Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007:
>> Melchior FRANZ wrote:
>>> "aircraft" minus "model"?  :-}
>> Well what do you suggest for storing /sim/aircraft in otherwise?
> 
> Err, looks like you didn't get the hint. A '-' in programming
> context is a minus, not a hyphen. Although some people seem to
> not like this old tradition, as we can read in Lockheed1049.nas:
Ah, that depends on programming language. Some does allow - in variable names.
Yes I renamed the variable now.
> 
>   # current nasal version doesn't accept :
>   # - too many operations on 1 line.
>   # - variable with hyphen (?).
> 
> Yeah, no hyphens in variables. Later nasal versions won't change
> this, I'm afraid.  ;-)
> 
> m.
> 
> 
> 
> PS: though one can always work around that by referencing
> a "hpyhen" variable via namespace hash/bracket notation.
> 
> PPS: the "too many operations" complaint is bogus
What complaint?

Oh btw I think this would be easier to discuss on IRC channel.

Regards,

Arvid Norlander
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWeIbWmK6ng/aMNkRCmWyAJ411FXgjiKHqMlJhavk2iyZYEnqQgCgsHaH
or5QypzZhBtmMaQOn+NusnE=
=+JKt
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem

[Melchior FRANZ]

* AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007:
> Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> > "aircraft" minus "model"?  :-}
> Well what do you suggest for storing /sim/aircraft in otherwise?

Err, looks like you didn't get the hint. A '-' in programming
context is a minus, not a hyphen. Although some people seem to
not like this old tradition, as we can read in Lockheed1049.nas:

  # current nasal version doesn't accept :
  # - too many operations on 1 line.
  # - variable with hyphen (?).

Yeah, no hyphens in variables. Later nasal versions won't change
this, I'm afraid.  ;-)

m.



PS: though one can always work around that by referencing
a "hpyhen" variable via namespace hash/bracket notation.

PPS: the "too many operations" complaint is bogus

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fwd: Preparing the vmap0 Data / TerraGear

[Chris Metzler]

On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:34:37 +
will Pink wrote:
>
> Hello,
> 
> Can anyone help with the attached ? I have checked and everything is
> there and the permissions are correct. I just really need to get over
> this hurdle as it is being used in quite a large Flight Simulator
> project and im delaying its progress!
> 
> So any help is appreciated!

If it's what I think it is, I wrote about it in my "Building and Running
TerraGear" wiki page.

Your error message is:

} processing failed with VPF exception: failed to open VPF table
} file /usr/local/src/Scenery/data/vmap0/vmaplv0/noamer/bnd/g/k/fbr

There's two possible problems here; both can be resolved by checking that
the path above is correct, *including the fact that it's case-sensitive*.
I'm pretty sure that directory you've called "k", for instance, is in
fact "K".

-c


-- 
Chris Metzler   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(remove "snip-me." to email)

"As a child I understood how to give; I have forgotten this grace since I
have become civilized." - Chief Luther Standing Bear


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease

[Tatsuhiro Nishioka]

Hi,

I found kind of a hint of the cause of DList stack overflow.

After reset, the number of ssgTransform increases a lot.
so maybe this has something to do with the cause of the problem since
ssgTransform::cull calls _ssgPushMatrix and _ssgPopMatrix. these two  
show "DList stack overflow" error.

Plus, this problem doesn't happen when --disable-ai-models is specified.
When I commented outnimitz_demo from  
preferences.xml,
this DL stack overflow doesn't happen even without --disable-ai-models.

So resetting carrier object in AICarrier::init() or methods called  
from init() probably generates
redundant or unexpected ssgTransform objects.

I'll dive deeper tomorrow.
If any of you have any idea on what causes this, please let me know.

Best,

Tat

On Dec 8, 2007, at 2:49 AM, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:

> Goorg, and Melchir,
>
> Thanks for your report and opinion.
>
> On Dec 8, 2007, at 1:09 AM, Georg Vollnhals wrote:
>> Hi Tat,
>> tested this on OpenSUSE 10.2 86_64 with FG 9.11 Prerelease
>> S76 Helicopter
>>> 1. DList stack overflow
>>>
> (snip)
>> NEGATIVE
>> Yes, my fingers are aching ... pressed more than 30 times SHIFT-ESC  
>> =>
>> NO problem here
>
> OK, so this is a Mac OS specific bug.
>
>
>>> 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset
>>> This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz.
>>>
>> POSITIVE
>> Found the S76 on the water and the carrier moving away :-(
>
>
> Got it!
>
>
> On Dec 8, 2007, at 2:12 AM, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
>> * Tatsuhiro Nishioka -- Friday 07 December 2007:
>>> 1. DList stack overflow
>>
>> I've seen them on other occasions in fg/plib. Haven't tried with
>> Shift-Esc, but I think that's a plib problem. Don't think that's
>> something we can fix before the release. It's definitely not one
>> of bugs that people usually report. More of a "Doctor, it hurts"
>> problem.  :-)
>
> Haha, though I don't think it's "Doctor, it hurts" thing since it
> actually occurs on Mac OS, I understand that we can't fix it before
> the release. So I'm going to notice that there is a problem on
> sequential resets on Mac OS X in the release note if I can't find the
> cause of the problem by the time of the release. I'm going to trace
> some code that uses DList push/pop during reset. If someone already
> know what functions uses these on reset, please let me know.
>
>
>>> 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset
>>> This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz.
>>
>> I've been told that this is a ... feature.  :-/
>
> Oh... but I don't buy that idea since it's not a product made by  
> MS :-p
>
> Anyway, I'm trying to find the cause of this issue, finding the ground
> elevation gets negative value
> when reset. I force adjusted the ground elevation value when reset on
> Nimitz for test, but A6M2 fell down onto the sea
> anyway. so that's not the real cause. I hope I can find the real cause
> of this soon.
>
> Best,
>
> Tat
>
> -
> SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> just about anything Open Source.
> http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
> ___
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007:
>> Indeed that was what I did, as a way to do aircraft specific mappings. Now I
>> renamed the variable to aircraft-model.
> 
> "aircraft" minus "model"?  :-}
Well what do you suggest for storing /sim/aircraft in otherwise? Doing getprop
on each access I understood as being slower than using a variable as this
variable won't change between each time I access it. Correct?

/AnMaster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWdrsWmK6ng/aMNkRCginAJ0Tmt5jqH8uetT5N1Irxh97NKwLqACeKAre
U3kytF8dDDdpOe+oMJTCIgY=
=O89a
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem

[Melchior FRANZ]

* AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007:
> Indeed that was what I did, as a way to do aircraft specific mappings. Now I
> renamed the variable to aircraft-model.

"aircraft" minus "model"?  :-}

m.

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007: 
>> Melchior FRANZ wrote:
>>> You probably defined a variable named "aircraft" somewhere else
>>> in the joystick driver file, and this overwrote the "aircraft"
>>> namespace 
> 
>> Ah, should call it aircraft-model or something then. Thanks I was
>> not aware that nasal would do this.
> 
> Nasal doesn't do this by itself. That's a joystick driver feature.
> The same is true in the keyboard.xml file and dialog XML files.
> It allows to define generic parts like functions and variables in
> a separate  block, and to use them in all nasal bindings.
> If you define a local "aircraft" variable, then this will have
> precedence over the a global one.
Indeed that was what I did, as a way to do aircraft specific mappings. Now I
renamed the variable to aircraft-model.

/AnMaster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWdeEWmK6ng/aMNkRCrDhAKCgJ4IcDijoPDgYr0E+oC/LAdtNWwCeLsyN
J9ntvNOcxViwLvGsPfcDq6c=
=dwPr
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem

[Melchior FRANZ]

* AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007: 
> Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> > You probably defined a variable named "aircraft" somewhere else
> > in the joystick driver file, and this overwrote the "aircraft"
> > namespace 

> Ah, should call it aircraft-model or something then. Thanks I was
> not aware that nasal would do this.

