RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: CVS simgear : error during compilation
Georg Vollnhals Hi Gerard, I also was a little astonished and disappointed when I followed the discussion about a new FG release very soon. A lot of users simply can't start version 0.9.9 as I learned by many of them emailing and complaining about my FGTools not to be compatible with the new version (- all Windows users) When we analysed their problem it was 95% that FlightGear did not run either with FGTools nor fgrun or by using the command-line option of windows. It just crashed... :-(( People who wrote me had generally sufficient hardware, most of them better than I have, and after my advice they tried all (updating video-drivers, trying other OpenGL software..) one could do. I did not notice any workaround for this severe problem :-( I also reported some strange behaviour (error messages) when installing/running FlightGear 0.9.9 on my daughters PC for test purposes but better would have spend my time with other things as nearly noone actually has interest in debugging 0.9.9. This is far behind my personal skills, I just can report .. All plans for version 1.0.0 should be stopped until we have a solution for this general severe problem after my opinion. Then we could think about an official new version release. And to be honest, when I am thinking of a 1.0.0 version release from user side, it should have some really missing features as Melchior, cmetzler, Paul and others have already suggested. But it seems that the train can't be stopped before the broken bridge .. Regards Georg Gerard ROBIN schrieb: Le dimanche 18 décembre 2005 à 03:14 +0100, Melchior FRANZ a écrit : Thanks Melchior for your answer. That is the opportunity to say: I wonder about these addons to FG, are these new functionalies useful ? more than a good review and correction of errors and disfunctions within FG. How many users are still using 0.98 because they cannot use 0.99 Wasn't it forecast to deliver a GOOD 0.99 FLIGHTGEAR ?, our existing one is not accurate. May be the development team don't remember the big discussions we had (USER) after getting the 0.99 FG buggy. Some of them where shocking to see how many people did not try one of the prereleases. I am shocking to see they don't listen to the USERS Cheers 0.9.9 windows installed here, and worked right out of the box, as did fgrun. Fgrun needed a little updating to make it work a bit better with MP; Fred did that, and it's fine now. I don't see any bug reports here or on the devel list. It also compiled and ran right out of the box under Cygwin. If it hadn't everyone would have certainly heard about it from me. What's your beef? Perhaps we could help if you told us the problem. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Official FG Snapshot
Gerard ROBIN Le lundi 12 décembre 2005 à 10:58 -0600, Dave Culp a écrit : On Monday 12 December 2005 08:37 am, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Hello Dave http://flightgear.org/Gallery-v0.9.9/Link/A6_F8refuel.html If i had been informed about your wish, i could have tried to do a better one. :=) Don't know how you can top that one. I've been experimenting with your method to make some screenshots of the KC-135 (Innis' version with some added things by me) and Erik's F-16: http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-001.jpg http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/refuel-f16-002.jpg I wish my modeling skills were better, especially when it comes to texturing. I'm getting better all the time, though :) Dave Again, Just an idea, and a question. Does multi players could offer that kind of scenario ? No it doesn't, but it could in the future. However, I'm not sure if network latency problems will allow formation flying of sufficient accuracy to get the boom to mate up. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: Some FG videos...
Pigeon. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-users- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pigeon Sent: 11 December 2005 19:58 To: FlightGear user discussions Subject: [Flightgear-users] Re: Some FG videos... the Nimitz... takeoff video is great to demonstrate what FG is capable now! This one (and other of this quality) should be on FlightGears site - only argument against this could be the size of videos. We can always resize videos... and btw while we're on the topic of this, do these videos play properly under windows? Anyone tried? Just wondering... Works fine on Windows XP here. Next time use take-off flap on the Seahawk, not landing :-) Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Carrier Elevators
Gerard Le mercredi 07 décembre 2005 à 19:27 -0500, Ampere K. Hardraade a écrit : On December 7, 2005 06:17 pm, AJ MacLeod wrote: On Wednesday 07 December 2005 22:56, Gerard ROBIN wrote: Carrier elevators are working perfectly (CVS update). We only need to define a Key Binding for toggle property property/ai/models/controls/elevators/property which key could be used ? I think a menu might be an appropriate way to control that sort of thing. I actually have a menu entry ready for it, but haven't actually got round to using it yet :-) No reason not to have both, of course. Cheers, AJ I think the control should be a hot spot beside the elevator. Ampere OK, which elevator would be involved ? on Nimitz we have 4 on others may be less may be more. I did not think when asking about key that could be a big problem. We have a property, we have a function, which open possibilities on every carriers and others ship to handle and carry AC. I do not ask more. Within my naval aircrafts development i will include a specific key which bind with that property (elevators) if one do not like it he could fly with an other AC :=) Glad to hear that the elevator property works for you, Gerard. I'm with Josh on this one. Because we are running short of keys, and this is not a flight related function, I'm not planning to assign a key to the elevator function. I'm planning this to be a menu feature along with existing turn into wind menu item. This policy at least has the merit of consistency. There are more potential menu items - set base course and speed etc. If you want to assign a key locally, or on a per ac basis, go right ahead. Atm there is only 1 raise/lower function, so all the lifts move together, or not at all. Here, for the Nimitz, I have 2 lifts operated by the property, and 2 are static. Specifying lifts by number would be a possible enhancement. Right now I'm tracking down a bug in the launchbar code so it's not going to be soon, if at all. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: Multiplayer Communications
Nope Vivian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MPCEE French Bureau Sent: 08 December 2005 17:52 To: user discussions FlightGear Subject: [Flightgear-users] Re: Multiplayer Communications Hello: Can you see me now communicating as sauviat? Martin ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Spitfire Sim
Paul Duncan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-users- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sent: 08 December 2005 22:05 To: FlightGear user discussions Subject: [Flightgear-users] Spitfire Sim Was just doing a little web surfing and found this. Unfortunately its not gonna be for Flightgear, but its interesting nonetheless. http://www.aeroplaneheaven.com/HFL_SPITC.htm BTW: I've not given up on the hardware and FPS benchmarking :-) They're just catching up on our model then :-). (Although I still have a few cockpit details to add.) Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] multiplayer screenshot
Fred Vivian Meazza a écrit : I will fix that tonight. Well, of course, it always worked for me, because I just went to advanced/networks, and entered all the data correctly, but we do need this to be user-proof. Whoops, nearly wrote idiot-proof there. This one should be better : ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Win32/fgrun-win32-20051205.zip Sorry for the delayed reply: I was out yesterday (watching rugby at Twickenham). That seems to work as it should, or at least as I think it should :-). I'm not usually a Windows user, and I haven't done more than a superficial test. Perhaps some more regular Windows users on this list could really try to break it??? Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] multiplayer screenshot
Fred Quoting Vivian Meazza : Fred Vivian Meazza a écrit : What's wrong/missing in fgrun ? It seems to default to in,10,localhost,5000. Not the end of the world, but the solution (in Advanced/Networks) is not self-evident. Perhaps having 2 points of entry to MP is a little confusing? I changed the default host by retrieving the real host name. Could you tell me if it works for you ? ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Win32/fgrun-win32- 20051204.zip Hmmm, not consistently. I expected to be able to put the hostname= to, say, pigeond.net, the in port to 5000 and out to 5002. In which case the in address is still 'localhost'(which you can't see). This requires a user to guess that he needs to go to advanced/networks to sort it out. If on the other hand, all is left blank, then if you open advanced/networks then the local computer name is shown. If this page is now filled in correctly, all is well. I think a bit more work is required to make this user-proof. Did you had a look on the command line. Here, there is no 'localhost' anymore and I was able to join the server without having to go to the Advanced section. Uncheck then recheck the multiplayer option to make sure. It's not working correctly here. If I check and uncheck 'Multiplayer' with all the options blank, my computer name is correctly displayed in the command line. If I type _anything_ into _any_ of the boxes this reverts to 'local host', and I can only correct it by going to advanced/networks. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong? Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] multiplayer screenshot
Fred Quoting Vivian Meazza : It's not working correctly here. If I check and uncheck 'Multiplayer' with all the options blank, my computer name is correctly displayed in the command line. If I type _anything_ into _any_ of the boxes this reverts to 'local host', and I can only correct it by going to advanced/networks. Now I see, and I understand what you meant by 'not consistently'. I missed a few localhost. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong? You are not checking the multiplayer box after changing parameters ;-) I will fix that tonight. Well, of course, it always worked for me, because I just went to advanced/networks, and entered all the data correctly, but we do need this to be user-proof. Whoops, nearly wrote idiot-proof there. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] multiplayer screenshot
