[Flightgear-devel] Concorde
Hi guys, We've just had a really lucky day in Bristol today, as far as weather goes. There were some dark clouds in the West, I think we wouldn't have seen much of Concorde's last flight if it had been half an hour earlier or later! Anyway, I took some pictures of G-BOAF on its last flight, here they are: http://onepointfour.dyndns.org/concorde/ These are probably unique because I took them from a rather special place... I hope you enjoy the pictures, and that you don't suffer much knowing there's one technical marvel fewer in our skies from now on. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Multiplayer Server RFC -- Current Status [now C++]
If C++ doesn't scare you, you have no business using it.
Sorry, but that was just too open. I had to take the shot. But
seriously, there's more truth in that statement than a sarcastic
retort like it deserves. The time to run screaming from a project is
the moment the architect declares that it *has* to be written in C++
because no other language will do. I'm serious; use with caution. :)
I fully second Andy here.
If you want to learn about object-oriented programming, C++, Java,
PHP, etc. is the wrong place to start. Get
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/ObjectiveC/ObjC.pdf
and read the introduction to OO programming. It really gives you the
insight you need to understand C++ and also what's wrong with it.
Pity Objective-C never really made it outside of {Next,Open,GNU}Step.
If you start a project and need OO features, either do it properly (in
Python or Objective-C), or do it the hard way with GLib/GObject.
I'd better shut up on the mailing list of a giant project written in
C++... I still admire you folks for getting it this far even with C++!
Andras
===
Major Andras
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www:http://andras.webhop.org/
===
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cloud problems
OK, it's not as it bad as it seemed to be. I've just upgraded to ATI's latest drivers, and some of the problems vanished. All are still there, but less likely to occur. For instance, I only get the rotating clouds and big coloured polygons with the P51D, not with the 747. Also, the c310-3d is just fine now with both 3D clouds and speculars enabled. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] view weirdnesses
I just discovered two rather funny things in the latest CVS code, related to the visibility setting. I often change visibility with the z/Z keyboard commands during flight to maximize framerate when I don't need to see very far (short finals etc.). This, however, has two unwanted side-effects -- first of all, it seems it has an effect on the flight dynamics. I've seen this in the P51D and in the YF23, haven't tried JSBSim aircraft yet. Every time I change visibility quickly (say, 5 or 6 keypresses within about a second), the aircraft gets a kick from the side, which is rather awkward in a turn onto final. The other weirdness is that runway lighting (at least on KSFO) depends on this visibility, rather than just the time of day (maybe that's how it should be?). Thanks for the great work anyway, just thought I'd share my observations. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 60 seconds of flightgear
The movie editor for Linux is Cinellera, which is damn good IMO. Although it eats a lot of CPU. ... and crashes a lot, doesn't build out of the box on many systems, etc. etc. I believe that if you have exactly the same machine as the author's, it might actually work. I've used it a lot for audio editing, and audio quality is dodgy (most plugins are useless). Maybe video plugins are better. I use kino, which seems to be a lot more reliable and also very flexible, though it primarily uses a different set of file formats (DV/AVI instead of Quicktime). For coding/decoding video and even for simple cutting operations, MPlayer is the program of choice. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 60 seconds of flightgear
Any chance you can convert it to MPEG (instead of Motion JPEG)? irixdivx doesn't support motion jpeg yet :-( I have no facilities here for editing or converting movies. This is straight off my digital camera. Since MPlayer is such a great program, I've quickly generated a DivX5 from it -- please get it from http://andras.webhop.org/fgfs-movie1divx.avi I didn't bother encoding sound at all. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Gliding (Stall)
The research I did on them showed that these items were removed in the G H varients and roll is controlled by differential use of the seven segment spoilers. Ah, that makes sense. Reminds me, the spoilers are another area where improvement is necessary -- on the B52, engaging spoilers makes the plane roll violently to the right. Also, the right spoiler doesn't come out properly in the 3D model either. This is with the default keyboard mappings (j and k). Maybe this has something to do with the differential spoilers? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 747 engines: fuel consumption
If you could find a way to measure expected range and consumption rate that would be helpful. There is a parameter called tsfc (thrust specific fuel consumption factor) that can be added to each of the jet engine definitions in Aircraft-yasim/747.xml. David posted a figure from an airline pilot of 6000 lbs/h per engine during cruise. I've now tried the 747-yasim in a cruise at M.82 at FL370 and got around 2630 gal/h per engine, which is about 17700 lbs/h! Based on that calculation, the correct TSFC seems to be 0.274 -- not sure whether that's right though... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Gliding (Stall)
554 @ 21000ft 495 @ 46500ft were the two maxes I've tried. I can get 554 @ 21000ft but I couldn't get it over 38000ft, and it took ages to crawl there. This was still below the rated speeds. I haven't been able to get it to solve using 495kts @ 46500ft. Yet;) I'm pretty sure these figures are TAS. 495kt @ 46500ft would be something like M4, that sounds more like an SR-71 than a B52... I've been able to reach M0.80 at 4ft, haven't looked higher yet. Strange - I'll have to check my measurments again. Oh, you have a B52 you can put on a balance? :-) The problem with doing a G or an H is that they have no ailerons and I don't want to have to figure that out untill I've got the F working better. Oh, how does a G or H control roll then? The ailerons on the F are already pretty small, but it's damn hard to fly the thing without touching them... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] 747 engines: fuel consumption
If we're already talking about engines: has anyone looked at the 747 fuel consumption yet? The 747-yasim model seems to need way too much fuel. Even if I increase the fuel fraction to 1.0 in the XML file I'm unable to fly the plane across the Atlantic properly. Try taking the model from EDDF to KDTW, for instance, I guarantee you'll run out of fuel. I ascend in steps (FL180, 240, 260, 280, etc. up to something between 320 and 400, doesn't make a lot of a difference), keeping airspeed constant to around M.82, I can't think of a significantly more efficient way of conserving fuel. The real 747-400 can surely do better than that, even a 767 can! Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] YASim Propeller Drag
Can anyone describe briefly how props are modelled in YASim (and JSBSim, once we're at it)? I get the idea from all those if statements in the code that it's tweaked too much and not really based on physics. Andras (physicist, not an aerospace engineer) === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] YASim Propeller Drag
The biggest draw is probably compressing the air in the cylinders. Those pistons are still going up and down, even without the plugs firing. I just thought about it for a minute, and I don't think this is the case. Let's look at a four-cycle engine's cycles when no fuel is ignited: 1. compression, valves closed: gas gets compressed by piston 2. combustion, valves closed: no ignition, therefore no combustion, therefore the gas just compressed in 1. gets relaxed to its initial volume, pressure, and temperature (both processes can be assumed to be adiabatic, therefore no heat exchange with the engine block takes place) 3. exhaustion, one valve open: gas gets pushed out, no significant pressure required because the valve is open 4. suction, one valve open: gas gets pulled in, again no significant pressure required The entire cycle is symmetrical, so while the prop might have more resistance from one cylinder (1.), another cylinder comes up with just the required torque (2.). Even if the cylinders don't compensate for each other, the torque averages out to zero over the rotation of the engine. I'm sure the biggest contribution to the torque with the engine off is friction, primarily that of the cylinder sealing rings against the cylinder walls, and maybe the resistance of the water cooling system, which I guess is driven from the engine shaft. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Gliding (Stall)
There's another issue I reported earlier, it's probably not a generic Yasim problem though. In the Cub, cut the engine and try to glide and then land. I find it impossible to maintain altitude in the last few 100ft AGL, I always crash into the ground in an uncontrolled way because the plane suddenly loses airspeed very rapidly. I just tried a deadstick approach at 48 mph, and the Cub landed fine. What approach speed are you using? Approaches around 50mph are fine, but anything lower than that gets tricky. I would imagine that a windmilling prop doesn't cause much more drag than an idle one, but this seems to be the case -- try an approach at 40mph, and you'll find that it's a lot more critical with the engine off than with the engine idle. Also, have you observed what happens when you turn the engine off in flight? If you leave it enough time before touchdown, you can see the prop slow down, then start rotating the opposite way. This is certainly not right. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] YASim Propeller Drag
So we need the amount of force needed to rotate the mechanics (crank shaft, bearings, etc.) Exactly. The most correct model would be possble if we had: - the torque required to move the mechanics of the engine, as a function or RPM - the torque of the combustion at as a function of fuel flow rate (and probably mixture and RPM!) - a proper aerodynamic model for the prop, taking into account the region near the hub where the prop blades are angled quite steep, which is important for windmilling I guess Given that this is a lot of data, I doubt it is possible to obtain it for all engines, but it's worth a try... actually, if we have a good prop model, it's possible to measure the other two on a real aircraft, just by varying the throttle and mixture while the aircraft is standing still on the ground and observing how RPM reacts to it. I guess most engines will have similar curves, we'll only have a few parameters to adjust, so one realistic model could gain us quite a lot of realism for all piston planes. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Gliding (Stall)
