicated for some cases, we can encapsulate the
necessary functions in
Happy 2005 to everyone in the FlightGear community!
Here's a high-resolution picture of the Garmin-1000-based panel on the
new Diamond TwinStar, one of my dream aircraft (it rececently crossed
the Atlantic non-stop from Canada to Spain burning less than USD
200.00 worth of fuel). Anyone aircraft
On Sat, 1 Jan 2005 21:44:35 +, Dave Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.diamond-air.at/Pressebilder/DA42TwinStar/Panel/tn/DA42panel_high
.jpg.html
The visual model is easy enough but the panel is a different matter.
We can probably manage the left display. The right display
On Sat, 1 Jan 2005 23:39:49 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They also have a version with two Lycoming IO-360 for the North
American market,
Is that out yet? I'd heard that they were working on one because
there's no repair network for the Thielert diesel engine in North
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 08:08:12 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm passing along second hand knowledge here so I could be way off, but
I seem to recall there were problems with plib's handling of single
polygon objects ... it would collapse them into the parent layer. You
might
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 08:06:13 -0600, Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It appears that entire tables could be read in as one data chunk. I need to
do processing
in that case and manually separate the data rows. I think I've almost got
this one
figured out.
Sounds good. The main problem
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:22:54 -0500, William Earnest [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A bit of digging found that the airport ID of 1N9 had been changed to
K1N9. Further checks show that has happened to quite a few of the
non-Kxxx IDs in the USA. Is this a FG problem, or are the errors
coming
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:43:27 -0600, Jon S Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, I guess I've been lucky so far that the data I have gotten -
except in this particular case - has been chunked together. I'm a
little stumped as to how I can make sure that I get all the data for
an element and
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 16:07:19 -0600, Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought that sounded reasonable and tried that this morning. But, it still
doesn't seem
to work - in fact (at least the way I'm doing it) it seems worse that way. A
quick glance
seems to suggest (rightly or wrongly)
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 17:56:24 -0500, Ampere K. Hardraade
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What you want to print on the aircraft is its registration number, not the
callsign.
Right -- for private aircraft and commercial aircraft not flying for a
proper organization, the callsign and registration number
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 19:41:55 -0600, Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
void FGTrafficManager::data (const char * s, int len)
{
string token = string(s,len);
if (( token.find( ) == string::npos
(token.find('\n')) == string::npos))
{
value += token;
}
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:27:03 -, Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know that no one particularly loves VRML, but it is text based (like
AC3D) and open. As long as we're just doing textured and tinted
meshes, with the more complex stuff (like animations) in external XML
files, is
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:52:01 -0500, Ampere K. Hardraade
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3D Max Studio can't import VRML. I don't know about other modellers though.
Are you certain? Even the dinky little shareware modellers usually
support VRML 1.0 import and export -- it's like a spreadsheet not
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:28:18 +, Dave Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I've mentioned, the modifications to the c172p that I made were with ac3d
(it's not a hugely powerful modeller but speed of development is good).
I'm happy to hand over the 172p to Dave or someone else who is willing
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 09:53:49 -0500, Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SSG is certainly not propriatary in any reasonable man's vocabulary !!
You need to distinguish open specs from open formats. For example,
MSIE is closed source but uses open formats (HTML, CSS, etc.); Open
Office is open
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 17:41:20 +0100, Wolfram Kuss
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you completely hand edit the XML?
I hand-edit the animations, but eventually, we could look at something
more standardized.
Do you plan to keep it that way?
Since Blender has scripting support, it would be possible
Since there are so many talented 3D modellers around the project now,
I've put online the Blender source for the mostly crude 3D models I've
developed. Note that this is not, yet, a permanent location; I'll
think of a better URL later, or better yet, we'll set up a directory
on the main
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:27:09 +, David Luff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've always assumed that it's a fairly late model injected 172, in order to
justify the current lack of carb heating in the engine model ;-)
The 172P is carbureted, unfortunately.
All the best,
David
--
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 17:37:35 +, David Luff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah! Carb heating has just moved several places up my TODO list!
I'm not sure that the engine model should even be dealing with carb
heating -- it would be just as easy for something else to tell the
engine the temperature
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 19:15:46 +, Dave Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While you're there, is there any chance of a magneto-related performance loss?
ie: when you run left mags only you get a power loss.
