As in this image:
http://dodlithr.blogspot.com/2011/09/airplanes-stability-axis.html
Beta is positive when the wind hits the right side of the vehicle. This is
the only standard convention I have ever seen. I would recommend strongly
against artificially changing the sign of this parameter as
It seems that we have a problem with the FG/JSBSim-interface or it's a
rounding error during JSBSim-initialisation?!
Summarizing my observations:
- immediately after FG is started the property browser shows the
correct values
- this values hold true as long as the splash-screen appears
-
..my oversimplification: http://wiki.flightgear.org/YASim guesses how
it flies from how it looks, while http://wiki.flightgear.org/JSBSim
knows how it flies and tries to show us how that looks, e.g. stalls
are assymetrical in YASim but (still?) symmetrical in JSBSim.
..if I guess FG
Ok, I have pushed the current JSBSim/CVS version to FlightGear git.
Please check for and report breakages. In case of aircraft breakages
compare aircraft behaviour before and after the JSBSim update, if
possible, to determine if the breakage is new or not.
Cheers,
Anders
That's great,
developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim Synch with FlightGear
On 14 Jan 2013, at 02:57, Jon S. Berndt jonsber...@comcast.net wrote:
When's the next released scheduled after the upcoming one?
http://wiki.flightgear.org/Release_plan
So, 7 months from
I agree that - at least - we should mention it in the documentation. We could
hypothetically also accept data in any of the supported frames. Unfortunately,
a lot of the data present in technical reports (NACA/NASA/AIAA) that I have
seen is ambiguous as to frame for the rotational
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Torsten Dreye wrote:
Hi JSBSim and FlightGear lists,
should we sync the latest JSBSim code into FlightGear for the next
release, scheduled for February this year?
My vote is not to sync at this point.
I'd consider a JSBSim sync to be similar to
Yes, i had hoped, too. However, as you mentioned, many new features
have been developed and that violates our feature freeze rule,
unfortunately.
That rule has been introduced for exactly this situation: not to raise
some last minute issues (to avoid bugs here).
Sorry - but as we improve
Sorry - but as we improve our plan with every release, this most
likely will not happen again ;-)
Torsten
When was the last time that JSBSim was synched with FlightGear?
Jon
We synced about six months ago just before the last release of FGFS.
Outerra will be more up to date
hi, my two cents, as someone interested in better formation flight.
First, about using FGAccelerations::GetUVWdot as acceleration, i'm not
sure you will have what you want. i'm trying to do (slowly) something
about the lag ( http://wiki.flightgear.org/Mp-patch ), and i tried to
use UVWdot,
When the HUD no longer works, make sure you haven't deleted anything in
FGDATA - like the fonts. You don't need to define the path to the base
scenery (within fgdata). If you downloaded additional scenery, in one
or multiple separate directories, you can separate the paths with :
(works also
--airport=KCHS
Cannot find Nasal script './data/Nasal/local_weather ...
...
Nasal runtime error: non-objects have no members
...
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Jon S. Berndt [mailto:jonsber...@comcast.net]
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2012 9:33 AM
To: 'FlightGear developers discussions
Am 11.11.2012 17:39, schrieb Jon S. Berndt:
Also, if I specify only the custom scenery path - as in the command
line below - I get the errors that follow. Don't know if those are
revealing or unexpected ...
bin/Win64/fgfs.exe --fg-root=./data --fg-scenery=./scenery
--aircraft
Well, I've tried all sorts of combinations of pathnames, using different
path name specification forms (windows, linux, etc.) and I can get
FlightGear to run using several of the forms - and to load the scenery I
desire, as well - I cannot get both the custom scenery and the HUD symbology
to work
Well, I've tried all sorts of combinations of pathnames, using
different path name specification forms (windows, linux, etc.) and I
can get FlightGear to run using several of the forms - and to load the
scenery I desire, as well - I cannot get both the custom scenery and
the HUD symbology to
.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Jon S. Berndt [mailto:jonsber...@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 3:59 PM
To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Scenery not being loaded
Another thing: the Moon descends through the fog and is still visible
I'm running the latest FlightGear (64 bit v2.8.0.5, under Windows 7). I'm
driving it from an external instance of JSBSim, and it's working very well
except that no terrain is loaded. I can see what looks like a planet below
me that is covered in fog. Altitude ranges from about 40kft to 200kft, and
Another thing: the Moon descends through the fog and is still visible -
there doesn't seem to be any terrain that gets in the way and occludes it.
