=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
2007-10-28_19:49:14 (helijah)
/var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/data/Aircraft/Grob-G115/Models/PanelLabels.rgb
- Instruments udapte by Jon Stockill
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
2007-10-28_19:49:15 (helijah)
/var
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
2007-11-02_13:45:59 (curt)
/var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/source/src/Main/fg_init.cxx
/var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/source/src/Main/options.cxx
Add a --vehicle= option which is an exact synonym for --aircraft= but is
more natural for selecting groun
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your
On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 22:23:08 -0500
"Curtis Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/3/07, Georg Vollnhals <> wrote:
> >
Thank for the encouraging reviews ...
According to the documentation I read , it is very sensitive to control inputs
... but Im afraid I haven't found airfoil numbers , so I'm
On 11/3/07, Georg Vollnhals <> wrote:
>
> To have a R22 in the sim is especially nice as you can find so much
> documentation and training-instructions on the net. And it is a
> demanding helo if you want to learn to fly within the flight-envelope.
Not to mention that it's a beautifully done 3d m
On Saturday 03 November 2007 22:08, Georg Vollnhals wrote:
> Hi Syd and all,
>
> I could not go to bed when I saw that you uploaded the first files of
> this helo to CVS, waited some time, downloaded and tested it.
>
> Thank you very much. I enjoyed my test-flights (used some different
> airports o
Hi Syd and all,
I could not go to bed when I saw that you uploaded the first files of
this helo to CVS, waited some time, downloaded and tested it.
Thank you very much. I enjoyed my test-flights (used some different
airports on the world with different winds) very much.
And I was very surprised
David
> Sent: 03 November 2007 19:19
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fixing head lag
>
>
> On 03/11/2007, Vivian Meazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As I said before, but perhaps you didn't notice, we already have a
> > force based system working o
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Durk Talsma
> Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 5:30 PM
> To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Flightgear-devel] The Big Monitor show at FSWeekend,
>
> Hi Everybody,
>
> One th
> Torsten, Durk, and one developer who again wishes to remain anonymous,
> had a
> pretty good show today, with a bit of a slow start. Initially, we had
> some
> performance issues on the windows machine, and some minor bugs to
> solve, but
> these problems were gradually resolved during the day.
>
Hi Everybody,
One thing that probably stands out at this year's FlightGear booth is that we
had 6 more monitors than presenters, and that the monitor to presenter ratio
at the booth is 3:1. This leaves the question as to how many presenters were
at the booth, given that this number is a prime.
On 03/11/2007, Vivian Meazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As I said before, but perhaps you didn't notice, we already have a force
> based system working on the input of pilot g. It moves the pilot's eye
> position according to this input. And as Melchior pointed out, we probably
> need to stabili
David
> Sent: 03 November 2007 15:58
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fixing head lag
>
>
> On 03/11/2007, Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I should do something similar for planes. Of course, this is still
> > configurable per aircraft,
On 03/11/2007, Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I should do something similar for planes. Of course, this is
> still configurable per aircraft, too. Just not via properties,
> but by defining a Nasal handler. I'll review that.
>
> And again: I appreciate suggestions for improvements or
* David Megginson -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> it might be worth reconsidering the up/down movement. While
> pulling back on the yoke/stick may make a jet fighter shoot upwards,
> with a regular plane it's just as likely intended to slow the plane down.
Yes, this was targeted at fighter jets.
On 03/11/2007, Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * David Megginson -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> > I wasn't looking at any NASAL code. Is the NASAL code enabled
> > by default?
>
> While you were away, we got support for automatically saving GUI
> settings to an ~/.fgfs/autosave.xml f
* Melchior FRANZ -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> * David Megginson -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> > I had been looking at dampEyeData in src/Main/viewer.cxx, assuming
> > that was causing the problem.
>
> That's only for views, which set the damping values. At the moment
> it's only used for "Cha
* Curtis Olson -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> I suspect there may be an aircraft in the fleet that turns this
> setting on for you, [...]
No, I don't think so. I've checked the whole tree a few times
for that. And now I did again. There's only the bo105 (and
derivatives) which defines a key bindi
On 11/3/07, Melchior FRANZ <> wrote:
>
> * David Megginson -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> > I wasn't looking at any NASAL code. Is the NASAL code enabled
> > by default?
>
> While you were away, we got support for automatically saving GUI
> settings to an ~/.fgfs/autosave.xml file, and you might
* David Megginson -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> I wasn't looking at any NASAL code. Is the NASAL code enabled
> by default?
While you were away, we got support for automatically saving GUI
settings to an ~/.fgfs/autosave.xml file, and you might have
enabled dynamic view at some fgfs run, and n
* David Megginson -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> I had been looking at dampEyeData in src/Main/viewer.cxx, assuming
> that was causing the problem.
That's only for views, which set the damping values. At the moment
it's only used for "Chase View".
> I wasn't looking at any NASAL code. Is the
* David Megginson -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> Which is enabled by default -- head-shake or dynamic views -- and how
> do we change the default?
head-shake is implemented by various aircraft and can usually
not be turned off interactively (and usually breaks view adjustment via
(Ctrl-)MMB-dragg
David Megginson writes:
>
> I think it's great that FlightGear added head lag to the sim -- it's a
> good alternative when the pilot can't feel forces -- but I think we'd
> do better to model it based on perceived forces, not on roll/yaw/pitch
> damping. For example, simply entering a coordinated
On 03/11/2007, Vivian Meazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As Melchior said, the head-shake mechanism does indeed regard the head as a
> mass and a (damped) spring, but it's a bit more sophisticated than that -
> the resistance of the neck muscles are modelled as well.
Which is enabled by default -
On 03/11/2007, Syd&Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Looking at videos taken by passengers , you can certainly see these forces
> ... and as a passenger , I have definately sunk in my seat ( no head
> springs involved ), so I still use it myself ...
Yes, that's much more realistic, and in
On 03/11/2007, Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not sure if you are talking about "dynamic view", but this *isn't*
> supposed to change the view based on physical forces. The first
> three lines in $FG_ROOT/Nasal/dynamic_view.nas are:
>
> # Dynamic Cockpit View manager. Tries to simul
David
> Sent: 03 November 2007 02:25
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Fixing head lag
>
>
> I think it's great that FlightGear added head lag to the sim
> -- it's a good alternative when the pilot can't feel forces
> -- but I think we'd do better to model i
* Syd&Sandy -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> Looking at videos taken by passengers , you can certainly see
> these forces ...
Umm, but the videos taken by them don't show what their
brain sees. Our brain is a *lot* better at stabilizing the
image than most of the camera stabilizers. Simulating
the
* Melchior FRANZ -- Saturday 03 November 2007:
> they treat the head only as a mass on a spring,
> and completely disregard the physiology of the
> eye/equilibrium organ/brain system.
Maybe I should clarify: My idea was not that view changes
based on acceleration/inertia should be even more sophis
On Fri, 2 Nov 2007 22:24:42 -0400
"David Megginson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it's great that FlightGear added head lag to the sim -- it's a
> good alternative when the pilot can't feel forces -- but I think we'd
> do better to model it based on perceived forces, not on roll/yaw/pitch
>
30 matches
Mail list logo
