Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgdata merge request 91:Animated Jetways
Martin Spott wrote: Anyhow, the reason why I had been writing EMail several times is the removal of the /sim/paths/use-custom-scenery-data clause. This property has been removed, the state which had been activated by the flag is now permanent - see: Ah, I missed that change. :-) It turns out it doesn't really make a difference, at least for now. The Nasal file will search for the models in the $FG_SCENERY directory if this (now-removed) property is turned on; otherwise it will search in $FG_ROOT (which is now in-sync with the master object repository). Obviously this does create dead code. I'll revise it soon. On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 2:51 AM, Julien Nguyen jngu...@etu.emse.fr wrote: Hi Ryan, When I wanted to create some thumbnails for the models in scenemodels.com, every models named generic.airline.***.xml doesn't display anything in Flightgear and I met the following error: Could not find at least one of the following objects for animation: 'AirlineSign' Same problem with the model from fgdata git and terrasync. Don't know where it comes, I'm not really an expert on it. Cheers, Julien Hello Julien, Those files are dummy models; they serve no purpose whatsoever except to specify the texture paths for the different airlines in the jetway models. Trying to load them as full models will cause FlightGear to not find a model, and- you guessed it- not find this mythical AirlineSign object. ;-) I'll admit it is an odd setup, and probably one that deserves a rethink in the future. I'm considering a partial rewrite of my Nasal files during the FG 3.0.0 development cycle, so I'll definitely take a look here. ~Ryan -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] LOD Slider for Aircraft
How about adding an Aircraft Level-of-Detail slider to the Rendering Options dialog? It could provide an easy way for aircraft developers to add lots of detail to their models but still make them usable on low-end systems. Ideally it would work like the existing Performance vs. Quality slider for shaders. Since almost no aircraft would use the new slider, perhaps it could be disabled and enabled on a per-aircraft basis? sim model level-of-detail type=float5/level-of-detail level-of-detail-enable type=booltrue/level-of-detail-enable /model /sim -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-oct ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Making helijah's pilot models generic
Why not make helijah's pilot models generic, so that they can be reused by all aircraft? Ideally, we'd also have parameters for each model so that their limbs can be rotated for different cockpit configurations. Emmanuel, I'll need a list of your pilots, as the French X-plane site you mention in your README seems to be down. I discussed this idea on IRC, and the main question was where to put the models. $FG_ROOT/Models/Aircraft/xxx seems like a good candidate. -- Magic Quadrant for Content-Aware Data Loss Prevention Research study explores the data loss prevention market. Includes in-depth analysis on the changes within the DLP market, and the criteria used to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these DLP solutions. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51385063/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] fgdata merge request #107
Before the 2.4.0 branch is created, could somebody please merge in Gitorious merge request #107? It doesn't contain any new features, just a bunch of bugfixes. -- AppSumo Presents a FREE Video for the SourceForge Community by Eric Ries, the creator of the Lean Startup Methodology on Lean Startup Secrets Revealed. This video shows you how to validate your ideas, optimize your ideas and identify your business strategy. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appsumosfdev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Dual-licensing question
Stupid question about dual-licensing: Can I dual-license an aircraft under both GPL2 and CC-BY (no -SA or -NC), and still have it placed into fgdata? -- EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Airbus A320
Currently, there are two A320s in fgdata- Fred's A320 and A320-family by me and Ampere. I propose that the former A320 be removed some time before release, to prevent confusion, etc. -- EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgdata merge request 91:Animated Jetways
I ran some tests yesterday about the possibility of using static jetways as placeholders. At KSFO, with animated jetways disabled and no dynamic jetway models at all, FPS was at about 32-33 on my system. With animated jetways, it plummeted to 15-16. When I used $FG_ROOT/Models/Airport/jetway.xml as a place holder, FPS slightly increased to 22-23. My conclusion is that this really doesn't offer any benefit, and frankly, competing sims don't have such placeholder jetways either. I've filed a new request at Gitorious here: https://gitorious.org/fg/fgdata/merge_requests/98 . A list of improvements can be found in the description. -- EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 4
More spam on yahoo accounts? -- EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgdata merge request 91:Animated Jetways