Nasal doesn't do this by itself. That's a joystick driver feature.
The same is true in the keyboard.xml file and dialog XML files.
It allows to define generic parts like functions and variables in
a separate  block, and to use them in all nasal bindings.
If you define a local "aircraft" variable, then this will have
precedence over the a global one.

m. 

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512



Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * AnMaster -- Friday 07 December 2007:
>> aircraft.HUD.cycle_color()
> [...]
>> Yet I get this for button:
>> Nasal runtime error: No such member: HUD
>>   at /input/joysticks/js/button[3]/binding, line 1
> 
> You probably defined a variable named "aircraft" somewhere else
> in the joystick driver file, and this overwrote the "aircraft"
> namespace created by $FG_ROOT/Nasal/aircraft.nas. You have to
> know that all Nasal in a joystick driver is in a common Nasal
> namespace.
Ah, should call it aircraft-model or something then. Thanks I was not aware that
nasal would do this.

/AnMaster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWdKzWmK6ng/aMNkRCjKjAJ4hWNJEmKK64LuhNUwjAg+RYRoL0wCgnGi5
iC9Ifr7JAsDf07rmIFBRT0o=
=HZrl
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem

[Melchior FRANZ]

* AnMaster -- Friday 07 December 2007:
> aircraft.HUD.cycle_color()
[...]
> Yet I get this for button:
> Nasal runtime error: No such member: HUD
>   at /input/joysticks/js/button[3]/binding, line 1

You probably defined a variable named "aircraft" somewhere else
in the joystick driver file, and this overwrote the "aircraft"
namespace created by $FG_ROOT/Nasal/aircraft.nas. You have to
know that all Nasal in a joystick driver is in a common Nasal
namespace.

m.

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

[Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

I wanted a button to turn off/on HUD on my joystick so I took a look at the
keyboard binding for it:
 
  h
  HUD Master Switch
  
   nasal
   aircraft.HUD.cycle_color()
  
 

Now I tried to insert that in my joystick config:


HUD Master Switch

nasal
aircraft.HUD.cycle_color()



Yet I get this for button:
Nasal runtime error: No such member: HUD
  at /input/joysticks/js/button[3]/binding, line 1


While the keyboard binding works fine.


Any idea what could cause this?

By the way this problem happens in both osg and plib and it worked just 2 days
ago in both.

Regards,

AnMaster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWdA8WmK6ng/aMNkRCqo0AKCLajQ1xFzFY/6Gv9TZ+ESPUeNXUQCeOQGK
UsJr2pxbk8ftufQT2/BvHM4=
=Vfp4
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Thomas Förster]

Am Freitag 07 Dezember 2007 schrieb LeeE:

> ...[end user rating scheme is bad idea]...
> I propose that we identify the different areas of development i.e. 3d
> model, FDM, Cockpit, flight control systems etc. and then just state
> the level of development for each of those areas.

While this is probably the most neutral scheme a few questions arise to me. If 
its not coming from the users, who is going to do the evaluation? According 
to which criteria/set of standards? 

The result might also be too complex for new users (for which this rating 
system was intended in the first place), so we also need some defined 
procedure (e.g. weighted scores of the categories) to cut it down to a few 
easily understood levels (like we have now in the hangar, i.e. alpha, early 
production, production, maybe not that developer centric). I favour school 
grades over stars because you get a decimal for finer distinction.

Anyway I like the idea of having 'Stiftung Warentest' (THE german consumer 
goods evaluator) for aircraft.

Thomas

Note: haven't read the whole thread so bear with me if I'm just restating 
other's ideas.

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Curtis Olson]

On Dec 7, 2007 2:43 PM, LeeE <> wrote:

> I'm not sure that a rating scheme, where the ratings are given by end
> users, is a good idea.


I'm not sure the value of debating and discussing and designing a system
that probably no one will step forward to build.  But that said, if you
allow multiple user ratings with attached comments, I would think that would
be useful.  Sure there's always going to be a chance that a bad apple gets
in there and claims the world will end if anyone downloads this aircraft,
but that is set again the 99% of thoughtful reviews and comments and
experiences.

I don't think it's possible to have a completely objective system since we
are often don't have good truth references for historic or exotic or new or
classified aircraft.

Is there a way we could abuse the flightgear forum for this purpose?  We
could start a forum thread for each aircraft and link to that thread from
the downloads page.  It would be kind of clunky and a bear to maintain, so
we'd have to find someone who is pretty passionate about rating aircraft and
tracking user comments.  But something like this could be interesting ...
authors could post update notices for their aircraft, and all this
information would be consolodated in one place.

Regards,

Curt.
-- 
Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/
Unique text: 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[LeeE]

On Friday 07 December 2007 20:25, Curtis Olson wrote:
> On Dec 7, 2007 2:20 PM, AnMaster <> wrote:
> > Just an idea:
> >
> > A rating system for users. ("Please rate this aircraft after you
> > tried it for a
> > bit!") However we can't know how well the users know how it
> > should be. Maybe we
> > should ask them if they are pilots/if the flew that aircraft in
> > reality.
>
> Some sort of rating/comments system is a good idea, but someone is
> going to have to step forward to design and build such a system (or
> find one that does just what we want) and hopefully tie it in with
> the aircraft downloads page.
>
> Curt.

I'm not sure that a rating scheme, where the ratings are given by end 
users, is a good idea.

It would be too easy for small-minded people who simply don't 'like' a 
particular aircraft for whatever personal reasons or because they 
wish to promote a different aircraft, or even because they don't like 
a particular person associated with an aircraft, to give that 
aircraft a bad rating when it might not be deserved.  Sorry, but 
people _are_ that small-minded and it _will_ happen.

I propose that we identify the different areas of development i.e. 3d 
model, FDM, Cockpit, flight control systems etc. and then just state 
the level of development for each of those areas.

LeeE

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512



Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
> Hi there,
> 
> On Dec 8, 2007, at 5:01 AM, Syd&Sandy wrote:
>>> Quite a few of the aircraft currently use the following scale:
>>>
>>> - alpha
>>> - beta
>>> - early-production
>>> - production
>>>
> (snip)
>> I agree with most of the discussion , but the above scale means  
>> nothing to me , it doesn't give ME any indication of what I'm  
>> downloading  it only means something from an authors point of  
>> view , IMHO.
>> Im trying to think as a user  :)
>> I do agree that we need something more informative .
> 
> 
> 
> What about the following perspectives?
> 
> 1. Flight model stability (at least flyable without easily noticeable  
> weird behaviors)
That would cause a lot of less experienced users to think ground loops with tail
dragers = "weird behaviour". And even for experienced users, some plane had
weird behaviour in reality.

> 2. 3D model completeness (at least shape is acceptable, textured, and  
> gears are animated)
That should be easier to check.

> 3. Instruments completeness (it doesn't have to be 3D but should be  
> working properly, most of instruments should be implemented)
> 4. Interior completeness (at least cockpit room, throttle, canopy are  
> implemented)
> 
> We still need to know how to rate aircraft "objectively" using these  
> perspectives.
> 
> Considering authenticity is a big problem to me. for 3D model,  
> Instruments and interior,
> some people can rate aircraft, but for Flight model, I have no idea  
> how to rate especially historical aircraft
> since there exists few data or aircraft itself.
Indeed.

However some issues are clear. Autopilot not working well (like altitude hold on
787) are very likely a problem in aircraft model for example and not a quirk
with the real aircraft.

