Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Stuart Buchanan
--- Jonathan Wagner wrote: These are not dogfight-only problems. These are multiplayer problems which currently are not addressed well in the current multiplayer implementation. On the public servers with high latency, multiplayer flight can be choppy as a plane in your view magically

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Martin Spott
Gene Buckle wrote: Personally I'd go crazy in the real Cessna if it would take me one third of a second until the beast starts !! responding to a control movement - this would turn almost every landing at gusty crosswind into a really difficult situation Martin, the 300ms figure

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread James Palmer
Stuart wrote: I think our current MP architecture is superb for the following reasons: - Setting it up is straightforward - it is light-weight. The load on the client and server is low - personally I have it switched on permanently - so people are encouraged to use it for general flying, even if

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Gene Buckle
Martin, the 300ms figure is really only applicable to a Level A simulator which is basically equivalent to a cockpit procedures trainer with no visuals. Ok - that one makes sense. On the other hand, any type of 'tricky' VFR flight with 300 ms delay, I'd expect even with 150 ms would ruin

Re: [Flightgear-devel] c130

2007-05-14 Thread Martin Spott
Emmanuel, Markus Zojer wrote: I really enjoy the flight with this plane, especially the 110kts landings :-) I noticed, that the sim model is not in sync with the 3d model, so I changed Models/c130.xml to pathc130.ac/path offsets x-m 17.0 /x-m (was 0) y-m 0.0 /y-m z-m

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Ralf Gerlich
Hi, Gene Buckle wrote: Martin, the 300ms figure is really only applicable to a Level A simulator which is basically equivalent to a cockpit procedures trainer with no visuals. Ok - that one makes sense. On the other hand, any type of 'tricky' VFR flight with 300 ms delay, I'd expect even

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Bill Galbraith
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ralf Gerlich Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 10:23 AM To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting Hi, Gene Buckle wrote: Martin, the 300ms

Re: [Flightgear-devel] c130

2007-05-14 Thread gh.robin
On Mon 14 May 2007 16:18, Martin Spott wrote: Emmanuel, Markus Zojer wrote: I really enjoy the flight with this plane, especially the 110kts landings :-) I noticed, that the sim model is not in sync with the 3d model, so I changed Models/c130.xml to pathc130.ac/path offsets

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH] HUD target circles

2007-05-14 Thread Csaba Halász
Sometime ago my radar patch introduced a valid property to ai models. Attached patch updates the code drawing the HUD target circles to test this flag so that invalid entries don't get displayed. Thanks to AnMaster for reporting and testing. Greets, Csaba Index:

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH] fix 747 gear animation in MP

2007-05-14 Thread Csaba Halász
Removed leading slashes from gear properties. Didn't have a chance to try it yet. Greets, Csaba Index: data/Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-jw.xml === RCS file:

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Curtis Olson
On 5/14/07, Bill Galbraith wrote: If I remember correctly, the human eye can detect something less than about 15-20 fps. The number that comes to my mind is about 22? Movies that you'd see in a theater run at 24 fps I believe. One aditional element though that is *critical* is that this

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Simgear updates for next release

2007-05-14 Thread Curtis Olson
On 5/10/07, Stuart Buchanan wrote: --- Melchior FRANZ wrote: Maybe the changelog should be on the wiki for fixes/extensions? An excellent use of the wiki - done. I've merged the data and simgear logs together here along with the feedback I've seen so far:

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Simgear updates for next release

2007-05-14 Thread Martin Spott
Stuart Buchanan wrote: --- Melchior FRANZ wrote: Maybe the changelog should be on the wiki for fixes/extensions? An excellent use of the wiki - done. I've merged the data and simgear logs together here along with the feedback I've seen so far:

Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFD: New Airports;

2007-05-14 Thread Martin Spott
Curtis Olson wrote: On 5/9/07, Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stuart Buchanan wrote: Major Changes = [...] Airport runway and taxi signs This reminds me of something related: For my taste it's time to put an update to the airports list into the base

Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFD: New Airports;

2007-05-14 Thread Curtis Olson
On 5/14/07, Martin Spott wrote: which appears now to have started. If nobody objects, then I'll go ahead putting the current Airport and Navaid stuff into the base package, Double check there isn't any x-plane 8.50 bezier stuff in the version we use since we really aren't setup to use

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Lorne McIntosh
You guys might want to give this a read. I found it helpful as an introduction when I was looking at this multiplayer stuff a few years ago: http://www.valve-erc.com/srcsdk/general/multiplayer_networking.html Because of their fast-paced competitive nature, First Person Shooters have extremely

[Flightgear-devel] Nasal stuff

2007-05-14 Thread Melchior FRANZ
Since today there's a function systime() available. It returns the Unix Epoch time in seconds. Even if that doesn't tell you much, it's very useful for benchmarking: var start = systime(); how_fast_am_I(123); var end = systime(); print(took , end - start, seconds); The function has

[Flightgear-devel] sim/time/elapsed-sec

2007-05-14 Thread syd sandy
Hi all, I use the property sim/time/elapsed-sec in the S76C to calculate fuel flow as there is no helicopter engine yet ... and noticed a very inconsistant behavior... dont know if its related to the 'framerate hesitation' problem ... but would like to know if anyone else sees the 'un-smooth'

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Mathias Fröhlich
Hi, On Saturday 12 May 2007, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: While development over the past few years might give the preception that Flightgear is a game, Flightgear is actually meant to be a serious flight simulator. Things that go boom are cool in games, but they are also useless; more so in

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Mathias Fröhlich
Hi, On Friday 11 May 2007, Martin Spott wrote: Vivian Meazza wrote: Well, as the Irish would say, if you want to get there, you don't want to start here. Good luck. And if you want to see how much work would be involved, compare that task with the cutover to osg - now 6 months old and

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Mathias Fröhlich
On Friday 11 May 2007, Gene Buckle wrote: The problem is one of network latency. This has been a major hurdle for games like Aces High, Air Warrior and WWII Online. The server should handle the collision to avoid situations where the shooter client sees a hit and the shootee client doesn't.

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Mathias Fröhlich
On Sunday 13 May 2007, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: On Sunday 13 May 2007 13:18, Harald JOHNSEN wrote: If the server does the fdm 100 times per second and send the data 10 times per second it's like if the client was running the fdm at 10 hz. That's why I said it's not needed to run the fdm

[Flightgear-devel] E3B FDM: Engine thrust

2007-05-14 Thread Reagan Thomas
The E3B engines are currently defined as having a thrust of 18000 Lbs. A google search indicates that the per engine thrust should be 21000 Lbs. If this is verified as being true, the attached patch should correct the associated E3B/Engines/JT3D.xml file. -- Reagan Thomas ? E3B.diff ?

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Mathias Fröhlich
On Sunday 13 May 2007, Jonathan Wagner wrote: Maik, These are not dogfight-only problems. These are multiplayer problems which currently are not addressed well in the current multiplayer implementation. On the public servers with high latency, multiplayer flight can be choppy as a plane in

Re: [Flightgear-devel] More ideas on dogfighting

2007-05-14 Thread Ampere K. Hardraade
On Monday 14 May 2007 04:38, Stuart Buchanan wrote: If what you are suggesting is that to use MP, we will have to run the FDM on a server and accept a much lower refresh rate on the client, then I don't think that is acceptable as it will make the civil MP experience much worse. This isn't as

Re: [Flightgear-devel] E3B FDM: Engine thrust

2007-05-14 Thread Ron Jensen
Yes and no. The NATO/USAFE E3Bs should have TF33-PW-100 engines producing 21000 lbs thrust(1), not JT3D engines which produce 18000 lbs thrust. The JT3D engine is used on the 707-320B (2) which is the basis of the E3B. An RAF, FAF or RSAF E3B should be using CFM56 turbofans producing 24000 lbs