Innis Cunningham wrote:
Hi Stefan
Stefan Seifert writes
Before 0.9.9 is released I think one problem should be resolved: on
some planes (like the 737, f16, Concorde, fokker100) the engine
sounds are missing. Specifically Sounds/jet.wav is not audible.
I discussed this problem some
--- Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
data/Aircraft/c172p \
data/Aircraft/c310 \
data/Aircraft/c310u3a \
I would switch the c310 for the Citation or B1900d
I agree - the c310u3A is much nicer.
data/Aircraft/wrightFlyer1903 \
3). J3 - The J3-Cub is complete (not much to cubs anyway) and easy to
fly for someone just starting out.
A real life Cub has a ball slip/skid indicator (just like in a turn
coordinator), and a wire sticking out of the fuel cap in front,
showing the fuel level. Other than that, it's pretty
On Wednesday 09 November 2005 19:31, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
The current list is:
data/Aircraft/737 \
data/Aircraft/A-10 \
data/Aircraft/bo105 \
data/Aircraft/c172 \
data/Aircraft/c172p \
Erik Hofman wrote:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
The rule generally is that if we add one, we have to remove an existing
one so the total number of included aircraft remains about the same...
The current list is:
data/Aircraft/737 \
data/Aircraft/A-10 \
Thanks for applying the patch to the current code.
I wonder what the jamming logic should be instead. Maybe check
whether the angle between the cockpit Y axis and the resultant force
presently acting on the plane is within some limit?
I have no problem checking the angle above (based on the
3
Vivian Meazza wrote:
I only mention this because it indicates that the quality of our testing
might not be quite as good as it should be as we move rapidly towards 1.0
RANTWe know exactly this phenomenon for several years now and to my
observation very little changed in the meantime. The
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 10:34 +, Thorben wrote:
On Wednesday 09 November 2005 19:31, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
The current list is:
data/Aircraft/737 \
data/Aircraft/A-10 \
data/Aircraft/bo105 \
data/Aircraft/c172 \
Martin Spott wrote:
RANTWe know exactly this phenomenon for several years now and to my
observation very little changed in the meantime. The biggest success
was to install a consensus that the pre-release phase should last at
least two weeks. To my opinon two _months_ would be appropriate for
Erik Hofman wrote:
Martin Spott wrote:
RANTWe know exactly this phenomenon for several years now and to my
[...]
supporters for this idea./RANT
Guess why the next release is 0.9.9 and not 1.0 and why 1.0 is released
early next year?
Yep, but sipmly _delaying_ the next release doesn't
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
It's not the UFO that's superfluous, but the discussion about its
removal. I wouldn't even list it as an aircraft that's up for
discussion. Sheesh.
Good point. I would drop it from the aircraft list, but not from
distribution. It's no real aircraft and doesn't use
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Andy Ross wrote:
Something odd is going on -- apparently some other stick's binding for
the right brake only is being picked up by your configuration. Have
you modified the name properties of any of you joysticks files? Can
you verify that your base package is unmodified?
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, George Patterson wrote:
To find out which copy is being loaded when you type fgfs, open up a
terminal and type which fgfs and you should get something like
/usr/local/bin/fgfs.
I meant version as in version number.
Perhaps a command line parameter could be added to
Oh, and before the first points me to --fdm=ufo: I know that, of course.
--fdm=ufo and --fdm=magic can be used with any aircraft. This is actually
very useful for getting acquainted with how nav/ils instruments work.
But this is only settable from the command line, but not from fgrun,
where you
On 9 Nov 2005, at 19:31, Curtis L. Olson wrote:I reserve the right to make the final determination (and all non-included aircraft will still always be available for separate download from the web site ...) Given that new aircraft have arrived on the scene since the last release, do we want to
Martin Spott wrote:
RANTWe know exactly this phenomenon for several years now and to my
observation very little changed in the meantime. The biggest success
was to install a consensus that the pre-release phase should last at
least two weeks. To my opinon two _months_ would be appropriate for
Stefan Seifert wrote:
Hi,
attached are two small patches for giving the 737 nosewheel some
animations. Namely it rotates when steering and compresses on breaking.