On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 12:38 +, Martin Spott wrote: I'm feeling slightly uneasy with the current state because people don't get any jetways at all if they disable the flag in order to preserve performance. Personally I'd prefer a solution which keeps static jetways and just disables the animation if people feel like the need to. That sounds like a good idea. But it _might_ still cause FPS impacts. Will have to run some tests later. On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 12:38 +, Martin Spott wrote: While I'm at it, I'd like to point to another, presumably more severe issue: The elevation of every of the animated jetways is hardcoded into the respective 'ICAO.jetway.xml' files. Now take into account that ground elevation is subject to change with almost _every_ rebuild of the corresponding region and airfield surface From my perspective this calls for a more considerate solution. The only solution I can think of is to remove the elevation setting and use Nasal to calculate the elevation for each jetway's longitude/latitude. The only problem with that is that the calculations would take into account the terminal buildings, which would cause jetways appearing on top of the terminal roofs. ...however, I just had another idea. Making the elevations _relative_ to the terrain instead of absolute. That means the current definition files will have to be changed, but I can automate that with a script easily enough. That also means I have to update my FG 2.0.0 version. -- Simplify data backup and recovery for your virtual environment with vRanger. Installation's a snap, and flexible recovery options mean your data is safe, secure and there when you need it. Discover what all the cheering's about. Get your free trial download today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-dev2dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgdata merge request 91:Animated Jetways
On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 16:40 +0200, Durk Talsma wrote: Hi All, After having discussed this issue with Martin privately, we have come to the conclusion that it is in the best interest of FlightGear to back out parts of this commit, and wait for an improved version. I had accepted the merge request, after I had concluded that Martin's original objections had been resolved, but that appears not to be the case. Very well. Should I still attempt my proposed amendments? -- Simplify data backup and recovery for your virtual environment with vRanger. Installation's a snap, and flexible recovery options mean your data is safe, secure and there when you need it. Discover what all the cheering's about. Get your free trial download today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-dev2dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgdata merge request 91:Animated Jetways
On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 21:09 +0200, Arnt Karlsen wrote: ..right, then we'll want those fancy gate parking lights too, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_Docking_Guidance_System Theoretically that's perfectly possible by piggybacking on my system, and we even have the X-plane model required, but I don't feel like implementing it. :) -- vRanger cuts backup time in half-while increasing security. With the market-leading solution for virtual backup and recovery, you get blazing-fast, flexible, and affordable data protection. Download your free trial now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-d2dcopy1 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgdata merge request 91:Animated Jetways
Well I did some major changes and squashed it all down to one commit- however, things got pretty messy. Redid the merge request, here's the new URL: https://gitorious.org/fg/fgdata/merge_requests/95 Changes from last time: * Now uses James' new io.read_airport_properties() function, so it is much more compatible with Terrasync. The $FG_ROOT/Airports/Jetways folder has been removed in favor of $FG_SCENERY/Airports/I/C/A/ICAO.jetways.xml. * Jetway models are now loaded from scenery directories and $FG_ROOT/Models; scenery has the higher priority. * A new checkbox has been added to the rendering options dialog. * Jetways are disabled by default due to noticeable FPS impacts. Currently the Models/Airport/Jetway folder is still in the commit. I can remove it if this is inappropriate. Feel free to look it over, and hopefully this commit is ready for merging. -- vRanger cuts backup time in half-while increasing security. With the market-leading solution for virtual backup and recovery, you get blazing-fast, flexible, and affordable data protection. Download your free trial now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-d2dcopy1 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgdata merge request 91:Animated Jetways
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 22:04 +0100, James Turner wrote: I talked to Ryan on IRC last night, and we discussed this. I've some local mods to commit+test that basically do exactly what is described above; they allow Nasal (or really, the loadxml command) to hook into my existing 'find a file for an airport, in the scenery locations' code we use for the other 'airport scenery data' files. I'll hopefully commit this tomorrow, then Ryan can test, and then hopefully jetways can live in the airport scenery data happily. Excellent- thanks James. :) While you're at it, could you also publish the $FG_SCENERY paths to the property tree? (Don't use my patch, it turned out to cause a build error (which shows how good of a programmer I am), and the pastebin link is probably expired now. ;) ) The jetways make a very noticeable impact on FlightGear's frame rate, particularly at large airports such as KSFO, where up to 120 models could be loaded at a time. Perhaps they should be disabled by default. -- vRanger cuts backup time in half-while increasing security. With the market-leading solution for virtual backup and recovery, you get blazing-fast, flexible, and affordable data protection. Download your free trial now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-d2dcopy1 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] fgdata merge request 91:Animated Jetways