The stall speed figure I found for the B-52 was 169 kts :) Yes, without flaps. I haven't ever seen the described effect without flaps, though. Are you flying with default weather conditions? The wind settings are could easily produce the asymmetry effects you're seeing, especially considering you're taling about stall behaviour, which is at the flight limits. I don't think it's a stall, because 170kt with full flaps is quite far from a stall in the B52. Actually, I think I've seen this in the 747 around 200kt as well, again with some flaps (probably just one notch, can't remember). Same happened to me recently in the P51d, can't remember at what speed though. When this happens, the plane usually enters a steep dive eventually, and there is no way to recover from the condition. You can try counteracting, or just setting all controls to neutral and wait until speed reaches something like 200kt, and the thing will still keep rolling. That reminds me: I've only seen rotation to the left so far, not once did the plane roll to the right. Check the trottle settings too, to make sure that all eight engines are the same - with some joystick combinations it's possible for throttle No. 2 to be They are, I'm using keyboard and mouse with the default mappings. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Gliding (Stall)
The B-52 is proving quite a tricky one to get right. Some of the characteristics almost seem mutaully exclusive and it can be hard to reconcile them. For example, I found max speeds of 554 kts @ 21000 ft and 495 kts at 46500 ft but I can't get a working solution that'll climb that Neither is a problem if you're careful and patient: you have to keep airspeed up all the time (if you use A/P, the best way of doing that is to adjust target ascent speed as you go), and you'll have to burn quite a bit of fuel in order to reach a decent altitude. If you take off and ascend at, say, 300kt (full power all the way through), you'll level out at 18000ft, but the plane will accelerate and be able to climb further once you've lost some fuel. After several hours, you can reach 45000ft or so, no big deal. characteristic are the flaps. These are pretty big but only have two positions - fully deployed (35deg) or fully retracted, with no in-between Really? That's weird... I guess B52 pilots must be pretty well-trained then... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Gliding (Stall)
Take the dc3 up to 5000' and cut engines whilst cruising. Without paying any attention to maintaining altitude, make some shallow turns and try to glide around for a while then try and land the plane once you get the feel for it. I fail to do this. I get an apparent stall, randomly, like one wing is stalling before the other. I wiggle the rudder a little and wait for the Have you tried any JSBSim aircraft? I suspect that this is a problem to do with Yasim. In the P51D, 747, and especially the B52, I've seen this asymmetric stall many times during non-stabilized approaches, and they usually happen at decent airspeeds (say, 170kt). I haven't ever experienced anything like this in the A320 or F16 or C172. There's another issue I reported earlier, it's probably not a generic Yasim problem though. In the Cub, cut the engine and try to glide and then land. I find it impossible to maintain altitude in the last few 100ft AGL, I always crash into the ground in an uncontrolled way because the plane suddenly loses airspeed very rapidly. This might have to do with the effect that the prop starts turning in the wrong direction when you build up airspeed with the engine turned off (try starting FG with the plane at a few 1000ft AGL with 0kt airspeed, you'll see). I haven't seen this in other Yasim prop planes. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Glide path fun
David, This was just added to the Canadian AIP: Glide path installations generate a radiated signal resulting in a normal glide path angle of 3deg (it can currently be anywhere from 2.5deg up to 3.5deg). The normal antenna pattern, of glide path installations, generates a side-lobe. The side-lobe pattern produces a false glide path angle at three times the set angle (e.g., at 9deg for a normal 3deg glide path angle). I've never been so high on an ILS that I've seen this, of course, but it's interesting, and should be an easy effect to model. Any volunteers? Great idea, but I haven't got any time to help with this right now... what I can say though is that I assume from the description that the side lobes should also be somewhat (3 times?) less sensitive, i.e. you need a larger angular deviation than normal to reach the same needle position. Your post raises another question of course: in FlightGear, the glideslope and localizer either both have sufficient signal or none of them. Is this realistic? I would have thought that the glideslope signal is detectable from a wide range of directions but only in a small vertical range, whereas the localizer is detectable at a variety of altitudes and only in a narrow range of radials. What's real ILS like? (You must know by now... congrats BTW) I'm asking because the glideslope lobe at 9deg would also have smaller range due to the smaller emitted intensity. But currently the range doesn't vary as long as the localizer is detected, which sounds a bit funny to me. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Auto Pilot problem (was Instant replay system)
Ta for the info. I found that the auto-throttle holds the set speed very well, even between different a/c types and it was very easy to match speeds between them. Using multiplay, with a B-52 and a YF-23 both set to the same ap speed, there was hardly any drift between them and it got me thinking about doing a KC-10 for playing at in flight re-fuelling:) Not the KC-10! A Vulcan and 11 Victors make a good set for a Black Buck mission, now that would be exciting! I'll have to give the new A/P a try... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Rudder Trim
Also the keyboard gives me rudder movement in only one direction at present and it isn't reported in the property browser. This is using the default C172. Do you mean that KP_Enter works but KP_0 doesn't do anything? Anything else that isn't working? I'm asking because I had a very similar thing recently. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Suggested Flight
-- FlightGear changes the keyboard repeat settings of the X server! Not good, since all other programs are also affected! We're not smart enough to do that ourselves (i.e. FlightGear doesn't understand its host OS that thoroughly). Something must be going wacko in plib, or, more likely, glut. OK, thanks -- it seems that it only happens sporadically, now that I had a few more flights. Something also screwed up my xmodmap, but luckily it hasn't happened again since, don't know what caused it in the first place! Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Suggested Flight
fgfs --airport=KHAF --runway=30 --visibility=32000 Nice work folks! I noticed one recent and rather awkward change though -- FlightGear changes the keyboard repeat settings of the X server! Not good, since all other programs are also affected! Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] New buildings models
I can't accept this argument ;-)) BTW, I suppose you all know about the cockpit video of someone flying below the eiffel tower. I don't know if this video is real, but it looks pretty nice Where is it? Is it on the web somewhere? One of the best places for flying under a bridge is Bristol (UK), there's a lot of space beneath the Clifton Suspension Bridge (some 250m long, ~75m above the water). Allegedly, hot-air balloons used to fly underneath the bridge occasionally, but that must have been before my time. More recently all flying under the bridge has been banned. Bristol is not only home to important hot-air balloon companies, but also to an Airbus facility at Filton, and it's the same airport where final assembly of Concorde took place. Would be nice to take one of those under the bridge on their maiden journey... Andrs === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] New buildings models
I just put it on ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Devel/eiffel.qt It's very short but it looks like it were real Looks real, but it stops at the wrong place... in any case, I can easily imagine someone flying through there, given proper clearance by ATC etc. Not in an Airbus, but a Cub or a 152 should do just fine down there. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airbus A320
I once witnessed an Aeroflot jet on approach to KSEA that had an alignment problem actually horse the jet into a 45 degree bank, haul it about a quarter mile to the west to get on the right approach. Freaked me out on the ground just watching it. I don't want to think about what those poor passengers were going through. :) Reminds me of my flight into Bologna last year in one of go's (now Easyjet) latest 737-300s -- there was a period of about 10 minutes when we never flew straight. But they eventually managed to get the thing aligned, and we did fly the last couple miles in a straight line... Mind you, it's not normal on a passenger flight to see the lit runway in its full glory head-on from a passenger window, but that time we did... There's an old joke that goes something like this: Aeroflot Pilot: My, these American runways are VERY short! CoPilot: Yes, but look how incredibly WIDE they are! Yuri, what do you think, is that the phone box marked on the map? Damn, a cloud has just got in the way... -- Aeroflot navigator on board a Tu-134... or Il-76 for that matter! Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS Server Fatal Signal 9
This just happened twice: ... blah blah ... cvs server: Updating Aircraft/UIUC/beech99-v1/doc cvs server: Updating Aircraft/UIUC/fkdr1-v1-nl cvs server: Updating Aircraft/UIUC/marchetti-v1 cvs server: Updating Aircraft/UIUC/ornithopter Terminated with fatal signal 9 Just rerun the update command. The cvs server (which I hope to move This happened to me this morning as well. I tried again and again (20 or so times), no change. I solved it by removing the UIUC directory and re-running cvs update, it worked first time. at some point) gets a bit overwhelmed at times and this is a fail save to kill cvs processes that go balistic in their memory use. Just rerun the update and you should get further each time. Sorry for the Mine stopped in exactly the same place every time, in the ornithopter directory. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airbus A320
Last thing on the cockpit voice recorder: Captain: oh look, my gyro has tumbled. CoPilot: look, my gyro has tumbled too. Or the ever popular: Hey, watch this! Last thing on the A320's CVR: Hey, what's this bloody plane doing again? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airbus A320
