Hi all
Another question rised up here during my faa-data to apt.dat conversion.
Does the current (or the updated) genapts take new approach lightning
codes into account ? Can the scenery tools read the new 8.50 runway line
already or is this still based on 8.10 specs ?
Maybe I missed this poin
Am 16.12.11 11:26, schrieb HB-GRAL:
> Am 15.12.11 23:13, schrieb Martin Spott:
>> "Vivian Meazza" wrote:
>>
>>> The other one, which used to be non-op, seems to have gained operational
>>> capability along the way.
>>
>> You see, in order to avoid confusion, having just one operational
>> arrestor
On Friday, December 16, 2011 14:57:24 Olivier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> That's a nice start! Are you grabbing data from:
> http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/ ?
Yes. aprs.fi also has a good feed, although more oriented towards ham radio
APRS.
AisHub has very detailed NMEA data, but they require you to send
Hi,
That's a nice start! Are you grabbing data from:
http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/ ?
In fact, depending on the data format, you may obtain the speed & the type of
the ship with AIS.
So if speed=0, you should use a ship without wakes (eg ship in a harbour, and
display a type
depending on th
> Martin wrote:
>
> Disabling the shaders requires moving the slider forth and back at
> runtime in order to take effect - that's inconsistent, I'd say ;-)
Ah, good catch. Didn't think of that :P
Will commit a fix this evening, if no-one beats me to it.
Thanks!
Gijs
Hello everybody,
I wrote a little script to add maritime traffic from AIS static data. It's a
little crude Nasal script at the moment, but it could be done in C++ to
automate the display of traffic according to a certain range/density. I'll be
looking at that later.
For an explanation of the AI
Am 15.12.11 23:13, schrieb Martin Spott:
> "Vivian Meazza" wrote:
>
>> The other one, which used to be non-op, seems to have gained operational
>> capability along the way.
>
> You see, in order to avoid confusion, having just one operational
> arrestor would have been the clever solution.
>
> We'r
Gijs de Rooy wrote:
> Next to that there are some typos/faults in current Git with respect to
> shader-properties, so it is possible
> that some shaders are accidentally still enabled. I'm preparing a commit that
> fixes quite some bugs, hope
> to push it today. But you can already test it via
> We are still looking into this one. At first glance there doesn't seem
> to be
> any good reason for the wind not being honoured. The overcast is a
> problem
> of interpreting different implementations between Global and Local
> weather.
> Now you are back operational we will try to come up with
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 09:42 +0100, HB-GRAL wrote:
> Am 16.12.11 09:38, schrieb Erik Hofman:
>
> >
> > That's probably wrong most of the time. I think the start of the
> > blastpad is more accurate most of the time.
>
> Oh no! The blastpad is ALWAYS outside the runway. In xplane specs, and
> also
Am 16.12.11 09:38, schrieb Erik Hofman:
>
> That's probably wrong most of the time. I think the start of the
> blastpad is more accurate most of the time.
>
> Erik
>
Oh no! The blastpad is ALWAYS outside the runway. In xplane specs, and
also in FAA specs !
Cheers, Yves
-
On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 23:09 +0100, HB-GRAL wrote:
> Attached you find the list. There are 55 "BAK12" and 23 "BAK14" devices,
> 156 items total, all in the US and found in recent FAA runway data.
>
> The coordinates comes from column base/reciprocal ends of runways,
> published by FAA, assuming
12 matches
Mail list logo
