People have left the FlightGear project for various reasons I'm not
going to explain here and now. _But_ leaving the project entirely just
for the simple reason that _other_ project members don't perform at the
rate as _you_ expect them to do is certainly not one of the most
honourable
Guys, I had made my conclusions. It seems I am leaving.
On my view situation in FG is:
1) Closed upper society have intention to make profit by Flight Gear
finally, maybe have some little profit right now.
2) Intention to include someone else in that society is absented in it
of course.
3) Plans
I'm afraid that you wrongly interpret 'being busy doing other things'
with 'unwilling to help'. So far everybody who has made valuable
contributions has been welcomed by everybody. And depending on the time
someone has/is willing to reserver for FlightGear there's always a
chance of getting
Perhaps expecting a flight simulator to be changed overnight to deal with
the problems of orbital flight was rather too optimistic.
Problem was not in changing of others, of simulator without me.
Complexity was no one had wanted to explain me how it organized in
inners to help me solve that
Problem was not in changing of others, of simulator without me.
Complexity was no one had wanted to explain me how it organized in
inners to help me solve that tasks personally.
I'm pretty certain you're under-estimating the effort required to
explain the details of how FlightGear works.
Hi Vitos,
That's sad. Obviously an old project like FG as its own pace, things
here evolve slowly, most of the time those things move in some cahotic
way rather than an effective and straight way as would a strong and
popular project (like a free operating system or a free web server)...
The lack of internal documentation is an issue for many of not most
open source projects. One reason for this is that it is a big
undertaking to completely document a system of the complexity of FG.
For example I just finished (meaning that it is good enough - not
that it is perfect)
FlightGear is never going to have top down authoritarian leadership
like a large corporation might have. This is good in many ways, but
is also creates challenges in many ways. I often see my roll more as
a facilitator for the efforts of developers who are working on their
own priorities
Well, these video are real, but the absence of update is an indication
of the progress (or lack thereof) of the project.
Regards,
-Fred
Wish best to You with it anyway. It's not good when something is stops
on the middle. For me it's better then You can say: Well, maybe it's
not used. But
-Fred
Little bit other topic.
Hi Frederic, I have two questions for You.
1) Can Your terrain engine be added in FG?
2) Can it be fast enough for orbital flight with visibility ~500km and
speed ~3km/h, ~8km/sec?
Victor
I'll let you elaborate on this topic before I could answer.
Frederic, thank You for answer. It seems what it's become more or less
clear now.
I think it's reasonable to test osgEarth at least to compare speed,
exactness, and including possibilities then. If Your engine is
completely different
Could we please stop hijacking threads?
(and I know Martin wasn't the first offender)
Do not know. If You ask me then I never had started any fight and would
not do that here for sure. It's so hard to tell who offends who in non
directive communications what attempts to do so only spoil
At least one of us is confused about how things are structured.
Heh. I mean if You add some model with great sphere in it, without
addition things, all who have that model installed will see part of
giant sphere in the sky or whole sphere.
I have no idea what you mean by the distinction of
It would be nice to get fgfred64's project finally into, as the
current terrain seems outdated to me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkzsD95K_Jk
He do not answer on my message on YouTube, his email what mike4lin had
gave me on forum is outdated, his folder on fotolia.com is closed. If
Nobody is talking about implementing anything on *aircraft* model level -
the idea is to represent *Earth* by a model the same way we can represent,
say, clouds by a model.
If two users in parallel flying spacecrafts will see the same good then
there is no problem. But everything on Nasal is
engine off completely and leave only fog to avoid
terrain loading and lags. Because I do not want to overwhelm developers
resistance to some improvements including and I am need to know what it
will be accepted for sure to avoid unaccepted work. If not then not.
With best regards,
Slavutinsky
As I indicated in the Forum
http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=6t=12005
a solution to the problem would be to represent Earth from high altitude
by pieces of a hires textured sphere (textures to be obtained from
Celestia), with (at least as demo) a simple Nasal script
My tests with Vostok shows what current FlightGear atmosphere have
serious issues in means of high altitude flights.
On reentry dynamic pressure inverts and have negative values on
60...50km. That can be tested by dropping any FG JSBSim based craft from
altitudes higher than 60km, from, say,
,
Slavutinsky Victor
--
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
In addition to previous message I can tell what existed X-15 and SR-71
need that implementation, as some other already existed high
speed/altitude crafts too.
With best regards,
Slavutinsky Victor
--
What Every
Hi Victor,
Hi Stuart.
Unfortunately, programmers with sufficient OSG and FG knowledge are
very thin on the ground. Tim Moore is the guru, and best placed to say
how difficult this would be, though I've spent some time working on the
graphics as well.
Cool...
From my experience adding a
In addition, I have two questions for You, one is nice and other is not
so. Firstly not so nice question.
When?
I mean, surfing on the rocket it's not so easy on itself and only
fanatics will try it when there is no Earth surface visible but lags and
fallouts instead of it. Even me, who put more
GoogleEarth/osgEarth type systems look incredible from altitudes of a
few thousand feet on up. But if you ever put your view point very
close to the ground and try to look at roads or airports, you'll see
that all the great imagery washes out and all that depth and shadow
goes away and you
I found out what texranslate can be used only one time on object because
only last translation is counted. Property can not be used in axis tag
too. It means what currently it's not possible to shift texture
independently vertically and horizontally. Can someone fix it?
Victor
24 matches
Mail list logo
