Re: [Flightgear-users] Will pedals help me fly better in real life?
On Tuesday 13 December 2005 21:26, Durk Talsma wrote: The main disadvantage is that they come without force-feedback, but the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages, IMHO The problem is that most rudder pedal setups battle as is to stay put. A proper force feedback system that can simulate a total hydraulic failure in a 737 would require both the pedals and your chair to be bolted to the floor and those plastic pedals certainly wouldn't stand up to that sort of force. Even a few kilograms of force would require some proper fixtures. And the cost of servo motors and circuitry put the price up something horrible. Even proper force feedback sticks cost a lot more and I'm not referring to those joysticks that vibrate but are also labeled force feedback. I think the imagination is always going to be a lot cheaper. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Flight Deck taxiing and launch
On Saturday 26 November 2005 21:25, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 18:39 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello All: On the flight deck with some power I find it difficult to turn with breaks etc, what with the carrier's perpetual motion. Also, when launching from catapult, full power, breaks off, presses 'C' and the Seahawk is thrusted at full power - backwards!!! Any comments as to the catapult settings and what to look for to rectify this? Thanks in Advance Martin Hello Martin, In spite of some remarks about the opportunity to taxis on the flight decks :=) With seahawk i have found a way, probably you did find it before me, keeping pressed the break (left or right according to the wish) to push the throttle to a hight value (probably more than it should be in reality) and the AC will begin to turn on the gear. Cheers You need to set /controls/gear/tailwheel-lock to FALSE to taxi easily. If you do that you'll only need to apply about 1/8 throttle and apply one wheel brake and it'll swing on a dime. The nosewheel will castor. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Flight Deck taxiing and launch
On Friday 25 November 2005 19:59, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 18:39 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello All: On the flight deck with some power I find it difficult to turn with breaks etc, what with the carrier's perpetual motion. Also, when launching from catapult, full power, breaks off, presses 'C' and the Seahawk is thrusted at full power - backwards!!! Any comments as to the catapult settings and what to look for to rectify this? Thanks in Advance Martin Hello Martin, I hope you didn't forget to activate the LaunchBar upper case L before 'C' Sure it is not easy to taxi , and sometime the ground reaction is not right (probably to be fixed, in the source code). Cheers Hi Martin In order to turn the Seahawk easily while taxying you need to switch the lock tailwheel property to off in the property browser. Once you do that it'll swing on a dime. Yeah I know the Seahawk doesn't have a tail wheel - you can ask Vivian about that. :) Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Sound on Linux systems
On Wednesday 16 November 2005 02:34, Gerard ROBIN wrote: And it seem that FG (openal) does not share the sound usage. Experts could answer. Ok first of all forget what the others have told you about using sound daemons. :) You do NOT want to use aRts or ESD or any of those crap sound daemons otherwise you'll be pulling your hair out in no time since not all apps like to play nicely with each other or the sound daemons. Firstly the Windows versus Linux scenario. In Windows the sound is mixed in software by default and since there is only one sound API in Windows it's not a problem. All the Windows apps happily use the same sound system regardless if Windows is doing the software mixing or leaving the mixing up to capable hardware. Under Linux you have a whole bunch of apps which are compiled for different sound systems and don't play nicely together. Here are a few solutions to get sound mixed under Linux. 1. Use a decent sound card that supports hardware mixing like the Creative Labs cards which use the emu10k chipsets (32 source hardware mixing ...) Onboard AC97 is simply an awful sound chipset - I always disable it and pop in another sound card. 2. Use software mixing. No not aRts, ESD or friends but use the ALSA dmix software mixing plugin. This will do the mixing at the ALSA level. It doesn't matter if an app is compiled for ALSA, SDL, OSS - they will all work since they all end up using ALSA. You can find details of how to write .asoundrc config files on the ALSA website. 3. If you have a sound card that supports multiple playback devices then you can route the sound around a bit using ALSA and OpenAL config files. I use a cheap SB PCI 128 card that has two playback devices and 1 capture device. I route the OpenAL FG sound through /dev/adsp and use /dev/dsp for the other apps like TeamSpeak which require device 0 (capture and playback). This allows two apps to play sound at the same time. Not perfect but it's all I need. Example .openalrc file that tells OpenAL apps to use hardware device 1 (second channel for playback) and the capture device on channel 0 for recording : (define devices '(alsa)) (define alsa-out-device hw:0,1) (define alsa-in-device hw:0,0) (define speaker-num 2) 4. Use multiple cards and mix the sound externally or by looping the output on one card back into the line input of another card and mixing them that way. Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] More than one waypoint of the same name
On Sunday 13 November 2005 11:22, Innis Cunningham wrote: Yep and I found two of them in a row RIC08 being one and the other one escapes me at the moment. Anyway that is not the problem.The problem is FG choosing to fly to the one that is 15000 miles away over the one that is 50 miles away. Yip. That is something a bit of intelligence sorts out. If you add a fix in a GPS unit like a GNS 430/530 or even an old KLN-90B and there are duplicates it will prompt you for the one you want to use in order of ascending distance. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] More than one waypoint of the same name
On Sunday 13 November 2005 06:20, Josh Babcock wrote: With 26^5 (11881376) possible identifiers You'd think there wouldn't be any duplicates. Actually, I just checked fix.dat.gz, and it came up with 70011 entries whether I did a sort -u on it or just counted the entries. This should mean that there are no dups. What fix were you using? Josh Fixes are only required to be unique on a per country level. Each country is legally allowed to use the same set of identifiers as a neighbouring country although it's not recommended. There are 2158 non-unique fix identifiers in the database out of a total of 70007. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
On Sunday 06 November 2005 20:18, Paul Duncan wrote: Even MSFS obviously gets it *very* wrong from time to time. Now, I have never taken the controls of a helicopter (although I have been a passenger in one), but I'm fairly sure that with the engine off it shouldn't cavort around in the air for ages without loosing altitude, which is just what the MS Jetranger does :-) I think, what I'm trying to say is, its all very well to encourage people to strive for perfection in the flight models, 3D cockpits, etc, but when they don't quite reach it, don't beat them up about it, because even the proprietary sims don't get it right all the time :-) MSFS is a simulator?!! I thought it was just a game and therefore excused all the funnies. Sort of like a hard core, no frills version of Crimson Skies. Regards Paul P.S. I own a copy of FS2004 ;-) ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] New Model: Crusader F-8E
