Hi All,
I've made some initial changes to the Cub and c172p for project
Rembrandt, including a landing light for the latter. Great work Fred!
I'd highly recommend taking the Cub for a fly with the shadows turned
on - the shadows of the overhead struts on the cockpit are
particularly nice.
I've
Hi All,
Rembrandt works well on my GT260M, and really moves FG's graphics on
massively. I think it's a fantastic enhancement to FG, and we should
really consider naming the July/August release as v3.0.0.
Does anyone know whether FG is unique amongst desktop simulators in
offering this? I have
Stuart Buchanan wrote:
I've got a couple of questions for anyone who has flown a c172 at
night: The landing light appears to be located on the left wing. I'm
having trouble determining the angle of the light, and how far it
extends. For the moment, I've pitched it slightly downwards, so the
Martin Spott wrote:
The taxi light (I don't remember which one it is) [...]
Service manual says: The left hand light is used for taxi and the
right hand for landing. and Adjustment of the landing and taxi light
is pre-set at the factory, however changes to this adjustment may be
made as desired
Secondly, what cockpit and instrument illumination is available?
There are also those with individual instrument lights shining on the front
side of the instrument.
Those are the grey things on this picture:
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Martin Spott wrote:
Stuart Buchanan wrote:
The C172's I know (past 1970, I think) are having the two lights
mounted into the cowling right below the prop - see:
http://www.c172fg.de/d-eeqa-dismount-1-03.jpg
Thanks - looks like our c172p has got lights in the
On 04/03/2012 11:12 AM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
Secondly, what cockpit and instrument illumination is available? I
_think_ there's a general overhead floodlight in the ceiling of the
aircraft (though I expect this isn't used during flight), and I've
previously assumed that the instruments are
Martin Spott wrote:
Service manual says: [...]
Beginning with 1971 Models, the landing and taxi lights are located in
the nose cowl. The D-EEQA (on the picture, sitting in wet grass) is a
1978's Cessna F 172N (serial 1697) and FlightGear's is, as far as I
remember, a 1981's C172P. Therefore
Stuart Buchanan wrote:
How's the cockpit project going BTW?
Having a sponsor to pay the transport would be cool ;-)
Aside from that, we're looking for a couple of small (8-12 range),
bright and preferrably identical colour TFT displays for the panel,
because the mechanics of the yoke prevent
Newer models of C172 has landing and taxi lights located in the front
edge of the left wing. This can be seen on Cessna web site and I've seen
it on planes built in 2008. Of course, if fg's C172 is from 1981 then
the new placement of the lights probably does not apply.
Cheers,
Jari
On
Hello,
Does anyone know whether FG is unique amongst desktop simulators in
offering this? I have no experience of X-Plane nor FS-X.
Yes, X-Plane 10 also makes use of deferred shading. They just named it Global
Lighting/HDR. Framerates aren't better there as in FGFS as now.
The difference is
Hello,
Martin Spott wrote:
Service manual says: [...]
Beginning with 1971 Models, the landing and taxi lights are located in
the nose cowl. The D-EEQA (on the picture, sitting in wet grass) is a
1978's Cessna F 172N (serial 1697) and FlightGear's is, as far as I
remember, a 1981's C172P.
Actually, what I wonder is, do we need the scenery cast shadows to be
calculated on each frame? Is there a way that they can be stored and just
updated every few minutes for static objects?
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2012 13:53:08 +0100
From: aeitsch...@yahoo.de
To:
Hi,
We have a comics here where the main character is named Lucky Luke. He is a
cowboy who run after the evil Dalton brothers and is famous to fire faster than
his shadow.
Do we want objects ahead of their shadows and play Lucky Luke in fg ?
Rendering half the scene in the shadow map is not
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Martin Spott wrote:
Stuart Buchanan wrote:
How's the cockpit project going BTW?
Having a sponsor to pay the transport would be cool ;-)
Aside from that, we're looking for a couple of small (8-12 range),
bright and preferrably identical colour TFT displays for the
Heiko Schulz wrote:
I didn't had any service manual when I started and announced the
c172p-update and it seems I did not informed myself enough about the
c172-history for the update.
My comment wasn't meant to blame you for making a mistake ;-)
it's just been an informal notice as I
Heiko Schulz wrote:
Look here:
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/6/4/3/2081346.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Cessna-172P-Skyhawk/2076182/L/sid=40c47e6e201184197341cb50f65a74cd
Bah, both are almost as ugly as our D-EEQA btw, the second one
appears to be a
Stuart wrote
Hi All,
Rembrandt works well on my GT260M, and really moves FG's graphics on
massively. I think it's a fantastic enhancement to FG, and we should
really
consider naming the July/August release as v3.0.0.
Does anyone know whether FG is unique amongst desktop simulators in
It's possible to have two layers of shadow map to separate static and
dynamic things, but at a significant cost (you need the extra buffer,
and the memory bandwidth to sample it, ...). Probably not a win on the
kind of hardware that needs a speedup here.
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Vivian
Vivian Meazza wrote:
[...] Much of the shared and
scenery models need similar checking: the windsock is an obvious one.
Given the fact that QA on scenery models (shared as well as static
ones) has always been a bumpy road, I'm pretty much convinced that this
task doesn't fit into a regular
Each aircraft in the inventory needs checking for 2 sided faces,
panel lights need converting, and nice to have are nav. lights and
landing lights. Much of the shared and scenery models need similar
checking: the windsock is an obvious one.
Can you imagine the task for USS Vinson?
Yes, X-Plane 10 also makes use of deferred shading. They just named
it Global Lighting/HDR. Framerates aren't better there as in FGFS as
now.
The difference is only that landinglights there looks much smoother
(no hard edges)
This is just designers' art. The light poles don't have hard
Hey guys,
I have 17 chunks of 3x1 degree or 2x2 degree raw shapefile data I've been
generating from USGS data for the western United States.
These should be as topologically clean (as is practicable with shapefiles)
because they've been exported from a 'clean' GRASS database and are ready to
Hi Gene,
Gene Buckle wrote:
Martin, if you were to pick up a copy of Mike Powell's book Building
Simulated Aircraft Instruments, you could fill that whole panel pretty
cheaply, including a servo based artificial horizon. I would be happy to
supply you with any custom metal parts that
Fred wrote:
Each aircraft in the inventory needs checking for 2 sided faces, panel
lights need converting, and nice to have are nav. lights and landing
lights. Much of the shared and scenery models need similar
checking: the windsock is an obvious one.
Can you imagine the task for USS
On Tuesday 03 April 2012 18:38:55 syd adams wrote:
I assume that users complaining about ugly models is the only means to
make many of the modellers fix their stuff.
Cheers,
Martin.
True :). Although it would be a great help to know what needs changing
... apparently I've
26 matches
Mail list logo