I apologize for not raising this discussion *before* I filed that request, as I should have. From the comments on http://gitorious.org/merge_requests/91: In the past we've been struggling for more than one and a half release cycles in order to separate Scenery-specific stuff from the Base Package and to draw a clear line. Now you’re doing almost exactly the contrary: Introducing new dependencies between Scenery and Base Package by putting airport specific stuff into the FlightGear ‘Airports/’– as well as into the shared models directory. This stuff belongs into the Scenery directory structure. I can see why introducing a dependency could cause some problems. However, due to the technical details of the new jetways, it is not possible to integrate them with Terrasync/Shared models as it was previously. This is because the jetways are specified in an XML file for each airport that a Nasal script parses and loads models for via fgcommand(add-model, ...). That's how each jetway knows its independent position and its relative location to the aircraft door, unlike a static model in scenery where this is not possible. Additionally, the 3d models have to be stored somewhere. By my logic, that should be in Models/Aiport, hence the new directory. I intended this to not be synced with Terrasync (syncing won't have an effect anyway, since ATM the script always loads models from the main models directory). It would be possible to revert back to specifying jetway models in an STG file. However, that would cause a loss of features including the ability for the jetway to 'know' the position of the aircraft, and gate numbers and airline signs specific to each jetway- all of which are very well-received by end-users and I spent hours programming. Only the former can be worked around (and not very well, at that). Perhaps the directory structure needs reorganization. I would consider making a new directory under $FG_ROOT, perhaps Jetways/, but that just seems like a waste to me. Again, sorry for not raising this issue earlier. Ryan -- What Every C/C++ and Fortran developer Should Know! Read this article and learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools to help Windows* and Linux* C/C++ and Fortran developers boost performance applications - including clusters. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: fgdata merge request 76: Improvedairport Textures
On Sun, 2011-05-08 at 23:46 +0100, Vivian Meazza wrote: I’m afraid that the “improved textures” really aren’t an improvement. Not only do they not work for taxiways, we have also lost the chevrons at the threshold that were quite recently added: Really? I certainly did *not* touch the stopway textures- I just copied the high-resolution stopway textures, scaled them down, and put them into the low-resolution folder. If they were removed, I'm not sure what happened. I didn't do that in my commit. Stopway textures have been around for quite some time, but they were missing from materials.xml. I was the one who made that fix. :) As for them not looking good at all, most people agree that the grass is an improvement. Perhaps you could tell me what, specifically, is wrong with it. Is it too bright? Too bland? Too repetitive? -- Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability What every C/C++ and Fortran developer should know. Learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools to help boost performance applications - inlcuding clusters. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Future repository for non-GPL aircraft
Something I've always thought about is an official aircraft repository that contained non-GPL2 aircraft- straight from the authors, of course. There are many aircraft for FlightGear that are not GPL-licensed (some of them very well-developed, like the Tu-154b and the MD-81), and I think it'd be best if we had an official repository for them. Currently, they are hosted on a number of unofficial hangars, decreasing their visibility and their accessibility to the end-user. This discussion has been raised before on the forums; just thought I'd mention it here. Sorry if there's been a previous conversation about this and I've resurrected a dead topic. -- Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Quiet
Now it seems to me it has changed. The list is quiet since a while now; there are only few announcements for code changes, (in the past we had more, though the number of changes are still similar), and as I can see more and more people using the forum for questions about developement and coding. I was thinking about discussing my various projects for FlightGear on the mailing list instead of the forums, but I figured I'd better not spam the list like I do on the forums. I must admit, that the quality of the forum depends much on the users we have. On the one side a got big help on modelling the EC130 B4, more than expected. On the other side I see a lot of spam by younger users in the forum, which makes reading more and more difficult and unpleasant. Agreed. And it seems certain people expect the forums to be some kind of 100% nice utopia... -- 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 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Thrust reversal for YASim turboprops?