Martin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-users- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MPCEE French Bureau Sent: 04 December 2005 09:57 To: user discussions FlightGear Subject: [Flightgear-users] multiplayer screenshot Hello: Can multiplayer be undertaken on Windows, as there was an earlier thread discussing cvs etc? Multiplayer works with -0.9.9 for windows. See here: http://www.o-schroeder.de/fg_server/ However, FGRun is a little out-of-date. Use Advanced/Networks to set the parameters, not multiplayer on the initial page. If you are using a command line interface follow the instructions. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] multiplayer screenshot
Martin Hello Vivian: A superb afternoon with multiplayer! Should the frame rate drop as the numbers of players join in? I wish I could say 'no', but the fact is that it does. You will see a marked drop in frame rate as someone joins, then it will go up again after they are initialised, but not to the original rate. I'd like to think that could be handles better, and perhaps it will be when/if we update MP. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] multiplayer screenshot
Fred -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-users- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frederic Bouvier Sent: 04 December 2005 11:36 To: FlightGear user discussions Subject: RE: [Flightgear-users] multiplayer screenshot Selon Vivian Meazza : However, FGRun is a little out-of-date. Use Advanced/Networks to set the parameters, not multiplayer on the initial page. If you are using a command line interface follow the instructions. What's wrong/missing in fgrun ? It seems to default to in,10,localhost,5000. Not the end of the world, but the solution (in Advanced/Networks) is not self-evident. Perhaps having 2 points of entry to MP is a little confusing? Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] multiplayer screenshot
Fred Vivian Meazza a écrit : What's wrong/missing in fgrun ? It seems to default to in,10,localhost,5000. Not the end of the world, but the solution (in Advanced/Networks) is not self-evident. Perhaps having 2 points of entry to MP is a little confusing? I changed the default host by retrieving the real host name. Could you tell me if it works for you ? ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Win32/fgrun-win32-20051204.zip Hmmm, not consistently. I expected to be able to put the hostname= to, say, pigeond.net, the in port to 5000 and out to 5002. In which case the in address is still 'localhost'(which you can't see). This requires a user to guess that he needs to go to advanced/networks to sort it out. If on the other hand, all is left blank, then if you open advanced/networks then the local computer name is shown. If this page is now filled in correctly, all is well. I think a bit more work is required to make this user-proof. HTH Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] multiplayer screenshot
Ampere On December 4, 2005 01:38 pm, Vivian Meazza wrote: I wish I could say 'no', but the fact is that it does. You will see a marked drop in frame rate as someone joins, then it will go up again after they are initialised, but not to the original rate. I'd like to think that could be handles better, and perhaps it will be when/if we update MP. Vivian What I find weird is that planes that show up fine in single user mode cause decrease of framerates when viewed in multiple users mode. Take the MD-11 for example. Eventhough it is a resource hogger, people can still get decent framerates with it when they are using it alone. However, as soon as someone online is using it, everybody's framerate drops to zero. I think the reason is that your own model is loaded before runtime. Trying to do load any model during runtime is a heavy hit on frame rate; to try to load the MD11 is just too much for any but the most powerful systems. Unless we get this sorted somehow, MP is barely fit for purpose, IMO. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Nimitz at Night
Martin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-users- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MPCEE French Bureau Sent: 29 November 2005 18:10 To: user discussions FlightGear Subject: [Flightgear-users] Nimitz at Night Hello and an Open Question to All: Flying at night offers a little reality when you cannot see beneath you or the horizon. Flying by instruments alone etc. What is nice about this, at night, are the approach and runway lights and the sense of achievement having had a smooth landing. Can some one add navigation lights to the Nimitz and the deck lights as well? This would make a big difference in when off the mirror lights. There's no developer named Some One, but I might get around to it after I've finished USS Eisenhower and HMS Victorious. My main worry is that it might be quite a hit on frame rates, but I haven't tried yet. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Carrier Deck (v098a)
dene maxwell Hi guys, I placed Nimitz (v098a) in my local harbour (Wellington, New Zealand) at -41.246433 LAT, 174.886783 LONG, heading 198. The took off from NZWN on runway 34. Very enjoyable flight except the deck of the Nimitz under FGv098a doesn't seem solid. Was only using the Cessna 172P does this make a difference? encourage you to try this scenario... see a bit of New Zealand too...LOL. Cheers Dene From: Georg Vollnhals [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: FlightGear user discussions flightgear-users@flightgear.org To: FlightGear user discussions flightgear-users@flightgear.org Subject: Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 15:19:25 +0100 MPCEE French Bureau schrieb: Hello Georg: Thank you for this offer and, yes, I would like to be able to use it. As for no response, It was more like not understanding. Martin, I have to excuse for my very bad English, *you* were not meant with this as we always worked good together and solved your problems :-) It was more a general problem with offers to the user public, forget about .. Can I place the Nimitz in European waters? Yes, I placed it near Bremerhaven (EDWB) though it might be a little narrow for such a big ship: http://home.arcor.de/vollnhals-bremen/Martin/FGSnSh120001.jpg (and I ruined the engines of the BO105 when taking this snapshot as I overtorqued them to get quick into the right position :-/ ) You may place the carrier anywhere you like it: This is a cut out of niemitz_demo.xml with the *Lat/Lon* of Bremerhaven and the right *heading*: ... solidElevator-3-Deck/solid solidElevator-4-Deck/solid latitude53.57/latitude longitude8.48/longitude speed10/speed heading300/heading rudder0/rudder turn-radius-ft4000/turn-radius-ft flols-pos ... Under Windows you should edit the XML file with right-mouse-click- open with - word pad mfc if you don't have a xml-editor. Search for latitude ... and edit the numbers. It is easy. But as already mentioned you have to prepare the preferences.xml file, see the other mails you have got from helpful souls. More to come this late evening. Regards Georg The solid carrier deck was not and is still not implemented for JBSim Models. It should work for YASim models. Why on earth are you still using that old version - upgrades are totally free, and as far as I know work (albeit with some bugs and limitations) on all systems. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Martin Hello you two! Can you let me in on this? On Windows, can I add another carrier and set up the TACAN as you describe? Regards Martin -Original Message- From: Gerard ROBIN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 12:40 AM To: FlightGear user discussions Subject: RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers Le dimanche 27 novembre 2005 à 20:27 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard Good, I'm pretty sure now that it works. I'm now working on a control for the elevators. Vivian Hello Vivian, Working = with a third boat escort La_Fayette TACAN 25X , elsewhere on Mediterranean sea ( i will need to make a 3d Model of that one) Working= Flight from one carrier to an other carrier and return with TACAN Everything quite right. This is development work, which should really be taking place over on the developers list. Right now you can't implement 2 carriers under Windows. It might be possible in a couple of days using FG-cvs. Otherwise, it's a ver-1.0.0 feature. (Actually, it was there all along, but there was a bug which precluded it working - now fixed.) Something to look forward to :-) Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Vivian Meazza wrote Gerard Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 15:58 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard I think I've found the bug, and an update to cvs has been forwarded. I haven't tested it as well as I would like, because we seem to have a bug in cvs under Cygwin, which I'm now investigating. Vivian Hello Vivian May be i am wrong , i have not found any new update in cvs. the last one is tacan.cxx 25 Nov 2005 19:07:24 - 1.6 Quite right: the patch was submitted at 15:50 Saturday and has not yet reappeared. If it doesn't do so shortly, I'll post it where you can download it. I don't have cvs access, so I can't do better, Sorry Vivian Gerard, the patch is in cvs. I would like hear how you get on. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard Le dimanche 27 novembre 2005 à 17:54 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Vivian Meazza wrote Gerard Le samedi 26 novembre 2005 à 15:58 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard Gerard, the patch is in cvs. I would like hear how you get on. Vivian Sooner than i thought, A first answer each Ship find and use his own TACAN code, not any mixing. Nimitz = 29Y (KSFO) CdG = 26X (LFMN) Seems all right. I will later on test it with an other Ship in different places, and mainly try to get by AC from one ship to the other ( no i will not go from KSFO to LFMN, i will ask the Pacha of CdG to go to KSFO) Cheers Good, I'm pretty sure now that it works. I'm now working on a control for the elevators. Vivian ___ 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