It would be nice to see that generalized a bit, so that we can
eventually model fouled
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:20:37 +, Dave Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Simulated carb icing might be exciting too (coupled to weather, of
course :-) )
It would certainly make you remember to pull the lever ;)
Some day, we might model then entire air induction system, the way
that we model
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 20:38:33 +, Dave Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just wondering if the C172P is supposed to represent a specific model year?
Totally up to you, but my 172P POH is for the 1981 model, for what
that's worth. I cannot even remember the light positions on the
planes I
A Piper owner trying to have is PA-28-201 (Arrow) repaired managed to
get this concrete information from Piper:
--
From: airframe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 10:50 AM
To: 'Stanley Zamkow'
Subject: RE: Contact Us Request Form
Dear Sir:
There is not an
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:27:00 +0100, Arnt Karlsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
..one way is point .gov and .com people to if someone flies into an
Aussiestani or Canuckistani tower, is it jihad, and who get's sued?
That doesn't work so well outside of the U.S., because other countries
don't have
, you have done a great service to many
communities by making that information available for so long.
Thank you, and all the best,
David Megginson
Ottawa, Canada
==8==
All the best,
David
--
http://www.megginson.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 10:36:19 +1100, Nick Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I must have missed it, sorry about that. Oh yeah, 2 months ago was exam
time, I stopped reading the list for a few weeks.
No harm done. We're all unhappy, of course, but it's hard for
non-Americans like me to complain
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 10:18:36 +0100, Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FlightGear has used the Peel database for quite some time (always?) and
just recently (one or two years ago) Robin started to use DAFIF. Prior
to that we only had data contributed by volunteers. Now we have a better
base
On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 01:06:56 +0200, Paul Surgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm surprised someone else hasn't commented on this yet.
We had a discussion a couple of months ago, when the topic first came up.
All the best,
David
--
http://www.megginson.com/
On Thu, 09 Dec 2004 09:32:46 +0100, Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a clean way to move files in a CVS repository from one
directory to another for a reorganization?
No, that is one of the shortcomings of CVS. The only way is deleting it
and adding it at the new location.
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:55:29 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hm ? I thought Curt just made it working with stock PLIB - is it still
broken ?
It uses the AC3D crease directive, which stock plib doesn't support.
More importantly, FlightGear still tries to load the Nimitz even when
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:40:53 -, Vivian Meazza
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry guys, I sent today's Nimitz before I realized that Curt was removing
crease tokens. Mind you, after all the effort we went to get it in ... I'm a
bit confused here. Mathias submitted a patch to plib, and I thought
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:09:10 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mmmmh, depending on who your copilot is
In a C150 things are much easier because the compass is very close - as
is your copilot :-)
In the Warrior, you can see the numbers fine, but because you're
looking at
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 00:05:33 +, Matthew Law
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now drop the nose a little and let the air speed build to above Vs still
with idle power. I repeatably get the stall warner to well over
70kt indicated. Are other people seeing this? Is it normal? (I've never
just
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:10:35 +1100, Curtin, Robert
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just stumbled across this thread and couldn't figure out whether it was
resolved or not. Not being overly familiar with FlightGear, I'm not even
sure what the inputs to this problem were. This is how I would approach
n Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:45:29 +0100, Roy Vegard Ovesen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm migrating stuff from the cockpit directory to the instrumentation
directory. Specifically I'm migration the stuff in the radio stack. My
question is this: should I also move the properties from /radios/*
to
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:57:43 -0500, Vance Souders
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there an aircraft currently in flightgear that is a good example of
proper 3D cockpit construction?
I don't know about 'good', but the J3 Cub and the PA-28-161 both have
pure 3D cockpits (no 2D panel code).
All the
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 06:05:57 +0100, Arnt Karlsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
..this is with or without oxygen?
Without -- oxygen is a very difficult thing to manage in the eastern
half of the continent. I could purchase a portable oxygen system good
enough for me (not enough for pax) for less than
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 17:42:37 +0100, Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, OK. Didn't relate this to the Mac port. At first this looked like
the classical troll post: go to an application specific forum, tell
how this app sucks and how others are better (which so far would be
OK) but then
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 17:14:44 +0100, Arnt Karlsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
..eh, in RL, you often _can't_ see the ground at night, just lights.
I'll confirm that. The runway and taxiway lights are aimed up and do
not illuminate the pavement at all (not even a tiny area around each
light).
