On Thursday 28 October 2004 09:45, Erik Hofman wrote:
David Culp wrote:
Hi Erik,
I was wondering if the enable and path properties for
the submodel system should be moved out of
/sim/systems/submodels and into /sim/submodels instead.
This will complete the migration out of the
On Sunday 31 October 2004 16:10, Lee Elliott wrote:
On Thursday 28 October 2004 09:45, Erik Hofman wrote:
David Culp wrote:
Hi Erik,
I was wondering if the enable and path properties for
the submodel system should be moved out of
/sim/systems/submodels and into /sim/submodels
David Culp asked:
My submodel config file is not getting read at startup (I'm getting file
not
found). Is anyone using CVS FlightGear and Linux having this problem
also?
Thought I'd check before I go over the config file for the fiftieth time
looking for an error.
I'm getting the
On Wednesday 27 October 2004 04:08, David Culp wrote:
My submodel config file is not getting read at startup (I'm getting file
not found).
Are you getting file not found or No systems model specified for this
model!?
Is anyone using CVS FlightGear and Linux having this problem
also?
Is anyone using CVS FlightGear and Linux having this problem
also? Thought I'd check before I go over the config file for the fiftieth
time looking for an error.
Are you using the generic config or a custom made? If you are using a
custom config, you must remember to override the generic
David Culp wrote:
Unable to read submodels file:
/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Aircraft/FW190/submodels.xml
Did you already load the file in your browser to see if it's XML compliant?
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
David Culp wrote:
... snip ...
The submodel system has been moved away from the Systems code. It's now
an
independent subsystem of FG.
I think the spitfire submodels are working because I get a crash due to a
crease token, which implies the smoke submodel is being created.
I'm
Never mind. I somehow got some DOS line endings in my file. Must have been a
cut/paste from a DOS document.
Dave
--
David Culp
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
On Wednesday 27 October 2004 15:09, David Culp wrote:
The submodel system has been moved away from the Systems code. It's now an
independent subsystem of FG.
Silly me! I must have confused submodels with systems. I thought you where
talking about systems.
--
Roy Vegard Ovesen
On 23 October 2004 21:22 Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Saturday 23 October 2004 21:14, Vivian Meazza wrote:
I've finally found time to revisit this problem.
The FGFS is working fine with updates up to 15th Oct. Paths, etc. are
good.
I've updated and recompiled Simgear and Flightgear.
I wrote some time ago:
... snip ...
I've gone back to cvs update as of 15 Oct: all the aircraft work
correctly.
I conclude that this problem is caused by your new code. Unless you
can
confirm that the instruments work in all models in your location, or
tell
me exactly what I
On Saturday 23 October 2004 21:14, Vivian Meazza wrote:
I've finally found time to revisit this problem.
The FGFS is working fine with updates up to 15th Oct. Paths, etc. are good.
I've updated and recompiled Simgear and Flightgear. Nothing else has been
changed. Should work, right?
Wrong:
Roy Vegard Ovesen
Sent: 20 October 2004 00:32
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 19:42, Vivian Meazza wrote:
It's not obviously a path problem. My preferences.xml file was updated
at
15:22 yesterday, and has
On Wednesday 20 October 2004 12:03, Vivian Meazza wrote:
I have checked the path - I'm was the downloaded cvs data from 1522 Monday.
I have re-downloaded cvs data and source this morning and recompiled.
I've changed the hunter to use the generic files - it already has custom
electrics and
Roy Vegard Ovesen:
Sent: 20 October 2004 13:31
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
On Wednesday 20 October 2004 12:03, Vivian Meazza wrote:
I have checked the path - I'm was the downloaded cvs data from 1522
Monday.
