> I recently started work on a P-38 J and collected some data. Mostly
> Pilot reports and Manuals because I prefer Yasim FDM. Although these are
> different versions, I'd prefer to have only one P-38 project (maybe with
> different versions and/or alternate Yasim FDM). If you are willing to
> take
> Original Message
> Subject: Flightgear
> Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 16:23:22 -0700
> From: Rell Angton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Hello to all,
>
> I respectfully request permission to sell the download "Flightgear".
> Would it be possib
maintains the
ability to be run on its own in a batch mode, and also because it tries to
be a drop-in FDM for other general purpose simulators (see the JSBSim list
this morning for another example of that).
It appears that we need to do some work here, though. Thanks for pointing
these things out, an
> I'd very much like to have a car FDM. A realistic one like Curt
> mentioned.
>
> m.
There's Racer:
http://www.racer.nl/
JB
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB
John Denker wrote:
> Given the exiting mess, adopting a policy of "no tabs in files"
> seems like a step in the right direction, namely a way of
> dealing with point #2, i.e. the file-encoding issues.
I need to clarify that I do that in code that I am the main editor for.
Fortunately, other devel
Amazingly, I seem to have restored hardware accelerated OpenGL capabilities
to my system after two years (?). A chance encounter with a five year old
posting about a beta driver from VIA seems to have restored the capability.
This came from the readme file with the driver:
--- start ---
"It close
SourceForge is accepting nominations for the Community Choice Awards. There
are several projects involved with this flight sim community that could be
nominated, and I encourage you to consider nominating packages you feel
deserve it.
You can find the projects that are related to flightgear here:
> The time ( and Jon :) ) is (are) working for us , wouldn't the
> coming external forces within JSBSim solve these aerotow and winch starts
> funct (and others.)
>
> Regards
>
> Gérard
Yes, Dave Culp has done a lot of work on this, and I am continuing it, but I
don't have an idea when i
> I'm attempting to assemble a list of basic aircraft state values, like
yaw,
> pitch, roll, and velocity and acceleration vectors. I'll probably be using
> the JSBSim FDM. Is there a place where this information can be easily
> extracted from the program? The FGState::ReportState function seems to
> I'm going to be connecting flightgear to a motion platform, propably
> through
> UDP. I'll need at a minimum yaw, pitch, roll for the aircraft and g-
> forces
> that the pilot is subject to. If this could be done in a FDM-
> independent
> manner that would be nice but isn't necessary. I don't kno
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:52:20 +0200
"gh.robin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri 13 July 2007 18:32, AnMaster wrote:
>> gh.robin wrote:
>> > On Fri 13 July 2007 01:28, bass pumped wrote:
>> >> On 7/12/07, gh.robin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> SNIP
>>
>> >> While you are it... maybe a M-21 an
For about 2 weeks now I'm getting a FlightGear crash deep in the OSG
internals on my laptop. I was hoping it would be a transient issue in OSG
and clear itself up, but so far that is not the case. The same code and
versions of everything run just fine on my desktop. I've got the most
current OSG
Fabian wrote:
Currently , as far as I understand, JSBSim does not support
the buildup of the aerodynamic characteristics by taking the wing-body alone
and adding the tail contribution. This is essential for example in
investigating an aircraft behaviour during ice c
> Hi,
>
> I've updated the little Cessna so it should be flyable again (the fdm
> was still in the jsbsim old format).
> A few parts were updated too.
>
>
> http://sites.estvideo.net/tipunch/flightgear/c150-026.jpg
> http://sites.estvideo.net/tipunch/flightgear/c150-027.jpg
>
> Harald.
>
> Thi
Is there a convention we should follow for formatting messages here (besides
trying not to top post - which I admit I am guilty of)?
It's not easy to reply to messages formatted in HTML. I'd personally like to
see that format banned from the list.
Jon
--
> Top posting is always annoying and wrong. Of course, it's bad to
> have 100 quoted lines with a single "OK" under them. But the problem
> here is not the "OK", but the nonsensical hundred lines!
>
> m.
More importantly: is HTML to be avoided?
Jon
> A: No.
> Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
Ha! This gave me a laugh.
