Re: [Flightgear-devel] KT 70 transponder....

2007-04-12 Thread Syd Sandy
Ron Jensen wrote: On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 21:36 -0700, Syd Sandy wrote: Hi all , Added the kt-70 transponder to the Aerostar awhile back , and noticed a few things . The material animation , is at the end of the xml file which tends to break things in PLIB ,at least on the

Re: [Flightgear-devel] KT 70 transponder....

2007-04-12 Thread Syd Sandy
Hi again Ron , I just moved the material animation to the head of the file , and that did fix the PLIB model orientation problem Thanks, Syd - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's

[Flightgear-devel] [RFC] tacan rewrite

2007-04-12 Thread Csaba Halász
is also calculated from this, I think it is a misnomer.) With these changes theoretically it should be possible to operate the tacan from the source aircraft in MP for example. Grab the patch from: http://w3.enternet.hu/jester/fgfs/tacan-20070412.diff Now you can start telling me why this doesn't

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] tacan rewrite

2007-04-12 Thread Vivian Meazza
.enternet.hu/jester/fgfs/tacan-20070412.diff Now you can start telling me why this doesn't make any sense :) Doesn't make any sense to me - what bug are you trying to fix? TACAN works as is for AI and MP aircraft, and at the moment allows up to 3 of each, but it is trivial to increase that to any

Re: [Flightgear-devel] framerate hesitations...

2007-04-12 Thread Syd Sandy
Harald JOHNSEN wrote: Syd Sandy wrote: gh.robin wrote: Jeff is right, i noticed that problem a loong time ago, And never got any answer. I have solved it with running fgmap on a separate computer Regards. I get this with varying degrees from different

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] tacan rewrite

2007-04-12 Thread Csaba Halász
On 4/12/07, Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Doesn't make any sense to me - what bug are you trying to fix? None, it is already fixed. This is just a follow-up. Why do you want to offset a TACAN position? You know why: because on the carriers the tacan altitude is 100 feet. And that

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] tacan rewrite

2007-04-12 Thread Vivian Meazza
Csaba Halász On 4/12/07, Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Doesn't make any sense to me - what bug are you trying to fix? None, it is already fixed. This is just a follow-up. Why do you want to offset a TACAN position? You know why: because on the carriers the tacan altitude

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] tacan rewrite

2007-04-12 Thread Csaba Halász
On 4/13/07, Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Csaba Halász On 4/12/07, Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why do you want to offset a TACAN position? You know why: because on the carriers the tacan altitude is 100 feet. And that *is* fixed, no matter where the carrier

[Flightgear-devel] An-2 v0.2 ready!

2007-04-12 Thread Yurik V. Nikiforoff
Apr, Friday, 13 :) 3D cockpit. 80 animated/controlled items on panels! Engine prop has rewritten; New animation for gear; Automatic mixture correction (like real aircraft); New ADF control gauge; Automatic slats with real aerodynamic data; Second pilot view point; A lots of bugfixes; New