On Wednesday 12 October 2005 20:37, Curtis L. Olson wrote: Great shots. For whatever it's worth, if you turn on anisotropic texture filtering, the textures on the deck in the first shot will be much sharper. This is an environment variable in unix (at least for nvidia) and probably some control panel setting in windows. This also makes a *huge* difference for runway textures as well. Or if you are using Linux just use the nvidia-settings GUI to adjust antialiasing, anisotropic filtering, gamma, color correction, etc on the fly. A lot of Linux nVidia users don't seem to be aware of this nifty little app that comes with the drivers. I use 6x anisotropic filtering and like Curt mentioned it makes the textures in FG look MUCH better especially runway textures. Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Tutorial
On Saturday 01 October 2005 17:44, Eric Brasseur wrote: Hello, I wrote a FlightGear tutorial: http://www.4p8.com/eric.brasseur/flight_simulator_tutorial.html Cheers Eric Looks good! The only thing I would change is to tell the user how to takeoff using the rudder. In other words teach them how to taxi first and then then will know how to track the runway centerline when it comes to takeoffs. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Flight Simulator Aircraft Connversion to FlightGear
On Thursday 29 September 2005 08:43, T J wrote: I want to use Flight Simulator Aircraft in FlightGear. These aircraft will be downloaded from Avsim. How do I get these aircraft to work in FlightGear? Any help much appreciated. They can't be used as is. About the only thing in a Flight Simulator aircraft you can use in FlightGear without modification is the visual model. The panel, flight dynamics, etc must all be recreated from scratch. Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] A380 Files
On Thursday 29 September 2005 14:56, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Le jeudi 29 septembre 2005 à 17:02 +1200, T J a écrit : Does anybody have any finnished/updated A380 files? If so could they please send them to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The same applies for the AN-225. If this is not practicle could they please update the Flightgear CVS. Thanks. The best way for you is to subscribe to Flightgear-cvslogs You are advised of every updates which area delivered. And so you can get the very last release of your preferred aircraft. I do use it, and so i don't need to ask for any finished/update. Cheers TJ You can subscribe to the CVS log mailing list here : http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-cvslogs Developers will keep adding fixes and updates in their OWN time and pace. So if something is amiss in an aircraft requesting a fix isn't going to help in most cases. Things will be fixed when they get fixed. If it's a bug then by all means let us know. Feature requests and bug reports are welcome but obviously can't always be implemented soon or at all depending on the general mood of the developer. Some people have families and jobs to attend to as well and just don't have enough time to fix and implement everything. If you want you can start looking around in the aircraft directories in FlightGear and learn how to fix and add things yourself. In most cases the files are in text form and can be edited with a general purpose text editor. If you fix or add something then join the developer list and let us know and one of the core developers can check it and add it to CVS. When a developer fixes or adds something to flightgear it will be added to CVS as soon as it is ready and has been checked to see that it causes no problems. CVS contains the newest code and data and you can't get it any quicker. Developers won't keep the changes on their own hard disks unless it's a work in progress and aren't willing to submit it yet for inclusion in FlightGear. Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Cockpit video Georg
On Thursday 29 September 2005 20:32, Georg Vollnhals wrote: Hi Andy, as I told you via eMail your eMail account is not big enough for the video-size and it was rejected by your internet provider: http://zupload.com - 500MB file size limit - any file type - no bandwidth limit - link only expires after 30 days of inactivity Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Rudder/Ailerons center
On Thursday 22 September 2005 00:59, Paulo da Silva wrote: BTW, why is the default plane turning always to the left (no winds) when the rudder/ailerons are centered?! Even when I put the engine at minimum! Let me guess ... are you flying the Cessna 172? If so : http://www.mindspring.com/~cramskill/propefct.htm Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] 1900D Issue
Not sure if I should hijack this thread or start another one but ... Has anyone else noticed that the B1900D is very twitchy on the runway at low speeds? I just have to touch the rudder and it wants to veer off in either direction. I have to toggle it down the runway until the rudder has enough authority to override the nosewheel. Otherwise the handling is great - snap rolls at 200 knots in level flight work perfectly too! :) Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] 1900D Issue
On Saturday 17 September 2005 14:26, Dave Martin wrote: I deliberately boosted the ground steering response on the B1900D at the suggestion of a pilot familiar with the type. It was quite a while ago that I made those changes to the FDM and he's since been back and had a go with the rudder pedals and he thinks it's 'spot on' for the ground handling (although I can see that its a handful with the KB). It's a handful with a twist grip joystick too - it's way too sensitive. I can see that it may work nicely on a high precision rudder pedal setup where the increments are probably very small. On my Sidewinder Force Feedback Pro the twist grip increments in steps of 1213 from -32767 to 32767. So that means I only have 27 steps either way. Maybe we could have an option for dampening the response for twist grips that can be selected at run time for the B1900D because there are several people who battle with the sensitivity. Otherwise I like the handling - it's my third favourite aircraft behind the Seahawk and Hunter. Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] VOR: where to find documentation, how to use it
On Tuesday 06 September 2005 00:59, Stephane Rodet wrote: Thank you very much for your answer! Unfortunatly, atlas don't compile on my system (gentoo on AMD64). I will try to see what is the problem. I've tried to compile it on another computer (Athlon 1Ghz) with a bad graphic card, but it needed flightgear as dependencies. Is it possible to run atlas on a distant computer that don't have 3d accelerator ? Stephane If you are flying in the USA you can find FAA sectional charts for the entire country here : http://aviationtoolbox.org/raw_data/FAA/ Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] fgfs start error
On Monday 05 September 2005 10:40, Jose Antonio Jimenez Madrid wrote: The OS is a Debian Linux 3.1 alias Sarge. The kernel version is 2.4.27 (I compiled this kernel), and my graphic card is a nVidia RIVA TNT2 with 32 MB. You're going to need a newer graphics card than the TNT2. I used to run FlightGear on a 32MB TNT2 up until about two and a half years ago when it stopped working after some CVS updates. I was getting all sorts of random video problems all of which disappeared after getting a Geforce 4. Updating drivers did not work for me. I just dropped the GF4 in without touching the drivers and FlightGear ran perfectly. The rest of your system is fine though. Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] why *.stg files in terrain database? can I use *.flt files?