My wife and I were flying Vangaurd airlines (now defunct?) into Kansas city (on a 737) a couple years ago and on *very short* final the pilot made us all temporarily weightless to get back down on the glide slope quickly. Recent x-rays show that my wife's fingernails are still embeded into the bone of my left forearm. It was a windy day, but not *that* windy. This reminds me of a flight in a British Airways 757 back in 1993, into London Heathrow, when the crew engaged full spoilers plus reversers at full throttle about 3nm from the airport... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] OT: First Flight
I've never had the chance to use a grass runway -- how does it feel as you get close to takeoff speed? We need to start modelling the bumps and jolts in FlightGear. I've taken off one (in the back seat, though), it's surprisingly smooth. I think it's the same effect as when you ride over a pothole on a bicycle -- the faster you go, the smaller the bump. The wheel simply has less time to sink into the hole. Also, by the time you reach take-off speed, load on the undercarriage is fairly small anyway. The bumps might be a problem for sim pilots because the pilot would tend to overcorrect them, not having the feedback of one's bottom that one gets in a real plane. (...much the same as turbulence, I guess.) This gives me an idea -- I think a more challenging thing to model on grass strips is the tall grass hitting the canopy on landing in a glider. Since the glider usually tilts forward a bit because of the torque imposed by the wheelbrake, this looks quite impressive from inside. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Jsbsim-devel] MSFS Aircrafts
A pilot familiar with that plane is almost certainly going to find it very unstable in the pitch axis, and complain that the nose bounces up and down too much. In the real plane, the dynamic pressure from the relative wind tends to hold the control surfaces in one spot, and it takes a bit of effort to move them from where they want to be (a *lot* of effort for a big deflection). A home-computer joystick or yoke might have a little spring in it, but in general, it's going to be far too easy for the computer user to create an elevator deflection, and the plane's going to feel unstable. Just an idea -- if someone were to build proper force-feedback yoke/pedals/etc., would FlightGear be able to drive them realistically? I.e., is force on the controls part of the FDM? Fly! allowed one to change the exponential effect. Possibly it is misnamed, x^n involves an exponent, perhaps it was 'n' that could be varied. MSFS2K appears to have changed to some intrinsic non-linear mapping compared to FS98. I don't know about Fly!, but exponential traditionally is a misnomer. A lot of RC transmitters allow you to set it, but that usually means that the response is proportional until you reach a certain deflection, then makes a kink and the control starts reacting with more authority, but still linearly. No such thing as an exponential function, which is probably because exponentiation is rather difficult to implement in analogue electronics. Fly!, and MS FS/CFS allow one to change 'null zone' and 'sensitivity' for the JS in the menu. Lower sensitivity adds more low Is the null zone there in a real aircraft (backlash), or just a feature of the sim to allow the pilot to go and grab a cup of coffee? -1.0 = -1.00 -0.5 = -0.25 0.0 = 0.00 0.5 = 0.25 1.0 = 1.00 This is a good response, but it also implies that at 0 deflection, the control is totally nonresponsive (gradient is zero). Shouldn't we simply add a linear term here? That would make the control linear around the centre and transition into a square response at higher deflections. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Jsbsim-devel] MSFS Aircrafts
This is a good response, but it also implies that at 0 deflection, the control is totally nonresponsive (gradient is zero). Shouldn't we simply add a linear term here? That would make the control linear around the centre and transition into a square response at higher deflections. I'm not sure that I understand the problem. As soon as you move the control, it is no longer at zero and will get a gradually increasing response. Yes, but wouldn't it be better to have at least a small amount of control around the centre? I think it would make things more natural. The best example I can think of now is aileron -- a linear term would make it easier to keep the aircraft level. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] P-51D 3D model progress
Does anyone know anything about how the radio compass (ADF), upper left instrument should work? I'm not sure yet where the radio controls are (the radio actually sits behind the pilot seat). My biggest problem is not knowing what the second arrow is (the one with two white lines running lenghtwise) and whether or not the dial turns. There is only one knob so I suspect the dial is fixed. I'm not sure one way or the other, but I can show you some pictures that may help. See http://unbeatenpath.net/software/fgfs/P-51D/ADF/ Isn't this simply two ADF indicators in one gauge? I remember a document on the internet mention such, I've forgotten where it was. I guess the knob just rotates the rose for easy bearing calculations. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Hi-Res C172-S Instrument panel
Martin Dressler just sent me his hi-res Bendix-King HSI which rounds out the C172-S instrument panel. This panel is designed to run full screen and sit next to a physical radio stack so it's not complete in and of itself, but it is a beautiful sight to see. Martin does really nice work. Fantastic, this plane is better than ever for IFR training (though tuning the radios via the menu is a bit painful, especially if the mouse is the yoke substitute for lack of dedicated hardware...). Just two questions: I assume that this HSI uses an ADAHRS rather than a gyro, otherwise it would have to be calibrated, and I can't see a calibration knob anywhere. What North does it point to then? Also, if I use the AP in heading mode, why don't any two of the three headings (HSI, HUD, AP buck) coincide? I just tried flying (out of KSFO) with the buck set to 360. HUD shows 356.5, HSI is on 342. I thought the AP would just centre the buck, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Any ideas? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Screenshots: Curt's scenery improvements
Locally I have about 220Gb of HD space dedicated towards storing the original raw data. The intermediate preprocessed form of the data. The shared edge data. And the final scenery. Oh. I didn't expect it to be that much... If we get SRTM data for the whole world, that will have to jump up substantially. Can't things be done in sections? Why would one want to do the whole world in a single operation? For scenery building I'd love to have at least an 8-16 node cluster with really high bandwidth/ low latency net between them, a terrabyte If processing involves a lot of data copying, you'd probably be better off keeping everything on a single computer. Use a multiprocessor machine with lots of storage and lots or RAM. Just an idea: how about using the HP TestDrive farm? They have some nice computers there such as a quad 1GHz Alpha. It would be necessary to ask for their permission first, but this being an open-source project, I wouldn't think this would be a problem. We can then give credit on the website or so. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Screenshots: Curt's scenery improvements
Just an idea: how about using the HP TestDrive farm? They have some nice computers there such as a quad 1GHz Alpha. It would be necessary to ask for their permission first, but this being an open-source project, I wouldn't think this would be a problem. We can then give credit on the website or so. What kind of disk space can they give us? I've just checked, the central file space is 160GB, which is about 50% full right now. It's shared via NFS, unfortunately, so it's not that good really. They still have impressive computing power, I've just checked that they have a 4x800MHz Itanium and a 4x1GHz Alpha. The Itanium has 4GB of RAM, as many of the SMP systems they have. All in all, if it's really just copying data around, then it would be best to do it on a PC with a lot of (local) disk space. From your experience, what difference does CPU speed, the number of CPUs, and the amount of RAM make? As someone else has said, disk space isn't that expensive, and if we get a donation, you could set up a new heater^H^H^H^H^H^HPC in your house with a 1TB RAID made of 4 IDE disks or so. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Screenshots: Curt's scenery improvements
1 arcsec = approximately 30 meters = approximately 100 feet. 3 arcsec = approximately 90 meters = approximately 300 feet. The points are on the lat/lon grid lines so the horizontal spacing becomes smaller as you get further away from the equator. Ahhh, damn, I should have thought a little bit. Forget my previous post! Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Screenshots: Curt's scenery improvements
Hmmm, are you sure ? from my understanding : 360 degres = 44000km 1 degre = 122.22km 1 minute = 2.037km 1 second = 0.033km That's what I just realized. I think it's bedtime. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flying in the UK
Darren Hammond writes: Biggin Hill - South of London Wasn't that a Spitfire and Hurricane base in the Battle of Britain? At least, its name is ringing bells loud enough to smash my windows. Isn't Shoreham the airfield where the annual Battle of Britain airshow takes place? Anyway, you'll probably get to see WWII planes if you go to any of these two. Here's another portal you might want to check out: http://www.flyer.co.uk/ It might be worth asking a question in their forums too. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Teaser
Thanks. Think I read somewhere that Employee of the Month awards come with a 20% pay increase. Let me see... $0.00 + ($0.00 * 0.20) - fed - state - fica - medicare ...hmm... maybe one of math gurus can figure this out for me. Palladium will not allow you to make monetary calculations without written permission from the President of the United States and a license to be obtained from Microsoft Corporation. Click on 'Finish' to obtain a license now. -- 'OK' -- 'Cancel' What shall I do? Ah, got it without the use of a computer: I think that breaks down to his beer getting 20% more expensive. But he will also enjoy it 20% more... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] current bugs (hsi-fix)
http://members.verizon.net/~vze3b42n/newhsi.tar.gz actually works form mozilla if you right click on the link and then in the drop down menu select Save link target as then click save. But for some reason it does not work with the mozilla download manager. Actually, I've been using wget all along... It works now, so I'll give it a go. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] current bugs (hsi-fix)
