Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Durk Talsma wrote: > Hi Gene (and John), > > On 07 Nov 2012, at 15:31, geneb wrote: > >> >> Durk, if you can find someone that's willing to cut the parts for you, I'd >> be happy to donate a drawing set for my single-seat collimated display >> system. You show up next year wit

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Durk Talsma wrote: > No worries. :-). This is actually fairly subjective, and I'm afraid that I > didn't explain my concern too well in my initial post. The real issue is > salience, which you can describe as the subjective property of a percept to > stand out from it's environm

[Flightgear-devel] fix.dat.gz and nav.dat.gz modification

Hello Martin, I can not reach you by PM hence I send using mailing list as suggested by Gijs. 1. I have the fix.dat.gz which reflects the latest AIS Japan data https://aisjapan.mlit.go.jp/Login.doand was provided on Japan forum. I already sent this to Robin to update but he is too busy to answer

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

Hi Gene (and John), On 07 Nov 2012, at 15:31, geneb wrote: > > Durk, if you can find someone that's willing to cut the parts for you, I'd > be happy to donate a drawing set for my single-seat collimated display > system. You show up next year with THAT and I can just about guarantee > most f

[Flightgear-devel] little cosmetic patch on src/FDM/YASim/proptest.cpp

Hi all, The purpose of this little cosmetic patch is to ease the use of proptest's output in a ploter. Thanks to review, Alexis diff --git a/src/FDM/YASim/proptest.cpp b/src/FDM/YASim/proptest.cpp index 9bdadef..cc4ffc4 100644 --- a/src/FDM/YASim/proptest.cpp +++ b/src/FDM/YASim/proptest.cpp

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

Le 07/11/2012 10:55, Renk Thorsten a écrit : > Sorry, I don't want to talk down on the great job you guys are doing > in presenting all this, I'm just trying to understand what it is you > consider an eye-catcher. I'm just a bit mystified that somehow a > feature which dominated our screenshot

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

adding to what Gene said; first, we have the warping code developed and running in FG-2.6 for a collimated display system. second, we also run fgfs on a multi-core machine with three graphics cards. Performance is around 50-60 fps for each core. and thanks to Jan Comans the 3d clouds are s

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

Durk, I don't know: FS-X can really impress: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XViCj0uqeco &feature=related Lots of wow! While we can do some, or perhaps even most of this, we can't do it at an acceptable frame rate. (Er . can

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Durk Talsma wrote: > Hi Thorsten, So, what I was actually looking for was new ways of *using* > FlightGear, within the limitations of an internet-free environment. Our > lan based multiplayer server was very effiective in the past, and in the > last few years we also had som

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, AJ MacLeod wrote: > On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:48:27 +0100 > Durk Talsma wrote: > > > It's definitely worth putting effort into promotion of FG, I'm sure the > vast majority of FSX (and probably X-Plane) users have almost no idea of > what it is or is capable of and there are boun

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

Hi Thorsten, On 07 Nov 2012, at 10:55, Renk Thorsten wrote: > > Sorry, I don't want to talk down on the great job you guys are doing in > presenting all this, I'm just trying to understand what it is you consider an > eye-catcher. I'm just a bit mystified that somehow a feature which dominated

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:48:27 +0100 Durk Talsma wrote: > On a more general note, the latter argument makes it really difficult to > convince these people that FlightGear might be worth considering. I've also > gotten a few questions about whether there would be commercial add-ons for > FlightGear

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

Hi Durk, > Please note that I never said that we didn't *have* any major new > features. The major difference between previous years and this year was > that we didn't have *obvious* eye catchers. Every feature you mention is > really a great improvement, but they are not sufficiently salien

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

Hi Adrian, On 07 Nov 2012, at 09:48, Adrian Musceac wrote: > > What about AI traffic according to real-life schedules, for most major > airlines? That's something FS-X doesn't do out of the box. > That's certainly a good feature to mention and -as you may have guessed- something I care about

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

On Wednesday, November 07, 2012 10:30:47 James Turner wrote: > Also, everything on Thorsten's lists is things that FS-X does, or has done > even for some time. Maybe not as good (but maybe better) as our solutions, > but again, that's no help for catching people's initial attention. > > James >

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

On 7 Nov 2012, at 08:24, Durk Talsma wrote: >> Surely there must be something in this list which qualifies as major >> innovation? Surely this is not _all_ my personal bias that I like certain >> features? :-) >> > > Please note that I never said that we didn't *have* any major new features.

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend 2012...

Hi Thorsten, On 07 Nov 2012, at 08:52, Renk Thorsten wrote: > > If I'm not much mistaken, during the last year we got (in addition to > Rembrandt): > > * atmospheric light scattering > * regional texturing > * placement masks for random objects > * procedural texturing > * Canvas with all the