Mathias Fröhlich On Freitag 25 November 2005 22:14, MPCEE French Bureau wrote: Yep! It was the launch bar not attached. It is difficult to note when it is attached. As I am landing with the 'wires, I taxi to a catapult, but it is very much trial and error to know you are in a catchment area. There is a little trick with mounting the launchbar. It is *required* to have very few relative movement of the gear relative to the surface to establish that connection. That is if you want to press L make sure that you are exactly above the catapult, apply the brakes to make sure you dont move anymore and then press L. You will notice that the aircraft is pulled slightly into its nosegears spring. That compressed gearspring helps to keep the aircraft on the deck as long as the gear is attached to the cat. That produces a negative angle of attack. When the launchbar is released, that compressed spring pushes the nose into the wind and helps getting a sufficient angle of attach suficiently fast. That is how the launchbar systems on /modern/ aircraft (F14,F18,A4...) typicaly work. The real life Seahawk has a slightly different mounting scheme. Looking forward to more models with the modelled modern scheme ... :) Well, my F-18 and the Crusader (I hope so, it is a great thing!) will hopefully arrive at some time in flightgear ... Yes, I had to hack the launchbar a bit to make it work with the Seahawk and Seafire to model the catapult strop arrangements. (Phase2 - model the strop - perhaps :-0). It works particularly well with the Seafire. In addition to the launchbar tensioning, which can be seen as you mentioned, the ac doesn't move when you release the brakes, which is a good indication! But I did rather wonder if we should show a brief legend in the manner of ATC messages to say that the launchbar was engaged. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard ROBIN Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 16:47 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard, Back on topic, I've just submitted some code for upload to cvs which allows TACAN to be fitted to 0, 1, or more carriers. So escorts carrying helos and TACAN will have to be designated carriers. (Might consider changing that if it causes major difficulties.) I've tested it here, and, of course it works. Any feedback would be much appreciated. Vivian Hello Vivian I am getting difficulties: First i try my configuration = CdG on Mediterranean sea and Nimitz on Pacific 1/ start FG on CdG with TACAN 26X TACAN working and with TACAN 29Y TACAN working !? 2/ i start on Nimitz with TACAN 29Y TACAN not working and with TACAN 26X not working Second modify my configuration = CdG on Mediterranean sea and Nimitz beside 1/ start FG on CdG with TACAN 26X or 29Y TACAN working 2/ start FG on Nimitz with TACAN 29Y or 26X TACAN working I'm investigating. Thanks for the feedback. Meanwhile could you run log-level=debug, and see if you can see what is going on? Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-users- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Vivian Meazza Sent: 26 November 2005 10:26 To: 'FlightGear user discussions' Subject: RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers Gerard ROBIN Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 16:47 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard, Back on topic, I've just submitted some code for upload to cvs which allows TACAN to be fitted to 0, 1, or more carriers. So escorts carrying helos and TACAN will have to be designated carriers. (Might consider changing that if it causes major difficulties.) I've tested it here, and, of course it works. Any feedback would be much appreciated. Vivian Hello Vivian I am getting difficulties: First i try my configuration = CdG on Mediterranean sea and Nimitz on Pacific 1/ start FG on CdG with TACAN 26X TACAN working and with TACAN 29Y TACAN working !? 2/ i start on Nimitz with TACAN 29Y TACAN not working and with TACAN 26X not working Second modify my configuration = CdG on Mediterranean sea and Nimitz beside 1/ start FG on CdG with TACAN 26X or 29Y TACAN working 2/ start FG on Nimitz with TACAN 29Y or 26X TACAN working I'm investigating. Thanks for the feedback. Meanwhile could you run log-level=debug, and see if you can see what is going on? I think I've found the bug, and an update to cvs has been forwarded. I haven't tested it as well as I would like, because we seem to have a bug in cvs under Cygwin, which I'm now investigating. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard, Back on topic, I've just submitted some code for upload to cvs which allows TACAN to be fitted to 0, 1, or more carriers. So escorts carrying helos and TACAN will have to be designated carriers. (Might consider changing that if it causes major difficulties.) I've tested it here, and, of course it works. Any feedback would be much appreciated. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard Le vendredi 25 novembre 2005 à 16:47 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard, Back on topic, I've just submitted some code for upload to cvs which allows TACAN to be fitted to 0, 1, or more carriers. So escorts carrying helos and TACAN will have to be designated carriers. (Might consider changing that if it causes major difficulties.) I've tested it here, and, of course it works. Any feedback would be much appreciated. Vivian All right, Vivian, thanks, No problem about Escort which is designated carriers i did it before (we can define a parkpos), i have in mind old First Class Cruiser she had Catapult and seaplane (Walrus). May be, the main overload is to have to include every ships in only one scenarionimitz_demo.xml/scenario A Nimitz near KSFO, and CdG near LFMN, and why not some other (HMS) in the Channel Different specifics scenarios reduce the number loaded. When we decide to start from KSFO we choose to load Nimitz only. When we decide to start from South of France we choose to load CdG only If we decide to start from England .and so on. I think that's the way to go. I tested it with 2 near KSFO - no problem here. We should perhaps think of something in the Far East, if anyone feels so inclined. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard Le mercredi 23 novembre 2005 à 23:17 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Well, only for testing i have changed in nimitz_demo.xml the name Nimitz by nameRonald Reagan/name when i run fgfs --carrier=Ronald Reagan --aircraft=seahawk tacan does not work /instrumentation/tacan/in-range[0]= false I'm going to be really unhelpful, and say: works for me. The answer really isn't that simple, but it's late here. I'll get back to you with a proper answer tomorrow morning. Vivian Hello Vivian Before searching and giving an answer, (nothing urgent), You could say if i am wrong = into AIScenario.cxx line103 we find en-name= entry_node-getStringValue(name, Nimitz); Nimitz seem given as default. Isn't it a mistake? Here's the fuller reply I promised earlier. The code makes 2 assumptions: a. there is only one carrier in the environment (which I will change to allow more in the future). b. In the carrier_nav.dat file each carrier is assigned a unique frequency which corresponds to a TACAN channel. This will not change The code takes the channel # and searches for the corresponding frequency, then uses this frequency to search carrier_nav.dat. Using the first match it comes to (assumption b. above) it searches the property tree to find the name of the carrier (assumption a. above). If the name of the carrier found is a substring of the entry in carrier_nav.dat, then it has found a valid entry, and will measure range and brg. Some points to note: If the entry in carrier_nav.dat is: 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 CDG FNS Charles de Gaule TACAN then nameCharles de Gaule/name namede Gaulle/name or even namede/name all produce a valid entry. The entry is NOT enclosed in quotes. No en-name= entry_node-getStringValue(name, Nimitz); is not a mistake. If name/name is not specified, then it defaults to Nimitz. If name/name is specified then it uses that instead. As I said, it works here. If you set log-level=debug you might be able to see all this happening, as there are several debug points set within this code. Make sure you have a well-formed carrier_nav.dat, that it is gzipped, and name/name is correct. HTH. Let me know how you get on Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard Subject: RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 15:06 +0100, Gerard ROBIN a écrit : Vivian, OK working with CdeGaulle, only if: 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 CDG RFN CdeGaulle TACAN 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 NMZ USS Nimitz TACAN CdeGaulle on the first line, in that case Nimitz doesn't work TACAN is not activated If y do 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 NMZ USS Nimitz TACAN 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 CDG RFN CdeGaulle TACAN Nimitz working with TACAN CdeGaulle do not The AI name is not a problem typecarrier/type nameCdeGaulle/name pennant-numberR91/pennant-number NB:previously i did put the new one behind Nimitz, if we want TACAN working we can have only one carrier. Thanks Cheers Vivian, Well, going on further, i get something i cannot explain What i have said before, is right, ONLY, if we keep for it the AI filename nimitz_demo.xml I have tried to rename it cdg_demo.xml and instead of preferences (into AI parameters) scenarionimitz_demo/scenario i have modified to scenariocdg_demo/scenario Result TACAN again does not work. I don't understand OK Gerard, from your reports everything is working as it should. As I explained, it is assumed that each carrier has a unique TACAN frequency. Thus the code uses the first match it comes to. We've added a new carrier_nav.dat file to cvs: add 'FNS Charles de Gaulle' to the database with TACAN channel 026X You ought to be able to switch between the 2 using the channel selector in the drop down menu. Check it out and let me know if it doesn't work for you. You can only use nimitz-demo.xml because thats hard coded - the software can't guess which random file name contains carrier info. It used to be called carrier-demo, and perhaps that's a better name for it. If you want 2 carriers (I've tried it and it works, sort of) add another entry/entry with all the data. Note: you will need to use wirewire-1a/wire etc, otherwise the code gets confused and marks no wires :-). I've asked Mathias to add it to his TODO list. I'd like any feedback you have on this one too. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard ROBIN Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 16:46 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : OK Gerard, from your reports everything is working as it should. As I explained, it is assumed that each carrier has a unique TACAN frequency. Thus the code uses the first match it comes to. We've added a new carrier_nav.dat file to cvs: add 'FNS Charles de Gaulle' to the database with TACAN channel 026X You ought to be able to switch between the 2 using the channel selector in the drop down menu. Check it out and let me know if it doesn't work for you. You can only use nimitz-demo.xml because thats hard coded - the software can't guess which random file name contains carrier info. It used to be called carrier-demo, and perhaps that's a better name for it. If you want 2 carriers (I've tried it and it works, sort of) add another entry/entry with all the data. Note: you will need to use wirewire-1a/wire etc, otherwise the code gets confused and marks no wires :-). I've asked Mathias to add it to his TODO list. I'd like any feedback you have on this one too. Vivian OK, I 'll start to build it, in fact i will have 3 ships both carriers and a destroyer which carry an helicopter (bo105), so i will try to implement 3 TACAN. Sounds good, I'll get on with allowing more than one ship in the TACAN code. I was about to start on HMS Victorious - looks like next year now. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Jon Stockill Vivian Meazza wrote: Sounds good, I'll get on with allowing more than one ship in the TACAN code. I was about to start on HMS Victorious - looks like next year now. Any chance the tacan could could be more generic than that - it's not used only on ships. The TACAN instrument works with all TACAN and VORTAC beacons - just use your channel selector. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard Le jeudi 24 novembre 2005 à 18:46 +0100, MPCEE French Bureau a écrit : Hello Gerard: You know, the favourite for all the historians is the Fairy Swordfish, or commonly known as the Stringbag, carrying a Torpedo. As an afterthought, maybe the torpedo could be interactive, and then I could attack the Charles De Gaulle! I did not know, it is funny :=) We could worry if it was reality, because the royal french navy has had ^ many difficulties with that only one carrier, during making and after making. :=( Robespierre would be disappointed :-) Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Windows FGv9.9 and FGTools - Help Me to HelpYou
