2011/8/2 Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
> So I decoupled these two structures somehow. I have put bv-trees of geometry
> into the userdata field of the scenegraph. So for the high level operations
> like tile loading, the scenery paging is used to load and get rid of the bv-
> trees. The whole intersectab
On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
>> On Sat, 2011-08-06 at 14:43 +0300, thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi wrote:
>> > Some visual impressions from the 3 cloud types I've converted to
>> > the new
>> > system so far here:
>> >
>> > http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7358
2011/8/2 Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
> So I decoupled these two structures somehow. I have put bv-trees of geometry
> into the userdata field of the scenegraph. So for the high level operations
> like tile loading, the scenery paging is used to load and get rid of the bv-
> trees. The whole intersecta
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 8:15 AM,wrote:
>
> I've finally (I guess you all know the feeling of too much other stuff to
> do...) managed to start some tests with Stuart's Nasal interface for 3d
> cloud generation. Right now there is only a very rough placement structure
> and no real management (no rem
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 9:48 AM, James Turner wrote:
>
> On 30 Jul 2011, at 20:31, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>
>> So, I quickly wrote an alternative to the current Nasal system geodinfo(),
>> using the groundcache instead of the current scenery method.
>
> I'm w
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Durk Talsma wrote:
> Hi Stuart,
> On 30 Jul 2011, at 21:31, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>
>>
>> So, I quickly wrote an alternative to the current Nasal system geodinfo(),
>> using the groundcache instead of the current scenery meth
Hi All,
The July 2011 edition of the FlightGear Newsletter is now available:
http://wiki.flightgear.org/FlightGear_Newsletter_July_2011
As always, we are looking for contributions to the next newsletter,
available here:
http://wiki.flightgear.org/FlightGear_Newsletter_August_2011
-Stuart
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> 2011/7/14 Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
>> While being able to do a croase ground query on such a kind of regular grid
>> might be beneficial for the weather module. I would prefer the ai module just
>> using the already avai
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 6:21 PM, ThorstenB wrote:
> On 28.07.2011 00:30, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>> On my machine I don't see any performance impact, despite the fact
>> that more trees are displayed. I'd appreciate it if those with more
>> graphics-constrained syst
2011/7/14 Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
> While being able to do a croase ground query on such a kind of regular grid
> might be beneficial for the weather module. I would prefer the ai module just
> using the already available bounding volume tree that is used for the main
> aircrafts elevation queries.
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Slavutinsky Victor wrote:
>Occasional dropouts and slowing to 1fps and things as that. More and
>more bugs with every change what's harder and harder to eliminate, not
>linearly, squarely harder. Dramatical lowering of common development
>rate, coming to "very outd
Hi All,
I've got a small patch to improve the FG forests, along with some
particularly bad C++ I need advice on.
The patch does the following:
1) Fixes the longstanding bug where the first set of tree definitions
in a tile were used for all forests within that tile. This meant that
if you have an
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 10:34:33 +0200, Torsten wrote in message
> <4e214d19.20...@t3r.de>:
>
>> > ..how about historical weather from e.g. air crash reports?
>> >
>> fgfs --metar="add any metar you want here"
>
> ..replacing METAR IDs with a data
Hi Guys,
While thoroughly enjoying the PC9-M, I noticed that its license is GPL v3.
>From a very cursory browse of the "Quick Guide to GPLv3",
(http://www.gnu.org/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html) GPL3 is
apparently compatible with GPL2, but I'm not clear if we can
distribute a GPL3 aircraft as pa
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
> Okay, it isn't plain text (we can easily convert it once it's done, altough
> I cannot think of a place where we'd publish
> a plain-text-changelog, apparently we stopped updating the fgdata/NEWS
> file), but this will allow us to work togethe
Hi Thorsten,
Thanks for writing. I've got a couple of comments.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Thorsten Renk wrote:
> I get the impression that some people believe that Local Weather is a
> temporary, experimental thing. That's actually not my position. I assigned
> a version number larger t
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 2:24 PM, grth_team wrote:
> The answer from these devel team persons, was a joke, at least to us,
> they said "we will include your project with FG 2.6" ( February ?),
> they probably make fun of us ( do you consider newbee are not serious
> ?).