On Saturday, 6 August 2005 13:22, Siva kumar wrote: Hi, I am using fligthgear 0.9.4. I am having three queries. 1. For scenery database I have downloaded flightgear world scenery which is in *.btg file format.I would like to know why *.btg files are called within *.stg file. 2. Can I use Multi Gen creator which gives *.flt files to model the terrain and objects.Whether flighgear can import *.flt files? 3. What are the file formats supported by fligthgear. regards, deepha Hi Deepha As far as I know the *.stg and *.btg file formats are native to FlightGear and have no correlation to any other products which may use the same extension names. TerraGear contains the tools required to make FlightGear compatible scenery and I know of no other application that can do it. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong.) Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] scenery files
On Saturday, 23 July 2005 16:12, James Vahn wrote: Hello, Is there a list of scenery files that can be looked up by airport? I'm specifically looking for KJFK. Thanks! I am not aware of such a list but it would be easy to write a script to generate one. The easiest way is to use the scenery download map : http://www.flightgear.org/Downloads/scenery-0.9.8.html You can find KJFK's lat lon coords here : www.airnav.com/airport/KJFK Then just pick the right tile. The origin of a tile is the lower-left corner. ftp://ftp.flightgear.org/pub/fgfs/Scenery-0.9.8/w080n40.tgz Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Hardware requirements
On Saturday, 9 July 2005 13:06, Erik Hofman wrote: AJ MacLeod (email lists) wrote: On Saturday 09 Jul 2005 03:58, James Vahn wrote: Pick something for me at http://zipzoomfly.com in the $50 range, if you'd be so kind. Hmm. I know there are plenty of people here with far better technical knowledge of 3D graphics and the relative merits of the various generations of cards than I have, and I hope some of them will suggest something to you. Low-end FX5200 or later should be enough to have fun. Faster is better (as always) but not necessary unless you're after something special. Erik If you can get your hands on one of the Geforce 4 Ti range like the Ti4200, Ti4600 you should be happy. It's faster than the FX range up to to the FX5600 Ultra. The FX5200 is a budget card based on Geforce 2 hardware that has been made DirectX 9 compliant (which is of no use to FlightGear since we are using OpenGL anyway). The FX5200 is consideably slower than the GF4 Ti cards since it only has a single texture unit per pipe as opposed to the GF4's 2 texture units per pipe. FX5200 = 4 pipes x 1 texture unit per pipe = 4 texture units GF4 Ti = 4 pipes x 2 texture units per pipe = 8 texture units A good place to start is Tom's Hardware VGA charts. http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/vga_charts.html Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] OK I'm back what's changed?
On Saturday, 2 July 2005 14:46, David Ginger wrote: I did not know about the aircraft carrier, how do I find it ? Either grab a copy of CVS and compile and install it or wait for a new binary release. Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] OK I'm back what's changed?
On Friday, 1 July 2005 20:02, John Clary wrote: I was on the list about 2 years ago when my old computer died and I had to wait until I could afford to get it fixed properly. I also had my inbox severely restricted by my email provider, but that's been taken care of now so I can get back on the list. So what flight models are supported now, and how is the frame rate on less than cutting edge video cards? If you want a thorough breakdown then your best bet is the CVS logs. :) A lot has changed over the last 2 years. We have a few nice WWII aircraft (Seafire, Spitfire) quite well modeled thanks to Vivian. We have a working aircraft carrier. We have a new 3D cloud implementation (added recently) We have proper aircraft shadows (added a couple of weeks ago) Hmmm ... those are the most noticable things I can think of but there are lots and lots of behind the scenes improvements most of which I cannot remember. One such improvement is Display List support (About a 30% increase in performance) Your best bet is to get a new copy and play with it. Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] DAFIF to disappear from public domain
On Wednesday, 29 June 2005 19:53, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't kept up to date with FG lately, and Google doesn't show any hits for this. What are the developers planning to do when DAFIF is no longer available starting October 1st - will FG keep using the last DAFIF, or are there plans to fork a version? Ari. https://164.214.2.62/dafif/dafif_0506_ed7/readme.txt I'm not sure what we'll do. We are not the only ones who will be affected. I know that the MSFS people use the DAFIF data as well especially for the high end addons like FMC and GPS units. However I don't see it as being a real problem since it's only for flight sim purposes. Having outdated data is not going to cause anyone to die. You'll probably find that the flight sim community will create and update their own source of data in the end. Of course the more outdated the data becomes the less FG can be used for real world training purposes. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: the nimitz_demo HOW??
On Saturday, 25 June 2005 16:31, Dave Culp wrote: I would also feel better if we could restore its original location, NW of KHAF. The KSFO location with the carrier driving over land was only temporary for people to test, but that's IMHO too ugly. Sure, many people won't find it after that, but that's like in real life (assuming radio failure). :-) ... I agree. And what about having the airplane start on the carrier? I've never tried this, and I'm not sure it's possible yet. Don't know if the carrier is there early enough, or if the aircraft will need a small initial velocity. Anyone tried this? Does the carrier really need to be sailing around full-steam? Can't we get the aircraft loaded on a stationary carrier first and then figure out how to do it on a moving carrier at a later stage? I see little point in having an aircraft carrier cruising around burning up heavy fuel oil at the taxpayers expense when it's not on a mission. Don't aircraft carriers normally just anchor when they are not going some where? Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Windows users only
On Saturday, 25 June 2005 01:15, Kristin wrote: How did you get FG to work, it seems the install does not really spec the right path to data/scenery files. some flight/plane combos cause lockup requiring me to do a hard reboot (press the reboot key) as my mouse (serial Kenisington expert mouse trackball) to freeze along with the keyboard. I also get a rainbow effect somtimes, the program will work but the graphics are distorted. I have uninstalled and re-installed several times, there are two files fgrun.lgc and fgfs.lgc in my windows/applog dir. I have deleted these and the leftover flightgear folder in program files dir. To try to make a clean install. Here are my PC specs: System: OS win98 4.10.1998 AMD XP 2400+ Athelon 256k memory Soyo sy-k7vempro v1.0 MotherBoard Kennsington expert mouse trackball ser port 1 VIA tech vt8361/vt8601 graphic controler on MB Via sound realtech ac97 audio on MB Realtech vt 8139 ethernet card on MB Microsoft sidewinder precision pro joystick(added a few days ago) along with the SW to program buttons. If you are running Unix/Linux please do not reply as I want to compare paths etc with another windows user. I could boot Win NT also if anyone has had success with that. Kristin Kristin, you may want to play around with the OpenGL video drivers for your Via graphics controller as that is the most likely cause of the distorted graphics and could very well be causing the system lockups too. I used to have lots of system lockups under Win98 with various pieces of DirectX and OpenGL software until I installed a more up to date video driver for my video card. (I've had less video hassles under Linux than Win98 or XP which is a bit ironic.) Unfortunately some graphics cards have poor or non-existent OpenGL support in this MS DirectX infested world and I'm not sure how good the OpenGL implementation of Via graphics controllers is. Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] minimal scenery
Yeah, I've done it. The TerraGear tools can be a pain to figure out the first time but it's not that hard once you have the sequence figured out. It took me a couple of days before I got it right. To add an airport that has been closed (or an imaginary one) you just have to add it to the airport.dat file before running genairports on it. Paul On Tuesday, 10 May 2005 23:47, Dave Culp wrote: Has anyone attempted to run FlightGear with a home made scenery? How about one tile with no elevation data, but with terrain graphics and airports? Is it possible to hand-code a minimal tile? I'm asking because I'm exploring the possibility of making a flight simulator for a Forward Air Controller museum, and the airport I want has recently been demolished, so I'll need custom scenery. Dave ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] (no subject)
You just hit the reply button in most mail readers. All that is required as far as I know is a Re: preceding the original subject for the threading to work so you could even add one by hand if you like. Paul On Monday, 9 May 2005 02:30, Mostyn Gale wrote: Just a quickie. How do I properly reply to the mailing list so that my post apears under the right tree in the archives? Cheers, Mostyn Gale ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] please help - no sound!