/AnMaster

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWbA8WmK6ng/aMNkRChwDAKCNTvL7NGDNdJocKT7yKp//v7Rn6ACeMmHp
qTlg/6z2Y9WdZMMUFO7rFwQ=
=b8+r
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Curtis Olson wrote:
> On Dec 7, 2007 2:20 PM, AnMaster <> wrote:
> 
>> Just an idea:
>>
>> A rating system for users. ("Please rate this aircraft after you tried it
>> for a
>> bit!") However we can't know how well the users know how it should be.
>> Maybe we
>> should ask them if they are pilots/if the flew that aircraft in reality.
> 
> 
> Some sort of rating/comments system is a good idea, but someone is going to
> have to step forward to design and build such a system (or find one that
> does just what we want) and hopefully tie it in with the aircraft downloads
> page.
> 
> Curt.
> 
As I guess PHP would be prefered I sadly lack the experience to code such a 
system.

/AnMaster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWa5LWmK6ng/aMNkRCrpeAJ9GmtmClJ2EQ3g5SRWPkiEezTyEmACeKsj1
l+gOmFKXx9YJlLVSnNyhlmU=
=eOcy
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Tatsuhiro Nishioka]

Hi there,

On Dec 8, 2007, at 5:01 AM, Syd&Sandy wrote:
>> Quite a few of the aircraft currently use the following scale:
>>
>> - alpha
>> - beta
>> - early-production
>> - production
>>
(snip)
> I agree with most of the discussion , but the above scale means  
> nothing to me , it doesn't give ME any indication of what I'm  
> downloading  it only means something from an authors point of  
> view , IMHO.
> Im trying to think as a user  :)
> I do agree that we need something more informative .



What about the following perspectives?

1. Flight model stability (at least flyable without easily noticeable  
weird behaviors)
2. 3D model completeness (at least shape is acceptable, textured, and  
gears are animated)
3. Instruments completeness (it doesn't have to be 3D but should be  
working properly, most of instruments should be implemented)
4. Interior completeness (at least cockpit room, throttle, canopy are  
implemented)

We still need to know how to rate aircraft "objectively" using these  
perspectives.

Considering authenticity is a big problem to me. for 3D model,  
Instruments and interior,
some people can rate aircraft, but for Flight model, I have no idea  
how to rate especially historical aircraft
since there exists few data or aircraft itself.

Best,

Tat

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Curtis Olson]

On Dec 7, 2007 2:20 PM, AnMaster <> wrote:

> Just an idea:
>
> A rating system for users. ("Please rate this aircraft after you tried it
> for a
> bit!") However we can't know how well the users know how it should be.
> Maybe we
> should ask them if they are pilots/if the flew that aircraft in reality.


Some sort of rating/comments system is a good idea, but someone is going to
have to step forward to design and build such a system (or find one that
does just what we want) and hopefully tie it in with the aircraft downloads
page.

Curt.
-- 
Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/
Unique text: 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Syd&Sandy wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 15:39:53 + (GMT)
> Stuart Buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>> --- AJ MacLeod wrote:
>>> I agree that we need a better indication of "state of completion" for the 
>>> models on the downloads page, but as far as I can see it will have to be a 
>>> very basic overview.  I'm not a fan of simplistic "star" ratings, but if 
>>> the 
>>> stars are for degree of completion and every star has a well-defined 
>>> meaning, 
>>> the idea might well have some merit (merely as a rough indication of what 
>>> to 
>>> expect).
>> Quite a few of the aircraft currently use the following scale:
>>
>> - alpha
>> - beta
>> - early-production
>> - production
>>
>> which I think is fairly easy to understand for users, and fit in with the 
>> basic
>> software model of improvement over time. However, as others have pointed 
>> out, we
>> need a better definition for what each of these mean.
>>
> 
> I agree with most of the discussion , but the above scale means nothing to me 
> , it doesn't give ME any indication of what I'm downloading  it only 
> means something from an authors point of view , IMHO.
> Im trying to think as a user  :)
> I do agree that we need something more informative .
> Cheers
Just an idea:

A rating system for users. ("Please rate this aircraft after you tried it for a
bit!") However we can't know how well the users know how it should be. Maybe we
should ask them if they are pilots/if the flew that aircraft in reality.




/AnMaster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWar6WmK6ng/aMNkRCqYvAKC0Zz7y8a1d1srYxjNv467+71XQGQCfYPEI
y6XVV2YmVInOqZUejhVWvrI=
=tN/0
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 15:39:53 + (GMT)
Stuart Buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> --- AJ MacLeod wrote:
> > I agree that we need a better indication of "state of completion" for the 
> > models on the downloads page, but as far as I can see it will have to be a 
> > very basic overview.  I'm not a fan of simplistic "star" ratings, but if 
> > the 
> > stars are for degree of completion and every star has a well-defined 
> > meaning, 
> > the idea might well have some merit (merely as a rough indication of what 
> > to 
> > expect).
> 
> Quite a few of the aircraft currently use the following scale:
> 
> - alpha
> - beta
> - early-production
> - production
> 
> which I think is fairly easy to understand for users, and fit in with the 
> basic
> software model of improvement over time. However, as others have pointed out, 
> we
> need a better definition for what each of these mean.
> 

I agree with most of the discussion , but the above scale means nothing to me , 
it doesn't give ME any indication of what I'm downloading  it only means 
something from an authors point of view , IMHO.
Im trying to think as a user  :)
I do agree that we need something more informative .
Cheers
-- 
Syd&Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] X-52 Pro joystick configuration

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
> Hi AnMaster,
> 
> It seems better than mine to me. I'll test it with my X52 (not X52 pro  
> but it looks useful with X52 too).
Please note that the axis and button numbers differs between X52 and X52 Pro at
least if your config was correct for *nix.

Also I'm working on a use for the third mode (aircraft specific) as well as some
other features. The mouse button/axes I want to use in X11 to control the mouse
if possible, haven't got around to investigating if that is possible yet 
however.

If you want I can mail you my current config but it is not in a state to be put
in CVS currently.
> 
> Thanks for your effort!!
> 
> Tat
> 
> On Dec 4, 2007, at 4:45 PM, AnMaster wrote:
> 
> I have made a joystick config for Saitek X52 Pro: the axis numbers  
> and button
> numbers differ from the normal X52.
> 
> This is an early version, I expect it to change as I find what is  
> useful and
> what isn't. If someone want to put it in CVS, the file is attached.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> AnMaster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWaogWmK6ng/aMNkRCr1lAKC1mOtQGULEh9FJ/oRYl+MlyRBusgCeM7c5
UNdhW5S03IZqFTNCuNqFB9U=
=mB7m
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
> Hi there,
> 
> I want to know if the bugs that I reported before are Mac OS specific  
> or not.
> So I want you guys to check if the following bugs occur on your  
> platform(s).
> 
> 1. DList stack overflow
> When I reset fgfs by pressing Shift-ESC for several times (maybe 10  
> times), DList stack overflow occurs.
> This problem has something to do with the "flying instruments" problem  
> that I posted before
> since the instruments start flying when DList stack overflows occur
Happens here too on Gentoo Linux (x64_64) but not often.
> 
> 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset
> This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz.
Happens here too.
> 
> If these are Mac OS specific, then I'm going to find the causes to  
> make patches.
> 
> By the way, can I have a CVS account?
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> 
> Tat
> 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWajMWmK6ng/aMNkRChpRAKC+MDYd0ww6Hjd8culSyDu+vm90UwCdFDAd
tycH16Y1znnzE5cwaT4sOvc=
=nzjR
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Helicopter simulations

[Heiko Schulz]

Hi,

You should have the latest CVS-Version or the
pre-Release-version. 
It has the latest YASim with improved helicopter-fdm.
In the DOC's you will find further information about.