As one of the people who or
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> Am 11.07.2011 14:37, schrieb Stuart Buchanan:
>> Hi Thorsten,
>>
>> I think we've gone beyond what can be done for the upcoming
>> release, but comments below.
> What I'd really love to see in the
On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 7:33 AM, wrote:
>> Sounds logical to me ...the double weather systems are a bit of
>> nuisance , would be nicer, in my opinion , if they could be combined
>> in a single dialog but not sure if that's possible.I use real
>> world weather anyway , so i never use those s
Hi Thorsten,
I think we've gone beyond what can be done for the upcoming
release, but comments below.
On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 7:30 AM,thorsten.i.renk wrote:
>> 2) As it stands, it's very difficult for a new user to understand the
>> difference between Local Weather and Global Weather. let alone h
On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 4:29 PM, David Van Mosselbeen wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> When feeding fgfs with --dme=115.7 in the radio frequencies settings it
> show up as 115.70. See that on the image [1]
>
> [1]
> http://dvm.zapto.org:8080/~dvanmosselbeen/fgfs/tmp/command_line_opts.jpg
This is pretty
Hi All,
I've just done a pass over the GUI making minor changes to clean it up
and make it consistent.
There are a couple of slightly more significant layout changes I'd
like to make, but want to discuss first.
1) Currently there is a wireframe option on the Rendering menu. While
it's of moderat
On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 4:22 PM, David Van Mosselbeen wrote:
> Depending of the view angle, smoke is showing in white or black. I mean,
> if i click twice on the right mouse button, then move the view... But alsoror
> sometimes when flying. See the image [1]. I don't know if this is a know
> issue,
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> There is a element to add an offset to the property value just before
> step and scroll are applied. If you pick it small enough, It gets cut off by
> the element but gets you past the roundoff error.
Thanks Torsten. I should have read the
Thanks!
No idea how it could have worked before. I've committed an update as
described above.
However, I'm still seeing some strangeness:
1) Sometimes I'm seeing "99" rather than "100"
2) Even with these changes, the -1000 value is incorrect.
I suspect that there's some floating point issue som
Hi All,
I've been trying to fix bug 340
(http://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=340), where
the VS KAP140 display in the c172p mysteriously stopped working about
a month ago.
To fix it partially, I've created a new AP filter converting from the
pressure-rate-target to a fpm val
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:47 AM, Hal V. Engel wrote:
> I just added this to the P-51D this morning. I have this setup so that the
> propwash affects Roll_moment_due_to_rudder Cldr, Pitch_moment_due_to_flaps
> Cmflap, Delta_Lift_due_to_flaps dCLflap, Lift_due_to_Elevator_Deflection
> CLde, Pitch_m
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 8:50 PM, ThorstenB wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the final GUI bits for a new feature are now in fgdata - the last
> feature addition for the 2.4 release from my part... You can
> download/update scenery directly from FlightGear now (main menu:
> Environment => Scenery). Credit for the i
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Martin Spott wrote:
> Comments on the state of the c172 model went unheard for months,
> therefore I'd like to hear a really convincing reason why such major
> overhaul can't wait until the tree is open for the next development
> cycle.
Not quite unheard - just inc
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Martin Spot wrote:
> Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
>
>>> Please refrain from pushing new features or major infrastructure changes
>>> to our streams. Please note: this includes fgda
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 8:47 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> Short version for the impatient reader:
> Please do _NOT_ push any major changes or new features to simgear,
> flightgear, fgdata until further advice!
> Please refrain from pushing new features or major infrastructure changes
> to our str
Please ignore the message below, it appears my email account has been hacked.
-Stuart
- Original Message
> From: Stuart Buchanan
> To: tors...@t3r.de; effly...@yahoogroups.com; olivier.faivr...@gmail.com;
>fakesexnoi...@googlemail.com; fergus_mc_c...@yahoo.com; will...@
http://hsf-sulzbach.de/indexz51X.php
--
EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content
authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image
Editing and ensure content is compliant with
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 2:24 PM, David Van Mosselbeen wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just download the source code of that magic scam at
> http://proflightsimulator.com/source/Source-Files.7z
This was discussed ad naseum quite some time ago on this
list and on the forums.