For the latter I attached a one line patch that let's JSBsim expose
compression-norm to the property tree just like YaSim.
I
Stefan Seifert writes
Innis Cunningham wrote:
I do a lot of my model testing on a 9.4 copy of FG and the engine sound
is working just fine there.I will check out the 737 in 9.8 today and see
if I
can get to the bottom of it
Sorry, should have given some more information (has been a
Hi,
attached are two small patches for giving the 737 nosewheel some
animations. Namely it rotates when steering and compresses on breaking.
For the latter I attached a one line patch that let's JSBsim expose
compression-norm to the property tree just like YaSim.
I don't know if this is in
Buchanan, Stuart wrote:
Hi All,
I've updated the Cessna 182 as follows.
Great, we have a new c182 maintainer.
- New Skylane textures to replace the old ones (which said Skyhawk on the
side!)
- Re-upholstered interior :)
- Improved 3D cockpit with new
- yokes
- engine controls -
Andy Ross wrote:
Erik Hofman wrote:
Ok, I've test compiled the simgear/nasal library using gcc on IRIX
and linked it with the MIPSpro build version of FlightGear and it's
working like a charm. Now remains the question, is it an exploited
gcc bug/feature or is it really a MIPSpro bug?
I've
Melchior FRANZ writes
It is beyond me why nobody seems to understand the purpose of the UFO.
It was never meant to be a serious aircraft. It is the scenery
exploration tool. It doesn't need to have a cockpit or a realistic
FDM. It uses up 76 kB uncompressed, and 10.8 kB compressed! Even
--- Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm clever enough to realize that my idea of quality control is not
necessary the best one for FG ;-)) I simply want to point out that
the project is very well advised to have better quality control than it
had for the past years. I have one or two
Curt,
One follow-up question. Are we still following the convention of
odd-numbered releases being dev and even being stable. I ask as the
Getting Start Guide still thinks so, and I'll correct it if it is wrong.
-Stuart
Buchanan, Stuart wrote:
Curt,
One follow-up question. Are we still following the convention of
odd-numbered releases being dev and even being stable. I ask as the
Getting Start Guide still thinks so, and I'll correct it if it is wrong.
We tried that. 'Officially' 0.8.0 is the current
Buchanan, Stuart wrote:
One follow-up question. Are we still following the convention of
odd-numbered releases being dev and even being stable. I ask as the
Getting Start Guide still thinks so, and I'll correct it if it is wrong.
This clause should be removed - I remember it's in there, but
Here's the output when I try to run fgfs 0.9.9-pre2 with SimGear 0.3.9-pre2 and 0.9.9-pre2 base package.Using Mac OS X hack for initializing C++ stdio...Error reading properties: Failed to open fileat .//data/cloudlayers.xml
(reported by SimGear XML Parser)Bus errorAnd of course there's no
Arthur Wiebe wrote:
Here's the output when I try to run fgfs 0.9.9-pre2 with SimGear
0.3.9-pre2 and 0.9.9-pre2 base package.
Using Mac OS X hack for initializing C++ stdio...
Error reading properties:
Failed to open file
at .//data/cloudlayers.xml
(reported by SimGear XML Parser)
Bus error
Yeah the file is in CVS but it's not included in the 0.9.9-pre2 release base package.I guess I'll just use CVS base then.On 11/10/05, Erik Hofman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Arthur Wiebe wrote:
Here's the output when I try to run fgfs 0.9.9-pre2 with SimGear 0.3.9-pre2 and 0.9.9-pre2 base package.
Erik Hofman wrote:
Update of /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/data/Aircraft/c182
In directory baron:/tmp/cvs-serv2788
Modified Files:
c182-set.xml
I can't resist the suspicion that there's something wrong with the 3D
model. At least I get the glider to see and I yet didn't find yout why.
Arthur Wiebe wrote:
Yeah the file is in CVS but it's not included in the 0.9.9-pre2
release base package.
I guess I'll just use CVS base then.
