Here is the only picture I have seen of the B2 cockpit.
http://www.link.com/b2atd.html
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
This does not yet work with JSBSim.
But it used too :-)
When? I've tried it over the years many times and never had it work for me.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
contributions are just being ignored (my improved cp2fg script still
hasn't made it into CVS yet!!!).
Yes, it has.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
OK. Started with a fresh JSBSim checkout. The Makefile.linux is pretty
out-of-date, and basically, broken. The attached patch gets things
moving a bit further, but basically, I don't think this system is
anywhere near as flexible as automake, so I'll be
concentrating on that
from now on.
Also, automake is getting confused between JSBSim.cpp (which contains
main()), and JSBSim.cxx (the FDM interface). At link time, it creates
the JSBSim.o, then overwrites it when it compiles the next one. Could
one or other of these files be renamed for clarity?
No chance. First (but not the
In the past, we've talked about removing JSBSim.cxx from the JSBSim
distro completely, especially since it cannot be compiled there (much
less tested).
Yep. Right now we are in sort of a Mexican standoff situation. JSBSim.cxx
exists only to support JSBSim. However, JSBSim.cxx is not compiled
Sorry :-)
JSBSim.cxx is the interface (a.k.a. The Bus) that acts as the conduit for
data trasnfer between JSBSim and FlightGear. It is not used in teh
standalone version of JSBSim. JSBSim.cpp is the driver program that
instantiates and runs JSBSim standalone. It is not used with FlightGear.
Jon
Would this be of help?:
http://www.lycoming.textron.com/products/engines/540.html
I provide this link because I suspect the IO540 is the engine we want(?)
Jon
-Original Message-
From: John Check [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 4:19 PM
To: [EMAIL
Doing a new build with the the C310 code and latest CVS
(Wednesday- noon)
during compile FGReportState complains about a missing
FGAerodynamics::GetNlf();
At runtime everything normal until error msg:
FGState::GetParameter() - No handler for parameter height/span
Is Wednesday
then I should replace the FGState.cpp code from the C310 package??
JW
If I were you I'd grab it all from JSBSim CVS now. It's all in sync and
works - it is *very* fresh.
This new version requires the latest config files.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel
The current version of JSBSim in JSBSim CVS is now completely syncronized
with several bugs squashed. The intense efforts of the FlightGear and the
extended JSBSim team have given us a new vehicle to fly, the Cessna 310.
As David Megginson mentioned in his release announcement, there are still a
I proposed that as an example, but you need to design in the ability for
expansion now or you might wind up ripping out a lot of code later. IMHO
you
need to start worrying about weight and balance now, before some of the
other items on the table. I don't see anything to account for # of pax
I suppose we ought to create a list of priorities and basic capabilities
we are lacking and go for those before we go on to the finer details
like
realism and random failures. You think?
I proposed that as an example, but you need to design in the ability for
expansion now or you might
Darrell:
Any more (current) issues with Mac builds with JSBSim?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Did anyone notice my post?
The propellers on the 310 are not counter rotating. If they are, the
aircraft must take off like a Frisbee! The props are identical.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:06 PM
To: [EMAIL
You might want to notice a few things:
4) the lens distorts the perspective a little, the
lower left and right side panels are perpendicular to the
flight deck
Maybe I am not understanding what you mean. The panels with instruments to
the left of the pilots left arm
Compilers complains : delta_T_exhaust used without having
been initialized
Why the '-=' in the else case of calculation of
delta_T_exhaust ? What is its previous value ?
Oy! Good catch. I screwed up. Fix to be committed shortly.
___
I don't see why not as long as you #include GUI/gui.h
Note
This Dialog Box requires the user to click a button for it to go away
Also note that in this case, ie the plane has crashed, I would prefer
to see a data member in FGInterface that was set appropriately by the
current FDM.
I am again trying to compile the CVS version of FlightGear.
I *think* I am following instructions!
I have not had any trouble building the version 0.7.8, but
with CVS I get the following compile error:
Did you do a build of plib first, followed by Simgear, then FlightGear?
Jon
No. That was going to be my next guess. Thanks, I'll try that!
Mark
I've got a perl script (and I believe Norman also has a script) that
automates that whole process for me, in the corret order, with dependencies.
If you do a checkout of flightgear, you should also do a checkout of Simgear
The latest stable Plib (1.4.2 I believe) should also work (It
does for me). It shouldn't be necessary to keep checking out CVS Plib.