Martin Hello Vivian: When FG is running and from the Tool Bar I chose File Browse Internal Properties Instrumentation. There are two; the 2nd is the nearest, but relates to heading indicator and path. This refers to the Seahawk and is for xml. Nothing here refers to TACAN! Look in fileinstrumentationtacan Not Fileinstrumentation[1] You should see a wide range of parameters relating to TACAN, including the station name. This should be 'USS Nimitz TACAN' if the Nimitz is not present or not in range this may read 'China Lake TACAN' If I am looking in something wrong, then point me in the right direction. In fact the only mention, as far as I can see is in Equipment Radio Settings. Here you see the default 029Y setting. That is the correct channel for Nimitz/China Lake For the Seahawk, as I mentioned, none of the instruments direct you to the Nimitz, but back to KSFO as the default. Having the cockpit laid out like a Cessna, does not help, as one's vision is very restricted for visual flight!!! Er, you are using the 3d cockpit built from the Pilot's Notes with adjustable seat height? Nothing to do with the Cessna at all. If you are, then the TACAN range and bearing are displayed on the dials on the left panel, just by the hook raise lower switch. You can adjust the FoV as well (as in all ac) the view should be as good as, if not better than the real thing, well except for peripheral vision, of course. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard Le mercredi 23 novembre 2005 à 08:32 +0100, Melchior FRANZ a écrit : * Larry -- Wednesday 23 November 2005 08:12: Where do I find the carriers? I tried doing fgfs --carrier=nimitz but it told me it couldn't find nimitz. :) http://www.seedwiki.com/wiki/flight_gear/aircraft_carrier_howto.cfm?wpid=2 09315 http://members.aon.at/mfranz/nimitz.jpg [22 kB] m. ___ To get a full operational aircraft carrier you need the FG CVS tree source and data (within some aircrafts , a4, hunter, seafire, may be i forget some others) Erm ... I hope not - it should be included in -0.9.9. I'd like to know if it's not. The short keys are O/o hook down/up C catapult. You need L first to engage the Launch Bar. This is not included in the Hunter (as in real life) as the Hunter wasn't carrier capable. It is in the A4, Seahawk and Seafire. With it you can start from the Nimitz with the following comand fgfs --aircraft=hunter --carrier=CVN-68 --parkpos=cat-1 Previously you must uncomment scenario nimitz_demo AI in preference.xml file Nimitz is situated not far from San Fransisco on Pacific. . ai enabled type=booltrue/enabled scenarionimitz_demo/scenario !-- scenarioaircraft_demo/scenario -- /ai -- Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Martin Like with TACAN, it does NOT work for me and certainly does NOT give me the direction towards the Nimitz. As an ex naval aircrew having many years experience of finding carriers day and night, I think I know when something is working or not. I've checked TACAN under Windows and Cygwin. Melchior has checked it under Linux. It will work providing: a. you have -0.9.9 (source and data) b. you are using a TACAN fitted model - Seahawk or Hunter - and these are the latest versions. The latest version of the Hunter was included in -0.9.9. The Seahawk has to be downloaded. c. The TACAN channel is correctly selected - the default value is correct for Nimitz. d. IF Nimitz is present then the TACAN will give range and bearing readouts on the runway at KSFO. If it is not, it will detect China Lake, but may not give indications until high enough for reliable indications. (Note: this is a range calculation only - Line of Sight is not calculated) As I have already said, you can check all this in the property browser. Unless you can describe your problem better, I can offer you no more help, I'm afraid. Atm you are the only person reporting this problem. Can I place the Nimitz in European waters? Yes, anywhere you like, including on land. Vivian PS RN pilots are not to be trusted to find carriers, that's why we gave 'em Observers. The only thing they can reliably find is the bar :-) ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Martin With other communications to me, all can now be revealed! The cockpit instrumentation was those of 3D, hence I was not seeing the cockpit I can remember. However, I have banished the 21st century instrumentation and behold I have all dials working and flying blind to the Nimitz. Good, except the correct cockpit (the one with the realistic dials) is 3d, the Cessna thing is 2d. Do you know how you ended up with the wrong one? One point to note: in properties, yesterday, after instrumentation, there was a limited number of extensions and TACAN was not there. Today, thanks to your Jpeg, all is now there. If it was not for the fact that many others have said that it was there and the dials were working, I would not have tried to find the problem alone. I know that when I load FG, not everything loads and that's fact. Some days flying is good and others are head in a bucket day. Do you know what's causing this - a local problem or ...? Someone mentioned Hunters and not RN aircraft. Poppycock, Hunters were given hooks and there were still some around at RNAS Brawdy (SW Wales), when I was there with Gannets. Yup the Hunter FGA11 was a naval aircraft - that's why the model has Royal Navy written on the side :-) They were converted RAF F4s and were not carrier-capable. They were given hooks, used AFAIK for shore based training. They had no catapult strop attachment points. Unless you can show me a photo or drawing that says otherwise ... Something for all developers/builders of aircraft. All naval aircraft were designed to fly from the deck without catapults. Why? Should there be a breakdown. There were both steam and hydraulic ones operating. Observers were mentioned. They were there for Airborne Early Warning (AEW) gannets and Vixens and helicopters. Scimitars, followed by Buccaneers and then Phantoms were for specific rolls. Well, in my navy the Buccaneer and Phantom had Observers, but perhaps that guy in the back seat was a dummy ... hush my mouth ... that's no way to speak of Observers. Free take-off in a Bucc or Sea Vixen ... not from Hermes. Gannet possibly, although I never saw it done. It's not a problem for aircraft designers - you feed in the correct engine parameters etc. and it's either possible or not. Dangerous games on flight decks! On Ark Royal during the 12 months I was on her in the Far East - 1965/66, we lost 16 aircraft and 7 aircrew. Two of those in one day Careless ... On HMS Hermes in `68 - '69 we lost 3 aircraft and no aircrew. Today, on landing on Nimitz at full throttle, catch No2 Wire, I carried on and was left hanging over the deck!!! When instant replaying to give you a snap shot, I found that the aircraft replays, but Nimitz carries on regardless and is to be seen a couple of miles further on her course. You should be able to do a full throttle landing, but the wires may need re-calibrating. Now we have a proper carrier-qualified pilot aboard some more feedback would be much appreciated. I'm afraid we haven't done the replay for the carrier yet. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard ROBIN An other question with TACAN Into my specific scenery I want to add an other carrier. Where is the link between tacan value (NMZ) and carrier (Nimitz) ? I find Navaids/carrier_navaid.dat ==12 999999 100 11160 0.000 NMZ USS Nimitz TACAN Nothing else about NMZ and the link with Nimitz into AI or elsewhere. Add a similar line in carrier_navaid.dat with the appropriate frequency for the channel you want. That should be enough. Don't forget that it's a zipped file. The code checks that the name 'Nimitz' exists in both the tacan file and in AI models. I haven't implemented it for 2 carriers at the same time yet, but you should be OK for a _different_ carrier. Mathias hasn't implemented a proper identification of the various wires, cats etc, so make sure that the names in both are different wire3a or something. Let me know how you get on, and I'll add 2 simultaneous carriers to my todo list. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Seahawk
Larry Hello again. :) I downloaded the Seahawk from the aircraft download page and installed it in /usr/shared/FLightGear/Aircraft/UIUC/seahawk When I run this command: fgfs --carrier=Nimitz --aircraft=seahawk I get the following error: Error reading default aircraft: Failed to open file at /usr/share/FlightGear/Aircraft/UIUC/seahawk/../ ../Input/Keyboard/carrier-bindings.xml What am I missing? Just ../Aircraft/seahawk Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: carriers
Gerard Le mercredi 23 novembre 2005 à 21:13 +0100, Gerard ROBIN a écrit : Le mercredi 23 novembre 2005 à 19:54 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard ROBIN The code checks that the name 'Nimitz' exists in both the tacan file and in AI models. I haven't implemented it for 2 carriers at the same time yet, but you should be OK for a _different_ carrier. Mathias hasn't implemented a proper identification of the various wires, cats etc, so make sure that the names in both are different wire3a or something. Let me know how you get on, and I'll add 2 simultaneous carriers to my todo list. Vivian I have tried the following in Navaids/carrier_navaid.dat 12 999999 100 11160 0.000 CDG RFN CdeGaule TACAN and in Data/AI/cdg_demo.xml entry typecarrier/type nameCdeGaule/name pennant-numberRFN-01/pennant-number IT should do, i get nothing, anything else ? About wire and cat it is working, only tacan difficulties. Thanks Well, only for testing i have changed in nimitz_demo.xml the name Nimitz by nameRonald Reagan/name when i run fgfs --carrier=Ronald Reagan --aircraft=seahawk tacan does not work /instrumentation/tacan/in-range[0]= false I'm going to be really unhelpful, and say: works for me. The answer really isn't that simple, but it's late here. I'll get back to you with a proper answer tomorrow morning. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Windows FGv9.9 and FGTools - Help Me to HelpYou
Fred
Quoting Vivian Meazza:
Fred
I can reproduce the 737 problem here at will. I have some spare time
Wednesday, morning or afternoon for a debug session if that would help
I don't have any spare time before Sunday. If it is ok, I must prepare a
debug
kit before.