Yes, you should be able to use the file from cvs. I see I missed it
when I created the v0.9.9-pre base package. It will be in the next
release
Melchior FRANZ writes
It is beyond me why nobody seems to understand the purpose of the UFO.
It was never meant to be a serious aircraft. It is the scenery
exploration tool. It doesn't need to have a cockpit or a realistic
FDM. It uses up 76 kB uncompressed, and 10.8 kB compressed! Even
Martin Spott wrote:
We proudly present the first export from the TerraGear landcover
database or however you prefer to name it. [...]
You'll find some further information on this page refinement in
process:
http://web44.netzwerteserver2.de/212.0.html
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user
--- Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't resist the suspicion that there's something wrong with the 3D
model. At least I get the glider to see and I yet didn't find yout why.
Several XML files and the AC file do have DOS line endings but this
doesn't cause the trouble I've
On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 19:46, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
FlightGear v0.9.9-pre2 (second prerelease for v0.9.9) is now available
for downloading and testing from the FlightGear web site
(http://www.flightgear.org)
It would be great if as many people as possible could download the
tarballs for
On Thursday 10 November 2005 17:02, Steve Hosgood wrote:
The latter few lines of strace fgfs look like this:
open(/usr/share/FlightGear/data/cloudlayers.xml, O_RDONLY) =
-1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
I'm sure I saw an hour or so ago on this list that this file was mistakenly
Buchanan, Stuart wrote:
Have you synced Instruments-3d ?
The new C182 model requires the new yoke, flaps and trimwheel that I
submitted at the same time. I assume they were all checked in at the same
time.
Oops, they hadn't.
Erik
___
http://artooro.spymac.com/pub/fg_spash_screen.pngThis is a screenshot of some very interesting colors I get in the splash screen when launching FlightGear
0.9.9-pre2.Any idea what could be wrong? It all works fine once everything has been initiated.
-- Arthur/-
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 02:20:42 -0600, you wrote:
You are using a buggy freeglut version (2.4). Upgrade to a current CVS
version, or downgrade to 2.2, they work fine.
Where and how do I install 2.2 on SuSE? I tried adding a local folder
to Yast as a source of RPM packages. It said okay, click here
Steve Knoblock wrote:
I tried a suggestion on the SuSE forums to issue an yast -i
package.rpm command, but nothing seemed to happen. No error, nothing
was added to my Yast config as far as I can tell. I am uncomfortable
(prefer to let Yast handle it) issuing an rpm command, but perhaps I
should
Aside from the already mentioned glitch about the missing cloudlayers.xml
file, I was able to build 0.9.9-pre2 without any problems on my linux box. I
am getting some extraneous console output, which perhaps needs to be cleaned
up. (This is using the default log level, running the T-38 from
Or just
rpm -e --nodeps freeglut
rpm -ihv /path/freeglut-2.2-xxx.rpm
Ladislav.
2005/11/10, Stefan Seifert [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Steve Knoblock wrote:
I tried a suggestion on the SuSE forums to issue an yast -i
package.rpm command, but nothing seemed to happen. No error, nothing
was added to
Hi All,
I'm updating the getting started guide. It refers to runfgfs as the method
to start FG. However, my cygwin build didn't install it, and I can't find
it in my WinXP 0.9.8 install (though this is quite heavily modified).
Is it deprecated, or are my installs wrong and it'll be included in
Buchanan, Stuart wrote:
Hi All,
I'm updating the getting started guide. It refers to runfgfs as the method
to start FG. However, my cygwin build didn't install it, and I can't find
it in my WinXP 0.9.8 install (though this is quite heavily modified).
Is it deprecated, or are my installs wrong
Martin Spott wrote:
Martin Spott wrote:
We proudly present the first export from the TerraGear landcover
database or however you prefer to name it. [...]
You'll find some further information on this page refinement in
process:
Martin Spott wrote:
I can't resist the suspicion that there's something wrong with the 3D
model. At least I get the glider to see and I yet didn't find yout why.
Several XML files and the AC file do have DOS line endings but this
doesn't cause the trouble I've already removed all of them,
After some prodding from Curt, I finally spent a few hours yesterday
tracking down the pitch down discontinuity in the Citation.