Jon
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and
Bill G. wrote:
Now, is this a little overkill? Maybe, since most trainers that I've seen
don't go into such details. It is possible to generate data for these cases,
and I think it would yield higher fidelity trainers than anything seen
before, simply because that kind of data hasn't been availabl
> > Jon Replies:
> >
> > I've been thinking about these issues for some time. I've
> > actually considered just guessing. :-) I wonder how much
> > data is too much data? It would be great to have this level
> > of fidelity modeled.
> >
> > Jon
>
> Any chance JSBSim could be expanded to do infini
> Any chance JSBSim could be expanded to do infinity number of dimensions
> of tables (if it doesn't do it already)?
>
> Bill
We might actually be able to effectively do that, since we could have
multiple tables defined that create multipliers that could be used later.
Jon
---
> > We might actually be able to effectively do that, since we
> > could have multiple tables defined that create multipliers
> > that could be used later.
> >
> > Jon
>
> Well, that was going to be my initial approach, but it's a real pain to
> remove one dimension like that out of a 4-D table to
> On Tue 17 July 2007 15:27, gh.robin wrote:
>
> Hello,
> With T38 we get that error Nasal Message
> Nasal runtime error: No such member: getValue
> at FlightGear/data/Aircraft/T38/aar.nas, line 58
>
> Regards
> --
> Gérard
Has the recent addition of the Nasal Air-to-air refueling
>
> Finally, one short question: why there is no dedicated horizontal
> stabilizer property available in JSBSim, and we need to use for this
> the speedbrake property? Just curious...
>
> Fabian
Are you talking about JSBSim, or DATCOM? I'm not sure I understand your
question. There is a property
On the topic of calculating downwash at the tail, and the effects thereof,
rather than make a four dimensional table it might be better to think
outside the box and consider alternative ways to do what you need. Modeling
ground effect is one example of that. It's a function that is calculated
outsi
> Indeed, I was talking about two 2-D tables, "wrongly" guessing that
> JSBSim would interpolate the data in case, let's say, the current slat
> position is not any of the specific slat for which the tables are
> defined. Such an interpolation would be quite accurate, being better
There certainly
> I would need:
> CLtail = f(alpha_tail, delta_elevator)
>
> where alpha_tail = alpha_aircraft + horizontal_stab_angle - Epsilon
We should be able to do this.
> Some time ago I've been told that this can be done using the
> speedbrake property (indeed this is the way it is done in the 747
> ex
> It was asked in the German fgfs forum[1] if it's possible to log
> internal data to an XML file. Sure is! :-)
There are probably several ways within Flightgear to do this. If one is
interested in flight dynamics parameters you can also do this in JSBSim in
the aircraft configuration file with a
> But it doesn't look like this logs to an XML file, which is what that
> user wanted, and what the Nasal file does. (See subject.) Also, I'm
> not sure if he'd be happy about a JSBSim-only solution, which wouldn't
> even cover half of our aircraft. :-}
>
> m.
I was just mentioning another optio
> I use a gas turbine model for the 747 project. A copy was forwarded to
> the JSBSim project, but it was never incorporated into the baseline.
>
> It' s patterned after a model used at the NASA Lewis Research Center
> and a paper written by a professor at the Univ of Toledo in Ohio. The
> exact
> I vaguely remember this. There are several things that are ready or
> close to ready to be integrated with JSBSim at this time:
>
> 1) A new trim capability (Agostino De Marco - some of this will be
> presented at the AIAA Modeling and Simulation Conference during the week
of
> August 20 at Hilt
> My idea is to define an aircraft using JSBSim FDM and fly it in
> FlightGear, while having the output data plotted (realtime) in Matlab.
> Asking too much?
Fabian:
If you are running on Windows, I could possibly send you a stripchart
application that I wrote, which accepts data from JSBSim over
> Hello,
>
> My first post in this list was a BIG MESS.. I forgot to disable rich
> editor.
>I apologize for that. Please, follow the post bellow.
>
> Shamed Regards,
>
> LdsFly.
Actually, it looked OK, to me. Welcome to the list!
Jon
--
Jon S. Berndt
Dev
FYI, I am at the AIAA conference in Hilton Head this week. In two of
the presentations I was at this morning, FlightGear (and JSBSim) were
prominently mentioned in presentations. Also, I stopped by the
Mathworks booth here and watched their tool drive FlightGear. It was a
real attention-getter.