At your service, sir. Monday would be good, rather than Sunday.
I'm beginning to find more bugs. The Seafire cannot be started under
Win-0.9.9. The {} keys don't seem to work.
Vivian
___
Flightgear-users mailing list
Flightgear-users@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Windows FGv9.9 and FGTools - Help Me to HelpYou
Curt
Vivian Meazza wrote:
At your service, sir. Monday would be good, rather than Sunday.
I'm beginning to find more bugs. The Seafire cannot be started under
Win-0.9.9. The {} keys don't seem to work.
I had trouble with that one too I think, but it turned out to be
something system related ... i.e. engine needs fuel to run, full
mixture, that sort of thing. Something critical defaulted to off.
Er ... I'm the author of that model: I don't think it's a system problem. I
can't get the magnetos to switch on, either by using {} or the clickable
panel. It works under Cygwin.
Vivian
___
Flightgear-users mailing list
Flightgear-users@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Windows FGv9.9 and FGTools - Help Me to HelpYou
Martin Thank you; Nimitz is placed on my FGv9.9. Some observations, after having read the Read Me file etc: What is the keyboard control for raising and lowering the hook? When toggling the cockpit instruments, to use the TACAN, the ADF and DME are not functioning when seeking out the Nimitz. From the aerial shot, that was posted, it was possible to find her. The ADF is still functioning for the direction of KSFO and you find yourself heading back over the hills! One other point is it possible to place the Nimitz in any other location randomly, like when you choose your start airport, it is floating in the sea in that vicinity, like it is with the default setting. As an example, as an ex FAA aircrew (I had used the Seahawk for dummy deck training at RNAS Culdrose) but was frontline with Gannets (849 sqdn) on the Ark Royal in the mid 60's etc, but flying training was in Malta. To revisit these parts with a carrier is what this is all about. The Enterprise, during Vietnam, located from Subic Bay is another. Helicopters are another scenario, with Whirlwinds, Wessex Mk3s and later Sea Kings, before being transferred to the first RN Phantoms when they arrived from the US. This was the time for me to decommission in January 1972. Sorry, a little reminiscing here, but I am hoping to use my favourite workhorse, Concorde, to do circuits and bumps on the Nimitz! Could you describe the TACAN problem in more detail please? In particular if you open the property browser, under /instruments/TACAN you can see what station the TACAN is receiving, etc. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Windows FGv9.9 and FGTools - Help Me to HelpYou
Curt
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Er ... I'm the author of that model: I don't think it's a system problem.
I
can't get the magnetos to switch on, either by using {} or the clickable
panel. It works under Cygwin.
The controls work as advertised here. Both magnetos on, both fuel cocks
on, prime five times with I (aka capital 'i', not ell, not one.) Hit
the starter and the engine fires to life for me here on linux. You
don't say what system you are having problems with ... is it the MSVC
windows build?
Good, I'm delighted that it works as advertised under Linux ... phew. As I
said, works under Cygwin too. It seems to be a MSVC windows build problem,
although I still have one more thing to try.
Vivian
___
Flightgear-users mailing list
Flightgear-users@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Windows FGv9.9 and FGTools - Help Me to HelpYou
Fred
Quoting Vivian Meazza :
Curt
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Er ... I'm the author of that model: I don't think it's a system
problem.
I
can't get the magnetos to switch on, either by using {} or the
clickable
panel. It works under Cygwin.
The controls work as advertised here. Both magnetos on, both fuel
cocks
on, prime five times with I (aka capital 'i', not ell, not one.) Hit
the starter and the engine fires to life for me here on linux. You
don't say what system you are having problems with ... is it the MSVC
windows build?
Good, I'm delighted that it works as advertised under Linux ... phew. As
I
said, works under Cygwin too. It seems to be a MSVC windows build
problem,
although I still have one more thing to try.
Could you try the c172 ? It seems to me I tried taht recently. On a french
keyboard, it is a combinaison of 2 keys but it worked. I will try again
this
evening.
I was guessing that the AZERTY keyboard might have crept in there. What is
the key combination, I could try that as well.
V.
___
Flightgear-users mailing list
Flightgear-users@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Windows FGv9.9 and FGTools - Help Me to HelpYou
Fred
Vivian Meazza a écrit :
Could you try the c172 ? It seems to me I tried taht recently. On a
french
keyboard, it is a combinaison of 2 keys but it worked. I will try again
this
evening.
I was guessing that the AZERTY keyboard might have crept in there. What
is
the key combination, I could try that as well.
I just tried again. [] and {} are functional. At least the switch move
and I hear a click, even in the seafire, and I can start the bo105.
The button is also clickable. All this with the same binary that is
included in fgsetup-0.9.9.exe, but with my CVS base package.
On an azerty keyboard } is generated by 'AltGr' + ')'.
I fixed that one - I moved the Spitfire from my cvs directory into the
default directory in the base package, but otherwise unchanged. All OK. Is
there a bug or not?
