Re: [Flightgear-devel] Radio simulation of navigational aids

2012-02-07 Thread Pedro Morgan
How does one develop an autoland system atop that ? As I understand it the localiser signal is always pretty accurate in CAT3 protected ILS.. But the glideslope should be unreliable from 150ft ish which is why there is a "decision height" ie runway in sight.. My basic question is actually, is th

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random object/vegetation terrain masking

2012-02-07 Thread Martin Spott
Stuart Buchanan wrote: > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Martin Spott wrote: >> They _are_ being used, anyhow, retiring the old values and transferring >> the respective meaning into their 'modern' counterparts whould >> facilitate understanding of what's going on for those who don't deal >> with

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random object/vegetation terrain masking

2012-02-07 Thread Stuart Buchanan
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Martin Spott wrote: > Stuart Buchanan wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Martin Spott wrote: >>> From my perspective the meaning of the different properties >>> "tree-density" and "wood-coverage" gets a little bit confusing, but >>> I'd probably leave fiddling

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Version file check

2012-02-07 Thread ThorstenB
Am 07.02.2012 21:34, schrieb Curtis Olson: > The main reason for a version check between the binary and the data is > that we often make parallel changes to both (similar reason why we do a > simgear minimum version check when compiling flightgear.) If there are > version mismatches, things could

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Version file check

2012-02-07 Thread Curtis Olson
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 2:29 PM, ThorstenB wrote: > On 07.02.2012 21:13, HB-GRAL wrote: > > Is it a good or bad idea for the FGx launcher to check against the > > version file if it is a valid fgdata folder AT ALL ? I will need some > > kind of check. > > Seems a good idea. Same check is hard-code

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Version file check

2012-02-07 Thread ThorstenB
On 07.02.2012 21:13, HB-GRAL wrote: > Is it a good or bad idea for the FGx launcher to check against the > version file if it is a valid fgdata folder AT ALL ? I will need some > kind of check. Seems a good idea. Same check is hard-coded inside fgfs (of course, fgfs also requires correct content

[Flightgear-devel] Version file check

2012-02-07 Thread HB-GRAL
Hi all Is it a good or bad idea for the FGx launcher to check against the version file if it is a valid fgdata folder AT ALL ? I will need some kind of check. In case it is a bad idea, do you have other suggestions ? (Sorry for the dumb question but thanks in advance for your comments). -Yves

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random object/vegetation terrain masking

2012-02-07 Thread Martin Spott
Stuart Buchanan wrote: > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Martin Spott wrote: >> From my perspective the meaning of the different properties >> "tree-density" and "wood-coverage" gets a little bit confusing, but >> I'd probably leave fiddling with the new values to those with more >> powerful hardwa

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Radio simulation of navigational aids

2012-02-07 Thread Eric van den Berg
Hi Adrian, Would go with 1. As you say signal strength does not have a major influence on the functionality itself. It works or you have a flag. Only of the very border of reception the respective indicator will wander out. But that also is a signal strength issue and can be modelled according

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random object/vegetation terrain masking

2012-02-07 Thread Stuart Buchanan
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Martin Spott wrote: > Stuart Buchanan wrote: > >> I've just committed to simgear/next and fgdata/master code to allow >> the placement and rotation of random objects and vegetation to be >> masked based on a bitmap. > > That's a nice approach ! > >From my perspective

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Random object/vegetation terrain masking

2012-02-07 Thread Martin Spott
Stuart Buchanan wrote: > I've just committed to simgear/next and fgdata/master code to allow > the placement and rotation of random objects and vegetation to be > masked based on a bitmap. That's a nice approach ! >From my perspective the meaning of the different properties "tree-density" and "wo

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG scam resurfaces...

2012-02-07 Thread lists
On Mon, 6 Feb 2012 07:39:22 -0800 (PST), Gene Buckle wrote: > On Mon, 6 Feb 2012, Chris Wilkinson wrote: > >> http://flightsimulatorplus.com/terms.html >> >> Seems FSP or PFS or FPS or whatever has reinvented itself - that >> link >> showed on my Facebook page just now for the first time in perhap

[Flightgear-devel] Radio simulation of navigational aids

2012-02-07 Thread Adrian Musceac
Hi, While working to add support for realistic radio capabilities of navradio equipment, I have transitioned the radio code to a subsystem, thanks to valuable advice from Torsten, which should remove performance issues and make the system more flexible and useful for other development, like int

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Shader performance

2012-02-07 Thread thorsten . i . renk
> Gary adressed those creating the 3d-models and aircraft in FGFS. Yes, quite. And since your own aircraft doesn't repeat and is there independent of visibility range, so in some sense this is a special case anyway. Problem is, once you have created a model, you don't control what others do with