http://members.verizon.net/~vze3b42n/newhsi.tar.gz actually works form mozilla if you right click on the link and then in the drop down menu select Save link target as then click save. But for some reason it does not work with the mozilla download manager. Great, works fine now. So the problem was within the xml files rather than the c++ code? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Shadows
How about cheating? Add a rectangle under the aircraft, map a fuzzy silhouette texture onto it and animate it down to ground level (translate it based on AGL). Above 50m AGL you'd have to offset up a little to keep it above the terrain. Good idea, but how do you map the silhouette? It would be nice to see the aircraft's shadow change in a roll, for instance, so you can't use a static silhouette. Also, don't forget clouds -- if there are any, the silhouette has to be above them. How about this: after all scenery and clouds have been drawn, and before drawing the aircraft and panel, simply redefine the view/transform matrices so as to create a parallel projection that looks at the aircraft from the opposite direction of where the sun is -- i.e. the sun is behind the aircraft. Then draw the aircraft without any lighting, in plain grey, on top of the scenery with alpha-blending. This will darken out the shadow of the aircraft. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Short-field landing
The wheels must touch nothing but the runway, and you should try to be completely stopped before the first TDZ markings (the two sets of lines just past the number). If you run from a shell window, JSBSim will print out how long your ground roll actually was. Easy -- bang the gears down at 15m/s vertical speed and the fuselage will do the braking for you :-) No, seriously: apply full flaps and idle power, enter steep dive until just above the sea, then level out and pull up to slow down. With this method, I just touched down just past the threshold and rolled a total of 287 feet. I'll try and do better than that. The steeper you dive, the more energy you lose, so the slower your landing will be. I also tried with no flaps, it works, but it's a lot less stable. The trick here is to keep wiggling the nose up and down so as to enter and leave the stall regime all the time in order to lose energy but not fall out of the sky like a brick. David, is the 172p really that hard to stall? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Short-field landing
Here's another challenge to keep people busy: try landing the 172p (default aircraft) on 28L (default runway) at KSFO (default airport) in the shortest distance possible. Start with this command line: fgfs --altitude=600 --vc=70 --offset-distance=1 I've got another no-flap method: cut power, slow to 60kt, keep it there for about 10s, then push full right rudder and keep wings level (kicking rudder left is not so good because you can't see a thing). Just before hitting ground, centre rudder and land. This is the only way I've been able to make a no-flap short landing (333ft on my most recent attempt) without a tail skid. This is my report: Touchdown report for NOSE Sink rate at contact: 2.4998 fps,0.8519 mps Contact ground speed: 48.0378 knots, 27.6309 mps Maximum contact force: 1514.4225 lbs,6736.1511 Newtons Maximum strut travel: 7.6129 inches, 19.3368 cm Distance traveled: 238.5186 ft, 81.2872 meters Touchdown report for LEFT_MAIN Sink rate at contact: 1.6258 fps,0.5541 mps Contact ground speed: 52.2234 knots, 30.0384 mps Maximum contact force: 2653.9679 lbs,11804.8494 Newtons Maximum strut travel: 1.5462 inches, 3.9275 cm Distance traveled: 329.3639 ft, 112.2472 meters Touchdown report for RIGHT_MAIN Sink rate at contact: 1.7856 fps,0.6085 mps Contact ground speed: 52.2898 knots, 30.0766 mps Maximum contact force: 2928.6137 lbs,13026.4739 Newtons Maximum strut travel: 1.2614 inches, 3.2039 cm Distance traveled: 333.0386 ft, 113.4996 meters I think it's reasonably gentle at less than 1m/s for each landing gear. No other part of the plane touched the runway. Remember this is with no flaps at all, and there is no stall involved. Slip landings like this are quite fun in a real plane -- I was in the back seat of a Porsche DR400 when the pilot did one... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Short-field landing
If anyone wants a real challenge, try landing the Cub across the runway instead of along it. It should be easily doable with the 200-foot wide runway, but I haven't quite succeeded yet. I actually find this one a lot easier -- touchdown speed is around 35kt. Can I get a back garden listed as an airfield? :-) Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Call it a day.
Ignore the previous replay. 100 kt is about right. It definately shouldn't be much higher. But the lack of flaps makes it a bit difficult at this time. Really? Are you saying the F-16 can really approach that slowly? I'm not a pilot, but with FGFS, an 100kt approach in a 747 or A4 or TSR.2 is pretty much impossible, in my experience. I would be very surprised if the F-16 allowed a much slower approach than all other jets. BTW, does anybody know at what angle planes (other than the Harrier) usually approach aircraft carriers? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Segmentation fault in FGTower -- ASI and nav still broken!
- ALL planes show a discrepancy between the HUD speed readout and ASI on the panel. If the HUD shows IAS, why does the ASI show less at altitude? (They agree at sea level.) The HUD shows CAS, actually. We're not modelling errors deliberately right now, but eventually the ASI will always be a little off from the CAS. OK, but the IAS and CAS should be reasonably close to each other. I think the difference is simply too big, and it also increases with altitude like that between TAS and IAS should. I don't think 260 KIAS can lead to 320 KCAS at 12000ft, which I just got when flying the 747-yasim. - The combined Nav1 instrument clips the VOR/LOC needle. Again, this shows up in all aircraft I've tested, but the effect depends on the FDM: Do you mean the HSI? I haven't used that much, so it's hard to comment. Who originally designed it? Not sure what it's called, it's the instrument present on many FGFS aircraft that shows a compass rose, a VOR/LOC and glideslope as well as an RDF. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] More weirdnesses
This one is mainly for fun, not to urge anyone to fix anything... - Using wheelbrakes on the F16 model is not a good idea! Why I just managed to crash it into the ground (gear contact!) at 12000ft straight above KSFO is also beyond me. - Does EGHC really have grass strips only? (I know BAe146 etc. fly in and out of there in the real world.) - Do the guys at SLLP really need 4 (!) water towers right next to the runway? - Does that office block really protrude onto the runway at EDDS? It's actually quite fun to fly FGFS with all these little flaws! Once FGFS reaches fully mature level, how about adding a switch to make things buggy intentionally? Would be a bit of a challenge! Imagine making an IFR approach in dense fog and finding a water tower, building, or cow on the runway just before touchdown... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Segmentation fault in FGTower -- ASI and nav still broken!
OK, but the IAS and CAS should be reasonably close to each other. I think the difference is simply too big, and it also increases with altitude like that between TAS and IAS should. I don't think 260 KIAS can lead to 320 KCAS at 12000ft, which I just got when flying the 747-yasim. Let me know if it's better now. Looks a lot better, thanks. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] engine efficiency
David, This is probably obvious, but according to my study materials for the instrument rating, the efficiency of a jet engine depends on the temperature differential between its combustion and the outside air temperature -- that's why jets are very efficient flying near the tropopause at around -60 degC, but burn more fuel for less power in warmer temperatures (i.e. lower). Is YASim taking that into account? Just out of interest, what material is this (who wrote/published it)? Does it give a formula, or at least a reason for this? (I'm asking because I suspect that the author got something very wrong here.) Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] engine efficiency
Just out of interest, what material is this (who wrote/published it)? Does it give a formula, or at least a reason for this? (I'm asking because I suspect that the author got something very wrong here.) It's from the Canadian Forces Air Command Weather Manual (which is quite good, at least for weather). Here's the relevant passage: The performance of an aircraft depends on several factors, among which temperature is important. The efficiency of a jet engine depends in part on the difference between the outside air temperature and the maximum temperature attainable in the combustion chamber. When the air temperature increases above a certain value, depending on the altitude, the true airspeed and the aircraft efficiency both fall off, the aircraft's operating height is reduced and there is an increase in fuel consumption per mile. Thanks. That doesn't give away much of what the author thought... It all seems a bit funny -- if the efficiency drops at a given air temperature, then where does the combustion temperature come in? And why is the change not continuous and smooth? Anyway, I suspect the author read about the optimal efficiency of thermodynamic engines somewhere, and abused the efficiency of the Carnot cycle here... that efficiency is indeed 1-T1/T2, where T1 and T2 are the lowest and highest temperatures in the cycle, respectively. BUT it only applies to closed-cycle processes, which the jet engine's combustion process definitely isn't. Also, it is only a theoretical maximum that is technically difficult to get close to. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Segmentation fault in FGTower
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x080a1434 in FGTower::Update() (this=0xa71a2d8) at tower.cxx:171 171 ground-SetDisplay(); (gdb) bt #0 0x080a1434 in FGTower::Update() (this=0xa71a2d8) at tower.cxx:171 #1 0x0808bb81 in FGATCMgr::update(double) (this=0x94382d0, dt=0.0467170002) at /usr/include/g++/bits/stl_list.h:138 #2 0x0805624c in fgMainLoop () at ../../src/Main/globals.hxx:235 #3 0x4003954e in idleWait () from /usr/lib/libglut.so.3 #4 0x080524df in main (argc=1, argv=0xbfffef24) at main.cxx:1817 #5 0x403f64a2 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 Furthermore, print ground tells you that ground=NULL, i.e. it isn't initialized. Maybe this helps. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ..OT: cvs as company data backup server engine?