Even when I am right on top of where the runway should be, there is nothing
except blue water.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Jon S. Berndt
... is already over now, unfortunately.
For those who couldn't attend but are interested in what it was like
(make sure to join next year!), here are some photos showing the event
and FlightGear booth:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/70866411@N05/sets/72157631926925511/detail
/
More
John,
Yes, there were some changes. I’ll try to help out soon, but am limited on time
at the moment. You might search the JSBSim mailing list for the “tank priority”
terms.
Briefly, as I recall, there is now a “priority” element, with priority “1”
being the highest. I forget if “0”
. FGPiston does
provide a gal/hr output, and uses 6.0 lb/gal as the conversion factor.
FlightGear manipulates the JSBSim tank quantities by converting gallons to
pounds in JSBSim.cxx, using a conversion factor of 6.6 lb/gal.
Dave
From: Jon S. Berndt [mailto:jonsber...@comcast.net]
Sent
There are two primary ones:
- YASim
- JSBSim
See: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Flight_Dynamics_Model
Jon
From: kunai...@yahoo.co.jp [mailto:kunai...@yahoo.co.jp]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:28 AM
To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject:
If I'm not mistaken, there's already a quad copter flight modeled with
JSBSim.
Jon
From: Curtis Olson [mailto:curtol...@flightgear.org]
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2012 7:05 PM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Quad-copters
Quick question: Do we have
Yeah, look here:
http://diydrones.com/profiles/blog/list?user=0bcj6vzj8r2k0
Jon
From: Curtis Olson [mailto:curtol...@flightgear.org]
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2012 7:05 PM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Quad-copters
Quick question: Do we have
I found that if I waited a little but longer so that FlightGear was
completely started up, and used UDP instead of TCP that it worked. Great!
-Original Message-
From: Jon S. Berndt [mailto:jonsber...@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 6:03 AM
To: 'FlightGear developers
JSBSim
state
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
Not sure it does work:
FlightGear/projects/VC90/Win32/Release/fgfs.exe
--fg-root=c:/cygwin/home/jon/flightgear/fgdata --aircraft=c172p
native-fdm=socket,in,60,,55p --fdm=external
Processing command line arguments
I tried to post, but it appears my post went away.
I noticed that one of the comments made a remark about X-plane aerodynamics.
I think it might be time for a paper on that which we can use to inform
people.
Jon
From: Curtis Olson [mailto:curtol...@flightgear.org]
Sent: Sunday,
Concerning your original issue on implementing an autopilot: a much
better way to do it is to avoid Nasal for the actual autopilot
controller elements (numeric computation). Instead, use XML autopilot
rules for the filter, gain, damper, integrator elements:
Jack,
Check out the attached message from the JSBSim developer list.
Jon
From: castle...@comcast.net [mailto:castle...@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 7:52 PM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Gear transit times
Hi,
Is it possible
2) The high altitude FDM problem:
Our only spacecraft (Vostok) makes just 150 km altitude, apparently to
prevent it from running into a region where the FDM breaks down. This
isn't nearly high enough to see nice orbit scenes without pushing
gigabytes of textures at the problem. I have not
Ah, yes, found it in McCormick's Chapter six. Should we add some
comment in c172p.xml as a reference for future generations? The
computation is not very intuitive at first sight (at least for me).
Torsten
I think that's a very good idea.