> Melchior FRANZ
>
> But that's IMHO the only way that makes sense. And JSBSim
> (unlike YASim) currently lacks other gear features, anyway.
> Per-gear-material-info can easily be implemented when the
> JSBSim gear gets friction/solidity/etc. awareness. The
> "the whole world is a runway" behavior
> > As far as "other gear features", what would those be?
>
> - not allowing to land/taxi on water (except water planes)
> - gear friction taken from the ground material
> - considering ground bumpiness (small on concrete, high in the forest)
>
> You can check how Maik JUSTUS implemented it for Y
This would make a nice movie ...
Jon
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> gh.robin
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 7:14 PM
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Catalina- Water and Solid ground.
>
> I will rebuild my private URL in order to give an easy access to the
> models links , which will contains every updated versions.
>
> Sorry for the noise.
>
> I had to explain, the modifications of my policy.
>
> Cheers
>
> --
> Gérard
Hi, Gerard:
Just so I understand this, you will place
Check this out. Serious simmer:
http://mysite.verizon.net/antonioe/index.html
Jon
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120
> Hi Drew
>
> I just posted a patch on the JSBSim list to model this. I've been
> missing this
> for a long time. So at least aircraft that use the JSBSim FDM should
> see this
> feature soon ;-)
>
> Greetings, Torsten
Well, I don't know what happened. I can't find any hint that we ever added
th
> The SenecaII wing rock with light turbulence appears to result from a
> very exaggerated adverse aileron yaw. So I did the same experiment
> with the c172p and pa28-140 which both use the kap140. With the default
> turbulence, the c172p oscillates so bad that you cannot complete the
> approach
> With the turbulence zero, both behave the same.
>
> The SenecaII wing rock with light turbulence appears to result from a
> very exaggerated adverse aileron yaw. So I did the same experiment with
> the c172p and pa28-140 which both use the kap140. With the default
> turbulence, the c172p oscil
> is as solid as a rock with the default turbulence all the way down the
> glide slope. With the turbulence zero, both behave the same.
>
> The SenecaII wing rock with light turbulence appears to result from a
> very exaggerated adverse aileron yaw. So I did the same experiment
> with the c172p
> Is auto-coordination enabled? I don't think this is effective for
> YASim
> aircraft but it may be complicating things on JSBSim aircraft. Also,
> are you
> getting the same frame-rates with both aircraft? Last time I ran FG I
> found
> that the autopilot PID controllers ran at the frame rate
> I think Jon B. is onto something by asking how turbulence is
> implemented in the various fdms.
>
> Thanks for the ideas,
> Dave
Does anyone know what typical values are for these two properties:
/environment/turbulence/magnitude-norm
/environment/turbulence/rate-hz
The fact that the first
> >> The SenecaII wing rock with light turbulence appears to result from a
> >> very exaggerated adverse aileron yaw. So I did the same experiment
with
> >> the c172p and pa28-140 which both use the kap140. With the default
> >> turbulence, the c172p oscillates so bad that you cannot complete the
> I helped implement this with Tony a few years ago. As I recall, the
> value was from 0 to 1, where 0 represents no turbulence, and 1
> represents the most severe turbulence that we model. You couldn't
> represent turbulence simply in feet/second, because it consists of
> both movements and rota
> I don't think that's the primary issue ... although there
> might be a /secondary/ issue with the kap140 being more
> vulnerable to bad handling characteristics than some other
> autopilots are; I don't know. I recommend fixing the
> flight dynamics first, and only then looking to see what
> se
More on turbulence. At least in the copy of JSBSim.cxx that I have there is
this code in "Copy_to_JSBSim":
tmp = turbulence_gain->getDoubleValue();
Atmosphere->SetTurbGain(tmp * tmp * 100.0);
tmp = turbulence_rate->getDoubleValue();
Atmosphere->SetTurbRate(tmp);
There are two gai
This is a report I'm going to be taking a look at to help in evaluating this
reported problem with the SenecaII:
"Evaluation of the Effect of a Yaw-Rate Damper on the Flying Qualities of a
Light Twin-Engine Airplane." Technical Report NASA Technical Note TN D-5890,
Research Engineering, NASA Dryde
> The chance of reaching 100,000 ft is not the only issue.