..my idea is use cvs as a data backup server engine to _promptly_ back up whatever new file is saved, to cvs, and instead do the backup to the tape, off the cvs code base, rather than the traditional way, full, incremental, differential etc, off the file systems, every hour, day, week etc. Quite a lot of work to be done here! You'll have to ... 1. ... discover whenever a file has been modified, WITHOUT polling it. You'll probably have to modify an existing filesystem (or write your own) to do this. 2. ... be able to make a difference between saving and writing to a file. It makes sense to backup a file when a user saves a document from an application, but it's not a good idea to do this for files whenever they get written to -- you would end up with a commit for each line written to a log file, for example! 3. ... make sure you handle user permissions. If you use more-or-less plain CVS, you would have to store all backup files with the same permissions -- first, you'll have to store their permissions with them somehow, then you would have to create your web-to-cvs interface so that it only allows access to the user's files, that means the user will have to type their password in the browser. 4. ... take care of expiry -- if you store all versions of all files, you'll inevitably run out of space, and this is bound to happen at the worst moment possible. ..pointers to anyone who beat me to this idea is _much_ appreciated, as are pointers to resources telling me I'm an idiot thinking this is possible. Thank you anyway. :-) Seems like a good idea, and one that would probably make you famous (you could probably even make money off it, like some people do with PHP4 and MySQL, both widely used open-source projects). Implementing it on top of CVS seems a bit of a suicide mission though -- it looks a lot easier to take an open-source filesystem (which MUST have journalling AND access control lists if you're serious about it), and build your backup functionality into it. While you're at it, make it network-transparent with encryption and authentication a la kerberos. I might have some more ideas in the future (I've thought about redundant filesystems before, mainly because there is no really useable shared and redundant filesystem on the open-source market today), let's see. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Segmentation fault in FGTower -- ASI and nav still broken!
My UUCP connection is broken this afternoon, so I can't directly reply to dave's mail. Nevertheless I tried his patch - yet without success: OK, I think I've fixed it now - if you could try it again that would be great. Seems to be OK now. I've just tested a few planes. Here is what I have found: - ALL planes show a discrepancy between the HUD speed readout and ASI on the panel. If the HUD shows IAS, why does the ASI show less at altitude? (They agree at sea level.) - The HUD shows true heading rather than magnetic heading, which is confusing. (Again, all planes.) - The combined Nav1 instrument clips the VOR/LOC needle. Again, this shows up in all aircraft I've tested, but the effect depends on the FDM: + for YaSim planes, the needle is stuck as if true heading were 360 whenever the plane flies a true heading between 180 and 360, thus making westerly (i.e. most usual) approaches difficult. + for JSBSim planes, the needle is stuck whenever the heading lies between true North and magnetic North. This can only be observed for one sign of variation -- you see an effect at KSFO, but the instrument works fine at EDDF. These are both issues that should be easy to fix. Would someone who is more familiar with the code look into it for me please? Aircraft tested, just for reference: 747-yasim, c310-yasim, c310, c310-3d. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 747-400 cruise information
I asked a 747-400 pilot what was the fuel flow per engine at cruise. He said about 6000 lb-per-hour. Assuming a TSFC of 0.5 (I've seen 0.318 and 0.348 for the PW4060, but I don't trust these numbers) that would mean each engine is developing 12000 pounds of thrust. Therefore the total drag on the airplane at cruise is 48000 pounds, and total fuel flow is 24000 pph. Well. The YaSim model seems to burn something like 2000-4000 GALLONS per hour (depending on altitude and weight) during normal cruise (33000ft) per engine. Go figure. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] current bugs
My gutt feeling is that all the YASim jet's consume fuel faster than they should. The a4 can go about 150 miles before it runs out of fuel. I'm not a jet pilot though so maybe I'm doing something wrong. Hmmm. I've just taken that bird for a spin, I flew from EDDF to EDDM at airliner-style cruise speed, FL180, back to EDDM at FL270 (without landing), finally (again no descent) at FL330 to EDDS, and landed there. There were 1400lbs of fuel left still. EDDM is more than 150nm from EDDF, and EDDS is very roughly half-way between them. I've never actually flown a real plane, so maybe I should just shut up anyway. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] current bugs
This is probably obvious, but according to my study materials for the instrument rating, the efficiency of a jet engine depends on the temperature differential between its combustion and the outside air temperature -- that's why jets are very efficient flying near the tropopause at around -60 degC, but burn more fuel for less power in warmer temperatures (i.e. lower). Is YASim taking that into account? Being a physicist, not a pilot, I would have thought that air pressure has a much larger effect. After all, the temperature change is rather small compared to the temperature difference: outside air temperature changes by maybe 75K between ground and cruise altitude, the temperature inside the combustion chamber is something like 1500K (or at least of that order of magnitude, I haven't got figures). Pressure, on the other hand, changes by a factor of 4 between sea level and 37000ft. That makes me think -- how come jet engines are so much more efficient at altitude? Most modern airliners use turbofans with high bypass ratios, and the bypass part should become less efficient at lower air pressure! In any case, I think it's more a question of drag-to-efficiency ratio than efficiency alone, so it gets a bit more complicated... You could also check the throttle setting in the cruise parameters. I The 747 YASim config file has the throttle at 0.75. Cruise parameters? How do they affect my flying if I control everything by hand? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] more bugs
Has anyone looked at (or at least confirmed) the panel ASI and NAV problems? I've just found another one -- on aircraft on which the ASI works, the HUD and ASI readout for IAS don't match -- it seems that the panel ASI gets multiplied by the IAS/TAS ratio twice. I assume of course that the HUD shows IAS. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] [OT] tyre squeak
I've recently watched one of my favourite films called The Big Blue. I was amazed to find that even in a great film like this they added that fake tyre squeak sound on landing -- of a helicopter! Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] current bugs
[Re-post -- the first one of 15 Feb doesn't seem to have made it.] Hi, here are a couple bugs that make flying FlightGear rather difficult but must be rather easy to fix: - some time ago (a week or two), the 2D panel ASI stopped working on most aircraft I use (Seahawk, TSR.2, B52). The same applies to some of the other instruments (AoA, turn ind.) - the main nav display is clamped incorrectly. That is, the yellow indicators rotate nicely with the compass rose when heading is between 0 and 180 but behave like the compass is at 0 or 180 when you leave that range. Rather useless as most common approaches are westerly, and the localizer would be so much easier to use were the indicator pointing in the right direction... Also, has anyone actually managed to fly a 747 from Europe to the US or the other way round? I just tried that, and first of all, I found it hard to get to a decent altitude (the autopilot keeps stalling it) at a decent speed -- or is 300kt IAS at 3ft normal for a 747? This is at 90% throttle, I don't think it would go higher than that in real-life flight. Also, my 19lbs of fuel ran out at way less than halfway through the flight (I was more than 5 hours from the destination) -- am I doing something wrong, or is there a problem with the engine/fuel model? Finally, what's happening with the full-screen panel IFR C172 models? They both seem to be broken at the moment. Just my usual two pence, keep up the good work! Andras P.S.: Does EGHC (Land's End) really have grass runways? I love the cows in the area though -- they actually ARE there in reality... P.S.2.: I'm looking forward to seeing David Culp's new aircraft in CVS some day... === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Hmmmm
InterTran results: translation Too much he espouse. He is being THREE ' heartburn espouse when dw I ' heartburn play 'Flightgear' I go he is being two he one has ' heartburn espouse before the tw. He is being anyone ' heartburn blemish serious except we were we police force and ambulance I go machine fire. I looked I ' group game Scotland and Ireland. He is being game ' heartburn hand sail. He will be Ireland ' heartburn win receiving England? l appraise hard! He is being Telsa ' heartburn reach by Bristol. There is not anything train go by Bristol crookedly Swansea about Sunday now! He was she ' heartburn has tired I go anything happy. /translation Wow. Welsh must be a romantic language when every other word means heartburn... I love the He is being Telsa bit. What? Alan is coming to Bristol? He would be most welcome... As to DRI (Welsh for THREE!) crashing, I don't even need FlightGear to crash my computer with DRI CVS, it crashes on startup of the X server. Hmmm, maybe it's time to also install the kernel module from DRI? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] c172 instrument bugs
Just thought I'd note that these new instruments are pretty heavy on texture memory. Might be a big frame hit for some cards. They sure look nice though, especially when zooming in! Another thought: whenever the full-screen panel models are working again (they are currently both broken, at least they were on Friday), I would like to try them out with two screens. The problem here is that the secondary screen (showing the panel) doesn't have any 3D hardware (it's a laptop), so the panel will probably be rather sluggish. So my question is whether it would be possible to create a panel that's easy on the graphics engine so that you don't need accelerated OpenGL on each and every screen being used. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] current bugs
Hi, here are a couple bugs that make flying FlightGear rather difficult must be rather easy to fix: - some time ago (a week or two), the 2D panel ASI stopped working on most aircraft I use (Seahawk, TSR.2, B52). The same applies to some of the other instruments (AoA, turn ind.) - the main nav display is clamped incorrectly. That is, the yellow indicators rotate nicely with the compass rose when heading is between 0 and 180 but behave like the compass is at 0 or 180 when you leave that range. Rather useless as most common approaches are westerly, and the localizer would be so much easier to use were the indicator pointing in the right direction... Also, has anyone actually managed to fly a 747 from Europe to the US or the other way round? I just tried that, and first of all, I found it hard to get to a decent altitude (the autopilot keeps stalling it) at a decent speed -- or is 300kt IAS at 3ft normal for a 747? This is at 90% throttle, I don't think it would go higher than that in real-life flight. Also, my 19lbs of fuel ran out at way less than halfway through the flight (I was more than 5 hours from the destination) -- am I doing something wrong, or is there a problem with the engine/fuel model? Finally, what's happening with the full-screen panel IFR C172 models? They both seem to be broken at the moment. Just my usual two pence, keep up the good work! Andras P.S.: Does EGHC (Land's End) really have grass runways? I love the cows in the area though -- they actually ARE there in reality... P.S.2.: I'm looking forward to seeing David Culp's new aircraft in CVS some day... === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] In-Air collision ?
