[Flightgear-devel] A couple of random oddities
A bunch of issues I've seen - maybe some folks want to fix them before the release (all in a GIT pull of 5 days ago): * The B29 (JSBSim) doesn't run, but rather prints out an error message YOU HAVE AN INCOMPATIBLE CFG FILE FOR THIS AIRCRAFT. RESULTS WILL BE UNPREDICTABLE !! Current version needed is: 2.0 You have version: True, but if it is incompatible with 2.4, then it should either be updated or removed. * English Electric Lightning: I believe the plane should be able to reach Mach 2 around 36.000 ft in level flight - even in a descending pattern, I was never able to reach above Mach 1.7 - is there a problem with the FDM? In addition, the ambient/diffuse setting of the instruments on the main panel appears a bit odd - see my pics in the forum http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4t=11930start=15 * Precipitation: A really exotic one (not really relevant in practice, but might point to an underlying issue): I sometimes log on from my main user account to my fgfs development account on my laptop via su. This works fine, except that sound and a lot of hardware 3d acceleration is absent, but for quick checks and these things is just fine. Except if there's precipitation of any kind - that causes an immediate segmentation fault whereas all other 'fancy' effects simply don't run. * F-16: My sidewinders are a deep blue in external view (looks very odd) - the AMRAAM coming with the USAF livery are fine though... * A380: After reading all the documentation and trying for 3 hours to figure out the AP, I conclude that either I don't understand a thing, or the AP is plain buggy. I can fly the plane just fine with the AP in 'selected' mode, but when I select a VOR radial, bring the plane roughly on it and press 'loc' it doesn't follow the radial but gues 'loco', i.e. starts a high bank angle turn somewhere (I couldn't figure out where), loses altitude rapidly and so on. Also, switching the AP off doesn't return the plane in any stable mode such that it would rougly continue what it did before, but my usual experience is that throttle gets set very low and the plane starts a dive, from which I then have to recover. Also, when I set the AP to acquire a given altitude, and then change heading during climb, the set altitude is frequently lost and needs to be reset. It's a bit of a pity, because I can see there has been so much work going into this plane. May I suggest here to at least - disable any menu options of the AP which are not supposed to be used - expand the documentation of the system somewhat * X15 - I seem unable to start the engine. * Twin Otter (dhc6): Does the propeller pitch lever do anything? Somehow, I don't notice any effect... * Piper Comanche 250: If I set the engine mixture to 'full rich' at ~17.000 ft altitude - shouldn't the engine die? See my report here http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4t=11930 I hope some of that info will be useful! Cheers, * Thorsten -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] A couple of random oddities
A bunch of issues I've seen - maybe some folks want to fix them before the release (all in a GIT pull of 5 days ago): * The B29 (JSBSim) doesn't run, but rather prints out an error message YOU HAVE AN INCOMPATIBLE CFG FILE FOR THIS AIRCRAFT. RESULTS WILL BE UNPREDICTABLE !! Current version needed is: 2.0 You have version: True, but if it is incompatible with 2.4, then it should either be updated or removed. * English Electric Lightning: I believe the plane should be able to reach Mach 2 around 36.000 ft in level flight - even in a descending pattern, I was never able to reach above Mach 1.7 - is there a problem with the FDM? In addition, the ambient/diffuse setting of the instruments on the main panel appears a bit odd - see my pics in the forum http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4t=11930start=15 * Precipitation: A really exotic one (not really relevant in practice, but might point to an underlying issue): I sometimes log on from my main user account to my fgfs development account on my laptop via su. This works fine, except that sound and a lot of hardware 3d acceleration is absent, but for quick checks and these things is just fine. Except if there's precipitation of any kind - that causes an immediate segmentation fault whereas all other 'fancy' effects simply don't run. * F-16: My sidewinders are a deep blue in external view (looks very odd) - the AMRAAM coming with the USAF livery are fine though... * A380: After reading all the documentation and trying for 3 hours