The first thing I suggest is that you update your sound drivers. Windows XP and even the sound drivers that come with the hardware are normally too outdated/broken for OpenAL to work with. The biggest culprits are these cheap audio devices that are built onto the motherboards. The AC97 being the largest problem of all with regards to broken drivers. Try find a audio driver that was released in 2003 or later. Paul On Saturday, 30 April 2005 08:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could you more knowledgeable gents please help a 67 year old pensioner trying to get to grips with modern technology? I've downloaded FG; everythings works fine, but no sound. Instead I get multiple messages like this: OpenAL error(AL illegal command):play (AL source Play) and OpenAL error(AL illegal command): bind sources return. I know this is probably a stupid question and/or I'm just being dumb in my old age, but any help would be appreciated. I run a very capable computer using Windows XP. Regards to all, GrandpaMike ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Photo-realistic scenery
Hi Kevin FlightGear doesn't really support photo-realistic scenery. It can do it over VERY small areas but not large areas. The scenery engine cannot do the texture paging required for photo scenery over large areas - it will try to ram everything in sight into the video ram so if your video card has a few GB of VRAM you may just manage. I'm not sure what tools were used to generate the scenery but they are probably hiding somewhere in the TerraGear source code tree. Unless you plan to rewrite the FG scenery engine forget about having ever seen the photo scenery. Paul On Tuesday, 26 April 2005 13:16, Kevin Jones wrote: Hi, Having looked at the FlightGear screenshots it looks as if FGFS supports photo-realistic scenery. Is this feature installed as part of the default (Windows) installation? If so then how do I enable this feature and which airports have suitable scenery files? If the feature isn't part of the default installation then are there any support packages on the net that I could try? Thanks for any advice, Kevin. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Gliding/Soaring in FG
On Wednesday, 13 April 2005 04:35, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: On April 12, 2005 07:48 pm, Paul Surgeon wrote: A soaring simulator is just too specific and FG tends to be a general purpose, powered flight simulator. I disagree. Adding such thing as thermals into FlightGear will only add to the realisim. Just because thermals are used by gliders, that doesn't mean other aircrafts such as commercial airliners won't get affected by thermals. Ampere Maybe you didn't understand what I meant. I meant FG only really caters for powered flight at present - it does a terrible job as a sailplane simulator at the moment. I don't disagree with the fact that thermals affect other aircraft but where are the winch launches, aerotows, ridge lift, wave lift, final glide computers, GPS units, competition functionality, etc? Most of these features are specific to sailplanes. Anyway the thermals in FG are not realistic at all. 1. They are not generated based on the actual terrain and azimuth of the sun 2. They have no clouds attached to them (the primary means of identifying the possiblity of thermals in real life) 3. They don't lean with the wind 4. They don't weaken smoothly near the cloud base 5. They don't have areas of sink around the outside 6. They don't have strong lift at the center with less towards the edges 7. They don't decay and end up being sources of sink as the Cu turns into a thunderstorm If we model water in FG it doesn't suddenly make it a great submarine simulator. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Gliding/Soaring in FG
On Wednesday, 13 April 2005 20:40, Paul Duncan wrote: Speaking of the tow plane, I don't know if any of you have played around with X-Plane, but it has an incredibly strong tow plane, it can haul a B52 off the runway, dangling from the slow (and suprisingly powerful :-) tow plane! Anyway, just a little amusing aside :-) Paul Last year seven Czech pilots broke the world record by getting towed up simulataneously by a single Piper Pawnee. The video footage is quite impressive. It gives one an appreciation for how streamlined sailplanes really are. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Gliding/Soaring in FG
On Tuesday, 12 April 2005 23:39, AJ MacLeod (email lists) wrote: I've been getting withdrawal symptoms since my demo license for Silent Wings expired - it's really very good, and available on Linux, too. Unfortunately it is neither free nor open source and both, particularly the former is an issue for me - I just don't have £50 to spend on that sort of triviality! I also don't use any closed-source software other than the Nvidia drivers, and don't particularly want to go back down that path. My license expires this weekend but I'm going to scrape my pennies together and buy it because it's a great product and I would like to see it succeed. The multiplayer patch is going to make it really fun. Getting back to FlightGear (which is also a fantastic achievement), are the thermals fixed in the CVS version? Are any of the FG developers particularly interested in gliding; i.e. are we likely to see more features to facilitate that soon? I would dearly like to assist, but my coding skills leave much to be desired - testing is more my thing! I imagine that more accurate modelling of things like thermals/clouds and ridge lift are very low priority in FG and possibly not worth the detrimental effect on performance for the majority of users? There is/was interest in the area of adding soaring to FG but it's a huge amount of work. - Proper volumetric clouds with a thermal model attached to them - Aerotow and winch launching - Proper modeling of vertical air movement, ridge lift, windshear, thermals that lean with the wind, sinking air over water and cooler areas, etc. - Modeling of complex intruments (Cambridge L-NAV, GPS units, etc) - Decent terrain engine that can handle large areas of satellite or aerial images (the one in SilentWings is simple incredible!) A soaring simulator is just too specific and FG tends to be a general purpose, powered flight simulator. I'm sure if there was enough motivation it could be done but I doubt anyone would be willing to do all the hard work. It took a couple of people several years to write SilentWings and they were supported financially to do it. Just the terrain engine of SilentWings would take ages to write let alone all the other soaring specific stuff like aerotows, ridge and wave lift, etc. There will always be a place for commercial apps that excel in specific areas. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Radeon 7000 configuration (addendum 2)
On Saturday, 9 April 2005 02:03, Ralph Jones wrote: OK, some progress...I found the missing js device. Fedora uses /dev/input/js0, not /dev/js0. jstest works fine, so the OS is reading the stick, but fgjs and js_demo still cause it to segfault. If I remember correctly the input devices were moved into /dev/input when the dynamic device system was introduced (devfs and udev). Have you tried creating a soft link called /dev/js that points to /dev/input/js0 ? I seem to have done that but I can't remember why. Maybe it was because plib is not smart enough to look in /dev/input for joystick devices? BTW : I'm using a gameport version of the MS Sidewinder Force Feedback Pro and it works really well so I doubt the joystick driver module will be a problem. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] capturing FlightGear graphics to a video file