I had a strange effect today: I'm flying from KHAF to KSFO (somewhat 'blind' but interesting), as described in the posting 'Scud running' :-) Shortly before reaching KSFO apparently detects a collision. But there is no tree or building around: This used to be a problem with an earlier CVS build that I had when flying into KHAF (exclusively). On an approach from the East, the plane touched down (didn't crash though), then took off again somewhere half a mile out from the runway. There was no terrain nearby, and no trees that high. I haven't been able to reproduce this for a while though. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ANN: Turbulence
Great work, Jon and David! Here's a command-line for a fun approach (it would be more fun if I added a strong crosswind and low visibility, but you'll get the point): fgfs --offset-distance=2 --altitude=1000 --vc=80 --prop:/environment/turbulence-norm=1.0 (Keep your airspeed up right to the flare.) What flare? :-( Can you seriously land a plane like this? Also, doesn't turbulence get less when you get closer to the ground? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Possible Debian unstable problem ?
Something went wrong in flightgear during my last dist-upgrade (sid)... and I think it has something to do with the transition from gcc 2.95 to 3.2. (it fails to load some shared libraries). In any case, my CVS compiled version works fine, but the one in Debian's database fails to run. I've had this one recently. C++ libraries compiled with gcc 3.x and 2.x are incompatible. Make sure all your plib/metakit/simgear/flightgear is compiled with the same compiler. It's only a matter of time before Debian's plib etc. gets updated, but that again will break many things temporarily. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] How are light singles parked? [OT]
I think we're talking cheese. I guess no American would ever eat anything with 'light' in it's name! That's because here anything with light in the name tastes like crap. If it's different in the U.K., I'm moving! ;-) You're very welcome! Light doesn't mean much these days, simply because you can hardly find anything else (in fact, they often invent some new words for it just to attract customers). In the UK, light stuff is OK, the only thing I wouldn't touch is skimmed milk (or even semi-skimmed milk), it's just opaque water. Go to a cafe and order a big breakfast -- you'll know what the opposite of US light is. Oh, and you can buy infinite quantities of Cadbury's chocolate (good stuff), and Haribo's, and lots of really healthy things... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] keyboard commands for spoilers and reheat
Hi, I've added reheat commands to my keyboard.xml, I put them on shift+PgUP/PgDn, which seems to work for me. I think we should have similar mappings for spoilers and reversers/speedbrakes (whenever we have them in a model), but I can't find a good place for them on the keyboard. Any suggestions? One thing I noticed with the reheat is that the range seems to be too large, i.e. with the keyboard mappings I can set a reheat of less than 0% or more than 100%. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] runways at LHBP?
I can find nothing anywhere else suggesting a new runway at Ferihegy. Landing on taxiways or even at the wrong airport is not completely without precident. LOL... I can assure you it was the right airport, and given that no reversers and only little wheelbrake was used, the runway must have been quite long, certainly longer than the taxiway in that direction. The crew was quite professional, the landing was exceptionally smooth given that it was an A319 and we had a fair amount of crosswind. The only thing I can imagine is that it was a DME approach, and we did a very gradual right turn in the last 10 minutes -- but that would have required more room really. And there is no navaid in the right place anyway. No way we could have turned left into 31R, that would have required a 140deg turn which I wouldn't have missed. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] runways at LHBP?
Too bad they make you turn your gps off during the last few minutes of the flight. My little hand held garmin can pick up enough satellites to get a position if I hold it right up to the window of the aircaft. I was pretty amazed that it actually worked when I tried it on my last flight. Next time I'll have to find a laptop and plug it into the serial port and watch where I am with Atlas. :-) Well, put it against the window, then put your coat on it and pretend to sleep... I'll do that once I have a GPS (which sadly isn't now). I guess the waypoints stored by the GPS should give you a good idea of the route taken, I hope one can download that into the computer? Apropos GPS: check these out: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/297890/M/ http://www.airliners.net/open.file/269193/M/ I guess the navigator never uses any of the old radar etc. equipment anymore... Or if we could get that data to drive a DCS aircraft in FlightGear I could escort myself in the A4 ... until I ran out of fuel that is. Damn, we haven't got a VC10 tanker model yet? Would be good to have in-flight refuelling really... Reminds me: once we have that going and have Vulcan and Victor models, we should get a LAN/WAN party together to fly a Black Buck mission! I bet you can't do that with any other commercial flight simulator any time soon. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] runways at LHBP?
The only thing I can imagine is that it was a DME approach, and we did a very gradual right turn in the last 10 minutes -- but that would have required more room really. And there is no navaid in the right place anyway. No way we could have turned left into 31R, that would have required a 140deg turn which I wouldn't have missed. Your body's sensations of turning and level flight are extremely unreliable without a good outside view, especially in an aircraft cabin with only a tiny side window. That's what I thought, but the sky was clear and we could see all the lights on the ground. I can even remember crossing the main road that leads to the airport -- it's west of the airport and pretty much parallel to the 13/31 runways. Damn, I should have asked the captain. Still puzzled... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] runways at LHBP?
Sounds like a very reliable plane and/or company when the pilot has to ask an ordinary passenger for his ground speed... What would he do if no passenger had a GPS? Fly more carefully as he doesn't know how reliable his data is? Captain: Hey, can you hold onto the yoke for a few minutes, I need to run to the back and grab some pretzels. Push forward, trees get bigger, pull back, trees get smaller, left, right, yadda, yadda, you'll get the hang of it pretty quickly. But whatever you do, don't touch that big button over there. Great description... have you heard of the incident a while ago when a cargo plane carrying live animals nearly crashed because a monkey escaped from the cage and beat the crew out of the flight deck to take control itself? The crew reoccupied the flight deck after some time, though. The Aeroflot A320 wasn't that lucky... BTW, what big button are you referring to? I didn't know the PC-12 had missiles on board... I think I'd go into the cabin and lock the door behind me. :-) If only the PC-12 had a door rather than a curtain... Anyone know any good ways of getting permission to get onto the flight deck for a commercial flight? (I'm not thinking of box cutters, BTW.) (Also, I'm not a pilot and don't know the crew.) Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] runways at LHBP?
If it was at night, then anything you saw was especially unreliable. Pilots have a hard time flying VFR at night even with a full view out the front, and everything you see looks different. You were probably just on the approach to 13L/R. That would have taken us straight over the city, which certainly wasn't the case (the Danube is a very distinct landmark hard to mistake for anything else). I can even remember crossing the main road that leads to the airport -- it's west of the airport and pretty much parallel to the 13/31 runways. Are you sure you saw the right road? Again, it's *really* hard to do this at night. I found night circuits even within 2nm of the airport of my home town extremely challenging -- it was very hard to keep track of what was what. I can't be 100% sure of this one really. My guess now is that we flew straight above the airport using one of the two on-site VORs, then did a slow right-hand teardrop into 31L. It's all still very funny because it certainly was a non-standard approach (all standard IFR approaches I could find take you through the ERGOM fix into 13L/R), and LHBP has very strict rules for noise abatement and therefore doesn't normally allow deviations from normal procedures. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] IVAO support?
Damn, I'm starting to feel rather uncomfortable asking all these questions without actually contributing... I've recently come across a website which promises to be a global aviation simulation platform: http://www.ivao.org/ You can connect as a pilot or air traffic controller, using TCP/IP protocols. My problem is that the programs they specify are all Window$-based, worse even, one of them is M$ FS. Has anyone tested this to see what functionality FlightGear is still missing to be useful in this scenario? It might be worth negotiating with the tech guys at IVAO to see whether a direct network interface between IVAO and FG could be implemented, rather than having to go through SquawkBox or so. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] plib 1.6 problems fixed (?)