Also, I guess we should have some discussion on
Tuomas,
I can say for certain that YASim does not model TIT, and I believe
JSBsim doesn't either, though there seems to be a stub for TIT
modeling which may be where that property comes from. Someone please
correct me if I'm wrong about JSBsim and TIT. A developer may have
written custom
From: thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi
To provide the context: I wrote the above in response to pictures of Mars
(from Celestia) being posted and talk about Apollo missions, i.e. having
interplanetary missions in mind. (Jon actually knows that, because I
explained it later in the thread :-) ) -
From: thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi [mailto:]
I think it's grossly unfair to mix these issues: Spaceflight requires
to essentially write a space simulator. One of my first statements in the
forum was:
Orbital flights opens a whole new can of worms besides the need for
different rendering -
I've noticed sometimes that the videos produced by the flightgear community
have some characteristics that make them seem unrealistic - not that they
aren't still enjoyable to watch. I look for new ones regularly.
I think they could be better, though. There are some things that could be
done that
Note that the JSBSim environment model is in the middle of a major
overhaul so I wouldn't make too much of it at this point. It would be
more interesting to see how it compares after the rewrite.
Erik
The architecture is, but it should not affect the environment modeling.
Also, the new code
The way I understand this, the issues are to some degree separate (?).
I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that what Jon is largely talking about
is the altitude extrapolation of atmosphere conditions, i.e. given that I
specify pressure, temperature and dew point at sea level, how will these
I'm working on modifying the interface between JSBSim and FlightGear to work
with the new JSBSim standard atmosphere model. There are two or three ways
that the atmosphere model can be modified by the calling application:
A temperature bias can be added to the entire temperature profile (from sea
Torsten,
Eventually, there will be a null atmosphere model that will allow flightgear to
completely control the temperature pressure and density. There will also be
several other atmosphere models available in future versions of JSBSim. I'd
strongly recommend using the JSBSim atmosphere when
Hal,
Oops! Sorry I attributed code to you that came from somewhere else. :-) I
now seem to recall experimenting with your model at that time - actually
replacing the older one in JSBSim cvs with yours, then adding the estimated
propwash effects.
Hal wrote:
These
From: John Denker [mailto:j...@av8n.com]
On 06/19/2011 06:46 AM, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
Maybe I've gone wrong somewhere here, but something similar might
work.
Also, in situations like a flat spin or tail slide this probably
falls
apart!
Let's postpone discussion of exotic flight
From: syd adams [mailto:adams@gmail.com]
Does jsbsim ? I've just begun to look into it , so I don't really know
jsbsim's capabilities.
It's not automatic - not a natural effect calculated by JSBSim code itself.
Like many things in JSBSim, the facilities are present to let the aircraft
Does the new atmosphere code work well with FlightGear's atmosphere?
I remember we had some issues when fg and jsbsim were fighting for the
correct weather values.
But you are right - there are some nice new features we should have in
2.4.0. There will be four weeks starting tomorrow
There is a change coming to the JSBSim modeled atmosphere. A new standard
atmosphere class is being completed that models the U.S. Standard Atmosphere
(1972) all the way up to 1000 km. FlightGear interacts with the FDM
atmosphere in a predictable way, since the user may want to set conditions.
What is the requirement from the FlightGear side for an atmosphere model?
I'd like to remove the capability to drive the JSBSim standard atmosphere
model from FlightGear, but first I'd like to get a clear picture of how
FlightGear users interact with the atmosphere, if at all.
Comments?
Jon
What is the requirement from the FlightGear side for an atmosphere
model?
I'd like to remove the capability to drive the JSBSim standard
atmosphere
model from FlightGear, but first I'd like to get a clear picture of how
FlightGear users interact with the atmosphere, if at all.
Comments?
Credit the new JSBSim milspec/tustin turbulence model to some great work by
Andreas Gaeb last September.
Jon
Sent from my Samsung Captivate(tm) on ATT
Torsten Dreyer tors...@t3r.de wrote:
Great! Thank you! I really like the turbulence model of JSBSim- feels much
more realistic than the
Good description by Durk.
If you want to know more about ascent guidance and control, this is an
interesting and more basic look at that:
http://www.aero.org/publications/crosslink/winter2004/06.html
And this,
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2
Take a look at the J246 model in the JSBSim distribution or in our CVS
browser. That's a hypothetical heavy launch vehicle flight model that is
under (slow) development.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: AJ MacLeod [mailto:aj-li...@adeptopensource.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 6:24
I thought I was going to post the first rocket but it looks like you beat me to
it! :-)
Cool!