I have re-downloaded cvs
On Wednesday 20 October 2004 15:09, Vivian Meazza wrote:
Try to run Flightgear with --log-level=info and look for these lines:
Reading instruments from
data/Aircraft/Generic/generic-instrumentation.xml Adding subsystem
instrumentation
Reading systems from
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-devel-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roy Vegard Ovesen
Sent: 19 October 2004 00:55
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 01:00, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 09:47, Vivian Meazza wrote:
What instruments are not working, and what inputs do they use?
Hunter/Seahawk:
Altimeter, IAS, Mach, rate-of-climb, and turn-and-slip
When I checked the Hunter and Seahawk last night all these instruments worked.
IIRC the Mach
On Sunday 17 October 2004 02:18 pm, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Hi all!
I've not touched the new submodel.*xx sources yet because I want your
opinion on how I should implement it into the other configurable systems.
The existing configurable systems are the pitot, static, and vacuum
systems.
Vivian Meazza wrote:
I think most gyros are electrical. Certainly in the 40's/50's.
Really ? From what I've learnt electrically driven gyros are sort of a
modern invention where aircraft manufactures tend to rely more and more
on a working electrical system
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Sent: 19 October 2004 09:54
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 09:47, Vivian Meazza wrote:
What instruments are not working, and what inputs do they use?
Hunter/Seahawk:
Altimeter, IAS, Mach, rate
David Culp wrote:
I think it would be best if the submodel system is moved out of the Systems
directory altogether and made into a subsystem, like the AI manager. The
only reason I put it with the systems originally is that I first used it to
model a gun. It quickly became generalized to
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Sent: 19 October 2004 10:34
To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Sent: 19 October 2004 09:54
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
On Tuesday 19 October 2004
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 19:42, Vivian Meazza wrote:
It's not obviously a path problem. My preferences.xml file was updated at
15:22 yesterday, and has the right paths to the new generic files. However,
the properties relating to instruments are empty - hence broken instruments
:-). But if
On Monday 18 October 2004 00:24, Vivian Meazza wrote:
The ability to set a serviceability state for each submodel system would
seem to be the correct approach, but if I understand your proposal
correctly, it will end up in more files overall.
Actually the systems and instrumentation
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
A quick grep through the base package revealed that three aircraft use the
subsystem: F16, Spitfire and Hunter. I will of course move the subsystem
config to system config so that they don't get broken.
I have used the F-16 mostly as a demonstrator. I wouldn't mind much
Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Sent: 18 October 2004 09:26
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
On Monday 18 October 2004 00:24, Vivian Meazza wrote:
The ability to set a serviceability state for each submodel system would
seem to be the correct approach, but if I
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Sent: 18 October 2004 09:26
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
On Monday 18 October 2004 00:24, Vivian Meazza wrote:
The ability to set a serviceability state for each submodel system would
seem to be the correct
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Roy, Dave, Vivian, Erik
One thing that is not clear to me, is what happens with the submodel
stuff in a multi-display environment? Is there any facility for
replicating and syncing these objects across multiple visual channels?
Not yet, but I haven't forgotten about it.
Curt asked:
Sent: 18 October 2004 15:47
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Sent: 18 October 2004 09:26
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
On Monday 18 October
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Sent: 18 October 2004 09:26
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
On Monday 18 October 2004 00:24, Vivian Meazza wrote:
The ability to set a serviceability state for each submodel system would
seem to be the correct approach
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 00:10, Vivian Meazza wrote:
OK, I've just updated cvs, and the inputs to some of my 3d instruments are
now broken in the Hunter, Seahawk and Spitfire. How do I get them back?
What instruments are not working, and what inputs do they use?
I just tried the Hunter,
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 01:00, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Tuesday 19 October 2004 00:10, Vivian Meazza wrote:
OK, I've just updated cvs, and the inputs to some of my 3d instruments
are now broken in the Hunter, Seahawk and Spitfire. How do I get them
back?
What instruments are not
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Sent: 17 October 2004 20:19
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
Hi all!
I've not touched the new submodel.*xx sources yet because I want your
opinion
on how I should implement it into the other configurable systems.
34 matches
Mail list logo