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 12:32:41 +0100, Roy Vegard Ovesen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My motivation for setting the serviceable property to true in the source code
was that now that the instruments are configureable they can have an
arbitrary name in the property tree. The compass could for example be
I'm pretty happy with the magnetic compass now. I won't claim that
it's a perfect simulation, but it's close enough for practice, and
should be especially fun (??) for IFR students practicing
partial-panel work. I was sorry to throw out Alex's much more elegant
code for my crude hacks. Thanks
The DME groundspeed display is working again -- there was a small typo
in a property name in the C++ code.
All the best,
David
--
http://www.megginson.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:21:15 -0500, David Megginson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Obviously, when the dip is over 70 degrees, it doesn't take a steep
turn to cause this effect. The question is, does the compass hang
up (i.e. bind and refuse to turn), or does it swing around? If it
hangs up
I'm fixing the magnetic compass instrument to make its behaviour more
realistic. I'm starting with the northernly turning error, and found
a useful site that actually gives an equation:
http://williams.best.vwh.net/compass/node4.html
Here's the equation (radians for all angles):
Hc:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:36:33 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Explaining in pictures is easier than dealing with single-line-
equations :-) We'll see,
Multiple, sequential equations are welcome as well. Anything, really ...
Thanks,
David
--
http://www.megginson.com/
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 17:25:16 +0100, Boris Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My first VERY simple *guess* would be that it might be because of an
imbalance in inertia of a compasses moving parts as soon as the pitch
changes accordingly.
Other replies have pointed you to links explaining the
I've thought of a simpler way to approach this problem. Let's say
that I have a plane and the three Euler angles of rotation, phi,
theta, and psi (roll, pitch, and yaw). Given those three angles, I'd
like to determine which direction around the z axis is most directly
uphill and how steep the
On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 14:04:05 -0500, Chris Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A simple adaptation doesn't really work. Using the variables as you've
defined them, and taking theta to be positive for pitched up, write
Hc = atan2(a, b)
with
a = cos(phi)sin(Hm)cos(mu) -
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 16:02:19 -0600, Jon S Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After having scribbled for a LITTLE WHILE on the back of an envelope
;-) I am thinking that what you want is this:
-atan2(-phi,theta)
but I'll have to play a little bit more. I think this would give you
the angle
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 16:17:24 -0600, Jon S Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe I am missing what you are trying to do, but I just tried this in
Excel:
-atan2(theta,phi)
which gives this:
theta phi angle (from forward, positive clockwise)
45 0 0
45
On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:16:08 -0500, David Megginson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I understand, logically, why this is happening: flying west with a
magnetic dip of 71 and a bank of 20 to the south, I have an angle of
over 90 degrees to the magnetic flow. I think I even remember the
original
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 00:01:04 -0400, Ampere K. Hardraade
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now days, I am using a different method. Say I want to model a pentagon: I
will load the drawing in Gimp or Paintbrush, and measure the coordinates of
the five corners in pixel. After that, I will open 3D
Great report, Curt -- I'm glad to hear that FlightGear held up its end
so well. One of the most impressive things about FlightGear is its
ability to model marginal visibility fairly realistically -- watching
the runway come into view in FlightGear in 1 SM visibility really is
like watching the
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 02:15:07 +0200, Boris Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...how would you then call the following:
http://www.megginson.com/blogs/lahso/medicals.html ?
A brief lapse of judgement.
BTW: talking of healthy presidents: Pres. Bush Senior did even do a
parachute jump on his
I have had little luck finding aviation weblogs (they're all about
rants about politics, hype about technology, or complaints about
teenagers' social lives), so a couple of weeks ago, I decided to start
my own. So far, it's heavy on content on light on good looks, so it's
probably a fair
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 15:00:08 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This racing simulation appears to be somehow related to FlightGear - at
least it makes use of Simgear:
http://vamos.sourceforge.net/requirements.html
As far as I can see, the only part of SimGear it uses is
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 10:00:52 +0200, Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not familiar with the new code arrangement (it does
look like an improvement), and would appreciate some pointers before I
start hunting. I think that glutinit() used to set up OpenGL before
we switched to SDL.
I last built FlightGear successfully on 15 August (I hadn't realized
it had been so long). I had to make one small change to get to to
build today, which I've put in CVS, but now I'm having a problem with
OpenGL initialization. My old binary (also built with SDL) still runs
fine; the new one
1 - 100 of 2319 matches
Mail list logo