It takes about 2 minutes (maximum) to check out and build on my machine. I
always do it to avoid (and rule out) any build problems. This is one reason
why I no
Anyway, have a look at
http://www.karlsruhe.de/Tourismus/index.php3
Nice web site. Someday in the not-too-distant future we hope to visit
Germany.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Great! We've got a volunteer for LinuxTag 2003 then?
CU,
Christian
Probably 2005 or 06!
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Aside from stabilizing our current flight models, I think that the
absolute top priority for 0.8 should be at least a minimal level of
runway lighting. While the general scenery lighting makes night
flying nice (and makes roads look great), landing at night is too hard
Does this include
This is a fascinating report to read:
http://www.aerospace.nasa.gov/aero_blueprint/index.html
JON BERNDT
Project Engineer
LOCKHEED MARTIN SPACE OPERATIONS
Office: (281) 483-0342
Pager: (281) 527-6598
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Flightgear-devel
Hey. Who hijacked my thread?
;-)
Jon
Vallevand, Mark K writes:
Where is the Lino airpark? I've been in Lino Lakes for 11 years.
I've never heard of it. Does it show up on MapQuest (or whatever
mapper you use)?
I drive by the seaport regularly. I can't think where the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) The runways at KEDW appear to have no texture - they are pure
white.
Hmmm, looks like no one ever created textures for 'dirt' runways.
A couple/few of those are supposed to be concrete, I believe. Can someone
create dirt runway textures before the next
One of the problems is that JSBSim does its own output outside of the
SG_LOG infrastructure. We'll need to modify JSBSim to allow custom
logging interfaces, and that might be a bit of a tedious chore.
No really. If we want JSBSim to have no output log, simply set
JSBSIM_DEBUG=0
I don't
A worthy aircraft to model (the DC-3):
http://www.douglasdc3.com/amaze/amaze.htm
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Would you want to mention the switch to JSBsim as default
FDM?
Didn't that happen with 0.7.8?
And maybe the c310 model addition?
Yes, I think this is new.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmm, I have two issues:
Ctrl+U gives an exception
c310 doesn't work for me right now.
Refresh my memory: what's wrong with the C310?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christian Mayer wrote:
To the logical side: as long as the plane start *on* the
runway it's
IMO very unrealistical that the engine isn't running.
Y'know, folks, this is actually a really (really) good point. :)
Hilarious. That's right. Why would anyone be on the runway, ready to take
David M.: do you see a problem with the C310? I can't fly now - my big
machine is in the shop.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Ha! Actually, when we get around to it, we do want to be
plausible off-nominal, too.
Jon
Jon, I read that sentence, digested it and promptly started snickering
insanely. What a quote. I'm not crazy, I'm plausibly off-nominal!
*rofl*
??
Maybe I've been around NASA types too
Where in the code is the gear position (i.e. relative to retracted or
extended) calculated and managed?
Curt.
The gear forces and moments are calculated in individual instances of
FGLGear. The ground reactions as a whole are managed in FGGroundReactions.
Jon
I didn't mean to evoke a defensive response.
[That's just how I write, sometimes. I wasn't being defensive - though it
came across that way - just argumentative. :-)]
The question is, who should be updating the values inside of
FGInterface (which are really inside the JSBSim class since
--
I'm not crazy, I'm plausibly off-nominal!
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
Hey. Are you paying royalties on that quote!
;-)
Actually, my quote was that we wanted to be plausible, off-nominal,
meaning in outer-envelope flight we wanted to be believable in our
From: Michael Basler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Hi,
I just received a problem report from a German user on the
released version
0.7.9 which I - unfortunately - was able to confirm in part.
1. Start at CL77 Santa Cruz leads to an immediate crash.
2. He reported a crash at Munich
OK. Has the NTSB been called to the scene[s], yet?
They are not responsible for accidents on European territory ;-)
I don't think they are *responsible* for _crashes_ anywhere! :-P
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.chuckyeager.com/
Jon
Chuck Yeager.com.url
begin 600 Chuck Yeager.com.url
M6T1%1D%53%1=#0I05-%55),/6AT='`Z+R]W=WN8VAU8VMY96%G97(N8V]M
M+VEN95X+FAT;6P-@T*6TEN=5R;F5T4VAOG1C=71=#0I54DP]:'1T#HO
M+W=W=RYC:'5C:WEE86=EBYC;VTO:6YD97@N:'1M;`T*36]D:69I960]03`T
1-D0V-D)%14)0S$P,3DR#0H=
40 matches
Mail list logo