Vivian
___
Flightgear-users mailing list
Flightgear-users@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] FG 0.9.9 problems on Windows Me, Azerty, nVidia
Frederic Bouvier Quoting Eric Brasseur: Erik Hofman wrote: Eric Brasseur wrote: When the simulation starts I get 15 FPS which is normal on that PC. Once I circuit and turn towards the open sea, the frame rate drops suddenly to 3 FPS, which is quite harder to pilot. Turning the plane back towards plain land restores the frame rate but only after several seconds (maybe this is not a matter of time but of what's displayed). I didn't ask for random objects, 3D clouds or any such special features. This is probably becuase your hardware can't handle the high number of *static* scenery objects in down-town Wan Fransisco (near the bay bridge). You could try to limit this effect a bit by specifying: -prop:/sim/rendering/static-lod/detailed=500 --prop:/sim/rendering/static-lod/rough=5000 --prop:/sim/rendering/static-lod/bare=15000 I found no way to add these parameters to the command line. The Windows Me MS-DOS window did not allow me to type more than two lines of text for a command. The best solution I found is to fly using a little 800x600 window. I still get FPS freezes but very short, merely hickups. Also they don't occur at the same place neither heading the same direction. You can alter you preferences.xml file, or use the Advanced section of fgrun to set --prop options. Well, I don't know guys. I usually use Cygwin and cvs source and data. I thought I would see what all this fuss was about, so I downloaded and installed the windows 0.9.9 on an P4/nvidia GX5200 machine - nothing special. And, lo, it installed and ran right out of the box using FGRun. Absolutely no problems. Well, not quite true, so far as I can see --carrier=Nimitz doesn't work in FGRun (because you can't avoid having an airport set??). You can't select multiplayer on the main screen, but access via advanced/networks is fine. So I tried starting from the command line. Again no problems, except I'm not sure that there are any shadows, but I'm looking at that again. There are some bugs in the dropdown menus in FG - some of long standing- sound mute doesn't, and I can't seem to select an airport from the dropdown list. Apart from those everything seems to work as it should. (Melchior's Bo105 is a bit broken when shadows are selected, but we won't mention that) Ha! said the physicist: that proves FG-0.9.9 runs under Windows. Not at all said the statistician: that proves that at least one user can install FG-0.9.9 using XP on one combination of hardware. The computer scientist said nothing - by this time he was confused. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Windows FGv9.9 and FGTools - Help Me to HelpYou
Martin Hello Curtis: Windows comes with a debugger. It's an operation in from the IE browser Internet Options Advanced then you can able or disable bugging information. I use it a lot because of the vast number of sites where the creators have no idea how to set up script! It will pinpoint the line and the error. Is this what you have in mind? By the way, how do I get to the Nimitz or rather where is it AJ's advice is good, but I am unable to find a way to start at the carrier using FGRun. From the Cmd line this works (for me): C:\Program Files\FlightGear-0.9.9\bin\Win32fgfs --fg-root=\program files\flightgear-0.9.9\data --enable-ai-models --aircraft=hunter --carrier=Nimitz --bpp=32 Hth Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Windows FGv9.9 and FGTools - Help Me to HelpYou
Fred Selon Curtis L. Olson : MPCEE French Bureau wrote: Hello Curtis: Windows comes with a debugger. It's an operation in from the IE browser Internet Options Advanced then you can able or disable bugging information. I use it a lot because of the vast number of sites where the creators have no idea how to set up script! It will pinpoint the line and the error. Is this what you have in mind? Errr, really? I really doubt it, but but please prove me wrong, and tell us the line and the source file of the error! It would really help. If you give us something that looks like a screenshot of the blue screen of death with registry values and physical memory locations of the crash, that is nearly useless. We need/want to pin point the location in the original source code of the crash. I really doubt there is a native code debugger in Windows. I never found one. Martin surely refer to debugging CLR code that is a bytecode more or less MS response to Java. I also doubt it could be useful on the current binary as debugging informations are not there ( not stripped, simply not generated for performance reason ). The only relevant standard tool is DrWatson that only give binary trace and registers. What can be done though, is running the remote debugger provided with Visual Studio. A small exe is run on the target platform. It launch the version of the program that was compiled with debug information, and a developer connect to the target site and run the debugger at its side. If someone with problems is volunteering to play the guinea pig, we can arrange a debugging session. I can reproduce the 737 problem here at will. I have some spare time Wednesday, morning or afternoon for a debug session if that would help Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] FlightGear 0.9.9 Crashing on startup
Innis Cunningham Hi Dene Not that this will be much use to you but see my post Great 9.9. All I did was uninstall 9.5 with the uninstall shield and run the setup wizard and every thing worked fine. As for cards and drivers the 98SE version is using directX from a long time ago and I have not updated the drivers since the card was installed. Have you tried runing with the Nimitz senario disabled. I will be installing 9.9 on my other windows box today will see if I have any problems with that(2G athlon with FX5200 graphics)still running 98SE dene maxwell writes While waiting for an answer(and feeling like a seagull with a broken wing :-) I blew away the FG folder and tried a fresh installsame result Uninstalled through the Control Panel and reinstalled 0.9.9same result Loaded 0.9.8 over the top of 0.9.9 and it runs as before. No pressure, but are any of the FG guru's investigating this? I am really feeling empathy for birds with broken wings LOL What's the issue with the Nimitz demo? Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] FlightGear 0.9.9 Crashing on startup
dene maxwell I dunno what the issue is but it has been suggested that I disable it. I would, but I can't find where to? Dene From: Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: FlightGear user discussions flightgear-users@flightgear.org To: 'FlightGear user discussions' flightgear-users@flightgear.org Subject: RE: [Flightgear-users] FlightGear 0.9.9 Crashing on startup Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 10:40:41 - Innis Cunningham Hi Dene Not that this will be much use to you but see my post Great 9.9. All I did was uninstall 9.5 with the uninstall shield and run the setup wizard and every thing worked fine. As for cards and drivers the 98SE version is using directX from a long time ago and I have not updated the drivers since the card was installed. Have you tried runing with the Nimitz senario disabled. I will be installing 9.9 on my other windows box today will see if I have any problems with that(2G athlon with FX5200 graphics)still running 98SE dene maxwell writes While waiting for an answer(and feeling like a seagull with a broken wing :-) I blew away the FG folder and tried a fresh installsame result Uninstalled through the Control Panel and reinstalled 0.9.9same result Loaded 0.9.8 over the top of 0.9.9 and it runs as before. No pressure, but are any of the FG guru's investigating this? I am really feeling empathy for birds with broken wings LOL What's the issue with the Nimitz demo? Vivian Comment out the relevant line in preferences.xml Don't know what problem it's meant to solve though - AFAIK it's bug free - I'd like to no if someone has found a problem with it. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Windows FGv9.9 and FGTools
Georg Vollnhals MPCEE French Bureau schrieb: Hello Georg: I have the problem with FGv9.9 crashing and hanging when starting from the folder and from FGTools. With this it is not possible to isolate FGTools. I am also getting no maps other than the default, although they show in Atlas! Hi Martin, ok, this is a FlightGear problem and you are one of many who actually complain about FG 0.9.9 crashes when it should start. I would not be surprised if you have an ATI video card and *no* NVidia one. As I am no core developer I am not sure whether they are alarmed by the number of user (4, 5, ?) who already mailed to the list with the same problem - FG 0.9.9 crash/hangup when started! This is very bad news :-( With my Nvidia card I have no problems at all - after my last eMail I downloaded, installed and fired the Windows binary 0.9.9 - and it worked/works fine. No problems (until now) either with FGTools as a starter or direct through fgrun. Sorry for you, but I think you have to wait for a fix/workaround after the specialists have analysed the problem. You are registered to the developers mailing list, too, I think - watch out! All the best to you, Martin, keep on flying version 0.9.8!!! I've just downloaded and installed the Windows 0.9.9 version on XP/P4/nVidia FX5200. Runs just fine here right out of the box, although there are a couple of bugs which I'm investigating right now. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] FlightGear 0.9.9 Crashing on startup
Rodrigo Flores This crash comes when I selected a GMT time 11:55... When I select default time noon, FG runs ok.. Still no shadow here, just to clarify, I never complain about clouds shadow.. opening file: C:/Arquivos de programas/FlightGear/data/Navaids/carrier_nav.dat C:/Arquivos de programas/FlightGear/data/Navaids/TACAN_freq.dat Failed to find runway 28R at airport SBFT Altitude = 2170 Temp at alt (C) = 24 Temp sea level (C) = 28.4327 Altitude = 2170 Dewpoint at alt (C) = 14 Dewpoint at sea level (C) = 14.434 Initialising callsign using 'Aircraft/c172p/Models/c172p.xml' Initializing Nasal Electrical System opening file: C:/Arquivos de programas/FlightGear/data/Navaids/carrier_nav.dat C:/Arquivos de programas/FlightGear/data/Navaids/TACAN_freq.dat Failed to find runway 28R at airport SBFT Unknown exception in the main loop. Aborting... Possible cause: No error Works here using 11:55:00. Unknown exception in the main loop. Aborting... is often seen with sound card problems, usually drivers. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Contrails
Jon Berndt Dave Culp wrote: Yes they are. But now that you mention it I've been playing around with them, trying to get a better look. Here's a screenshot: http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/contrails_001.jpg Hmm, interesting. But, real contrails develop some considerable distance behind the aircraft, after the hot core exhaust has lost heat through diffusion and turbulence. Then, the turbulence and diffusion continues to spread the trail, so it gets LARGER the farther behind the aircraft it is. Jon (E.) And the wind blows them around over time. ducking and running :-) Yes - I was wondering why David turned off wind! And the sub-models will make the models get larger. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] fgrun, and freeglut
Jonathan Hepburn
P.S.: I can't get the Spitfire to start _at all_ unless I hit the magneto
switches as soon as FG loads, and the propeller is still windmilling. I'll
try
again when the FG CVS has finished.
The start procedure is complex, and detailed in the pilot's notes.
Summarised as follows:
Magnetos ({}) - on, Priming pump (I) - 5 strokes, Throttle - 1/3 open, Press
and hold starter. If this fails, index the Coffman starter cartridge (S),
repeat.
If all else fails read the Pilot's Notes again
Vivian
___
Flightgear-users mailing list
Flightgear-users@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] fgrun, and freeglut
Vivian Meazza
Jonathan Hepburn
P.S.: I can't get the Spitfire to start _at all_ unless I hit the
magneto
switches as soon as FG loads, and the propeller is still windmilling.
I'll
try
again when the FG CVS has finished.