Here's a possibly crazy idea : What if FG dumped the frames directly to RAM in a raw format? Then when the allocated RAM is full, pauses while the capture is compressed and saved to disk. Then FG automatically unpauses and does another dump to RAM cycle. Wash, rinse, repeat ... This way FG and the screen capture compression algorithm wouldn't both be fighting for the CPU nor would there be much of a hit on IO (e.g. FG trying to read new scenery while the screen dump code is trying to write to disk) The pauses may be annoying during the capture but should hardly be a problem seeing as it's usually only done to demonstrate something in FG and not during normal flights. I think one could end up with a very nice, full screen, video stream using this bizarre method without the need for a separate capture machine or capture hardware. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] instrument approaches in FG
On Thursday, 3 March 2005 17:52, Mike Rawlins wrote: Thanks Jon. But how does one access the DME in Flightgear? I see that Oakland (KOAK) has a VORTAC, frequency 116.80. I set NAV1 to 116.80 while on the runway there, and don't think anything like a DME engaged. KSFO has a VOR/DME on 155.80. Does one get distance from this frequency? Firstly what aircraft are you using? I suggest you use the default 172 which has a DME readout instrument right at the bottom of the radio stack. Not all the aicraft in FG have DME readout instruments. The DME readout instrument in the c172p looks similar to the KDI 572 : https://www3.bendixking.com/static/catalog/viewproductdetails.jsp?pid=280 Set NAV1 to 116.80 and then switch the DME intrument to N1 (NAV1) This will show you the distance to the DME equipment tuned on NAV1 as well as your ground speed towards it and the estimated time enroute. Of course it will only work for VORs/ILSs that are DME equiped. BTW : I did notice a minor bug/problem with the DME instrument - it didn't pick up the new frequency I tuned into NAV1 - I had to flip from N1 to HLD and back to N1 before it would display anything. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Dated Docs
On Saturday, 26 February 2005 05:35, Innis Cunningham wrote: While I am quite happy to do the corrections I notice that the getting started file is a PDF document and as far as I am aware I dont have a text editor that will handle PDF documents. If you have OpenOffice installed open Writer and and then select File-Print Drop the printer combo box down and select one of the PDF printers, check the print to file option and press the OK button. It will ask you for a filename and then spit out a PDF of your document. :) The CUPS printing daemon and tools also provide a default PDF printer driver which can be shared across a network with SAMBA so you can print PDFs on any PC on a network that know how to use a SMB (Shared Message Block) network printer. i.e. MS, Linux, a lot of commercial Unices, BSD ... There are plenty of other apps that write PDFs though like ps2pdf, Scribus, KWord, latex (with pdftex package). There is no need to fork out $449 to Adobe to get a PDF writer like Adobe Acrobat 7.0 Professional although I'm sure it's a decent PDF creator. :) One thing to look out for is to try to stick with fonts that are available on all platforms otherwise you have to embed the fonts into the PDF file which bloats it a bit. Now what you don't have is the original source of the getting started guide which means you can either copy the text and images out of it and reformat it in your favourite editor before exporting it again or we can try get hold of the author. If we look in the CVS logs we find that it was created by someone called j4strngs http://cvs.flightgear.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/data/Docs/getstart.pdf?cvsroot=FlightGear-0.9 Will Mr j4strngs please stand up! :) Hope that helps a bit. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Mandrake 10.1 build
On Thursday, 24 February 2005 09:46, Dave Culp wrote: Has anyone out there done a build of SimGear in Mandrake 10.1?My Mandrake system is almost nearly out of the box, and I've succesfully compiled the mm3d CAD application, as well as openal and plib, but I get this with SimGear ( both 0.3.8 and CVS ): I'm running FG on MDK 10.1 Community Edition (sort of a pre-release) Was the CAD program a pure C program or C++? The reason why I ask is because Mandrake stuffed up the GCC packaging by forgetting to include C++ support !!! This bit me when I tried to compile a C++ app and had me stumped because C apps would compile just fine. :) I'm not sure if this was rectified in 10.1 Official so if you need to fix it grab and install the gcc-c++ package. http://rpmfind.net//linux/RPM/mandrake/10.1/i586/media/main/gcc-c++-3.4.1-4mdk.i586.html Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Installing Linux for a better FGFS
On Thursday, 10 February 2005 03:51, Innis Cunningham wrote: This makes it all sound so easy IT IS NOT.You will get Linux on your box very easely.But getting FG up and running is not. If you are not Linux/Unix proficient and have a good grasp of command line operation you will end up dying of frustration. I have had Mandrake 10 up and operating for nearly a year now but not FG.I only realy started trying to to install FG about two weeks ago but have not managed to even get the 3D graphics to operate. The best advice I have is that someone sits down with you and shows you how to do it. What would work well is a VNC or screen session plus IRC. I've helped people like this in the past - you log into their box and show them how to do it. However just an IRC session could do it because you can just tell us the error and we can tell you what to type to fix it. The problem with offline step-by-step solutions is that it only takes one little problem to mess everything up like a header file being in the wrong place or a binary not being in a path. So Innis you're quite right about saying it's not easy. I battled for many months figuring out how Linux works and that's coming from a programming background! If you're coming from a point and click background then I can only imagine how frustrating it can be. However once you get the hang of it, it's dead easy. The IRC channel is there for this type of help - come join us sometime and we'll get you sorted out. :) Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] FlightGear v0.9.8 on Windows XP
On Friday, 28 January 2005 19:13, Frederic Bouvier wrote: Quoting Curtis L. Olson : EGNX runway 09 now appears as 09x. 27 is ok. This is a side affect of the new X-Plane apt.dat format. Frederic, we need to strip out those x's now. What is the right value to give to fgfs ? 09 or 09x ? -Fred 09 is the correct value. The x's are just there to pad the data for when there isn't an L, C or R (Left, Center Right runway) When the apt file is read by FG the x's get stripped off and thrown away. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] FlightGear v0.9.8 on Windows XP
On Friday, 28 January 2005 22:39, Vivian Meazza wrote: AnthonyL wrote: I (still) cannot start up the Spitfire. It seems as if the engine is almost running when it loads but splutters to a standstill before I can do anything. Messages are: Unknown runway code 09x passed to GetReverseRunwayNo(...) Failed to find runway 09x at airport EGNX type: spitfireIIa spitfireIIa: 0 type: spitfireIIa spitfireIIa: 1 WARNING: Legacy engine definition in YASim configuration file. Please fix fuel-cocks running Are you following the full start procedure? Begin by reading the Pilot's Notes in ../Aircraft/Spitfire. I've just checked - it starts OK. Regards, Vivian Vivian maybe it's the GLUT/magnetos issue that bit me a while back. What is the win32 build using? SDL or GLUT? Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] resolving sound problems
On Tuesday, 25 January 2005 21:30, Ron Freimuth wrote: From: Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is a new binary for FlightGear that should also solve the problem (without the need to update the drivers): ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Win32/fgfs-0.9.8-20050124.zip Erik Yes, that fixed my AC 97 sound problem! Ron I am so glad this was fixed - it was the number 1 question we kept getting from new users in the IRC channel. :) Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] fgrun install problem