Regards
HHS
--- Lee Duke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:

> I'm trying to build a simulation model of a
> helicopter and a tiltrotor 
> aircraft. I see there are a couple of rotary-winged
> models in the 
> FlightGear inventory. Does anyone know which FDMs
> were used for these 
> models. I'm looking for some information on how
> these aircraft and rotor 
> models were put together.
> 
> Lee Duke
> 
>
-
> SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> just about anything Open Source.
> http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
> ___
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
> 



__  Ihr erstes Baby? Holen Sie sich 
Tipps von anderen Eltern.  www.yahoo.de/clever

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[gerard robin]

On ven 7 décembre 2007, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> Gerard robin wrote
>
> > Sent: 07 December 2007 15:44
> > To: FlightGear developers discussions
> > Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
> >
> > On ven 7 décembre 2007, Heiko Schulz wrote:
> > > > Yes we must not talk about artistic competences
> > > > (here the "msfs" models are
> > > > better  :(  ), only to answer the question: does the
> > > > model simulate the  real
> > > > one ?which degree of simulation ?
> > >
> > > Right I think- eye candies are only one small part of
> > > being realistic, but if we want to be serious, we
> > > should attend this.
> > >
> > > Problem: how should we find out how realistic a
> > > aircraft is? Not all aircrafts here are based on save
> > > datas or have a real pilot as developer?!
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > HHS
> >
> > An answer only for fun:
> >
> > Yes the f16 is based on save data  ( partly yes , however,  it is )
>
> Sorry, run that hog by me again - what is "save data"?
>
> Vivian
>
I understood it to be result of measurements  from the real Aircraft,  tunnel 
wind data , others useful information about  the flight 
specifications 

Cheers



-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
<< Less i work, better i go >>


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

[Flightgear-devel] Helicopter simulations

[Lee Duke]

I'm trying to build a simulation model of a helicopter and a tiltrotor 
aircraft. I see there are a couple of rotary-winged models in the 
FlightGear inventory. Does anyone know which FDMs were used for these 
models. I'm looking for some information on how these aircraft and rotor 
models were put together.

Lee Duke

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease

[Vivian Meazza]

Georg Vollnhals

> Sent: 07 December 2007 16:10
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease
> 
... Snip ... 
>
> > 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset
> > This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz.
> >   

This is a bug which we never got around to fixing, so I guess we should call
it a feature now.

Vivian  



-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Vivian Meazza]

Gerard robin wrote

> Sent: 07 December 2007 15:44
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
> 
> 
> On ven 7 décembre 2007, Heiko Schulz wrote:
> > > Yes we must not talk about artistic competences
> > > (here the "msfs" models are
> > > better  :(  ), only to answer the question: does the
> > > model simulate the  real
> > > one ?which degree of simulation ?
> >
> > Right I think- eye candies are only one small part of
> > being realistic, but if we want to be serious, we
> > should attend this.
> >
> > Problem: how should we find out how realistic a
> > aircraft is? Not all aircrafts here are based on save
> > datas or have a real pilot as developer?!
> >
> > Regards
> > HHS
> >
> An answer only for fun:
> 
> Yes the f16 is based on save data  ( partly yes , however,  it is )
> 


Sorry, run that hog by me again - what is "save data"?

Vivian



-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Vivian Meazza]

Err ... there's a 2D exterior?
 
And a 3D cockpit is not necessarily better than a 2D. 2D is less demanding
on frame rate, and can be just as effective as a 3D cockpit. And some of
those are by no means brilliant. Horses for courses.
 
Our most detailed ac need high end computers to run on, with good graphics
cards. Not everyone has such a machine, and we have to have regard for them.
 
 
Vivian

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gijs de
Rooy
Sent: 07 December 2007 14:30
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality


> Nice idea!
> 
> Why not add a system like: 5 stars for a very complete
> aircraft like the Senecca II or one for the not so
> goog like the fokker 70/100?
> 
> So everyone can see, where is potential to develop?!
> 
> Regards
> HHS
> --- Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
We could give a star for every single part of the development stadia. One
start for the 3D Cockpit, one star for the Painting, One star for the 3D
Model, One star for the flying performances etc. So if a plane has a 3D
Cockpit and an 3d exterior model it gets 2 start by example.
 
PS: If this is added, we may add also something wich let users rate the
aircraft?


  _  

Windows Live Messenger het beste van de toekomst Download NU! Windows Live
Messenger!
  

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease

[gerard robin]

On ven 7 décembre 2007, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
> Goorg, and Melchir,
>
> Thanks for your report and opinion.
>
> On Dec 8, 2007, at 1:09 AM, Georg Vollnhals wrote:
> > Hi Tat,
> > tested this on OpenSUSE 10.2 86_64 with FG 9.11 Prerelease
> > S76 Helicopter
> >
> >> 1. DList stack overflow
>
> (snip)
>
> > NEGATIVE
> > Yes, my fingers are aching ... pressed more than 30 times SHIFT-ESC =>
> > NO problem here
>
> OK, so this is a Mac OS specific bug.
>
> >> 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset
> >> This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz.
> >


Don't worry, it is not only a Mac OS specific bug it is an old bug.
I have it on PC with Linux 

> Best,
>
> Tat

Cheers


-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
<< Less i work, better i go >>


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease

[Tatsuhiro Nishioka]

Goorg, and Melchir,

Thanks for your report and opinion.

On Dec 8, 2007, at 1:09 AM, Georg Vollnhals wrote:
> Hi Tat,
> tested this on OpenSUSE 10.2 86_64 with FG 9.11 Prerelease
> S76 Helicopter
>> 1. DList stack overflow
>>
(snip)
> NEGATIVE
> Yes, my fingers are aching ... pressed more than 30 times SHIFT-ESC =>
> NO problem here

OK, so this is a Mac OS specific bug.


>> 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset
>> This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz.
>>
> POSITIVE
> Found the S76 on the water and the carrier moving away :-(


Got it!


On Dec 8, 2007, at 2:12 AM, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Tatsuhiro Nishioka -- Friday 07 December 2007:
>> 1. DList stack overflow
>
> I've seen them on other occasions in fg/plib. Haven't tried with
> Shift-Esc, but I think that's a plib problem. Don't think that's
> something we can fix before the release. It's definitely not one
> of bugs that people usually report. More of a "Doctor, it hurts"
> problem.  :-)

Haha, though I don't think it's "Doctor, it hurts" thing since it  
actually occurs on Mac OS, I understand that we can't fix it before  
the release. So I'm going to notice that there is a problem on  
sequential resets on Mac OS X in the release note if I can't find the  
cause of the problem by the time of the release. I'm going to trace  
some code that uses DList push/pop during reset. If someone already  
know what functions uses these on reset, please let me know.


>> 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset
>> This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz.
>
> I've been told that this is a ... feature.  :-/

Oh... but I don't buy that idea since it's not a product made by MS :-p

Anyway, I'm trying to find the cause of this issue, finding the ground  
elevation gets negative value
when reset. I force adjusted the ground elevation value when reset on  
Nimitz for test, but A6M2 fell down onto the sea
anyway. so that's not the real cause. I hope I can find the real cause  
of this soon.

Best,

Tat

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[Jon Stockill]

gerard robin wrote:

> that one ? http://www.spyflight.co.uk/chipmunk.htm
> Better choice , less risk to caught a cold.

Yup, that's the one. Obviously it won't be ready before the next 
release, but should be available to fill the taildragger gap before the 
first osg release.

Jon


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease

[Melchior FRANZ]

* Tatsuhiro Nishioka -- Friday 07 December 2007:
> 1. DList stack overflow

I've seen them on other occasions in fg/plib. Haven't tried with
Shift-Esc, but I think that's a plib problem. Don't think that's
something we can fix before the release. It's definitely not one
of bugs that people usually report. More of a "Doctor, it hurts"
problem.  :-)



> 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset
> This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz.

I've been told that this is a ... feature.  :-/

m.

