[Flightgear-devel] 777 vs 787
Gentlemen, Please note that earlier in the week, I upgraded the 787 in CVS. Like I had mentioned previously, I would be inclined to swap the 777 in the base package for the 787. I am still open to that suggestion, but I have hardly had a chance to play with the new 787. I will try to do some testing tonight. In the mean time, can somebody please have a look and give some advice? Cheers, Durk -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear-1.99.5-RC2
John Denker wrote: On 12/17/2008 08:04 PM, Csaba Halász wrote: I assume you are not using sync-to-vblank or fps throttle. That's a correct assumption. Forsooth, I've never heard of sync-to-vblank or fps throttle in this context. The names sound nice, but -- They are not mentioned in --help --verbose -- They do not appear in the drop-down menus AFAICT. -- They do not appear in the getstart manual or in any of the plain-text documents in data/Docs AFAICT. Good point. If I get the chance before the release I'll check the manual and make sure they are mentioned. I mention this because I'm trying to test things from the user's point of view. If these features are going to be important to users, it would be useful to put them where users can find them. Or ... maybe turn them on by default. Recomputing the image at a rate that exceeds the refresh rate of the display seems kinda pointless, unless I'm overlooking something. That is a fair point, but I don't think we have any easy way to determine the refresh rate of the display. Setting the fps throttle by default in preferences.xml might be worthwhile. I don't have it set myself, but I believe that many people use it to provide more consistent frame-rates. -Stuart -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 777 vs 787
Hi Durk, I've just implented the livery selection dialog (working over MP) for the 787 yesterday. You can download it from the forum: http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4t=1001p=23180#p23180 If wanted, you can commit it to CVS. Regards, Gijs Please note that earlier in the week, I upgraded the 787 in CVS. Like I had mentioned previously, I would be inclined to swap the 777 in the base package for the 787. I am still open to that suggestion, but I have hardly had a chance to play with the new 787. I will try to do some testing tonight. In the mean time, can somebody please have a look and give some advice? _ De leukste online filmpjes vind je op MSN Video! http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=nl-nl-- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] NAV display proof-of-concept
On 18 Dec 2008, at 01:17, Syd wrote: On the gps display , the default scale is 5nm full deviation,in approach arm mode 1 nm full, but I didnt animate that ... there are still dozens of pages that need done yet. Ive been tempted to switch to the kln89 instead of trying to do this with nasal ... Just a heads up, I'm planning to deprecate (and remove!) the KLN89 C++ code, in favour of my enhanced 'regular' GPS code, some custom panel layers, and Nasal script. The rational for this is that the 'common' pieces (direct-to modes, route handling, etc) are all common to every GPS and FMS we might ever want to model, while putting the logic about pages, cursors and messages into C++ seems pointless to me. Once I create a specialised text panel layer to handle the screen of the KLN89/90/94, it's 'just' a case of cranking out Nasal scripts to setup and drive each page if they're displayed. The panel layer is the part I'm still working out how to do, it's one of my Christmas projects. Essentially I'm hoping to create a row/ column addressable two-dimensional text area, which can contains 'chunks' like the current text layer, but with some extra control from Nasal - eg making a chunk inverted its display, or blink. I think such a layer would be useful in implementing many small digital displays in a wide range of instruments. James -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] NAV display proof-of-concept
On 18 Dec 2008, at 06:54, Syd wrote: Ok , I did some test flights , now I see what you mean With the EFS 40/50 the deviation scale units depend on the navigation source: VOR/TAC 1 dot = 5 degrees ADF 7.5 degrees LNAV or RNAV 2.5 NM LNAV/RNAV appr 0.625 NM GPS ENROUTE 2.5NM GPS TERMINAL 0.5 NM GPS APPROACH0.15 NM Hope that helps , I'm going over the animations again to see if I got the scale right. Interesting. That means the GPS/FMS needs to expose its current mode in a standard way, which is fine - right now I've added a string property called 'mode', but I'm open to any cleaner way of handling this. If something like the KLN89 is slaved to a 'simple' HSI display or NAV gauge, I suspect the GPS itself takes care of shifting the sensitivity, since what it actually outputs (to drive needle deflection) is a voltage, I think. But equally that doesn't make sense when driving a 'smart' display like the ones in the B1900. Not quite sure the best way to handle this, will have a think on it. James -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] JSBSim Propulsion Work