On Sunday, 26 December 2004 05:30, Don Oliver wrote: Curtis, Thanks for being so helpful; I've been going around in circles, with SimGear asking for automake 1.5, then when I installed that, it went into a different directory from the installed version 1.4. Then, I had to find and install autoconf 2.59. Automake 1.4 is in /usr/bin, and automake 1.5 is in /usr/local/bin. If I can impose on you a little more, could you possibly tell me how to straighten this out - or point me to a resource where I can read up on such? My suggestion is remove the older version of automake unless you really have to keep it for some obscure piece of software compilation. Having more than one version of automake on a system almost always causes hassles. I've had this problem and I've had to help others with this problem in the past. The usual problem is that the automake soft link is pointing to the wrong automake-1.* version or you have two automake softlinks in different locations which are being picked up separately. Delete automake 1.4 and fix up the automake link. Often the link points to places like /opt/... or /etc/alternatives/... which in turn points back to /usr/bin/automake-1.* Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Still haven't found what I need, more on readios :)
On Wednesday, 22 December 2004 21:29, David Megginson wrote: Some of the charts are available online, but they're usually a pain to use. Why not invest a few bucks in paper charts if you're going to take all this time? They're available online from many sources, or you can just walk into the flight school or FBO at your nearest general aviation airport (which might be a fun place to visit anyway). IFR charts are well under $10 each, and you don't have to update them every 7 weeks since you're not using them for real aviation. Where I live it's Jeppessen, Jeppessen or Jeppessen. :-\ A single approach plate costs about $15 (USD) at the shop at my local airfield. Most of the charts have to be bought as a complete set which costs a few thousand Dollars. One probably has more options in Canada and the USA than elsewhere in the world. I really feel that FG should have a built in flight planner of some sort. All the basic navaid data is already in FG we just need some way of displaying it. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] New User.
On Sunday, 19 December 2004 16:28, Simon wrote: Hi all, I would like to install FlighGear on my Linux Mandrake 10.1 box. I have an XP2000+ 1.7Ghz processor. NVidia GeForce MX4000 GPU, 64 mb graphics card. 256mb ram. Will it run OK? I should run quite well on your system. FG runs at about 30-50 fps on my system which is an Athlon XP 2000+, 256MB RAM, Ti4200 128MB graphics card and Mandrake 10.1 What are all the packages I need and where will I find them? Regards, Simon. Unfortunately there are no up to date binary FlightGear packages for Mandrake. The latest binary package of FlightGear for MDK is available on the contrib mirrors and is version 0.9.5 which is rather outdated. If you want to run a newer version of FlightGear you'll have to download and compile it from source. This is not hard to do if you have some experience compiling Linux apps from source. You need two packages : source and data The lastest official release was 0.9.6 and can be found here : http://www.flightgear.org/Downloads/source.html However I recommend that you get a copy of what is in CVS and compile and install that instead because you have to compile from scratch wether you use the official release or the CVS version and with the CVS version you get all the up to date fixes and additions. The instructions for getting the CVS source/data is here : http://www.flightgear.org/cvs.html Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] [from Avsim] Telnet related issue: FlightGearand Matlab are not communicating with each other as expected
On Saturday, 18 December 2004 19:05, Anthony Steer wrote: By the way, does anybody know how to by-pass the FlightGear wizard in the latest versions as I would like to have FlightGear load automatically on start up with a particular aircraft and set of parameters (as was possible with the earlier versions using the batch file etc.). I do not know of any wizard in FG. Are you not possibly starting FlightGear using the fg_run utility? If so just launch the fgfs executable directly with the options in the command line or in a .fgfsrc file. fgfs --help --verbose will give you all the options. Regards Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] [from AVSIM] Config file parseerror: C:/ProgramFiles/FlightGear/data/system.fgfsrc '--prop: encountered in XP
On Sunday, 12 December 2004 11:51, Vivian Meazza wrote: Erik Hofman wrote: I think he's using fgrun. That utility will always overwrite the contents of the .fgfsrc file on Unix. Maybe the same thing happens on Windows with the system.fgfsrc file? Yes, it does. Yet another reason why I would love to see everything integrated into the FlightGear binary while still retaining the command line parameters for the hard core users. All these little bits and pieces of code scattered around in various apps makes it a real sticky-tape and bubble gum affair. Being able to select everything from inside the sim is going to make a lot of problems go away especially for noobs who don't know what a command line is. For instance airports that are in addon scenery will not appear or be selectable in FG until the scenery is installed and a new airport index is built (like MSFS). How difficult would it be to get FG to load a new aircraft without restarting? BTW : The airport selection in FG is broken. It just leaves me at the aiport I started at but it's an improvement over the fatal errors I used to get. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] [from AVSIM] Config file parseerror: C:/ProgramFiles/FlightGear/data/system.fgfsrc '--prop: encountered in XP
On Sunday, 12 December 2004 14:51, Dave Martin wrote: On Sunday 12 Dec 2004 11:16, Paul Surgeon wrote: Being able to select everything from inside the sim is going to make a lot of problems go away especially for noobs who don't know what a command line is. I'll bet tho that it would increase the incidence of people moaning that the aircraft is 'broken' and 'always pulling to the left'. I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Are you suggesting we should prevent people from using single engine aircraft all together? Why not just remove the 172, PA-28, etc from FG and be done with it? M$FS has realism sliders that affect aircraft handling and they are set to noob by default. It works just fine and I don't see why we can't do the same. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] [from AVSIM] Config file parseerror: C:/ProgramFiles/FlightGear/data/system.fgfsrc '--prop: encountered in XP
On Sunday, 12 December 2004 14:02, Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:16:03 +0200, Paul wrote in message Yet another reason why I would love to see everything integrated into the FlightGear binary ..I disagree, big fat binaries get fat and bloated and draggy. I don't see how adding a flight planner, aircraft selection and other useful features is going to bloat the code so much that is runs like a snail. Maybe if we were writing a mini OS into FG it would slow things down but you'll have to add millions of lines of code before it becomes a real issue. FG is written in C++ and not some crappy interpreted language like VB. According to your reasoning we should remove all the menu entries such as the weather selection and the property browser so that FG runs faster. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] NASA Worldwind