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease

[Georg Vollnhals]

Tatsuhiro Nishioka schrieb:
> Hi there,
>
> I want to know if the bugs that I reported before are Mac OS specific  
> or not.
> So I want you guys to check if the following bugs occur on your  
> platform(s).
>   

Hi Tat,
tested this on OpenSUSE 10.2 86_64 with FG 9.11 Prerelease
S76 Helicopter
> 1. DList stack overflow
> When I reset fgfs by pressing Shift-ESC for several times (maybe 10  
> times), DList stack overflow occurs.
> This problem has something to do with the "flying instruments" problem  
> that I posted before
> since the instruments start flying when DList stack overflows occur
>   
NEGATIVE
Yes, my fingers are aching ... pressed more than 30 times SHIFT-ESC =>
NO problem here
> 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset
> This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz.
>   
POSITIVE
Found the S76 on the water and the carrier moving away :-(

Regards
Georg EDDW


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[gerard robin]

On ven 7 décembre 2007, Jon Stockill wrote:

> I've got a Chipmunk T-10 planned when the grob g115 is more complete -
> was the standard RAF trainer a long time ago, and is still in service
> for pilots training to fly with the BBMF - would that be suitable?
>
> Jon
>

that one ? http://www.spyflight.co.uk/chipmunk.htm
Better choice , less risk to caught a cold.

Cheers

-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
<< Less i work, better i go >>


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease

[Tatsuhiro Nishioka]

Hi there,

I want to know if the bugs that I reported before are Mac OS specific  
or not.
So I want you guys to check if the following bugs occur on your  
platform(s).

1. DList stack overflow
When I reset fgfs by pressing Shift-ESC for several times (maybe 10  
times), DList stack overflow occurs.
This problem has something to do with the "flying instruments" problem  
that I posted before
since the instruments start flying when DList stack overflows occur

2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset
This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz.

If these are Mac OS specific, then I'm going to find the causes to  
make patches.

By the way, can I have a CVS account?

Thanks in advance.

Tat


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[Jon Stockill]

Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> --- Melchior FRANZ wrote:
>> * Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 07 December 2007:
>>>  - avoiding really difficult to fly aircraft in the default aircraft
>>>collection doesn't make fgfs a toy, and
>> Oh, and to take some pressure from the bf109, I declare now the
>> "pittss1c" the official victim that I'll pick on. That one should
>> definitely not be part of the default aircraft selection.  :-P
>>
>> m.
> 
> That's quite OK. 
> 
> I was originally hoping that the Pitts would be a nice way to transition from 
> the
> very easy j3cub to the powerful warbirds, but it turned out to be quite 
> handful
> itself!
> 
> We have a very nice progression from nose-wheel aircraft to twins for 
> complex/IFR
> operations:
> 
> c172p/pa29-161 -> c182rg/pa24-250 -> Seneca-II
> 
> However, I don't think we currently have a real equivalent path for 
> taildraggers
> in terms of handling.
> 
> The closest I can think of is:
> 
> j3cub -> dhc2W -> pittss1c/p51d/bf109/
> 
> However, there is a big jump in challenge from the Beaver to the warbirds.
> 
> Anyone know a good half-way house taildragger ?

I've got a Chipmunk T-10 planned when the grob g115 is more complete - 
was the standard RAF trainer a long time ago, and is still in service 
for pilots training to fly with the BBMF - would that be suitable?

Jon

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] X-52 Pro joystick configuration

[Tatsuhiro Nishioka]

Hi AnMaster,

It seems better than mine to me. I'll test it with my X52 (not X52 pro  
but it looks useful with X52 too).

Thanks for your effort!!

Tat

On Dec 4, 2007, at 4:45 PM, AnMaster wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> I have made a joystick config for Saitek X52 Pro: the axis numbers  
> and button
> numbers differ from the normal X52.
>
> This is an early version, I expect it to change as I find what is  
> useful and
> what isn't. If someone want to put it in CVS, the file is attached.
>
> Regards,
>
> AnMaster
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFHVQWdWmK6ng/aMNkRCsP8AKC1MOvJNtEvUfphX8ABtF47eVsY9wCgoljQ
> tynBvGtatKqQ/8cJaFOhmtE=
> =SDTP
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> 
> 
>
> 
> 
>
>   Saitek X52 Pro Flight Control System
>   Saitek Saitek X52 Pro Flight Control System
>   
>
>   
>   
>   false
>   0
>   
>
>   
>   
>      var self = cmdarg().getParent();
>   var data = self.getNode("data");
>   var modifier  = data.getNode("modifier");
>   var mode  = data.getNode("mode");
>   ]]>
>   
>   
>
>   
>   Aileron
>   
>   property-scale
>   /controls/flight/aileron
>   true
>   
>   
>
>   
>   Elevator
>   
>   property-scale
>   /controls/flight/elevator
>   -1.0
>   true
>   
>   
>
>   
>   
>   Rudder
>   
>   property-scale
>   /controls/flight/rudder
>   
>   
>
>   
>   
>   View Direction; Shift: Increase/Decrease visibility
>   
>   true
>   
>   nasal
>   
>      if (modifier.getValue()) {
>   # 
> fgcommand("increase-visibility", "/null");
>   } else {
>   view.panViewDir(1);
>   }
>   ]]>
>   
>   
>   
>   
>   true
>   
>   nasal
>   
>      if (modifier.getValue()) {
>   # 
> fgcommand("decrease-visibility", "/null");
>   } else {
>   view.panViewDir(-1);
>   }
>   ]]>
>   
>   
>   
>   
>
>   
>   View Elevation; Shift: Increase/Decrease field of 
> view
>   
>   true
>   
>   nasal
>   
>      if (modifier.getValue()) {
>   view.increase();
>   } else {
>   view.panViewPitch(1);
>   }
>   ]]>
>   
>   
>   
>   
>   true
>   
>   nasal
>   
>      if (modifier.getValue()) {
>   view.decrease();
>   } else {
>   view.panViewPitch(-1);
>   }
>   ]]>
>   
>   
>   
>   
>
>   
>   Throttle
>   
>   nasal
>   controls.throttleAxis()
>   
>   
>
>   
>   
>   Mode1: Mixture; Mode2: Carb Heat
>

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[gerard robin]

On ven 7 décembre 2007, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * gerard robin -- Friday 07 December 2007:
> > http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/StampeSV4.jpg
>
> Wow, that's a nice one!
>
> > Unfortunately it will not be available  before FG stable will
> > be released :(
>
> We can postpone the release for it.  ;-)
>
> m.
>
No, don't wait   i am not predicable .

Cheers


-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
<< Less i work, better i go >>


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[Melchior FRANZ]

* gerard robin -- Friday 07 December 2007:
> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/StampeSV4.jpg

Wow, that's a nice one!



> Unfortunately it will not be available  before FG stable will
> be released :( 

We can postpone the release for it.  ;-)

m.

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[gerard robin]

On ven 7 décembre 2007, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> --- Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> > * Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 07 December 2007:
> > >  - avoiding really difficult to fly aircraft in the default aircraft
> > >collection doesn't make fgfs a toy, and
> >
> > Oh, and to take some pressure from the bf109, I declare now the
> > "pittss1c" the official victim that I'll pick on. That one should
> > definitely not be part of the default aircraft selection.  :-P
> >
> > m.
>
> That's quite OK.
>
> I was originally hoping that the Pitts would be a nice way to transition
> from the very easy j3cub to the powerful warbirds, but it turned out to be
> quite handful itself!
>
> We have a very nice progression from nose-wheel aircraft to twins for
> complex/IFR operations:
>
> c172p/pa29-161 -> c182rg/pa24-250 -> Seneca-II
>
> However, I don't think we currently have a real equivalent path for
> taildraggers in terms of handling.
>
> The closest I can think of is:
>
> j3cub -> dhc2W -> pittss1c/p51d/bf109/
>
> However, there is a big jump in challenge from the Beaver to the warbirds.
>
> Anyone know a good half-way house taildragger ?
>
> -Stuart
> -Stuart
Yes i will have that one, i got training on the real one when i was young ( so 
many years ago).
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/StampeSV4.jpg

Unfortunately it will not be available  before FG stable will be released :(


-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
<< Less i work, better i go >>


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[Melchior FRANZ]

* Stuart Buchanan -- Friday 07 December 2007:
> j3cub -> dhc2W -> pittss1c/p51d/bf109/

BTW: the p51d wasn't considered very realistic in IRC discussions,
so I'm not even sure if it should be in the default collection.
Being a well known and remarkable aircraft in real life isn't enough.
But that's not really my area of expertise.

m.