I've made all PSL support in FlightGear conditional now, so there should be no more build problems with the official plib 1.6 release. Could someone using plib 1.6 do a CVS update and rebuild to confirm? I still get this: g++-2.95 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../src/Include -I../.. -I../../src -I/usr/local/SimGear/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -DPKGLIBDIR=\/usr/local/FlightGear/lib/FlightGear\ -g -O2 -c -o location.o `test -f location.cxx || echo './'`location.cxx make[2]: *** No rule to make target `../../src/Scripting/libScripting.a', needed by `fgfs'. Stop. make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/scratch/FlightGear/src/Main' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/scratch/FlightGear/src' make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 I did a complete rebuild from fresh CVS. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] plib 1.6 problems fixed (?) -- Radeon 8500 working now
Thanks for catching that. I've patched up src/Main/Makefile.am, and would be grateful if you could do a cvs update and make. There's no need to rebuild from scratch. It now works fine, thanks a lot! I like the terminal building at KSFO... Also, now that I give the mem=nopentium option to the kernel, I haven't had a single lockup yet, even after taking a TSR2, a B52, a 747, and an A4 for a spin. I landed with the first three, but I let the A4 circle (with autopilot and time-warp) until it ran out of fuel -- it did so before the X server had a chance to crash! Thanks for everyone who helped! Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Scud running
Knowing the route helps. Before starting I did a test run in the clear and found you could go back to the bridge (easy landmark) and head SW from there. Probably making it through the notch. I got just about all the way through and got hungup in a loop at a tile change (something to do with having terrasync parameters in my startup file without terrasync running I think). This is a really good one, David -- I think I would end up with s*** in my pants if I had to do this for real! Here's another one, I've just done it in a TSR.2 (not easy, even just taking off in this wind was quite hard -- maybe there's a problem with the yasim model?): keep the runway heading until you notice that the ground is getting higher, (there's a ridge there). Then turn somewhat towards west, which might lead you to another ridge, but that's only just not too high so you can fly over it without flying in cloud. You can then go on and try to land at Halfmoon Bay airfield KHAF (I haven't tried, finding it will be the next challenge). Does the real C172 shake like that in wind, or is it the changing wind that makes it dance? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] KSFO International Terminal
David, the link you provided might be of help here: http://edj.net/cgi-bin/echoplate.pl?SouthWest/SFO_.GIF It's only 2D, but it gives you a good idea where things are. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] runways at LHBP?
Anyone know of a new runway at LHBP (Budapest Ferihegy), or where I can find more up-to-date information about it? Depending on how good your Hungarian is, you can try this: http://www.bud-airport.hu/ Thanks, my Hungarian is fine, but there is no information on that site that I could use -- I can find out that there is a WLAN in the terminal buildings and that they now have facilities to do major overhauls on the A320 family (in addition to the 737), but nothing about the airport itself -- no map or anything. There is a gallery, but it doesn't show a single aerial view. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft updates in CVS
Talking British (well, European): how about Concorde, followed by some nice little Fokker 50 or ATR? Just make sure the Concorde's wings move as it accelerates on the ground... Concorde has fixed wings - I don't think they are supposed to move ;-) The nose moves down for better sight, I've never been in one, but I heard that the wings flex upwards visibly as lift increases during the take-off run. Oh, and don't forget that the bird is noticably longer when in Mach 2 cruise, simply because of thermal expansion of the outer skin. There is a gap at the back of the flightdeck into which you can place your hand during cruise but which is not even wide enough for a sheet of paper when on the ground. :-) Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft updates in CVS
Oh, I'd say Lee has a good taste ;-) BTW, he did a B-52 - didn't he ? Without looking at what was done by whom, just from the way things look: didn't he also make the A10 and the Warrior? To me, these are not British either... Great work, keep it up! Talking British (well, European): how about Concorde, followed by some nice little Fokker 50 or ATR? Just make sure the Concorde's wings move as it accelerates on the ground... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [Off-Topic] Aircraft updates in CVS
Quoted from www.auntymonkey.com, An Interview with the [Hot Air Balloon] World Chamion David Bareford:: 8. Why is England so good at ballooning but fairly average at every other sport? England has always been very good at aviation sports but because of that they never publicise it in the national press. We have a another tradition of inventing sports and beating the world until everyone else learns to play it then we end up getting thrashed - we then move on to inventing another sport. Oh, is that why you invented Rugby after your football team was beaten 6:3 and 7:1 by Hungary in 1953? :-) Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft updates in CVS
Has anyone got this bird airborne? It locks up as soon as my gear lifts off the runway. Yes, I've just taken one for a spin around KSFO. Is this a lockup of FlightGear (probably meaning that you have pulled the stick so far at a low speed as to crash the tail into the ground -- I'm guessing that would be recognized as a crash), or a hard lockup of the X server? It's a fast plane that needs quite a lot of airspeed to lift off, but it also has the brakes to match. Certainly a nice one, especially with the good animations. If only the black box played those back too! Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 747 segfault
#1 ssgSGIHeader::ssgSGIHeader(... /usr/local/FlightGear/lib/FlightGear/Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-jw-08.rgb, ...) at ssgLoadSGI.cxx:328 This is plib crashing while trying to load a texture file. My guess is that something is wrong with this texture. Either it doesn't exist, or is corrupt. Try updating your base package. OK, thanks a lot, Andy! I wonder why cvs never updated that file -- after deleting it and updating the directory from cvs, it now works fine. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 747 segfault
Can one of you get a stack trace in gdb to see where it's crashing? This is the command line: /usr/local/FlightGear/bin/fgfs --fg-root=/usr/local/FlightGear/lib/FlightGear --aircraft=747 This is what gdb says: Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. [Switching to Thread 16384 (LWP 1137)] 0x08401482 in ssgSGIHeader::getRow (this=0x8f10ce0, buf=0x8f19cb8 '\004' repeats 200 times..., y=862, z=3) at ssgLoadSGI.cxx:211 211 *bufp++ = *tmpp++ ; (gdb) bt #0 0x08401482 in ssgSGIHeader::getRow (this=0x8f10ce0, buf=0x8f19cb8 '\004' repeats 200 times..., y=862, z=3) at ssgLoadSGI.cxx:211 #1 0x084017eb in ssgSGIHeader::ssgSGIHeader (this=0x8f10ce0, fname=0x8e5b0d0 /usr/local/FlightGear/lib/FlightGear/Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-jw-08.rgb, info=0xbfffce50) at ssgLoadSGI.cxx:328 #2 0x08401c85 in ssgLoadSGI (fname=0x8e5b0d0 /usr/local/FlightGear/lib/FlightGear/Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-jw-08.rgb, info=0xbfffce50) at ssgLoadSGI.cxx:496 #3 0x0840094b in ssgLoadTexture (filename=0x8e5b0d0 /usr/local/FlightGear/lib/FlightGear/Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-jw-08.rgb, info=0xbfffce50) at ssgLoadTexture.cxx:301 #4 0x083fdd3a in ssgTexture::ssgTexture (this=0x8e5b090, fname=0xbfffceb0 /usr/local/FlightGear/lib/FlightGear/Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-jw-08.rgb, _wrapu=1, _wrapv=1, _mipmap=1) at ssgTexture.cxx:139 #5 0x0843aa07 in ssgLoaderOptions::createTexture (this=0x88d5740, tfname=0x8e5ae20 boeing747-400-jw-08.rgb, wrapu=1, wrapv=1, mipmap=1) at ssgLoad.cxx:117 #6 0x083f1794 in get_state (mat=0x8e5aa68) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:220 #7 0x083f2aa3 in do_refs (s=0xbfffd7fd 3\n) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:579 #8 0x083f163c in search (tags=0x84b4f70, s=0xbfffd7fd 3\n) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:129 #9 0x083f2219 in do_surf (s=0xbfffdc7d 0x10\n) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:497 #10 0x083f163c in search (tags=0x84b4f60, s=0xbfffdc7d 0x10\n) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:129 #11 0x083f2175 in do_numsurf (s=0xbfffe0f0 6\n) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:484 #12 0x083f163c in search (tags=0x84b4f00, s=0xbfffe0f0 6\n) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:129 #13 0x083f1c29 in do_object () at ssgLoadAC.cxx:322 #14 0x083f163c in search (tags=0x84b4ee0, s=0xbfffe56f poly\n) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:129 #15 0x083f1c62 in do_object () at ssgLoadAC.cxx:330 #16 0x083f163c in search (tags=0x84b4ee0, s=0xbfffe9ef world\n) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:129 #17 0x083f2e70 in ssgLoadAC (fname=0x88f0d70 Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-jw.ac, options=0x0) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:676 #18 0x083f2c27 in ssgLoadAC3D (fname=0x88f0d70 Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-jw.ac, options=0x0) at ssgLoadAC.cxx:601 #19 0x0843ac4f in ssgLoad (fname=0x88f0d70 Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-jw.ac, options=0x0) at ssgLoad.cxx:223 #20 0x082ddc40 in fgLoad3DModel (path=@0xb854) at model.cxx:281 #21 0x082e0a41 in FGModelPlacement::init (this=0x8e5a070, path=@0xb854) at model.cxx:639 #22 0x082e2377 in FGAircraftModel::init (this=0x8e59f08) at acmodel.cxx:57 #23 0x08055216 in fgMainInit (argc=3, argv=0xb9b4) at main.cxx:1658 #24 0x08056696 in main (argc=3, argv=0xb9b4) at main.cxx:1818 Other than that, I am running both FlightGear and fgfsbase from CVS (Root is :pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9 and :pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/cvsroot, respectively), no modifications. I haven't updated plib and SimGear in a while though. Hope this helps, Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] panel on Radeon 8500
This sounds vaguely like it's related to the glPolygonOffset issue I mentioned. The offsets for the instrument layers would be different from the background offset by a number proportional to the depth slope of the polygon. I posted a 1-liner fix, and I think it made it into CVS. Can you try current CVS and see if it's fixed? As soon as I get hardware acceleration re-working on that machine (went South during an attempted upgrade to XFree86 4.2) I'll post back how it works... I can confirm that both 2D and 3D panels (747 and A4) are shown correctly with no flicker on XFree86 4.2.1-4 from Debian sid with linux 2.4.20 and ATI's unified (fglrx) drivers, version 2.5.1, on x86. There is another issue with the A4 though -- pressing shift-KP8 gives a default view which is nicely out of the window, but the instruments are no longer on the screen. This is probably a simple bug in the xml files, but I don't have the time to dig into it and fix it. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] panel on Radeon 8500