to figure out the AP, I conclude that either I don't understand a thing, or the AP is plain buggy. I can fly the plane just fine with the AP in 'selected' mode, but when I select a VOR radial, bring the plane roughly on it and press 'loc' it doesn't follow the radial but gues 'loco', i.e. starts a high bank angle turn somewhere (I couldn't figure out where), loses altitude rapidly and so on. Also, switching the AP off doesn't return the plane in any stable mode such that it would rougly continue what it did before, but my usual experience is that throttle gets set very low and the plane starts a dive, from which I then have to recover. Also, when I set the AP to acquire a given altitude, and then change heading during climb, the set altitude is frequently lost and needs to be reset. It's a bit of a pity, because I can see there has been so much work going into this plane. May I suggest here to at least - disable any menu options of the AP which are not supposed to be used - expand the documentation of the system somewhat * X15 - I seem unable to start the engine. * Twin Otter (dhc6): Does the propeller pitch lever do anything? Somehow, I don't notice any effect... * Piper Comanche 250: If I set the engine mixture to 'full rich' at ~17.000 ft altitude - shouldn't the engine die? See my report here http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4t=11930 I hope some of that info will be useful! Cheers, * Thorsten -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A couple of random oddities
Thorsten wrote A bunch of issues I've seen - maybe some folks want to fix them before the release (all in a GIT pull of 5 days ago): * The B29 (JSBSim) doesn't run, but rather prints out an error message YOU HAVE AN INCOMPATIBLE CFG FILE FOR THIS AIRCRAFT. RESULTS WILL BE UNPREDICTABLE !! Current version needed is: 2.0 You have version: True, but if it is incompatible with 2.4, then it should either be updated or removed. Yup - Ron Jenson is on the case - we should be able to push an updated version soon. * English Electric Lightning: I believe the plane should be able to reach Mach 2 around 36.000 ft in level flight - even in a descending pattern, I was never able to reach above Mach 1.7 - is there a problem with the FDM? In addition, the ambient/diffuse setting of the instruments on the main panel appears a bit odd - see my pics in the forum http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4t=11930start=15 The author is inactive at the moment. Perhaps he can be persuaded to give this fine model a bit of a work-over. * Precipitation: A really exotic one (not really relevant in practice, but might point to an underlying issue): I sometimes log on from my main user account to my fgfs development account on my laptop via su. This works fine, except that sound and a lot of hardware 3d acceleration is absent, but for quick checks and these things is just fine. Except if there's precipitation of any kind - that causes an immediate segmentation fault whereas all other 'fancy' effects simply don't run. * F-16: My sidewinders are a deep blue in external view (looks very odd) - the AMRAAM coming with the USAF livery are fine though... * A380: After reading all the documentation and trying for 3 hours to figure out the AP, I conclude that either I don't understand a thing, or the AP is plain buggy. I can fly the plane just fine with the AP in 'selected' mode, but when I select a VOR radial, bring the plane roughly on it and press 'loc' it doesn't follow the radial but gues 'loco', i.e. starts a high bank angle turn somewhere (I couldn't figure out where), loses altitude rapidly and so on. Also, switching the AP off doesn't return the plane in any stable mode such that it would rougly continue what it did before, but my usual experience is that throttle gets set very low and the plane starts a dive, from which I then have to recover. Also, when I set the AP to acquire a given altitude, and then change heading during climb, the set altitude is frequently lost and needs to be reset. It's a bit of a pity, because I can see there has been so much work going into this plane. May I suggest here to at least - disable any menu options of the AP which are not supposed to be used - expand the documentation of the system somewhat * X15 - I seem unable to start the engine. * Twin Otter (dhc6): Does the propeller pitch lever do anything? Somehow, I don't notice any effect... * Piper Comanche 250: If I set the engine mixture to 'full rich' at ~17.000 ft altitude - shouldn't the engine die? See my report here http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4t=11930 Thanks for the work. Vivian -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A couple of random oddities