>
> Things pilots care about include:
> -- RPM as a function of altitude, prop control, throttle, etc.
> -- MAP as a function of .. ..
> -- Rate of climb as a function of .. ..
> -- Level-flight speed as a function of .. ..
> -- Mixtu
> The pa24-250 uses yasim, the c182 uses jsbsim. I just had a look at the
> jsbsim aircraft.
> Kicking the aircraft to 100.000 ft with the --altitude=10 commandline
arg
> the engine of the c182 was spinning at high rpm with no indicated
> manifold pressure at full throttle.
> I did the same wit
I have a bug report I've been looking at for JSBSim that was filed by a user
here.
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1739190&group_id=19
399&atid=119399
I'm wondering if this behavior can be duplicated by anyone else with the
current revision of FlightGear with the latest J
At one time, the ";" character was used to separate directory names. Is this
still the case? Does support need to be maintained for that?
Jon
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files
> Thanks for the hint,
> --prop:/environment/params/control-fdm-atmosphere=1
> on the commandline does the job and it looks like it is working
> perfectly well.
>
> Is there any specific reason why this is turned off by default in
> preferences.xml?
>
> Torsten
That's great to hear that it's wor
> Torsten, Durk, and one developer who again wishes to remain anonymous,
> had a
> pretty good show today, with a bit of a slow start. Initially, we had
> some
> performance issues on the windows machine, and some minor bugs to
> solve, but
> these problems were gradually resolved during the day.
>
> > Jon
> >
> Hi Jon,
>
> I hope my second email has given some clues as to the who 's who part
> of the pictures. :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Durk
"Second email"?
Jon
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still greppin
The C172x is an experimental model for use with JSBSim by itself. It's the
aircraft model I use to test all the new features. It should not be
released.
Jon
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Melchior FRANZ
> Sent: Saturday, November
> * Jon S. Berndt -- Saturday 10 November 2007:
> > The C172x is an experimental model for use with JSBSim by itself.
> > It's the aircraft model I use to test all the new features. It
> > should not be released.
>
> That only explains why it is in JSBSim
> If that variable doesn't show a large slip angle when parked
> in a crosswind, that's a nasty bug.
>
> You can easily enough check whether the FDM is calculating
> this correctly by recomputing it yourself. It's just the
> angle between the relative wind vector (projected onto the
> XY plane) a
> On 11/22/2007 09:10 AM, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
>
> > At this time, JSBSim zeroes out the wind velocities while at rest on
> > the ground, to prevent slippage.
>
John Denker replied:
> Aha. Thanks for the info.
>
> FWIW that sounds like *two* bugs to me.
> 1
> Maybe it would help to talk to the CDM guys instead of the
> FDM guys.
> http://www.google.com/search?q=car-dynamics-model
> http://www.google.com/search?q=car-dynamics-model+nascar
>
> I reckon the car-dynamics guys have a pretty good model of
> static friction and quasi-static rolling fric
> > I think we should merge the latest JSBSim code into fg before
> releasing
> > 0.9.11. There are many fixes since the last merge and I'd love to
> have them
> > in fg, too.
> >
> > Torsten
> >
> >
> Me, Too, I'd love to have them:)
>
> --
> Gérard
> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
I'd
This is very interesting:
http://www.microsoft.com/esp/
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2216455,00.asp
Jon
-
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. From the desktop to the
I don't see ESP as changing much. It might have appeal from some quarters,
but there will still be those who want open source solutions.
Jon
-
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Nove
ng my choices of third party libraries
> to use.
>
> I've been told that FlighGear people were interested in including a
> car simulation on it too, so that's why i'm seding this email :-)
I am particularly interested in how you model suspension/ground react
> I'm not familiar with the suspension geometry of planes, but i *guess*
> it can be modelled as a series of "bodies", "joints", "springs" and
> "dampers", together with the tire model.
>
> Planes tires are pretty big, so they're an important part of the
> suspension process in landings too (and b
I think it's worth pointing out that in FlightGear cvs we
have models of a jeep and of a snowplow (truck). The dynamics are based on
YAsim and the wheel/suspension modeling seems to work really well. I was
actually very impressed at the sorts of things that YAsim does ... Andy
coo
> GWMobile wrote:
>
> Just to help you. X-plane simulates springs and tires and has an open
> interface. People have built cars for x-plane. The roads suck though.