Jon
Sent from my Samsung Captivate(tm) on ATT
--
Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload
What perfect timing for this model too, given the recent 50th anniversary of
Yuri Gagarin's first human spaceflight.
Jon
Sent from my Samsung Captivate(tm) on ATT
--
Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial
I didn't find a project file for building FlightGear with MSVC++ Express
2010. Is there one yet?
Jon
--
Xperia(TM) PLAY
It's a major breakthrough. An authentic gaming
smartphone on the nation's most reliable network.
Forwarded to the JSBSim-devel list.
Jon
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:05 AM, cas...@mminternet.com wrote:
Hi,
...
The only parts lacking in the JSBSim as best as I can determine are some
numbers to define the elevator aero coefficents, hinge moments as a
function of tail alpha
Perhaps downwash and hinge force calculations should be the subject of a
section in the xml aerodynamics file so that they can be tailored on a
per-aircraft basis.
Alan
the xml files should be used to load the respective aircraft data for aero
coefficients, tail geometry, and
Hi,
...
The only parts lacking in the JSBSim as best as I can determine are some
numbers to define the elevator aero coefficents, hinge moments as a
function of tail alpha and deflection, and changes in the aspect ratio
of the wing as a function of flap deflections that will be used to
It's been quiet here.
--
Colocation vs. Managed Hosting
A question and answer guide to determining the best fit
for your organization - today and in the future.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d
I suspect that msfs and xplane have licensing agreements with trademark
holders. It would of course be good to know this!
Jon
Sent from my Samsung Captivate(tm) on ATT
Vivian Meazza vivian.mea...@lineone.net wrote:
Chris
On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 09:43 +, Vivian Meazza wrote:
I'm going
I'm going to set you all a simple multiple choice test - pay attention
because I'm only going to say this once:
7. Do I have to ask permission of the motor manufacturer, the
professional
photographer, or you to make or to publish my work on the internet?
A. No
B. Yes
8. I got there
I think that a key with all this is that none of the models will be sold for
profit. You could argue that even if the models are on a cd that is sold for
profit since they are also available freely that the models are not the source
of the profit.
Jon
Sent from my Samsung Captivate(tm) on
Staying beneath the radar might be effective but do you feel good about it?
Is it the ethical thing to do? Unethical? Hoping that ignorance is bliss?
Trying to ignore a perceived problem and wishing it would go away because it is
too hard to do things the right way?
OTOH even if a company
From: Curtis Olson [mailto:curtol...@gmail.com]
Jon: I respect your position, but I humbly ask then that you
please post or send me your letters for usage permission from Boeing,
Airbus, Douglas, Lockheed, Aérospatiale, BAC, deHavilland, McDonnell,
Cessna, Fokker,
From: Curtis Olson
Hi Jon,
I apologize for being persnickety here, but I am searching
for clarity and consistency on this issue.
Has the JSBSim project asked permission from all the
aircraft manufacturers that you create and
From: Stuart Buchanan [mailto:*.*.*]
I agree with Jon on this - ideally we should be pro-active about
asking for permission, even if we don't like the answer.
...
Jon - could you post the disclaimer text you eventually used?
-Stuart
With JSBSim, our situation is a little different,
Hi Bertrand,
I am currently working on a more generic solution to the issue based on
your
patch. Currently we have at least three different places within
FlightGear
calculating tank contents and converting them between different units.
The idea is to have a TankProperties class
I think ya'll just need to hang this one up and let it alone.
g.
I know. What a love-fest, eh? ;-)
jb
--
The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE:
Pinpoint memory and threading
Bertrand,
Is this patch supposed to be applied to JSBSim as it currently exists in
JSBSim CVS, or applied against the patch that Thorsten mentions?