Those unfamiliar are welcome to
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 6:56 PM, ThorstenB wrote:
> Hi Stuart and all,
>
> > http://wiki.flightgear.org/Formalizing_Aircraft_Status
>
> We have some (too few!) aircraft providing documentation / tutorials,
> i.e. how to start, how to use instruments... I like extremely
> detailed/realistic aircraft
Adding to Hal's comments:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Hal V. Engel wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 31, 2011 03:02:09 PM Vivian Meazza wrote:
>> I also disagree with Stuart that such advanced
>> features are nice-to-haves and add little to the simulation - why the hell
>> are we including them then? D
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> Stuart
>
>>
>> > Thanks for addressing the points that were hammered out over on the IRC
>> > channel. I think the modified system could work. Just a few points
>> remain:
>> >
>> > There is no penalty for including systems, such as an AP, whe
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Vivian Meazz awrote:
> Thanks for addressing the points that were hammered out over on the IRC
> channel. I think the modified system could work. Just a few points remain:
>
> There is no penalty for including systems, such as an AP, where none existed
> on the orig
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:19 AM, I wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Hal V. Engel wrote:
>> I used it for the P-51D and found the system to be easy to use and it took
>> all of perhaps 10 to 15 minutes to create ratings for the four areas that
>> get scored and then create the entries in th
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Hal V. Engel wrote:
> I used it for the P-51D and found the system to be easy to use and it took
> all of perhaps 10 to 15 minutes to create ratings for the four areas that
> get scored and then create the entries in the *set.xml file. The system is
> easy to use an
Hi Victor,
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Slavutinsky Victor wrote:
> Repost. Forum topic theme is
> http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=12005
>
> Hi. I am doing "Vostok-1" project for FlightGear and have a lot of
> problems due to current terrain engine what can not supply hig
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 9:13 PM, John wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Was also looking over Thorsten's pics and writeup on the FG forum (assume
> those were the pics referenced) and wondering how to go about setting up
> the cloud scenery.
I think the pics referenced were my photos from a recent RL flying trip
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 8:26 AM, Thorsten Renk wrote:
> gives me almost what I want - except that I don't actually see
> deciduous-summer, I see mixed-summer! It doesn't remotely matter what
> or I specify, I get the same output -
> although Flightgear responds correctly to changes of other prop
Hi Curt,
I've managed to find the problem, and once I get git to play ball,
I'll make a merge request!
If you've got a list of the 3D clouds bugs you've found and not fixed
yourself, I'd be interested in fixing them.
The flying trip was fantastic. We flew just over 1000 miles over 8
days (19 hou
Hi Curt,
I've been looking at the altitude problem all evening, but haven't
(yet) found the bug.
AFAICT the correct altitude (in m) is being passed down the stack and
used to create an altitude offset, so it's not just a case of the
stack using the height of the clouds rather than the altitude. I
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Heiko Schulz wrote:
>
>>
>> One function I had on my TODO list was something to return
>> the cloud
>> position in lat/lon. However, it's a bit tricky due to the
>> current
>> limitations in the command interface. Do you see any need
>> for it?
>
>
> Weather Radar?
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:42 AM, thorsten.i.renk wrote:
>> Now, the placed 3D clouds are wrapped, just like the global clouds, so
>> if you travel far enough (50km), you'll come across the same cloud
>> again. For local weather, that probably isn't what we want. So, I'm
>> thinking of adding a n
I've just committed (thanks to Torsten) an update to the 3D clouds. As
well as fixing a bug that caused the cloud density to be significantly
less than it should have been, the global 3D clouds now move with the
wind, which looks rather nice IMO.