>
> I think it would be great if fgear did this too.
Ground reactions have been a hot topic for a while. It sounds like Andy has
go
> Turns out that JSBSim and YASim already has what I'm looking for.
>
> My question then is reduced to: why doesn't more FDM modellers use
> these features of JSBSim and YASim to create cotrol surfaces that seem to
> have mass?
>
> Roy Vegard Ovesen
Roy:
Possibly, it is because many of the aircr
> Roy:
>
> Possibly, it is because many of the aircraft flight models were written
> before the specific capabilities became available. There are two flight
> control components provided by JSBSim which could be added into the
> control
> path for a JSBSim aircraft to affect movement of an aerosur
> On JSBsim I noticed that the thrust reverser are not
> working ( as an example Fokker 70/100), but I remember
> that it was working with 0.9.9 and 0.9.10 - something
> changed or I'm too stupid?
>
> thanks
> Regards
> HHS
I thought we fixed that. Maybe you have an old configuration or software?
I can't answer this at length at the moment, but a couple of months ago I
turned off JSBSim turbulence completely because I had some questions about
it myself. If you get the FGAtmosphere.cpp file from JSBSim CVS, that should
include the newly turned off turbulence.
I hope to revisit that in the n
I'd like to see the 737 stay. Also, I believe recent enhancements and fixes
in JSBSim may have fixed the F-16, but I'm not sure.
Jon
-
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. Fro
> >
> About f16-3d I just tried again it, flying with it 15 minutes over the
> Mediterranean sea from LFTH, i did not notice the problems you have.
> I confirm that it is a nice Model to fly, probably easier than the
> real one.
>
> Does it mean that the computer configuration is involved ? the F
> * Jon S. Berndt -- Wednesday 05 December 2007:
> > If the F16 is broken now it should not be included.
>
> It shouldn't be hard for someone with some JSBSim insight to
> fix it. When I told Dave about the problem, he suggested to
> replace the elevator FCS part by th
> Yes, the selection should be "balanced". A representative of
> every class that the users would be interested in, especially
> well done ones (with 3D cockpit) that don't consume excessive
> disk space, but more importantly: download volume. And they
> should be flyable, too.
>
> I couldn't care
> On mer 5 décembre 2007, Berndt, Jon S wrote:
> > There has been some discussion of the F-16 working badly. I took
> another
> > look at it over lunch. I think I have found one bug (which is not to
> > say, the "only" bug). There are several integrators used in the
> control
> > laws. These should
> There has been some discussion of the F-16 working badly. I took
> another look at it over lunch. I think I have found one bug
> (which is not to say, the "only" bug). There are several
> integrators used in the control laws. These should have wind-up
> protection set up (which they don't). B
gree of realism. Granted,
there are other airliner models that are very nice, too.
So, regardless of which aircraft are specifically included in the next
release, I think the discourse here is also valuable for discussing where
some of the models can be improved.
Jon
Jon S. Berndt
Development
> I don't think turning turbulance to zero by dedault is a good solution.
>
> If the problem is only in JSBSim then it should be fixed. Meanwhile we
> can provide the zero turbulance workaround in a wiki page or some other
> place.
>
> I want to know what is the real cause of the problem. turbula
> I vote to keep the 737
>
> Regards
> --
> Gérard
Once the 3D cockpit comes out, and some other work is done, perhaps it can
be reconsidered. I'm not going to argue with this process, which has been
careful and considerate.
One question, though, for these aircraft which will not be included f
For the first time in a very long time, I have a system on which I should be
able to build and run FlightGear. I had a script some time ago that handled
updating plib, simgear, and flightgear from cvs, and then built compiled
that. I think things have changed quite a bit.
I've got Cygwin and MS Vi
> Here is a nice shot over chicago...
> No antialiasing, sorry...