Well, I didn't find a discontinuity. I can now graph the lift curve
from a Surface (a real one, part of the real aircraft, not an isolated
test instance) and verify
On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 14:55:35 -0600, you wrote:
I think, especially in view of the spate of posts a short while ago, it would
be wise to only include (by default) aircraft which are quite complete - i.e.
with populated cockpits etc. People who know what they want and what they're
doing can
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Martin Spott wrote:
I can't resist the suspicion that there's something wrong with the 3D
model. At least I get the glider to see and I yet didn't find yout why.
Several XML files and the AC file do have DOS line endings but this
doesn't cause the trouble I've
Curt,
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I should also point out that the next scenery build (which is happening
concurrent to the v0.9.9 release and causing my head to spin 3x faster
than normal (not factoring in beer)) will be based on this data export.
Thank you very much for this commitment. I
can somebody with cvs access please run ac3d-despeckle on nimitz.ac
and commit the fixed version? i have one of those older nvidia cards
and the flicker is annoying. i can confirm that running ac3d-despeckle
fixes the flickering. thanks.
--alex--
--
| I believe the moment is at hand when, by a
Steve Hosgood schrieb:
Seems like the program closes /usr/share/FlightGear/data/preferences.xml
and immediately crashes.
Hi Steve,
I had the same problem today after compiling new SimGear/FlightGear CVS.
Although I had downloaded FlightGear CVS data with cvs update -d -P I
got the message
Steve Knoblock schrieb:
My first impression of FlightGear on Windows was soured by the first aircraft I
choose. It
was the Cessna with full IFR panel. The panel was upside down and very
strange. It didn't make a good first impression and left me confused.
If I had not been persistent I might
On Wednesday 09 Nov 2005 22:02, Craig E. Staples wrote:
Hello all,
I'm trying certain senarios via waypoints and varying
altitudes by using flightplan/.fgfsrc file. I plan on
implementing a data input change for route manger code to read
a file with my data, but in the mean time I was
Yeah...It appears as if autopilot is not getting the altitude info from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] The autopilot altitude value stays at it's
default 5k and doesn't budge. The only way to set this alt is manually
through the ap gui. Any quick fixes would be appreciated... Does the
telnet or GPS system
On Thursday 10 Nov 2005 18:01, Arthur Wiebe wrote:
http://artooro.spymac.com/pub/fg_spash_screen.png
This is a screenshot of some very interesting colors I get in
the splash screen when launching FlightGear 0.9.9-pre2.
Any idea what could be wrong? It all works fine once
everything has been
The flightplan works great with regard to waypoints, but I have to
manually insert an altitude in gui ap. This works great and stable
too... It just leads me to believe that the property tree is messed up
somewhere. Is coding the only correction here or can something be done
via xml file or
The flightplan works great with regard to waypoints, but I have to
manually insert an altitude in gui ap. This works great and stable
too... It just leads me to believe that the property tree is messed up
somewhere. Is coding the only correction here or can something be done
via xml file or
On Thursday 10 Nov 2005 20:20, Andy Ross wrote:
After some prodding from Curt, I finally spent a few hours
yesterday tracking down the pitch down discontinuity in the
Citation.
Well, I didn't find a discontinuity. I can now graph the lift
curve from a Surface (a real one, part of the real
Lee Elliott wrote:
On Thursday 10 Nov 2005 20:20, Andy Ross wrote:
After some prodding from Curt, I finally spent a few hours
yesterday tracking down the pitch down discontinuity in the
Citation.
Well, I didn't find a discontinuity. I can now graph the lift
curve from a Surface (a real one,
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 19:11:25 -0600, you wrote:
Their last recommendation was not what we would like to see and we
could say simply ignore it but a *lot* of linux user are reading this
magazin and potentially flightsim interested people get the wrong
impression by this review. :-(
I remember
Just a quick announcement that I rolled up v0.9.9-pre3 tonight. I had
screwed up and missed a file in the base package, and then some other
changes got snuck into simgear/flightgear so I figured I might as well
roll out another try.
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson
62 matches
Mail list logo