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[Stuart Buchanan]

--- Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 07 December 2007:
> >  - avoiding really difficult to fly aircraft in the default aircraft
> >collection doesn't make fgfs a toy, and
> 
> Oh, and to take some pressure from the bf109, I declare now the
> "pittss1c" the official victim that I'll pick on. That one should
> definitely not be part of the default aircraft selection.  :-P
> 
> m.

That's quite OK. 

I was originally hoping that the Pitts would be a nice way to transition from 
the
very easy j3cub to the powerful warbirds, but it turned out to be quite handful
itself!

We have a very nice progression from nose-wheel aircraft to twins for 
complex/IFR
operations:

c172p/pa29-161 -> c182rg/pa24-250 -> Seneca-II

However, I don't think we currently have a real equivalent path for taildraggers
in terms of handling.

The closest I can think of is:

j3cub -> dhc2W -> pittss1c/p51d/bf109/

However, there is a big jump in challenge from the Beaver to the warbirds.

Anyone know a good half-way house taildragger ?

-Stuart
-Stuart





-Stuart


  __
Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Heiko Schulz]

Hi,
--- gerard robin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:

> On ven 7 décembre 2007, Heiko Schulz wrote:
> > > Yes we must not talk about artistic competences
> > > (here the "msfs" models are
> > > better  :(  ), only to answer the question: does
> the
> > > model simulate the  real
> > > one ?which degree of simulation ?
> >
> > Right I think- eye candies are only one small part
> of
> > being realistic, but if we want to be serious, we
> > should attend this.
> >
> > Problem: how should we find out how realistic a
> > aircraft is? Not all aircrafts here are based on
> save
> > datas or have a real pilot as developer?!
> >
> > Regards
> > HHS
> >
> An answer only for fun:
> 
> Yes the f16 is based on save data  ( partly yes ,
> however,  it is )
> 
> Cheers
> 
> 
> -- 
> Gérard
> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
> << Less i work, better i go >>
> 
>
I meant that the datas are known and be sur to be the
right one! ( and not just guessing!)

Regards
HHS



  Heute schon einen Blick in die Zukunft von E-Mails wagen? 
www.yahoo.de/mail

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[gerard robin]

On ven 7 décembre 2007, Heiko Schulz wrote:
> > Yes we must not talk about artistic competences
> > (here the "msfs" models are
> > better  :(  ), only to answer the question: does the
> > model simulate the  real
> > one ?which degree of simulation ?
>
> Right I think- eye candies are only one small part of
> being realistic, but if we want to be serious, we
> should attend this.
>
> Problem: how should we find out how realistic a
> aircraft is? Not all aircrafts here are based on save
> datas or have a real pilot as developer?!
>
> Regards
> HHS
>
An answer only for fun:

Yes the f16 is based on save data  ( partly yes , however,  it is )

Cheers


-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
<< Less i work, better i go >>


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Stuart Buchanan]

--- AJ MacLeod wrote:
> I agree that we need a better indication of "state of completion" for the 
> models on the downloads page, but as far as I can see it will have to be a 
> very basic overview.  I'm not a fan of simplistic "star" ratings, but if the 
> stars are for degree of completion and every star has a well-defined meaning, 
> the idea might well have some merit (merely as a rough indication of what to 
> expect).

Quite a few of the aircraft currently use the following scale:

- alpha
- beta
- early-production
- production

which I think is fairly easy to understand for users, and fit in with the basic
software model of improvement over time. However, as others have pointed out, we
need a better definition for what each of these mean.

As it has worked quite well in the past for collating input, I suggest we set up
a wiki page to get a feel for what people consider acceptable for each of the
definitions. I'll set it up when I get the chance, unless someone else does so
before me.

To add to AJs point that we shouldn't be using this to critique model quality 
(as
opposed to completeness of the aircraft), I'd suggest that a fully 3-D cockpit
should not be a requirement for a "production" aircraft.

I think that a 2.5D cockpit (i.e. a 2D panel pasted onto a surface) is 
acceptable
for a production aircraft, and I'm not just saying that because I maintain some
aircraft that use this feature ;)

-Stuart



  __
Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Heiko Schulz]

> 
> Yes we must not talk about artistic competences
> (here the "msfs" models are 
> better  :(  ), only to answer the question: does the
> model simulate the  real 
> one ?which degree of simulation ? 
>

Right I think- eye candies are only one small part of
being realistic, but if we want to be serious, we
should attend this.

Problem: how should we find out how realistic a
aircraft is? Not all aircrafts here are based on save
datas or have a real pilot as developer?!

Regards
HHS


   __  Ihre erste Baustelle? Wissenswertes 
für Bastler und Hobby Handwerker. www.yahoo.de/clever

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[Melchior FRANZ]

* Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 07 December 2007:
>  - avoiding really difficult to fly aircraft in the default aircraft
>collection doesn't make fgfs a toy, and

Oh, and to take some pressure from the bf109, I declare now the
"pittss1c" the official victim that I'll pick on. That one should
definitely not be part of the default aircraft selection.  :-P

m.

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[Melchior FRANZ]

* dave perry -- Friday 07 December 2007:
> What is proposed is to make the default turbulence = 0.0 at start-up, 
> not turning off turbulence modeling.  You can still use the weather menu 
> to set the desired turbulence or you can [...]

OK, before even more people answer who didn't get what I was writing:

 - low/no default turbulence doesn't make fgfs a toy
 - high default turbulence doesn't make it professional

just as

 - avoiding really difficult to fly aircraft in the default aircraft
   collection doesn't make fgfs a toy, and
 - including them doesn't make it professional

I was just making a comparison! :-)

In the end I don't care much, as I (like everyone else here) will
not use the default package. The question is only, which defaults
are least frustrating for someone who just downloaded 200 MB of
data via dial up, and what makes the most sense.

That we want maximum realism *and* a way to configure as much as
possible and reasonable, was never disputed.

m.

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[gerard robin]

On ven 7 décembre 2007, AJ MacLeod wrote:
> On Friday 07 December 2007 14:40:34 gerard robin wrote:
> > Making the 3D model "shape" is the easiest (5% of the work, more or less
> > 24 hours of work, but very complicated shape)
> > There is a lot of stuff to do:
> > =>the cockpit must completed (versus the A10, Alexy has spent so many
> > time to do it)
> > =>the 3D model is missing a lot of details (maybe the user did notice it,
> > but the author knows it)
> > =>An improvement of the texture, and probably some variants
> > =>the FDM which not right, close to the real one, must be done fully
>
> All very true - and this doesn't even really mention all the various
> systems that might be involved - electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, radars,
> weapons etc.


That is right, we could add the autopilot, i only wanted to define the minimum 
acceptable, we could find a lot of others features which are specific to the 
model.
 
>
> I agree that we need a better indication of "state of completion" for the
> models on the downloads page, but as far as I can see it will have to be a
> very basic overview.  I'm not a fan of simplistic "star" ratings, but if
> the stars are for degree of completion and every star has a well-defined
> meaning, the idea might well have some merit (merely as a rough indication
> of what to expect).
>
> Stars for artistic competence and brilliance of execution should be
> avoided,

Yes we must not talk about artistic competences (here the "msfs" models are 
better  :(  ), only to answer the question: does the model simulate the  real 
one ?which degree of simulation ? 