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Bertrand Coconnier [mailto:bcoco...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 6:09 AM
To: FlightGear
2011/2/6 Jon S. Berndt jonsber...@comcast.net:
Bertrand,
Is this patch supposed to be applied to JSBSim as it currently exists
in
JSBSim CVS, or applied against the patch that Thorsten mentions?
BTW, this patch won't apply automatically due to path issues. I am required
to enter
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 13:18 +0100, Bertrand Coconnier wrote:
Hi Jon,
You may already know that but the current behaviour of Flight Gear
reset process is coded at a higher level than JSBSim glue code
(JSBSim.cxx). The reset process is to unbind - delete - create a new
instance of the
Go to JSBSim/src and add '-p 4' to the patch command line.
(this skips 4 levels of directory entries)
Erik
That works. Sort of. But it's trying to patch JSBSim.cxx which we no longer
have in JSBSim standalone.
Jon
PS: I've made several reset tests, all look good now. Also, no
side-effects with the previous patches were reported, so I'm also
pushing the patches to FG/2.2 now (trying to remember the entire patch
sequence... :) ).
cheers,
Thorsten
We'll definitely want to be sure that we don't lose
How can I update my FlightGear development codebase (which was created a
few months ago) from git so I can try to see this problem?
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Erik Hofman [mailto:e...@ehofman.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 6:42 AM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
From: ThorstenB [mailto:bre...@gmail.com]
Hi,
probably spotted the cause for the reported reset crash: it's the same
as already reported before - targeted by this earlier patch:
http://www.gitorious.org/fg/flightgear/commit/287cc74965e11ff3888117a9d
9b88ed2bdbb9252
This patch unties
Need new graphics cards amd will upgrade to a quad-core machine. In
the
meantime going to offload some of the number crunching for one of the
projectors to a slave to shoot the videos for the UCD presentation.
UCD ??
jb
-Original Message-
From: Erik Hofman [mailto:e...@ehofman.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2011 5:55 AM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim merge
On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 15:40 +, James Turner wrote:
Okay - I'm going to re-apply my
It comes up when at reset , for instance c172p.and we get a crash
with that message: Tried to initialize a non-existent engine!
It was solved, but my was over-written when Erik updated JSBSim
(because I didn't remember to submit it to JSBSim). But last night I
re-appllied the fix to Git,
No, the JSBSim object is created on the heap memory - not on
the stack. Only local variables (including local static
objects) are on the stack. Heap isn't initialized, neither
stack. So member variables have random values - unless
explicitly set. Most compilers provide warnings for
I seem to vaguely recall some issue with resetting (with JSBSim). I had
thought that the most recent JSBSim code fixed that, though.
Jon
From: henri orange [mailto:hohora...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2011 7:32 AM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re:
From: Hal V. Engel [mailto:hven...@gmail.com]
snip
Property /engines/engine[0]/mp-inhg is already defined.
Property /engines/engine/oil-temperature-degf is already defined.
Property /controls/fuel/tank-selector is already defined.
Property
I wonder when this started happening? When was the previous time that a
sync with JSBSim occurred?
-Original Message-
From: James Turner [mailto:zakal...@mac.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 6:13 AM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Some
It would be really, really cool if you could do this using the JSBSim
internal features so it could run in stand-alone, too. :)
Ron
This is true, because JSBSim is well-suited to various GNC systems modeling.
This has already been done to some degree, but not a lot of time has been
spent on
If it was important that a JSBSim aircraft model gets a non-squared joystick
input - that is, a linear joystick position from -1. To +1 (regardless of
what is in the joystick file), how would we command (at runtime) the
squaring to be false? The thinking is that there should be a class method in
Running through the same exercise for the p51d-jsbsim:
FDM: 5
Systems: 4 (still needs some electrical systems stuff)
Model: 3 (missing cooling door animation, liveries and Ambient
Occlusion
effect)
Cockpit: 3 (what is there is a 4 but it is missing a few things IE. not
complete)
Total
Woohoo!!! I clicked on one of those ProFlightSimulator ads, and it
took me to a page saying: ACCOUNT SUSPENDED.
See for yourself here! http://www.proflightsimulator.com/cgi-
sys/suspendedpage.cgi?hop=txflyer20
Cheers! Drinks all around!