This update also adds a couple of new commands that
On 24 Apr 2011, at 10:13, "Alan Teeder" wrote:
>
> Just a heads up with VC10
>
>
> c:\flightgear\simgear\simgear\scene\sky\cloudfield.hxx(76): error C2864:
> 'SGCloudField::RADIUS_LEVEL_1' : only static const integral data members can
> be initialized within a class
> c:\flightgear\simgear\si
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Thorsten Renk wrote:
> Mixing is actually not a problem at all - I can just create 2 overlapping
> cloudlets from 2 different texture sheets and place a third with dark
> diffuse bottoms below - that doesn't need to be hard-coded as long as I
> can ask for a textur
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Thorsten Renk wrote:
>
> To follow up Stuart, here are some of my thoughts:
>
Thanks. Comments below, significantly colored by what I've
managed to implement in a couple of hours of hacking here :)
> I) Basic building blocks - texture sheets
>
> I assume the b
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Thorsten Renk wrote:
> But if people feel that things inside e.g. the Local Weather package (or
> somewhere else) should be ported from Nasal to C++ - by all means do so,
> don't just complain :-) You have the Nasal code available, I for one am
> entirely willing
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Thorsten Renk wrote:
>> The "local weather" menu option is first before the other local weather
>> options. This does open up a dialog box where you do have to create
>> clouds
>> 1-by-1. Looking at this, it appears that the intent of this is more for
>> debuggin
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Harry Campigli wrote:
> Hello Stuart,
>
> Have you gone any further with your AIS scripting?
I have. I've got a quite nice proxy and some very simple heuristics
to make the ship movements seem realistic. Unfortunately they don't
quite work with ships docking from hi
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Jack Mermod wrote:
> Hi,
> As many of the textures were originally photos, they were edited
> in .jpg format and sent to me like that. I made the careless mistake
> of simply changing the extension from jpg to png. I will convert these
> the proper way in photo
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Jack Mermod wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The Red Bull livery has been removed from this release.
>
> Download: http://jackmermod.bplaced.net/Files/cobra21511.zip
Hi Jack,
I had a look at committing this, replacing the existing aircraft in
git, but there seem to be som
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:43 AM, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
> If in doubt – in fact, even if not in doubt – it’s good to ask.
>
> Here’s an actual data point.
I agree with Jon on this - ideally we should be pro-active about
asking for permission, even if we don't like the answer.
We could send out a
Curt wrote:
> So why aren't we *removing* all our existing uses of the redbull logo ... or
> at least the ones that I can find in 2 seconds? None of the people who are
> saying Jack can't submit his helicopter with a redbull livery are saying
> anything about the 2 aircraft and several scenery
Hi Curt,
At the risk of being a case of "if the hat fits"
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> I hate to wade into mud wrestling matches. But for every one who is on
> their high horse about being pristine in our non-use of any possible
> trademarked items ... have you brow
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> This is ridiculous. We have this discussion every so often, when we are not
> arguing over FlightPro Sim. Do we have to change every airliner model in the
> inventory? Of course we don't. Use the bloody thing. And if ever anyone
> complains sa
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Jack Mermod wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The Red Bull livery has been removed from this release.
>
> Download: http://jackmermod.bplaced.net/Files/cobra21511.zip
>
> I find it ridiculous and a bit immature how Oliver people whine about
> a simple logo.
It is neither ri
On 13 Feb 2011, at 19:26, dave perry wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> I have a clean local c172p ready to push that includes:
>
> - working nose gear link animation in terms of compression-norm using
> xml interpolation
> - working main gear animation in terms of compression-norm using xml
> interpolatio
Hi Guys,
Thanks very much for looking at this. I had a play with it myself
yesterday, and have XML interpolation code already working for the
nose-gear in my local copy. I used an oleo length of 1ft as
/gear/gear[0]/gear-compression-ft and
/gear/gear[0]/gear-compression-norm seem to be the same
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 7:21 PM, dave perry wrote:
> On 02/11/2011 10:28 AM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>> I've also got on my TODO list replacing the Nasal nose gear animation code
>> with straight XML animations.
>>
>> -Stuart
> Including the link animations?
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Ron Jensen wrote:
> On Friday 11 February 2011 10:07:11 Geoff McLane wrote:
>> Hi Curt,
>>
>> No probs, now that it seems Ron might have found
>> something, thus the thread is hovering on closing,
>> so chat away...
>
> While we argue over how many angles can dance
On 29 Jan 2011, at 01:30, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> ..found this wee snippet in my console output:
> r300: ERROR: FS input generic 17 unassigned, not enough hardware slots.
Well, that might explain some if the shader problems you are seeing.