I want to thank Ron, John, and all of you that are discussing the propulsion / flight modeling problems for the C172P and moving that forward. I'm trying to find time to keep up with the discussion. I think that refining the piston model is a good first task in the job of improving the piston-powered aircraft models. Jon -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear-1.99.5-RC2
On Wednesday 17 December 2008 22:18:15 I wrote: Just to make a blunt suggestion, although not completely of my own imagination: would it be an idea to release this version as 2.0?. Initially, we wanted to do a 1.9.0 release, because we felt that the OSG transition wasn't quite there yet. Since then, enormous progress has been made, in particular in the 3D clouds departments. So given this unexpected progress, would labeling this release as 2.0 be a viable option? I know that Curt's been in favor of calling this release 2.0. I initially was a bit more reluctant, but given the enormous progress, I have to say I'd be open to the suggestion. Okay, of the people who responded, the vote was unanimously against this idea. If it's up to me, I vote for going back to our original consensus, and releasing this version as 1.9.0. As far as I can tell, this number has the majority vote, and although not Curt's preference, he can live with it. To be honest, I personally would also not be too happy with the 2.0 version number yet. Cheers, Durk -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 777 vs 787
Hi Gijs, On Thursday 18 December 2008 10:35:45 Gijs de Rooy wrote: Hi Durk, I've just implented the livery selection dialog (working over MP) for the 787 yesterday. You can download it from the forum: http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4t=1001p=23180#p23180 If wanted, you can commit it to CVS. Thanks for the link. I will have a look. Having said that, after some testing this evening, I do see a number of problems. Most notably, - Most of the panel hotspots are not clickable, at least not in my configuration. - The throttle doesn't respond to joystick input. I will try to give the 787 another try tomorrow morning, using my laptop. If I can't find a way to start the engine, than I'm afraid I will have to stick to the 777. Having said that: I do believe that the 787 is looking really good and, if it doesn't make it into the base package now, it will be a good candidate for the 2.0. release. Cheers, Durk -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 777 vs 787
The throttle doesn't respond to joystick input. The new throttle doesn't respond before the engines are started (they are running, but not started...). The startup procedure is described on the wiki: http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php/Boeing_787 Gijs _ De leukste online filmpjes vind je op MSN Video! http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=nl-nl-- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 777 vs 787
Thanks for the link. I will have a look. Having said that, after some testing this evening, I do see a number of problems. Most notably, - Most of the panel hotspots are not clickable, at least not in my configuration. - The throttle doesn't respond to joystick input. Seems like a wrong version- But It needs some seconds till you can click on the overhead panel. The AP-panel is working now. The throttle reacts here on keyboad input I will try to give the 787 another try tomorrow morning, using my laptop. If I can't find a way to start the engine, than I'm afraid I will have to stick to the 777. Indeed, maybe there can be add a tutorial or a hot-start-button. In the forum there is now a description, but useless to the users who don't know the forum or the exact location of it. Having said that: I do believe that the 787 is looking really good and, if it doesn't make it into the base package now, it will be a good candidate for the 2.0. release. Cheers, Durk -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear-1.99.5-RC2
* Durk Talsma -- Thursday 18 December 2008: I vote for going back to our original consensus, and releasing this version as 1.9.0. Sounds good to me. With the subtitle: technology preview; test it, fire up your editors and fix all the bugs. :-) 1.95 would also have worked for me, but 1.99.5 is really a bit far-fetched. m. -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] plib versions and FG 1.99.5