> I think.  We have some stunning models and I personally make a 
> point of mentioning my appreciation to the authors of such, but making any
> kind of comments on models which might be discouraging to modellers who are
> still developing their skills would be counter-productive I think.
>
> Cheers,
>
> AJ
>

Cheers

-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
<< Less i work, better i go >>


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[AJ MacLeod]

On Friday 07 December 2007 14:40:34 gerard robin wrote:

> Making the 3D model "shape" is the easiest (5% of the work, more or less 24
> hours of work, but very complicated shape)
> There is a lot of stuff to do:
> =>the cockpit must completed (versus the A10, Alexy has spent so many time
> to do it)
> =>the 3D model is missing a lot of details (maybe the user did notice it,
> but the author knows it)
> =>An improvement of the texture, and probably some variants
> =>the FDM which not right, close to the real one, must be done fully

All very true - and this doesn't even really mention all the various systems 
that might be involved - electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, radars, weapons 
etc.

I agree that we need a better indication of "state of completion" for the 
models on the downloads page, but as far as I can see it will have to be a 
very basic overview.  I'm not a fan of simplistic "star" ratings, but if the 
stars are for degree of completion and every star has a well-defined meaning, 
the idea might well have some merit (merely as a rough indication of what to 
expect).

Stars for artistic competence and brilliance of execution should be avoided, I 
think.  We have some stunning models and I personally make a point of 
mentioning my appreciation to the authors of such, but making any kind of 
comments on models which might be discouraging to modellers who are still 
developing their skills would be counter-productive I think.

Cheers,

AJ

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[dave perry]

AnMaster wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Wouldn't turning the turbulence down make other FDMs less realistic?
>
> Also if JSBSim autopilots are affected, how come autolanding with Concorde 
> while
> turbulence is enabled (but no crosswind) works perfectly? Concorde uses JSBSim
> after all...
>
> /AnMaster
>
>   
Here is a quote from the Concord-autopilot.xml
 - a lookahead 8 s could accelerate the convergence of heading hold.
 But that creates roll oscillations, around 800 ft AGL during 
autoland (nav1),
 with turbulence (ins), and during the transition to magnetic 
heading hold (vor and ins).

Also, the Concord AP is controlling the rudder.  Neither the real kap140 
nor the real Century IIb nor the real Century III nor the nor Altimatic 
IIIc control the rudder.  If you turn on auto coordination, the 
oscillations go away.  These controller cascades were done to model 
available documentation on these autopilots.  By coupling in the rudder 
in the AP configs, one could likely stop the oscillations.  But that 
would be very unrealistic.  Further, that is not necessary for the pa28 
nor the pa24 which use YASim and these same autopilots.


> Melchior FRANZ wrote:
>   
>> * Laurence Vanek -- Friday 07 December 2007:
>> 
>>> Although I like realistic flight my ILS approaches we very unstable with 
>>> the turb values given in the Preferences.xml file [...]
>>>   
>> But, but ... some have just told us that we shouldn't make it too
>> easy, or fgfs will be perceived as a toy. So I'd rather turn the
>> values *up*.
>>
>> m.  :-P
>> 

What is proposed is to make the default turbulence = 0.0 at start-up, 
not turning off turbulence modeling.  You can still use the weather menu 
to set the desired turbulence or you can use the "advanced " weather 
option in fgrun to set the turbulence or the command line --turbulence = 
to set the desired turbulence.  But note that for some reason, in fgrun, 
when you set turbulence=0.0, the command line setting turbulence disappears.

-Dave Perry



-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[gerard robin]

On ven 7 décembre 2007, Hans Fugal wrote:
> The aircraft discussion has been interesting. One stumbling block I've
> come across when deciding which aircraft to download before is the
> quality guessing game. The web site lists the author's assessment, but
> I've found that to be less useful than it could be, because some
> authors say "alpha" when in fact the plane is much better than one
> which says "production", esp in the case where a "production" plane
> has bitrotted. The subjective judgement by different people is not a
> good basis for making decisions. For me personally, the decision in
> question is not the download itself but the hassle of putting the
> downloaded file in the right place and firing up flightgear for a test
> flight. For others with slower internet the download may be the big
> thing.
>
> I'm not sure what the solution is, but here's a few random ideas.
> There could be one person that assigns the subjective quality tags,
> maybe out of a set, e.g. "flies, 3d, realistic" or "2d, crashes" or
> whatever. Maybe a committee of 2 or 3, or 2 or 3 individuals that have
> agreed on what each tag means.
>
> Another possibility is some kind of user voting system, but I like
> that idea less and it probably means more work.
>
> Another idea is writing up some guidelines on how the authors should
> describe the plane in the status field, so that even though it's still
> a subjective description by many individuals, at least they are based
> on some common ground.
>
> Just my $0.02.

You are right that is the problem.
How to do with.
It must be discussed here.

When  delivering a model,  i usually say "it is only 15% done".
Why ?
Making the 3D model "shape" is the easiest (5% of the work, more or less 24 
hours of work, but very complicated shape)
In spite of an acceptable eye candy:
=>animations done (which include the landing gear with compression extension) 
=>a 3D cockpit, with some instruments
=>an FDM which seems to be right in order to "play" with it

There is a lot of stuff to do:
=>the cockpit must completed (versus the A10, Alexy has spent so many time to 
do it)
=>the 3D model is missing a lot of details (maybe the user did notice it, but 
the author knows it)
=>An improvement of the texture, and probably some variants
=>the FDM which not right, close to the real one, must be done fully


We could try to define some estimated values A, B, C, for each main components  
 
theses values could be defined within a range previously defined not by the 
author only, but by the community.

I guess it could be useful for the devel-modeler, sometime the author is going 
on a lot of details, which could lead to "the perfect is the enemy of the 
good".

Cheers
-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
<< Less i work, better i go >>


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[dave perry]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I don't think turning turbulance to zero by dedault is a good solution.
>
> If the problem is only in JSBSim then it should be fixed. Meanwhile we can pro
> vide the zero turbulance workaround in a wiki page or some other place.
>   
The problem is the default AC (c172p) with the default turbulence has 
the 0 to 500 ft boundary layer turbulence set to 0.1 which is enough to 
set off this oscillation. 
> I want to know what is the real cause of the problem. turbulance is just one f
> actor of the cause, I think.
>
>   
There is a long thread discussing what appears to be adverse aileron 
yaw.  Since most AP's control roll with aileron only, right aileron 
causes a roll to the right with a yaw to the left.  It is so noticeable 
with the SenecaII (with no auto coordination) that the ball is 
eventually pegged at one extreme and then the other and you see the yaw 
response and aileron inputs from the AP almost 180 degrees out of 
phase.  If you turn on auto coordination, the oscillations disappear.  I 
tried Jon Berndt's suggestion of adding a scaling value.  It had only 
minimal affect.  Even with this set to 0.0, the yaw problem persists.

-Dave Perry

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Gijs de Rooy]

> Nice idea!> > Why not add a system like: 5 stars for a very complete> 
> aircraft like the Senecca II or one for the not so> goog like the fokker 
> 70/100?> > So everyone can see, where is potential to develop?!> > Regards> 
> HHS> --- Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
We could give a star for every single part of the development stadia. One start 
for the 3D Cockpit, one star for the Painting, One star for the 3D Model, One 
star for the flying performances etc. So if a plane has a 3D Cockpit and an 3d 
exterior model it gets 2 start by example.
 
PS: If this is added, we may add also something wich let users rate the 
aircraft?
_
http://www.live.com/?mkt=nl-nl
Live.nl-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Heiko Schulz]

Nice idea!

Why not add a system like: 5 stars for a very complete
aircraft like the Senecca II or one for the not so
goog like the fokker 70/100?

So everyone can see, where is potential to develop?!