The start procedure is complex, and detailed in the pilot's notes.
Summarised as follows:
Magnetos ({}) - on, Priming pump (I) - 5 strokes, Throttle - 1/3 open,
Press
and hold starter. If this fails, index the Coffman starter cartridge (S),
^^
wrong - that should be cartridge (C) - sorry
repeat.
If all else fails read the Pilot's Notes again
Vivian
___
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] fgrun, and freeglut
Jonathan Hepburn
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 08:03:41AM -, Vivian Meazza wrote:
P.S.: I can't get the Spitfire to start _at all_ unless I hit the
magneto
switches as soon as FG loads, and the propeller is still windmilling.
I'll
try
again when the FG CVS has finished.
The start procedure is complex, and detailed in the pilot's notes.
Summarised as follows:
Magnetos ({}) - on, Priming pump (I) - 5 strokes, Throttle - 1/3 open,
Press
and hold starter. If this fails, index the Coffman starter cartridge
(S),
repeat.
Yes, yes, pilot's notes read (with difficulty, considering the poor
quality of
the paper that they were scanned from), many variations on the above
tried.
The problem is simply that the propeller will turn through about a third
of a
revolution and then stop, completely inadequate to start. Flightgear
0.9.8. I
have also noticed that with the Seafire it is necessary to leave the
magnetos
off until the propeller gets up to speed, or the electric starter will
never
have enough grunt to make the required revs.
If you are following the correct procedure, it should work. Press and hold
the starter is the only thing I can advise. Mixture should be full rich -
but it defaults to that.
I now have problems compiling FlightGear CVS, but that's another email.
Yeah - don't we all? Especially using Cygwin. Yesterdays cvs was a real
battle, but got there in the end
V.
___
Flightgear-users mailing list
Flightgear-users@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] fgrun, and freeglut
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-users- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hepburn Sent: 03 November 2005 10:07 To: FlightGear user discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-users] fgrun, and freeglut On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 09:05:33AM -, Vivian Meazza wrote: If you are following the correct procedure, it should work. Press and hold the starter is the only thing I can advise. Mixture should be full rich - but it defaults to that. Between 'should' and 'does' lies a massive gulf beyond the capacity of mere mortals to understand. I don't know what it is about my installation, but it don't work. All that happens, no matter what I try, is that the propeller kicks for about a third of a revolution. It might be something to do with how the executable interprets the space bar, I suppose... Quite likely - and it needs to be fixed. I have a heavily revised spitfire awaiting final touches before release. I'll revisit this once I've completed that task. Meanwhile - AJ's advice should see you OK. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] CitatiionII
Curtis L. Olson .. snip ... This is my biggest beef with the yasim flight model. It works great in most regimes, but if you ever get in a situation where you are over speed (very low aoa) or if you are trying to push the nose down to drop altitude on an approach (for instance) you can get these wild negative aoa stalls when you least expect them. It's often better to reduce throttle to lose altitude on approach. Avoids such problems. Adding flaps seems to change the nature of the wing and make this problem happen at slower speeds. They're meant to aren't they? Regards, Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Snapshot for pleasure
Gerard ROBIN Le lundi 31 octobre 2005 à 17:55 +0100, Gerard ROBIN a écrit : animate the elevators - another thing on the todo list - but I'm not sure if the fdm will like the ground disappearing under it! V. No Problem the A/C follow the Elevator floor http://ghours.club.fr/ac-on-Elevator3-0.jpg http://ghours.club.fr/ac-on-Elevator3-1.jpg http://ghours.club.fr/ac-on-Elevator3-2.jpg And , if you which to experiment it. Here animation to put into Nimitz/carrier.xml The Elevator3 -waits 100 sec -get down to the hangar level -waits 60 sec -go up to deck level working only once (sorry). animation typetranslate/type object-nameElevator-3/object-name property/sim/time/elapsed-sec/property interpolation entry ind0.0/ind dep0.0/dep /entry entry ind100.0/ind dep0.0/dep /entry entry ind115/ind dep-2.5/dep /entry entry ind130/ind dep-5.7/dep /entry entry ind145/ind dep-8.2/dep /entry entry ind160/ind dep-10.6/dep /entry entry ind220.0/ind dep-10.6/dep /entry entry ind235/ind dep-8.2/dep /entry entry ind250/ind dep-5.7/dep /entry entry ind265/ind dep-2.5/dep /entry entry ind280/ind dep0/dep /entry /interpolation axis x0/x y0/y z1/z /axis /animation That's good - I'm pleased that the fdm allows such movement with no problem. Did you try to make the hangar deck solid and taxi on to it yet? I'm currently updating the Nimitz model - I'll see if I can include this as a feature. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Snapshot for pleasure
Gerard ROBIN Le mardi 01 novembre 2005 à 08:20 +, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard ROBIN That's good - I'm pleased that the fdm allows such movement with no problem. Did you try to make the hangar deck solid and taxi on to it yet? I'm currently updating the Nimitz model - I'll see if I can include this as a feature. Vivian Not working, the a/c cannot taxi into hangar, it cannot enter, it seems to be in contact with an invisible wall. BTW: with CVS we cannot taxi into every hangar and fly under bridge. Yes - I was pretty sure that this would be the case - the current cvs code doesn't allow you to go under any solid object. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] error messages with new CVS
Dave Culp Shown below are the console messages I get when flying the seahawk from the Nimitz, using today's CVS, fresh checkout. It seems many Nimitz graphics files don't exist, or are somewhere else. Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] dave]$ seahawk Dent: .Dent: ..Dent: CVSDent: EHAMopening file: /home/dave/FlightGear/data/Navaids/carrier_nav.dat /home/dave/FlightGear/data/Navaids/TACAN_freq.dat instrument name: adf instrument name: adf instrument name: airspeed-indicator instrument name: altimeter instrument name: attitude-indicator instrument name: clock instrument name: dme instrument name: encoder instrument name: marker-beacon instrument name: heading-indicator instrument name: KT-70 instrument name: magnetic-compass instrument name: nav-radio instrument name: nav-radio instrument name: slip-skid-ball instrument name: transponder instrument name: turn-indicator instrument name: vertical-speed-indicator instrument name: gps instrument name: wxradar instrument name: tacan WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_7.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_9.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_5.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_4.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_10.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_8.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_6.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_41.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_11.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_81.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_21.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_2.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_31.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_71.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_61.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/crew_2.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/crew_1.rgb' for reading. WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open '/home/dave/FlightGear/data/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/crew_3.rgb' for reading. Object glide-path not found Reading xml electrical system model from /home/dave/FlightGear/data/Aircraft/seahawk/Systems/seahawk- electrical.xml I have the necessary textures, but they need a bit of rationalisation. It's on my todo list, but I diverted myself to build the TACAN instrument, which I hope that you are making good use of in the Seahawk. I can't say it's at the top of my todo list yet, but it's rising. I'm just maintaining the Hunter atm ... Hope you can live with it for now Regards Vivian PS we've fixed up the instrument stuff. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Request: How to compile FGFS on Win32 + Cygwin
Gerard ROBIN Le mardi 04 octobre 2005 à 23:19 +0100, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Gerard ROBIN Le mardi 04 octobre 2005 à 13:47 -0500, Curtis L. Olson a écrit : Gerard ROBIN wrote: Hum, do you know, with CVS release we cannot taxi into hangar, and fly under golden Gate that functionality has been removed. Could this be a by product of the ground cache changes that were put in since the last release? Curt. Don't know. That is not new, i have kept some old releases of the CVS tree, they give the same result. So i concluded, it has been removed. Am i right ? It was removed to allow landing on carriers - you can have one or the other but not both right now. There used to be a line somewhere that you could comment out to select one or the other, but either it's been removed, or I just can't find it. Vivian Are you sure ? I have FG 9.8 with landing carrier patch , which is working perfectly. And we can fly under bridge and taxi into Hangar. Exactly what i want. I'm sure that there used to be a line(s) which you needed to comment out to enable flying under bridges or land on the carrier. IIRC The current carrier code is not the same as the 0.9.8 patch - things have moved on. But if you run a diff I'm sure that you could identify the changes. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Appealing to MS Windows community
Lee Elliott So far, I'm just thinking in terms of a tool that would allow easier testing of animations - it's actually quite easy to find the correct values for the x, y z axis by measuring the start and end-points of an aileron, for example, in your modelling app and then working out the appropriate values with a simple calculator. No need for a calculator in AC3D. Choose a vertex at either end point (there may be convenient ones, or insert them into the object, or use a line object). Use the axisx1-mz1-m/axis format. In AC3D select one vertex, and press the '' tile at 'Move to' (do NOT press 'Move to'). This will display the acute xyz cords in the adjacent windows. You can now copy and paste these values into the .xml animation, making sure that you transpose the y and z values, and reverse the sign of the new y. Repeat for the other vertex. And bingo. A little complicated but absolutely no computation involved, and the results are very accurate. Giving away trade secrets here, but seeing as it's you Lee :-) Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Request: How to compile FGFS on Win32 + Cygwin