On Wednesday, 8 December 2004 19:03, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote: On Thursday 14 October 2004 08:19, Chris Ridley wrote: Found a very interesting program at http://learn.arc.nasa.gov/worldwind I've been playing around with World Wind, and I think that it would be possible to use it as a moving map display for FlightGear (just like Atlas). I tried to averlay a few NDB symbols onto the globe, and it worked great. I guess I should make some kind of script to parse the files in navaid and convert to World Wind's xml format. Sounds like a no-go to me unless you own a Micro$oft box. DirectX 9b and the .NET Runtime environment are required which probably excludes a large portion of the FlightGear community. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] NASA Worldwind
On Wednesday, 8 December 2004 21:10, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote: On Wednesday 08 December 2004 19:27, Paul Surgeon wrote: Sounds like a no-go to me unless you own a Micro$oft box. DirectX 9b and the .NET Runtime environment are required which probably excludes a large portion of the FlightGear community. You are right. But there are intentions to port this open source project to Linux and Mac. If I understood correctly the Mac port had a slightly higher priority. Just out of interest has anyone ever done a poll to find out who uses what OS for FG? It would be interesting and possibly useful info to see what OS's are the most popular for FG especially amongst the developer community. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Small problems
On Saturday, 13 November 2004 20:48, Andrew Midosn wrote: The first is - should the Cessna constantly turn to the left? I know that planes don't fly straight and level without input from the pilot, but this seems extreme. The turning to the left is normal when using full power and low airspeeds such as during a takeoff or climb. From what I understand the engine/propeller torque + swirling wind passing over the wings from the propeller causes this. All these forces are lumped together under a term called P-factor. I am not sure if a high wing aircraft such as the 172 should hit a 80 degree bank because of it though - it does seem a bit extreme considering that the aircraft is hanging underneath the wing like a big heavy pendulum. This wouldn't be so bad if FlighGear would let me trim the craft to counteract the roll, but I can't see anything in the documentation about this. It seems that you can trim the pitch of the plane, but that's it. You can trim the pitch, ailerons and rudder in FlightGear. However I noticed (in CVS at least) that only the rudder and elevator trim have keyboard mappings so you'll have to add some aileron trim keyboard mappings to your keyboard.xml file. The second question is - does the autopilot work? I have tried entering course and altitude settings and enabling the Heading and Pitch/Altitude controls, but this doesn't seem to have any effect. The 172 autopilot works very nicely! When using the KAP 140 autopilot make sure you zoom in to see what is on the display using the x key (Shift-x zooms out again) Make sure you arm/activate the autopilot (AP button). The KAP 140 has three types of lateral navigation settings. ROL (wing leveler), HDG (follows heading bug) and NAV hold. It also has two vertical settings. VS (vertical speed hold) and ALT (altitude hold) When I first tried using the autpilot I didn't know about the zoom and I so when I clicked on HDG it went into ROL mode and confused me a lot because I couldn't see the text on the display. Hope that helps a bit. Regards Paul Surgeon ___ Moving house? Beach bar in Thailand? New Wardrobe? Win £10k with Yahoo! Mail to make your dream a reality. Get Yahoo! Mail www.yahoo.co.uk/10k ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Texture sizes (was Re: New Livery for 747)
On Saturday, 30 October 2004 01:11, Chris Metzler wrote: snip have this worry that jacking up the texture sizes to do planes with higher resolution may come back to bite us later, when we find that we can't have as much scenery, or as many planes in the scene, as we would like. Maybe this is an unwarranted worry. -c /snip Hence the need for FlightGear to have a way of adjusting all these things (preferably from inside FG). We cannot expect one size to fit all which is more or less what we do at the moment. Yes, there are a couple of things we can tweak at the moment such as the model density in the scenery based on distance. As much as everyone loves using the command line for setting parameters what happens when we can't pass enough parameters via command line because we hit the limit on how much the shell can handle? On my Linux box it's not much of a problem but whats the limit in Windows? Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Texture sizes (was Re: New Livery for 747)
On Saturday, 30 October 2004 11:02, Erik Hofman wrote: Chris Metzler wrote: Imagine that we decide to go from using one ground texture for a particular surface type to four (drawn from randomly) to decrease the 'checkerboard effect'. Been there, done that. See BuiltUpCover in materials.xml and notice there are two texture tags. Erik Now that is interesting! I never knew something like that was in FG and I'm busy with some textures at the moment. So if I create 4 grass textures that can be tilable in any combination and I stick 4 texture definitions into the materials.xml file will FG randomly pick them for me? Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Texture sizes (was Re: New Livery for 747)
On Saturday, 30 October 2004 16:35, Erik Hofman wrote: Well, they are not tilable because the tile edges are not rectangular. But yes, the textures will be chosen on a round-robin base which turned out to look much more natural than simple random (and which has other advantages). Hmmm ... I see what you mean. Not quite what I was thinking. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] classifying development status of aircraft extending fgrun
On Friday, 22 October 2004 10:28, Boris Koenig wrote: Despite from that I don't like the idea too much, either - personally I am not that much into Java, and even though its platform-independence is a nice thing, it's really a bit awkward to make Java integrate with existing applications, and then there's the performance issue, too - even without time-critical applications, you'd always need to have a whole VM running - probably not a good option if you want to run something like FG, too. Why would you want to run an Installer and FlightGear at the same time? Surely FlightGear would only be launched after the installer has done it's job and exited? And I don't see performance as an issue - installers don't need to do tons of number crunching. If the install takes an extra 30 seconds so what. I'm not a real Java fan myself but Java is the closest cross platform environment/tookit that we have at the moment. All other toolkits like wxWidgets (used to be wxWindows till MS chewed them out), GTK, Python, Tcl/Tk, etc need to be installed first and the installation process often does not go smoothly. I've seen universal installers around before. What do they use? Java? Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Flyable aircraft
Shucks ... I can't get FG running again (keeps aborting on joystick bindings) but I was getting the yaw oscillations at about 2000 feet in level flight at about 250 knots (clean configuration). When I manage to get FG running again I'll set up a proper problem scenario. Paul On Saturday, 16 October 2004 23:36, David Culp wrote: The 737 is a really nice piece of work but the FDM needs a little tweaking. It gets into a strange yaw oscillation under nearly any circumstance that gets really annoying after a few minutes. :) I really wish I could help out with some of the aircraft but getting info is really difficult and working on FDM's is way past my ability and intelligence. You CAN help. Can you start by describing the flight condition that leads to the yaw oscillation? I'll need to reproduce this same flight condition so I can see what's happening first. Right now I don't see the oscillation. Dave ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] First things first !