My guess is that "FS" stands for Fragment Shader and your
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Ron Jense wrote:
> On Sunday 23 January 2011 23:25:43 Gary Carvell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've noticed that the Catalina has been broken for some time.
>> FlightGear aborts on startup with this message:
>>
>> Error loading aerodynamic function in aero/coefficie
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:32 AM, I wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I recently came across http://www.marinetraffic.com/, which tracks
> shipping by means of their AIS transmitter, which all vessels over 299
> gross tonnes must carry.
>
> The data is transmitted by radio and includes position, speed, course,
>
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
> Hi Melchior,
>
> I was about to send an email to the mailing list asking for feedback, so
> thanks for saving
> my three minutes :)
>
>> Shudder! This patch simply duplicates a lot of code that was meant
>> to be *re-used*.
>
> Right. So far it
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 3:44 PM, James Turner wrote:
>> On 2 Jan 2011, at 14:56, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>>
>>> gui.menuEnable("fuel-and-payload", false);
>>>
>>> We can add new names for an
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 3:44 PM, James Turner wrote:
> On 2 Jan 2011, at 14:56, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>
>> gui.menuEnable("fuel-and-payload", false);
>>
>> We can add new names for any other menus that we might want to disable
>> on a per-aircraft basis, b
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Dave L wrote:
> The ATIS is now in a releasable state. If as many people as possible could
> use it in the next couple of days and report any breakage that would be
> good.
>
> Cheers - Dave
Hi Dave,
Doesn't sound quite as good as the real recording we had previ
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 8:37 AM, I wrote:
> Adding symbolic names along with some helper functions for disabling them in
> Nasal/gui.nas is pretty easy. I'm happy to take on writing the code etc.
> Probably not today though!
It turns out that Nasal/gui.nas already had a menuEnable function for
e
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> How about adding
> X
> to the small close button?
I've tried that, but unfortunately the X isn't quite centered in the
box, and looks very much like the character "X" rather than a cross.
A better solution would be to modify the GUI code
Happy new year everyone !
On 30 Dec 2010, at 23:19, ThorstenB wrote:
> I still vote for keeping the original menu ordering in the "Equipment"
>>
> menu for the upcomming release, otherwise we have another
> incompatibility - and a very unnecessary one. It's very simple to
> avoid this issue for
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Curtis Olson> wrote:
> If anyone out there has been ripped off by these scammers or charged an
> amount they weren't expecting, they should be able to take advantage of the
> proflightsimulator 100% no-hassle rock-solid refund offer advertised on
> their web site.
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
> (Why) do we need two buttons to close a dialog? I recently removed the ones
> that say "Close" on most
> dialogs, replacing them with small buttons in the top right corner. There
> are quite some dialogs that don't
> have a "normal" close butto
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
>> Looks good to me Stuart! But I do wonder why people feel the need to
>> capitilise each single word.
>> Why isn't it "Traffic options", or &quo
Hi All,
The FlightGear Manual (previously known as the Getting Started Guide),
has now been moved to gitorious under the fg project. It's available
here:
g...@gitorious.org:fg/getstart.git
As always, Martin and I are very keen to receive updates/corrections,
either as patches or pure text.
Tors
On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
> Looks good to me Stuart! But I do wonder why people feel the need to
> capitilise each single word.
> Why isn't it "Traffic options", or "Tanker controls"? I know it's not a big
> deal, but to me it looks
> cleaner and clearer...
As Jacob poi
Hi Guys,
I've been updating The Manual for the upcoming release, including
updating the command reference to include the changes to the menus. I
came across a couple of menus which seemed mis-named, and for which
I've just committed some changes.
Specifically:
1) The AI menu had "AI" prefixed on
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Thorsten Renk wrote:
> Let me take a virtual needle and deflate the claims a bit. Until recently,
> Flightgear's idea of a weather change was that pressure, wind and
> visibility instantly jump from one value to another. Hardly what I would
> call accuracy. Doing
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
> Hey all!
>
> With the release in reach, I decided to test-load the base package aircraft
> from last release (and possibly the upcoming release).
> All this is with this afternoon's Git, on a Windows machine. All I did was
> launch FlightGear w
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Jack Mermod wrote:
>> Everything in the package I have sent is under the GPL.