I'm trying to implement thrust reversal (if possible) for the ATR 72, a YASim turboprop, but I can't seem to find a way to do so. I've tried the same parameters used for jets: control-input axis=/controls/engines/engine[0]/reverser control=REVERSE_THRUST / control-output control=REVERSE_THRUST prop=/engines/engine[0]/reverser-pos-norm / But YASim spits out a solution failure error. Changing /controls/engines/engine[X]/propellor-pitch to 0 or 1 does not seem to have an effect, and I haven't been able to find reverse thrust on any other YASim turboprop. -- 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 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Quiet
It seems more and more that people prefer using the forum instead the devel-list. (Certainly not me!) Forum activity is winding down too- all the informal aircraft/scenery developers have either left or are inactive. -- 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 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Default Aircraft Candidates
I am not a 777 pilot in real life, but I certainly agree with Jack that the FDM seems unrealistic to the casual pilot. For instance, fire up the 772ER and set the fuel tanks and payload weights to full capacity. Now make sure the flaps are set to 0. Take off, bear the blaring takeoff config warning, and keep the stick pulled back. Before long, the 777 will pitch up around 70 or so knots, and by 110 knots, you will be in the air. This hardly seems realistic. I'd also like to point out that the ailerons seem a bit ineffective, though perhaps this is designed to simulate the fly-by-wire on the real 777, or just to stabilize the autopilot. At this time, there is no viable replacement for the 772ER in the fgdata base package, and I'd be interested in hearing what Jack's better aircraft is. I'm trying to close that gap by working on the A330-300/A340-300 with Ampere, but it'll be a few months before either aircraft are completed and merged into fgdata. -- Free Software Download: Index, Search Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Default Aircraft Candidates
Another thing I've noticed when flying the 772ER long distances (KIND to EDDF, about 10-15% fuel consumed) is that fuel consumption seems abnormally low. I'm far from a YASim expert, but I've heard this may be due to an overly high lift ratio in the FDM. The 777's is around 193; perhaps this should be reduced to 120? On the other hand, adjusting the approach params may mitigate this issue entirely. YASim is a very complex system to balance... -- Free Software Download: Index, Search Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FLightProScam
Anybody noticed the tiny text at the bottom of the main page? It says Source code available in Members Area... -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] New airport textures
Martin's correct. I made cosmetic changes to the textures themselves, nothing outside of that like the way the mapping is done. However, I do agree with John that perhaps some of the runway texturing needs modifications. I tried to modify the grass and dirt runways to integrate more seamlessly with the surrounding airport grass, but my attempt was thwarted by the seemingly senseless way that FG lays them out. -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] New airport textures
Hello, For the past week I have been working on improved airport taxiway and grass textures. They've gotten positive feedback on the forums but Gijs suggested I post about them on the core mailing list for a fair discussion. Here are some screenshots of the textures in-sim: http://i54.tinypic.com/29povms.jpg http://i56.tinypic.com/14tmrp.jpg The textures themselves can be found at my Gitorious fgdata clone (see merge request #42). -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