Sébastien MARQUE ha scritto: Hi all, ... best regards seb solution: http://brisa.homelinux.net/download_and_compile.sh use this script for debian / ubuntu or look at it. bye -- Brisa Francesco Via Gabelli 16 22077 Olgiate Comasco (CO) http://brisa.homelinux.net france...@brisa.homelinux.net __ / / / / /___ ___ / / __/ / __ / / / __ \/ __ `__ \/ __ \ / /_/ / /___ /_/ / /___/ /_/ / / / / / / /_/ / \/_/\/\/_/ /_/ /_/\/ http://www.gl-como.it My public gpg key: http://minsky.surfnet.nl:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xC67DC12DC4361693 -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear-1.99.5-RC2
Durk Talsma wrote: Okay, of the people who responded, the vote was unanimously against this idea. If it's up to me, I vote for going back to our original consensus, and releasing this version as 1.9.0. As far as I can tell, this number has the majority vote, and although not Curt's preference, he can live with it. OK. I'll update the manual source to say 1.9.0 rather than 1.99.5. Durk - if you change your mind right before the release, can you make sure that Martin has checked in a new version of the manual with the new version number. Martin - I'll assume you are happy to generate the manual for the release and check it in. Let me know if you're too busy. -Stuart -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear-1.99.5-RC2
Stuart Buchanan wrote: Martin - I'll assume you are happy to generate the manual for the release and check it in. Definitely yet I didn't recieve any updates for The Manual from John D., though ;-) Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] plib versions and FG 1.99.5
Oh for me it is not a problem as I compile SG-FG cvs, OSG-plib svn using the script ./compile which is one of my own and install them in my user space (http://seb.marque.free.fr/fichiers/flightgear/compile.tgz can do many other things but coffee :)). Indeed I was mainly thinking about distros that won't be able to package FG until they have plib 1.8.5 in their repos, and as this version is available for some months now, I wonder why it is not already the case (maybe FG 1.99.5 could be the coup de pouce for pushing 1.8.5 in repos) regards seb francesco a écrit : Sébastien MARQUE ha scritto: Hi all, ... best regards seb solution: http://brisa.homelinux.net/download_and_compile.sh use this script for debian / ubuntu or look at it. bye -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] [Patch] trivial extension to SGRoute
As a precursor to submitting my GPS / route-manager work after 1.90 is released, here's a tiny extension to SGRoute. A small thing, but an important one, at least for my code - it makes the index of the current waypoint available directly from SGRoute. simgear-route-current-index.patch Description: Binary data Regards, James -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] FlightGear-1.99.5-RC2 WinXP issue.
All, I spent a couple of hours installing all the latest updates. According to the Mirosoft Update site I'm up to date. I loaded FlightGear-1.99.5-RC2 on my Windows XP Pro. SP3 box. FlightGear will not start. Missing MSVCR71.dll not found error. Is this a file I should have? Best Regards, Paul B. -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear-1.99.5-RC2
On Wednesday 17 December 2008 23:04:28 John Denker wrote:
A couple more six-legged crawly things:
42:: Instrument: KAP-140: As of rc2, as installed in the c172p and
presumably others, on initial startup the display of the Sim World
KAP-140 is blank. This is already a bug, because the display of the
Real World KAP-140 is never blank (unless you pull the circuit
breaker, which is not relevant to the present discussion). In
particular, the altitude alerter function is always active and cannot
be turned off, even in the rather common case where the auto-bank and
auto-pitch functions are on standby. In this case, the RW KAP-140
displays the target altitude. It would be nice if the SW KAP-140
did the same.
Unfortunately I am unable to build FG at the moment but I think this patch
will display the target altitude at initialisation.
diff --git a/Aircraft/Generic/kap140.nas b/Aircraft/Generic/kap140.nas
index 1b76255..1e129c9 100644
--- a/Aircraft/Generic/kap140.nas
+++ b/Aircraft/Generic/kap140.nas
@@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ var apInit = func {
annunciatorFpm.setBoolValue(0);
annunciatorAlt.setBoolValue(0);
annunciatorAltArm.setBoolValue(0);
- annunciatorAltNumber.setBoolValue(0);
+ annunciatorAltNumber.setBoolValue(1);
annunciatorGs.setBoolValue(0);
annunciatorGsArm.setBoolValue(0);
annunciatorPtUp.setBoolValue(0);
The nightmare scenario for the noobie pilot is taking off from an
airport situated above 1000 MSL and flying to an airport at 950 MSL.