On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:39:55 +0100 Vivian Meazza wrote: * English Electric Lightning: I believe the plane should be able to reach Mach 2 around 36.000 ft in level flight - even in a descending pattern, I was never able to reach above Mach 1.7 - is there a problem with the FDM? The author is inactive at the moment. Perhaps he can be persuaded to give this fine model a bit of a work-over. The author is a bit too active, which sadly doesn't leave any time for Flightgear :-( The instruments I'll try and fix myself, but do any JSBSim experts have any ideas on what might have changed the behaviour of the FDM model? It worked OK before... though I have no idea when that changed. Cheers, AJ -- -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Keyboard weirdness: shift modifier stays on
OK, I tracked this, I am answering myself for the record. On my system, I had to recompile OSG. It seems on left-shift-key release, Xorg sends a release event with a wrong keysym (XK_ISO_Prev_Group instead of XK_Shift_L). Same thing for right shift key. On release, the X11 keysym is XK_ISO_Next_Group instead of XK_Shift_R. So i remap these in OSG through the _extendedKeymap of GraphicsWindowX11. I add the following remappings in GraphicsWindowX11.cpp of osgViewer: _extendedKeymap[XK_ISO_Prev_Group] = osgGA::GUIEventAdapter::KEY_Shift_L; _extendedKeymap[XK_ISO_Next_Group] = osgGA::GUIEventAdapter::KEY_Shift_R; Not sure this is the correct solution, though. It works for me. Maybe this concerns OSG people? Xorg people? Cheers, Sylvain. On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Sylvain Mazet sylvain.ma...@gmail.comwrote: Hi all, First things first: I am a long time user of FlightGear (for play), I just love it. Since using FlightGear-2.0.0, I have a keyboard problem. Keyboard responds OK, except that the shift modifier, once activated, stays on forever. Example: 1) I start FlightGear, 2) I press 'x', I zoom in OK, 3) I press 'shift-x', I zoom out OK, 4) I press 'x', nothing happens. The shift modifier is still there (I activated the dump in keyboard.xml to see this). My system is an up-to-date Debian Linux Squeeze. I use gnome. I tried: - Simgear/FlightGear-2.0.0 bundle - Simgear/FlightGear git version (of yesterday: 2.3.0-something) - OpenSceneGraph 2.8.2, and latest 3.0.0 (I am not sure it has anything to do with it) I'll continue my investigations, but I could use some help... I am posting in case anybody has seen this behavior. I cannot find it described in the lists. Thanks for reading! Sylvain Mazet. -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A couple of random oddities
On Wednesday 29 June 2011 05:51:07 AJ MacLeod wrote: On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:39:55 +0100 Vivian Meazza wrote: * English Electric Lightning: I believe the plane should be able to reach Mach 2 around 36.000 ft in level flight - even in a descending pattern, I was never able to reach above Mach 1.7 - is there a problem with the FDM? The author is inactive at the moment. Perhaps he can be persuaded to give this fine model a bit of a work-over. The author is a bit too active, which sadly doesn't leave any time for Flightgear :-( The instruments I'll try and fix myself, but do any JSBSim experts have any ideas on what might have changed the behaviour of the FDM model? It worked OK before... though I have no idea when that changed. Cheers, AJ I don't know of any changes that would have impacted your model. We did fix the thrust tables a few months back... Its really hard for me to see individual aircraft histories in git, but we probably fixed the elevator drag issue in this FDM as well. If you remember, aeromatic configured CDde to go negative at times causing false thrust. I looked at this model in JSBSim stand-alone and saw three sources of drag at mach 2.06 and 36,000 ft: aero/coefficient/CDalpha = 12993.134843 (pounds force) aero/coefficient/CDmach = 5197.253937 (pounds force) aero/coefficient/CDde = 8567.342560 (pounds force) A combined 26,700 pounds of drag. Our two engines in full reheat at mach 2.06, 36,000 feet put out a combined thrust of 20,200 pounds of thrust. Leaving 6,500 pounds of drag unbalance, so we slow down. The CDde coefficient is 0.04 * |elevator-pos-norm|. This is an aeromatic default value for all aircraft. Since the Lightening F.1a has an all moving tailplane not an elevator, this number is way too big. Changing it to 0.008 yields an output of: aero/coefficient/CDde = 1787.161206 (pounds force) Or a combined 20,000 pounds of drag. Just about matching what our engines produce. Thanks, Ron -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Keyboard weirdness: shift modifier stays on