> http://www.t3r.de/fg/c172chicago.jpg
>
> Torsten
Ah ... the good ol' days. :-)
Jon
-
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Mark
> So, with FG, we can notice some "little" improvements ( on Amiga, the
> pictures are better) :):) :)
>
> Regards
>
> Gérard
I still have an Amiga 3000T somewhere around here. [I ran "Flight Simulator"
(from subLogix) on that in the very early 1990's.] The Amiga had such
promise. But oh
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 21:28:11 -0600
"Curtis Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Shad,
>
> ...
>
> So unless all this happened in private email, I honestly don't know
>where
> you are getting any of this from? All the discussion on the public
>mailing
> list that derived from any of your que
> [hundreds of lines of grep output omitted]
>
> I know for a fact that many of those allocations and assignments use
> smart pointers. How about a more useful list of those that don't?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Tim
And some others appear to me to be properly used.
I'm perplexed by the previous
> I have found memory leaks due to mismatched new/delete in
> JSBsim (and submitted patches to fix the problem).
> And JSBsim is very far from being the only place in
> FGFS where c-- style manual memory management is used,
> as detailed above.
I appreciate any bug reports, and others have run val
> On 01/19/2008 02:22 PM, Jon S. Berndt wrote in part:
> > Pushing an object instance onto a vector is a bad idea, as a
> proper copy constructor must then be created,
>
> Well ... that is exactly the point I'm trying to discuss.
>
> IMHO if you are going to
> Of course one should use reference counted objects in a language that
> supports them, but C does not. ...
>
> gl
I'd add: "when there is a need to do so". I don't see a need to go that
level with JSBSim. In the beginning, after an aircraft file is loaded,
objects are created, and remain intact
Dave Culp is running the newest JSBSim with FlightGEar and it seems to be
doing well. We are getting ready for a 1.0 release ourselves pretty quick. I
think that the migration of JSBSim CVS code to FlightGear should be fairly
painless, but I need to make a few more changes in the code for making it
> Hi All,
>
> Just a quick note to mention that I've now implemented random tree
> height, and
> multiple textures as suggested by Curt. Screenshot here:
>
> http://www.nanjika.co.uk/flightgear/forest2.jpg
>
> Still some work to be done, but it is looking more realistic.
That looks very impres
Well, for the first time in a very long time I am building the latest and
greatest FlightGear. To my delight, plib, simgear, and openscenegraph built
flawlessly under cygwin on my old XP box. The FlightGear build stumbled just
slightly, but I don't expect this is a big deal. Here's what I got:
g+
> Looking at the file I believe that should be HUGE_VAL.
> --
> Csaba/Jester
Thanks. It works. That was a lot simpler than I was expecting.
This probably needs to be fixed in CVS.
Jon
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
Is there anyone out there who has tried to compile FlightGear under Cygwin?
I've been running into an increasing number of compile errors. If anyone
else out there has gone through this before and knows what needs to be done
to get this to work, I'd be very interested to read about that.
Thanks,
Is there any level of g++ compiler that FlightGear depends on for successful
compilation?
Jon
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/
I'm having a pretty bad time trying to get past this set of compile errors
when trying to build the latest FlightGear from CVS under cygwin:
make[2]: Entering directory
`/cygdrive/d/jon/FlightGear-1.0/source/src/Environment'
g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../src/Include -I../.. -I../../src
-I/usr/lo
> Hmm, this sounds very familiar. I can't give a solution right now, but
> if all
> is well I have some notes on my old laptop, regarding a fix for these
> unqualified-id errors. IIRC, the solution is very very simple (adding a
> conditional include, or something like it), but I will have do dig
>
> These fixes should be in CVS now. Please give it a try. Took a bit
> longer than I expected. Life's been quite busy as of late. :-)
>
> FWIW, as far as I can tell, many of the unqualified-id errors in cygwin
> originate from the fact that either windows.h, or config.h are not
> included.
> These
> My experience with UAV control systems is that scheduling gains with
> airspeed is a good idea if you want control over a wide envelope. It
> is difficult enough to make the vehicle stable over the entire flight
> envelope. If you want anything approaching optimum control, you need
> to have ga
> Sometimes I really wish that I had the necessary data to do JSBSim
> configs for some of the aircraft I've done - then I could also play
> with some of the control stuff that JonSB has incorporated in to
> JSBSim. It's pretty unlikely that I could get good enough data for
> the aircraft I'm int
401 - 500 of 686 matches
Mail list logo