>
> That's great news :)
>
> I may not get the chance to commit this in the near future, so if
> s
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:59 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
>> IIRC clouds default to 2D if there isn't a 3D definition in
>> Environment/cloudlayers.xml
>>
>> That might provide an work around.
> Correct. Currently, the layer type is guessed in fgclouds.cxx by looking at
> altitude, thickness etc. My f
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> Argh - 3d-clouds :-P
> OK - I have some homework to do...
> Anyway - the overcast layer at -200ft is by intention, it's thickness is 700ft
> so the upper edge is 500ft. But it currently only works for 2d clouds.
> If the weather is changed at
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Jack Mermod wrote:
> Everything in the package I have sent is under the GPL.
That's great news :)
I may not get the chance to commit this in the near future, so if
someone else wants to go ahead, they are welcome.
Thanks for your work.
-Stuart
---
Hi Jack,
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 5:55 AM, Jack Mermod wrote:
> Hi,
> My development of the Bell AH-1W Cobra is far enough along where
> I feel it is time to commit it to GIT, especially in time for the new
> release. I use GIT, but I don't know enough about it to commit it
> myself. If somebod
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Hal V. Engel wrote:
> On Sunday, December 12, 2010 11:59:30 am Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>> > I also like having a minimum for each individual rating category so that
>> > everything has to have had approx. the same level of work to move up
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Martin Spott wrote:
> Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>> Martin - does this address your concern?
> Well, at the end of the day it's completely irrelevant if my concerns
> are being addressed ;-)
Not at all. Such decisions need to have community-wide
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Anders Gidenstam wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Dec 2010, Hal V. Engel wrote:
>
>> With this in mind I have used the Stuart's rating system and coded the status
>> line of the p51d-jsbsim-set.xml file with the following:
>>
>> FDM: 5, Systems: 4, Model: 3, Cockpit: 3
>
> Hi,
>
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Chris Wilkinson wrote:
> Thanks Martin,
>
> I will double check the licence attached to the data I have, but I'm
> confident it is free to use and distribute so long as any subsequent end-use
> is of personal or private non-profit nature.
Please double-check. That
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Hal V. Engel wrote:
> Yes I want to record and playback the controls using the native FDM of the
> aircraft. I do not care at all about the lat/lon/height of the plane. I want
> to be able to feed my control inputs into the playback and have the FDM
> process this
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Thorsten R. wrote:
> Stuart wrote:
>
>> In the great tradition of re-inventing the wheek, I'd propose 4 criteria:
>> - FDM
>> - Systems
>> - Cockpit
>> - External Model.
>
> It sounds very neat and if a large fraction of aircraft ends up rated that
> way, then I'll
I don't want to flog a dead horse, but you deserve answers to your questions.
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Thorsten wrote:
>> One example that strikes me is the c172p, though I'm biased as one of the
>> maintainers of the aircraft, and it is rated accurately according to
>> your criteria :)
>
>
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Martin Spott wrote:
>> So, if you claim that your rating is _not_ a beauty contest, then I'd
>> ask you: After taking the above mentioned thoughts into account, what's
>> left as a criteria for your rating ?
>
> Martin, I see no need to repeat myself over and over.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> Ok, Stuart and Martin make a fair point. Lets move forward with putting
> something onto the main FlightGear page. Stuart, you mentioned a faq you
> had drafted?
> Thanks,
> Curt.
Hi Curt,
The latest version of the FAQ (v1.4) is below. This
Curtis Olson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>> I drafted an FAQ on this subject last time it came around, which was
>> discussed
>> in detail, but never published on our website. Perhaps we should look at
>> that
>> again?
Curtis Olson wrote:
> Out of curiosity, has anyone been able to obtain a copy of their source
> code? Could this be posted in a known location? Or is there a known link
> for downloading their code? It might be useful for us to maintain a
> reference copy ourselves somewhere. It should be no pr
Hi All,
I recently came across http://www.marinetraffic.com/, which tracks
shipping by means of their AIS transmitter, which all vessels over 299
gross tonnes must carry.
The data is transmitted by radio and includes position, speed, course,
rate of turn, as well as the vessel type, dimensions et
401 - 500 of 1047 matches
Mail list logo