Since the default target altitude is zero, there will be an alert
on short final at 1000 MSL == 50 feet AGL. Unexpected beeping
warnings at 50 feet AGL are not a good thing.
Displaying the target altitude at all times will of course still result in the
beeping as you describe, but I guess it will be more expected. Can you
confirm that the RW KAP-140 behaves like this?
We note in passing that the instructions at
http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=Bendix/King_KAP140_Autopilot
do not even mention the alerter.
I was too lazy to document all the features, so I just pointed to the Pilot's
Guide :-) Feel free to add a mention of the altitude alerter in the Wiki.
--
Roy Vegard Ovesen
--
SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help
pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FGPiston patch RFC
On 12/17/2008 12:18 AM, Ron Jensen wrote: I've made the constant C a configurable item, but I don't have a good name for it. The patch calls it gagg-c but there must be a better name... I just can't think of one. Physically, this C represents internal friction. So, maybe gagg_friction or some such??? The Gagg-Farrar equation uses a constant to express the power drop off of a piston engine as air density decreases. sigma= air_density / standard_density phi = ( sigma - C ) / ( 1 - C ) power *= phi In early testing it seems to work well. I used rho_air_manifold for air_density and replaced suction_loss, which was based in part on throttle position, with phi. This may resolve one of Torsten's issues with the FGPiston model. There seems to be a consensus that this engine model would benefit from some TLC. The Gagg-Farrar equation is delightfully simple and reasonable. However, AFAICT it assumes the throttle is wide open. That makes sense for the original applications intended by Gagg and Farrar ... but I don't think it does what FGPiston needs to get done. In particular, I call attention to the lines in front of the patch Ron contributed: suction_loss = RPM 0.0 ? ThrottlePos * MaxRPM / RPM : 1.0; if (suction_loss 1.0) suction_loss = 1.0; MAP = (something) * suction_loss; First of all, regarding this quantity suction_loss, it's a misnomer to call it a loss ... because as this quantity becomes greater the MAP becomes greater. Terminology aside, I don't think we should be multiplying by throttle/RPM ... instead we should be dividing by (1+RPM/throttle) roughly speaking. This is much better behaved, especially at low RPM. Furthermore, these lines seem to be missing a rather important dependence on ambient pressure. This is related to the fact that while dynamic viscosity is insensitive to pressure and density, the kinematic viscosity is directly sensitive. I wrote up a first draft of the algebra involved in making a quasi-plausible model of this stuff. It can be found at http://www.av8n.com/fly/throttle.htm This includes a graph of the non-decreasing power versus revs curve that we discussed yesterday. The analysis is not 100% complete; in particular it does not include the frictional terms that Gagg-Farrar features. I reckon if we add that in, we might get something pretty nice. In particular, the Gagg-Farrar result should emerge as a corollary of the more general analysis, applicable to the special case where the throttle is wide open. -- SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear-1.99.5-RC2 WinXP issue.
- Bohnert Paul a écrit : All, I spent a couple of hours installing all the latest updates. According to the Mirosoft Update site I'm up to date. I loaded FlightGear-1.99.5-RC2 on my Windows XP Pro. SP3 box. FlightGear will not start. Missing MSVCR71.dll not found error. Is this a file I should have? This is the C runtime. You can get a copy here : http://www.dll-files.com/dllindex/dll-files.shtml?msvcr71 and you will need http://www.dll-files.com/dllindex/dll-files.shtml?msvcp71 -Fred -- Frédéric Bouvier http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/ Photo gallery - album photo http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/ FlightGear Scenery Designer -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