Regards
HHS
--- Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:

> The aircraft discussion has been interesting. One
> stumbling block I've
> come across when deciding which aircraft to download
> before is the
> quality guessing game. The web site lists the
> author's assessment, but
> I've found that to be less useful than it could be,
> because some
> authors say "alpha" when in fact the plane is much
> better than one
> which says "production", esp in the case where a
> "production" plane
> has bitrotted. The subjective judgement by different
> people is not a
> good basis for making decisions. For me personally,
> the decision in
> question is not the download itself but the hassle
> of putting the
> downloaded file in the right place and firing up
> flightgear for a test
> flight. For others with slower internet the download
> may be the big
> thing.
> 
> I'm not sure what the solution is, but here's a few
> random ideas.
> There could be one person that assigns the
> subjective quality tags,
> maybe out of a set, e.g. "flies, 3d, realistic" or
> "2d, crashes" or
> whatever. Maybe a committee of 2 or 3, or 2 or 3
> individuals that have
> agreed on what each tag means.
> 
> Another possibility is some kind of user voting
> system, but I like
> that idea less and it probably means more work.
> 
> Another idea is writing up some guidelines on how
> the authors should
> describe the plane in the status field, so that even
> though it's still
> a subjective description by many individuals, at
> least they are based
> on some common ground.
> 
> Just my $0.02.
> 
> -- 
> Hans Fugal
> Fugal Computing
> 
>
-
> SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It's the best place to buy or sell services for
> just about anything Open Source.
> http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
> ___
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
> 



__  Ihr erstes Baby? Holen Sie sich 
Tipps von anderen Eltern.  www.yahoo.de/clever

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

[Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality

[Hans Fugal]

The aircraft discussion has been interesting. One stumbling block I've
come across when deciding which aircraft to download before is the
quality guessing game. The web site lists the author's assessment, but
I've found that to be less useful than it could be, because some
authors say "alpha" when in fact the plane is much better than one
which says "production", esp in the case where a "production" plane
has bitrotted. The subjective judgement by different people is not a
good basis for making decisions. For me personally, the decision in
question is not the download itself but the hassle of putting the
downloaded file in the right place and firing up flightgear for a test
flight. For others with slower internet the download may be the big
thing.

I'm not sure what the solution is, but here's a few random ideas.
There could be one person that assigns the subjective quality tags,
maybe out of a set, e.g. "flies, 3d, realistic" or "2d, crashes" or
whatever. Maybe a committee of 2 or 3, or 2 or 3 individuals that have
agreed on what each tag means.

Another possibility is some kind of user voting system, but I like
that idea less and it probably means more work.

Another idea is writing up some guidelines on how the authors should
describe the plane in the status field, so that even though it's still
a subjective description by many individuals, at least they are based
on some common ground.

Just my $0.02.

-- 
Hans Fugal
Fugal Computing

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[Lee Duke]

If you want to make the simulation more "realistic" turning up the 
turbulence is not the best way to do it. At the NASA Dryden Flight 
Research Center, the simulations were operated at 1.4 times real-time to 
give the pilot a task that resembled the real thing.


This technique was developed during the X-15 days but was never documented.

Lee

gerard robin wrote:

On ven 7 décembre 2007, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
  

* Laurence Vanek -- Friday 07 December 2007:


Although I like realistic flight my ILS approaches we very unstable with
the turb values given in the Preferences.xml file [...]
  

But, but ... some have just told us that we shouldn't make it too
easy, or fgfs will be perceived as a toy. So I'd rather turn the
values *up*.

m.  :-P



ooohhh :)  probably a bad boy.

AND you understood i was talking about Aircraft.

Yes it may be zero turbulence, yes we can use Metar

BY that FG will not be a toy.

Cheers



  
-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[gerard robin]

On ven 7 décembre 2007, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Laurence Vanek -- Friday 07 December 2007:
> > Although I like realistic flight my ILS approaches we very unstable with
> > the turb values given in the Preferences.xml file [...]
>
> But, but ... some have just told us that we shouldn't make it too
> easy, or fgfs will be perceived as a toy. So I'd rather turn the
> values *up*.
>
> m.  :-P

ooohhh :)  probably a bad boy.

AND you understood i was talking about Aircraft.

Yes it may be zero turbulence, yes we can use Metar

BY that FG will not be a toy.

Cheers



-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
<< Less i work, better i go >>


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[Jon S. Berndt]

> I don't think turning turbulance to zero by dedault is a good solution.
> 
> If the problem is only in JSBSim then it should be fixed. Meanwhile we
> can provide the zero turbulance workaround in a wiki page or some other
> place.
> 
> I want to know what is the real cause of the problem. turbulance is
> just one f actor of the cause, I think.

There are many papers written on turbulence and gust modeling. It's a big
topic, really. I wouldn't ask that turbulence be turned off to suit one FDM.
If there are other reasons to do so, that's OK. And yes, the real cause of
the problem can very well be turbulence modeling.

Jon



-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] landing gear control

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Robert Black wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 December 2007 12:15:49 am Syd&Sandy wrote:
>> Ok I have another one 
>>  Can we add a /controls/gear/gear-lever-lock to prevent accidental 
>> raising
>> gear while on the ground , on aircraft that have this feature ? The key
>> bindings can be over ridden , but there's also joystick configurations to
>> consider , so the best place to add this would be the controls.nas routine
>> itself... It could simply be added as a bool in the set file of any
>> aircraft that needs it ... Cheers
> 
> I like the way the Aerostar Super 700 handles the gear. It is one of the only 
> planes that does not crash you if you accidently raise the gear on the 
> ground. It is pretty disappointing to set everything up for a flight and then 
> hit the gear button on the joystick instead of flaps.
I don't think the lightning does either. May be because of needed voltage 
however.
/AnMaster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWTDsWmK6ng/aMNkRCuxHAKC0MK5tH5HmKGSRaGHX9zlsJcq5rQCfRhJJ
DFRlllGsbUZDlUxxw1Y4KBI=
=EGeE
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] landing gear control

[Robert Black]

On Wednesday 05 December 2007 12:15:49 am Syd&Sandy wrote:
> Ok I have another one 
>   Can we add a /controls/gear/gear-lever-lock to prevent accidental 
> raising
> gear while on the ground , on aircraft that have this feature ? The key
> bindings can be over ridden , but there's also joystick configurations to
> consider , so the best place to add this would be the controls.nas routine
> itself... It could simply be added as a bool in the set file of any
> aircraft that needs it ... Cheers

I like the way the Aerostar Super 700 handles the gear. It is one of the only 
planes that does not crash you if you accidently raise the gear on the 
ground. It is pretty disappointing to set everything up for a flight and then 
hit the gear button on the joystick instead of flaps.  

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[tat . michy]

I don't think turning turbulance to zero by dedault is a good solution.

If the problem is only in JSBSim then it should be fixed. Meanwhile we can pro
vide the zero turbulance workaround in a wiki page or some other place.

I want to know what is the real cause of the problem. turbulance is just one f
actor of the cause, I think.


-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?

[AnMaster]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Wouldn't turning the turbulence down make other FDMs less realistic?

Also if JSBSim autopilots are affected, how come autolanding with Concorde while
turbulence is enabled (but no crosswind) works perfectly? Concorde uses JSBSim
after all...

/AnMaster

Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Laurence Vanek -- Friday 07 December 2007:
>> Although I like realistic flight my ILS approaches we very unstable with 
>> the turb values given in the Preferences.xml file [...]
> 
> But, but ... some have just told us that we shouldn't make it too
> easy, or fgfs will be perceived as a toy. So I'd rather turn the
> values *up*.
> 
> m.  :-P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHWQE1WmK6ng/aMNkRCg9mAKCdJz3wxaAFStEbtMJ3Xm45rcrK9gCdFkPd
M8hKNvsjDlI4GszkI8KLKTU=
=g4Wc
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel