Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-21 Thread Erik Hofman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are there any plans for helicopters, rockets, ballons and airships? The X-15 is considered a rocket. Also I've collected some NACA flight data documents of the U.S.S. Los Angles. I haven't had time to construct a JSBSim configuration files for this airship but I

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-21 Thread Lee Elliott
On Sunday 21 September 2003 08:35, Erik Hofman wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are there any plans for helicopters, rockets, ballons and airships? The X-15 is considered a rocket. Also I've collected some NACA flight data documents of the U.S.S. Los Angles. I haven't had time to

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-21 Thread Wolfram Kuss
Curt wrote: This is another step towards making aircraft self contained in their own subdirectory. The end goals is to be able to install / remove / distribute aircraft that are entirely contained in their own subdirectory tree making things easier on everyone [hopefully]. :-) Sounds good :-)

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-21 Thread Nick
: Lee Elliott To: FlightGear developers discussions Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg On Sunday 21 September 2003 08:35, Erik Hofman wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are there any plans for helicopters

RE: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-21 Thread Jim Wilson
Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: That's good. Maybe a more generic Historical category would be useful? Don't all of our aircraft fit into that category? :-) Well I suppose you could call anything that isn't built any more historical, but for the most part the term seems to be

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-20 Thread Matevz Jekovec
We might also want to start thinking of an official organization hierarchy such as: Aircraft/ LightSingles/ JetFighters/ CommercialJets/ CommercialTurboProps/ Bombers/ WWI/ WWII/ SailPlanes/ Experimental/ For modern military aircrafts, I would make the following hierarchy: - Fighter

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-20 Thread Innis Cunningham
Not to forget the prop liners before the jets. Also by the by is there any intention of updating to 9.3 in the near future.Just asking to see whats in the pipe line Cheers Innis Curtis L. Olson writes We might also want to start thinking of an official organization hierarchy such as:

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-20 Thread Jorge Van Hemelryck
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 11:29:48 +0200 Matevz Jekovec [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For modern military aircrafts, I would make the following hierarchy: - Fighter (most of F-xx, Rafale, MiG-s, Sukhoi-s) - Attack (A-10, Harrier, Tornado, Mirage 2000, my J-22, Su-25) - Bomber (F-117, B-1, B-2, B-52,

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-20 Thread Lee Elliott
On Saturday 20 September 2003 17:45, Jorge Van Hemelryck wrote: On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 11:29:48 +0200 Matevz Jekovec [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For modern military aircrafts, I would make the following hierarchy: - Fighter (most of F-xx, Rafale, MiG-s, Sukhoi-s) - Attack (A-10, Harrier,

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-20 Thread JD Fenech
I know this is slightly off topic, but what is the possibility of having a one aircraft, one file type configuration. The idea is basically to put all of the requisite files for a particular aircraft into some kind of archive file, such as a tarball, and then drop the archives into one

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-20 Thread Curtis L. Olson
JD Fenech writes: I know this is slightly off topic, but what is the possibility of having a one aircraft, one file type configuration. The idea is basically to put all of the requisite files for a particular aircraft into some kind of archive file, such as a tarball, and then drop the

RE: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-20 Thread Jon Berndt
That's good. Maybe a more generic Historical category would be useful? Don't all of our aircraft fit into that category? :-) Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-20 Thread Jim Wilson
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: snip Two areas of concern. There are about 40 variations on the c172 and about 20 variations on the c310 with different incantations and aliases and various conglomerations of yasim, jsbsim, 3d cockpits, 2d cockpits, etc. etc. etc. This was kind of

Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-20 Thread kreuzritter2000
We might also want to start thinking of an official organization hierarchy such as: Aircraft/ LightSingles/ JetFighters/ CommercialJets/ CommercialTurboProps/ Bombers/ WWI/ WWII/ SailPlanes/ Experimental/ Regards, Curt. Are there any plans for helicopters,

[Flightgear-devel] heads up - aircraft reorg

2003-09-19 Thread Curtis L. Olson
Heads up aircraft designers! I just committed a fairly significant change to both fgfs source and data CVS repositories. This is another step towards making aircraft self contained in their own subdirectory. The end goals is to be able to install / remove / distribute aircraft that are entirely