I can only run 0.9.5 on Mandrake 9.2. I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one having hassles. Version 0.9.6 and CVS abort during loading without any errors even with log-level on any of the settings. I also see no way of disabling display lists during configure which I have a suspicion is causing the problems in some way do to some threading issues. Paul On Sunday, 17 October 2004 14:39, Frederic Bouvier wrote: Stefan Lucian Palade a écrit : Ok ! Good question ! I've tested (in the morning) all the aircrafts from version 0.9.1 and there are few of them who are not working at all( interface crash ! console ok).I've seen the e-mail from yesterday about the aircrafts that dont fly ! and now I'm building a list of thoes who fly ! But my problem is that the version 0.9.6 is not working on my linux sistem !!! I've downloaded FGFS for Windows v.0.9.6 and is working . but I want v.0.9.6 on linux. OK ! Hope I've made myself understood ! Thanks !!! No because you still do not tell us what is going wrong when you try to build FG on Linux. Listing the error messages could be a begining. -Fred ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] Flyable aircraft
Does someone have a list of flyable aircraft for FlightGear? About the only aircraft that handles in a realistic way is the 172. What I would love to see done is all the incomplete aircraft stripped out of FlightGear. It leaves a sour taste in one's mouth when you try all the aircraft and just get one mess after another. It would be better if there was only 1 good aircraft in FlightGear than add a whole bunch of useless ones that just drag the reputation and quality of FlightGear down. How did most of these aircraft make it into official releases anyway? I know these are some rather hard remarks but I can't find one decent jet to fly in FlightGear and it's frustrating. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Linux Flight Joystick / Controller ?
On Saturday, 16 October 2004 19:24, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone on a Linux System have a suggestion for the best Joystick or Flight Controller to purchase ? and is there linux software to interact with it ? I'm using a Microsoft Sidewinder Force Feedback Pro joystick and I'm quite happy with the way it works under Linux. The twist grip works well even with the 172's p-factor. (I can maintain runway center line and climb out wings level.) I've got the game port version but the newer USB one's should work just fine. The game port version required a couple of minor configuration changes and two modules to be loaded but the USB one will probably be plug and play with a modern Linux distro. USB hot plugging seems to be part of all the new distros nowdays so it's actually getting easier to use USB devices nowdays. I think the CH products yokes and pedals also work under Linux but I haven't verified that myself yet. Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] CVS build of FG aborts on startup
On Tuesday, 5 October 2004 10:02, Erik Hofman wrote: It looks like this option is not properly implemented. You should use --with-threads=no instead. Ummm ... --with-threads=no doesn't work either. :-\ $ ./configure --with-threads=no Configure Summary = Prefix: /usr/local Debug messages: yes Automake version: automake (GNU automake) 1.7.6 Building with multiplayer support threads: yes Looks like threads are now a mandatory requirement. :P Paul ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] CVS build of FG aborts on startup
Hi guys I downloaded the latest CVS version of FG and it aborts on startup during joystick initialization. Version 0.9.4 used to work on my system and I haven't changed any hardware or OS since then. Here is the output with --log-level=debug = Trying Microsoft SideWinder Force Feedback Pro Found bindings Initializing joystick 0 Reading all bindings ... snipped Initializing button 4 Reading all bindings Reading binding property-assign Reading all bindings Reading binding property-assign Aborted = That's all it shows! Just Aborted :-\ It does it right after I hear a beeping noise that sounds like an inner marker audio signal but still during the splash screen. My system specs : Mandrake 9.2 Ti4200 128MB with nVidia 4496 drivers Flightgear source = CVS (3 Oct) Flightgear data = CVS (3 Oct) Simgear = CVS (3 Oct) OpenAL = CVS (3 Oct) plib = 1.8.3 Everything compiled and installed without any hassles. Any ideas? Paul Surgeon ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] CVS build of FG aborts on startup
On Sunday, 3 October 2004 11:52, Erik Hofman wrote: Does the same happen with different aircraft? Is there anything special in your .fgfsrc file or command line option? Does setting --log-level=info shows anything else? I tried to load the 172, 737, 747, asw20 and I get the same error. I can't find the hidden file called fgfsrc - is it a problem if it's missing? --log-level=info shows no extra info I tried to run it with gdb and it gave me this : Program received signal SIG32, Real-time event 32. 0x4002b714 in pthread_getconcurrency () from /lib/i686/libpthread.so.0 I'm not a programmer so I don't know if it's an issue with gdb trying to debug threads or whether there is an issue with my pthreads library. Thanks Paul Surgeon ___ Flightgear-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