You mean that the view is looking too far up, above the level of the instruments, right? Not that there's a rendering error preventing them from being drawn? That's right, it's only the direction of view, not rendering itself. It's actually a little deeper than that. The keypad 8 view control sets the view straight ahead. But that's too high for a typical fighter panel. For visibility reasons, military jets essentially put the panel in the pilots lap. The a4-set.xml file defines the default configuration for view 0 as looking down by 170 to give a better default view. Ah. FWIW, I have a joystick hat mapped to pan the view and use that exclusively. Once you get used to the 3D cockpit, you really don't mind the lack of a default. If I want to look down, I just look down. Waiting for the day when I have a proper yoke/stick/pedal/throttle/hat switch/bottle holder/ejection seat input device myself. Doing all this with a single mouse is a pain. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] panel on Radeon 8500
Yes, several people reported a completely grey 2D panel with Radeon 7000/7500 cards with the DRI drivers. I also get this (with XFree86 4.1.0) and didn't manage to find a fix posted. The problem goes away when software rendering is used. It also affects the 3D panel instrument needles, which flicker, and disappear when the view is set exactly straight forwards. The cub is not affected by this though. I think we have already identified this as related to the depth buffer on two elements (panel and background) which have the same depth -- then, depending on rounding errors, one or the other will be rendered on top. May I suggest a straight-forward solution: - For 2D panels, disable GL_DEPTH_TEST altogether. It just doesn't make sense. The only thing you have to be careful with is that all scenery is drawn before the panel is banged on top. - For 3D panels, they should be made real 3D panels -- needles should be some 2mm closer to the viewer than the scale. If you're worried about performance of the many glVertex3* commands, you can glPushMatrix, introduce a glTranslate, render the object with glVertex2*, then glPopMatrix. I think this is a much more robust approach than the polygon offset, which seems to be driver-specific (sorry, still haven't had time to look at the GL specs). What do you think? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] panel on Radeon 8500
Hi, this is my latest in the neverending series of dumb questions. I have a Radeon 8500 that does a great job for most of my work. I currently use the ATI binary driver (since XFree86 hasn't quite got good 3D support, but it's getting there). I updated the driver from the fglr200-1.4.3 to the unified fglrx-2.5.1 version, and two things have changed: - its performance is better, now I can actually land in KSJC with the photo scenery and it's still smooth. - the 747-yasim panel is not drawn at all -- all I get is the beige background, no instruments. Running the same CVS build without DRI, I get all instruments (at 0.3fps though). All worked fine with the older driver. Any ideas why this could be? Is there any OpenGL code in fgfs that allows ambiguity, like equal Z for panel/instruments with depth buffer enabled? BTW, the A4-yasim 3D panels appear to be just fine. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] panel on Radeon 8500
- the 747-yasim panel is not drawn at all -- all I get is the beige background, no instruments. Running the same CVS build without DRI, I get all instruments (at 0.3fps though). All worked fine with the older driver. There is no 747 panel...yet. :-) Sorry, I only said 747 because that was the only one I could run in the broken build I used. I now fixed that one, it happens with all 2D panels, 172, 182, 747 (press P), etc. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] heading: magnetic or not?
Just another question: I noticed that the different places in which heading plays a role (the different indicators as well as the autopilot) use magnetic and geographic heading at will. Are there any plans to unify them and/or come up with a convention of what heading is magnetic and what isn't? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] panel on Radeon 8500
Another ATI bug I've noticed is that they seem to have trouble with texture border. It's sampling the border color even when there is no border width defined, with the result that the runway tiles have dark shadows between them. Screenshot at: http://www.plausible.org/andy/ati-texture-border.jpg Oh, I thought they were just nice realistic tiles -- some runways are made of tiles of concrete about the size of the ones that appear with the ARI driver... Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] panel on Radeon 8500
OK, this turns out to be a trivial fix, although I still think it's a driver bug. There are two calls to glPolygonOffset in the panel rendering code (shared by both 2D and 3D panels). One is called per-layer, and sets up a layer-specific offset. The other is called for drawing the background textures, to lift them off of any underlying cockpit geometry. Isn't it better to disable GL_DEPTH_TEST for the 2D panels? It seems a waste anyway. I've included a single line that does that in panel.cxx, and the panels are drawn correctly. Maybe you have to turn it back on afterwards, but I haven't checked for side effects yet. Problem is, by my reading of the specification the bug should have had the effect of pushing the background texture *farther* behind the instruments, instead of pulling it on top of them. Either I'm reading the spec incorrectly or ATI has inverted the sense of the factor argument. Dunno, I'll submit a bug report to them and see what happens. Oh, I wasn't aware of polygon offsets -- nice feature, will be useful for my own stuff one day. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] heading: magnetic or not?
- The autopilot in the 172 tries to keep the orange heading bug at the top of the directional gyro, period. If you set the DG to the true heading (as you would in the Arctic), then the autopilot uses true Ever flown a (real) 172 across the North Pole? :-) The only place you can get the true heading directly is the HUD, which isn't really meant to simulate anything you'll find in a small plane -- it's just a (useful) developer's tool or a user's toy. Usually it should be turned off. Oh. I used the HUD quite a bit in the past because it gives me information I really want given the limits of the input devices I have (mouse and keyboard...). How about the HSI on the A4 panel? It appears to be fixed at true heading, and it doesn't seem to be adjustable (it's supposed to be a gyro, so it should be). Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] building models
Hi, I just came across a website: http://www.greatbuildings.com/ They have information on important buildings, many have downloadable 3D models. Those of you involved in creating scenery: how about adding a real Eiffel tower in Paris, for example? (Assuming it's not yet there.) Please Cc: to me as well when you reply. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] FDR playback broken?
Hi, has anyone recently used the FDR? I've just recorded a couple of flights with the a4-yasim, and whenever I try to play back the recording, fgfs dies with a segfault. The commands used were the ones from README.IO, and I've used them once a while ago with the c172. Maybe it's a yasim issue? If you need more specific info, tell me how to obtain it, and I'll run a test. Anyway, can anybody reproduce this? Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] autopilot problem
Hi, another nasty question from a user who hasn't bothered browsing through the source code: I have found in the CVS of FlightGear recently that the autopilot's altitude function doesn't work. It reliably steers me into the ground no matter what altitude I set (tried 3000, 5000, 15000, etc.), and regardless of which aircraft I fly (c172, c310, 747-yasim, a4-yasim). Ignore this if you haven't got the time to look into it... Cheers, Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] autopilot problem
You -are- engaging it and not just setting a target, right? I ask because I'm not seeing a problem, but I only checked the 172 Sure. F11, then 3000ft or so. It takes over the trim for me. Try with 747-yasim, take off, around 1000ft engage the AP to 3000ft and hope you haven't got too many passengers on board. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] O/T: Home made yoke
Matt, I've been looking at the comparitive high price of good quality analogue yokes and I wondered how difficult it would be to make my own and if anyone here has made one? I figured that there might be a place that I could buy an old yoke and shaft from a Cessna, Piper or similar and with a little engineering and some military grade rotary potentiometers an analogue yoke wouldn't be too difficult to make would it? Great idea, I've thought of something like that, too. My latest idea would be to buy a cheap 4-axis USB joystick (can be had for less than GBP20 each), rip it up, and you'll have all the USB electronics you need. Buy more of these if you need more axes (for multiple throttles, toebrakes, etc.). Remember: the price you pay for a joystick is for the mechanics, the electronics is almost free, so you can expect pretty good electronics even from the cheapest models. I also thought of doing this with USB but maybe that would be too difficult? You can always try analogue first, but you'll have a problem with the number of axes you need. USB also has the big advantage that it is electrically robust, so you don't run into problems with your rudder cable picking up noise from the rest of your computer, mobile phone, etc. If you want to program a USB chip, it shouldn't be too difficult, since the HID endpoint specifications are available (I think), so you know exactly what you have to code. The Cypress EZ-USB series might be an easy solution: you write your endpoint code in 8051 assembly or C. The rip-up-a-joystick solution is probably easier and cheaper, though. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: YASim solution solution?
not only they are not useful as speed brakes but instead they seem to provide extra thrust and lift. i was playing with the 747-yasim model yesterday, trying to come in for landing, no power (still going pretty fast at about 300 knots), gear down and then i lowered the flaps. it was fun. the plane started gaining speed and altitude. i was at 2000 feet when i lowered the flaps but before i knew it i was past 7000' and my speed was about 450 knots. boy that was fun. i tried to reproduce this, but so far no luck. I just broke the record: too a 747-400 to 14ft on idle power, full flaps. See snapshot for proof. Andras === Major Andras e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www:http://andras.webhop.org/ === fgfs-screen-002.png Description: PNG image