Check Six,
Jack
It's back.
I was viewing a
There was an update to the gear code yesterday. I suppose it's possible that
the new update has side effects. We'll look into it. Does anyone know when the
last good code is dated?
Jon
Sent from my Samsung Captivate(tm) on ATT
Gijs de Rooy gijsr...@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
after
-Original Message-
From: Hal V. Engel [mailto:hven...@gmail.com]
I just created a merge request to move updates to the JSBSim p51d into
fgdata. Changes include:
...
Hal
Would love to see a video of a flight showing these updated features. I
think it would be a really nice showcase
There is tons of stuff that remains to be done still.
You sound like me: always seeing what is yet left to be done. From my point
of view, your work on this model is at the top of the charts.
There are also things that I have not attempted to implement yet
because they
are not supported by
It has another interesting feature, suggested by ThorstenB - if you try
to read an invalid path, it doesn't silently succeed - it throws an
exception! This is to avoid lurking typos in property paths, which has
been an issue. (I will be adding a 'weak' variant, that takes a default
value, for
Yes. How do you want to send it? To what? See the JSBSim Reference Manual
at www.jsbsim.org.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: ing. Petr Ondra [mailto:petr.on...@erm.cz]
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 3:13 AM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] How use FG
This would be a good change to test. Note that JSBSim is experience
NaNs for me on reset/re-position, much of the time - I think I'm more
prone to this than other people, for some reason. I see the same
behaviour before and after the change, and Anders informs me it's a
long-standing bug, but
The URL given doesn't work.
Jon
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sA9Kato1Cx.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sA9Kato1Cx.%20A A , but that is for upward
loading. Winking smile emoticon
Alan
I once toyed with a quadracopter model based on JSBSim. The propeller
model
wasn't sufficient to the task, and I haven't tried again with the newer
rotor
model. There is a simple 3D model you could integrate with the YASim
version
perhaps. The repository is on gitorious:
I once toyed with a quadracopter model based on JSBSim. The propeller
model
wasn't sufficient to the task, and I haven't tried again with the newer
rotor
model. There is a simple 3D model you could integrate with the YASim
version
perhaps. The repository is on gitorious:
There also may be a way to do this with the new
JSBSim rotor model. There will probably be an
update to that code sometime soon.
Jon
From: Julien Peeters
Great to know that. I thought JSBSim cannot model
rotor based aircrarft.
Some one knows when this will be
-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] C++ for Simulation
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Jon S. Berndt schrieb:
If cost is an issue (isn't it always?), is it worth
it to expend the resources to clean up code that may have been gathering
flotsam and jetsam
Guys, I've got a question that's come up in my day job. I'd like to ask for
your opinion. If you had to justify to your boss the rewrite of old C code
in C++, could you do it? If cost is an issue (isn't it always?), is it worth
it to expend the resources to clean up code that may have been
Can these be converted to the format that FlightGear uses - particularly the
crawler, the VAB, and the launch complex - as well as the launch vehicle
models?
Jon
--
Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual
models just yesterday!
I managed to open the Shuttle model in Blender, so I guess it would be
possible to have them exported to Flightgear.
BTW, here's the link to the site:
http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/3d_resources/models.html
Regards,
Fabián
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Jon S. Berndt
Reading the NASA guidelines it seems to be compatible with GPL, so I
put
the VAB is in git in Models/Structures. Do you have any plans for it?
Vivian
Not for the VAB, so much, but to launch things from KSC the launch pad is
needed. :-)
And the Ares-1 vehicle would be nice, too. I'll try
Hi Jon,
If you don't do local changes updating is as easy as cd:ing into fgdata
Done.
(and the respective source repositories)
How do I do this?
and type 'git pull'.
JB
--
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is
Like this?
git pull git://gitorious.org/fg/fgdata.git
??
Which branch should I specify?
Jon
-Original Message-
From: Jon S. Berndt [mailto:jonsber...@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 11:26 AM
To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel
1 - 100 of 588 matches
Mail list logo