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Sylvain Mazet sylvain.ma...@gmail.com wrote: OK, I tracked this, I am answering myself for the record. It seems on left-shift-key release, Xorg sends a release event with a wrong keysym (XK_ISO_Prev_Group instead of XK_Shift_L). Same thing for right shift key. On release, the X11 keysym is XK_ISO_Next_Group instead of XK_Shift_R. Maybe this concerns OSG people? Xorg people? Sounds like Xorg ... look in your keyboard configuration files. For reference, here is my xev output: KeyPress event, serial 29, synthetic NO, window 0x281, root 0x117, subw 0x0, time 775114491, (46,147), root:(981,280), state 0x0, keycode 50 (keysym 0xffe1, Shift_L), same_screen YES, XLookupString gives 0 bytes: XmbLookupString gives 0 bytes: XFilterEvent returns: False KeyRelease event, serial 29, synthetic NO, window 0x281, root 0x117, subw 0x0, time 775114555, (46,147), root:(981,280), state 0x1, keycode 50 (keysym 0xffe1, Shift_L), same_screen YES, XLookupString gives 0 bytes: XFilterEvent returns: False -- Csaba/Jester -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A couple of random oddities
-Original Message- From: AJ MacLeod [mailto:aj-li...@adeptopensource.co.uk] Sent: 29 June 2011 12:51 To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] A couple of random oddities On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:39:55 +0100 Vivian Meazza wrote: * English Electric Lightning: I believe the plane should be able to reach Mach 2 around 36.000 ft in level flight - even in a descending pattern, I was never able to reach above Mach 1.7 - is there a problem with the FDM? The author is inactive at the moment. Perhaps he can be persuaded to give this fine model a bit of a work-over. The author is a bit too active, which sadly doesn't leave any time for Flightgear :-( The instruments I'll try and fix myself, but do any JSBSim experts have any ideas on what might have changed the behaviour of the FDM model? It worked OK before... though I have no idea when that changed. Cheers, Good to see that you're busy in RL, but not too busy to ignore FG completely. I've just pushed Ron's update to the JSBSim config. It needs quite a bit of up-elevator trim to maintain the cruise at 36000 ft, so there might be something else not quite right, but it will do M2.0 at 36000 ft. Regards, Vivian -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] C172P update
A little reminder for those that talked to me about the C172P update.The update is now packed in a merge-request. Please test and report bugs/opinions at Gitorious. https://gitorious.org/fg/fgdata/merge_requests/108 Thanks! Gijs -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A couple of random oddities
I wrote: -Original Message- From: AJ MacLeod [mailto:aj-li...@adeptopensource.co.uk] Sent: 29 June 2011 12:51 To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] A couple of random oddities On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:39:55 +0100 Vivian Meazza wrote: * English Electric Lightning: I believe the plane should be able to reach Mach 2 around 36.000 ft in level flight - even in a descending pattern, I was never able to reach above Mach 1.7 - is there a problem with the FDM? The author is inactive at the moment. Perhaps he can be persuaded to give this fine model a bit of a work-over. The author is a bit too active, which sadly doesn't leave any time for Flightgear :-( The instruments I'll try and fix myself, but do any JSBSim experts have any ideas on what might have changed the behaviour of the FDM model? It worked OK before... though I have no idea when that changed. Cheers, Good to see that you're busy in RL, but not too busy to ignore FG completely. I've just pushed Ron's update to the JSBSim config. It needs quite a bit of up-elevator trim to maintain the cruise at 36000 ft, so there might be something else not quite right, but it will do M2.0 at 36000 ft. Further research indicates that the F1A, modeled here was NOT capable of M2.0 at 36000ft. M1.9 seem more likely. Moreover, due to structural and stability problems the F1A was operationally limited to M1.7 or approximately 700KIAS. We have pushed a small change in Mach drag to model this better. Ron will look at the Mach stability issue a bit later. Vivian -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