Erik Hofman wrote Vivian Meazza wrote: It was removed to allow landing on carriers - you can have one or the other but not both right now. I believe (but I'm not 100% sure) that the deck of an AC has to be declared solid in the configuration files, so in theory both should be possible. Mathias needs to answer this one really, but you are correct that the deck (and other parts) of AC have to be declared solid - then you can land on them, or hit them, but not fly under them. Similarly, if the deck of a bridge is solid you can land on it, hit it, but not fly under it. If you do not make it solid, you can fly under it, but not land on it or hit it. Similarly hangars. Since flying under bridges is mostly illegal, and taxiing in hangars is bad airmanship (except for hardened shelters designed to allow taxiing) ... No doubt Mathias could fix it up, but as I said: right now, one or the other. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Appealing to MS Windows community
Gerard ROBIN Le mercredi 05 octobre 2005 à 08:33 +0100, Vivian Meazza a écrit : Lee Elliott So far, I'm just thinking in terms of a tool that would allow easier testing of animations - it's actually quite easy to find the correct values for the x, y z axis by measuring the start and end-points of an aileron, for example, in your modelling app and then working out the appropriate values with a simple calculator. No need for a calculator in AC3D. Choose a vertex at either end point (there may be convenient ones, or insert them into the object, or use a line object). Use the axisx1-mz1-m/axis format. In AC3D select one vertex, and press the '' tile at 'Move to' (do NOT press 'Move to'). This will display the acute xyz cords in the adjacent windows. You can now copy and paste these values into the .xml animation, making sure that you transpose the y and z values, and reverse the sign of the new y. Repeat for the other vertex. And bingo. A little complicated but absolutely no computation involved, and the results are very accurate. Giving away trade secrets here, but seeing as it's you Lee :-) Vivian OK that is my usual procedure, which is working perfectly, The discussion for me is rather to check the result, mainly in complex hierarchy animations. when we have to animate the full components of a landing gear = extension, retract, compression with rotating and translating struts and hydraulic actuator; (and i have to calculate trigonometric formulation, and simulate on the paper) I have got some experience with russian SU34 ac and Catalina PBY5 ac, both wonderful , and (i worry it) refurbished from MSFS world. I hope you will see some results with the Crusader i am building. Well . to check the animation results and to be sure i have not any mistake (and i have); Lee said it we have to try again and again with the real FG. A tool would be welcome. Lee suggested a tool which could be a simplified FG with an extract of the animations functions. Such a tool would be indeed be useful - or the ability to reload .xml files on the fly such as that for gui or panel I don't know if that would be possible, but it would speed development of models no end. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Request: How to compile FGFS on Win32 + Cygwin
Gerard ROBIN Le mardi 04 octobre 2005 à 13:47 -0500, Curtis L. Olson a écrit : Gerard ROBIN wrote: Hum, do you know, with CVS release we cannot taxi into hangar, and fly under golden Gate that functionality has been removed. Could this be a by product of the ground cache changes that were put in since the last release? Curt. Don't know. That is not new, i have kept some old releases of the CVS tree, they give the same result. So i concluded, it has been removed. Am i right ? It was removed to allow landing on carriers - you can have one or the other but not both right now. There used to be a line somewhere that you could comment out to select one or the other, but either it's been removed, or I just can't find it. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Seahawk/Hunter Engines
Andy Ross wrote: Vivian Meazza wrote: T J wrote: Is their a way to shutdown/restart the engines on the hunter/seahawk aircraft? No there isn't. There is an intention to include this feature in YASim some time in the future. If/when it is implemented, it will be included in the Hunter and Seahawk. Georg Vollnhals has promised to get me some cockpit video of a successful turbine start in exchange for such code. Hopefully real soon now. :) It will still be a hack, but it will probably look acceptable. There you go - more work :-) HP fuel cocks, starters ... V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] gyro
Dave Martin On Friday 09 September 2005 22:01, Edward Cawley wrote: New user with a Mac. Two questions, I have a feeling of being in a small minority, I would be happy to know some other Mac users. I have FG up and going, but with many questions. Such as- I'm trying to run ADF on the autopilot. All the directions I have found refer to setting the bug on the DG, but the default DG doesn't seem to have one, but the gyro xml refers to the bug? This seems to be a conflict. Any ideas why there is a difference? IIRC the gyro reference would be the DI (gyrocompass) rather than the ADF. There is definitely a working bug on the DI on some aircraft. As for the ADF, I think I had it working with the autopilot on the Hunter. Perhaps someone can shed some more light here The gyro bug works in the Hunter, but IRL the Hunter didn't have an autopilot, so in FG I've just copied Lee Elliot's AP for the Seahawk. If the gyro bug works with the AP it does so by accident rather than design. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] RE: Turbine Engine (Concorde, Hunter and Citation Information Needed)
T J I need information regarding the engine shutdown procedures of the Concorde, Cessna Citation and Hawker Hunter. Could somebody give me the key combinations for this procedure. If anybody has any update files of these aircraft, could they please send the files to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks. YASim has not yet implemented shut down/start up controls for gas turbines. Therefore there are none for the Hawker Hunter. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Startup problem on WinXP
Martin From your description I suppose that you are using FGRun.exe to start FGFS. I believe that there may be a problem with that program, although I have not investigated it in any depth You can start FGFS from the command line. Vivian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MPCEE French Bureau Sent: 31 August 2005 10:05 To: flightgear-users@flightgear.org Subject: [Flightgear-users] Startup problem on WinXP Hello Vivian: I have posed your question to Toshiba, as my knowledge on such things is non-existent. Hopefully someone will respond! Also, I have downloaded the same version on to a new machine, the HP Pavilion. Here, there are big problems too! After launching the programme from the desktop and then selecting aircraft, airport etc when you hit RUN the browser opens but nothing happens any further. The text not responding comes up in the top left hand corner next to FlightGear. The obvious question would be is there a general problem with the Windows version of this programme? Regards, Martin ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Startup problem on WinXP
Minot Opdyke I think that you have answered your own question FG runs on your XP box at home, but not on your Dell. Problem is likely to be in some setting on the Dell box. Possibly in the Nvidia driver settings. They should be all set to default in the first instance. I think you should set the monitor to the correct one with the correct driver. The difference between monitors is significant particularly crt/lcd. Vivian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sent: 31 August 2005 16:39 To: flightgear-users@flightgear.org Subject: Re: [Flightgear-users] Startup problem on WinXP Good point. But I've taken this same flight/aircraft on my OSX machine and the DME works fine. As far as the terrain being dark all around, I don't know. I downloaded the latest NVDIA drivers, played with differnt settings in the display. The only thing I didn't do was choose the specific monitor. It's listed as a standard plug and play monitor. (Dell monitor that came with the Dell box.) Would that make the difference? I have a Compaq presario at home with XP and don't have this problem. Minott Opdyke SCT Rose Elementary School 432-2495 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/30/05 6:24 pm On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 03:09, Minot Opdyke wrote: 2 - the DME was not accurate.the ADF, for example, correcly lead me to the beacon, but the DME distances were way off. Probably the DME transmitter is not at the same location as the NBD transmitter. DME is a separate transmitter.It doesn't have to be co-located with another navigation transmitter (which is often (usually?) a VOR). Nick 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] Citation/DHC 2 Issue
syd I sent in the dhc2 and citation a few weeks ago... maybe they arent updated on the web page yet , but if you can download via cvs they should be there. I started working on the b1900d tonight ...it may take a few days . I doubt they will ever be 100 % complete the b1900d has a ground proximity warning system that I'd love to make functional , but my C programming is REALLY rusty :). C? A simple GPWS needs a few lines of XML in the sound.xml configuration file. Here is a fragment: stall namegear up warn/name modelooped/mode pathSounds/gear-hrn.wav/path condition and less-than propertycontrols/engines/engine/throttle/property value0.3/value /less-than equals propertysim/alarms/gear-warn/property value0/value /equals less-than propertygear/gear/position-norm/property value1/value /less-than less-than propertygear/gear[1]/position-norm/property value1/value /less-than /and /condition property/sim/alarms/gear-warn/property volume factor0.7/factor /volume reference-dist10.0/reference-dist max-dist20.0/max-dist /stall This code sounds the gear warning klaxon if the throttle is closed and the gear is up. Substitute /position/altitude-agl-ft, probably remove the throttle stuff, add whatever sound you want and you have a GPWS. Regards Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Startup problem on WinXP
Martin, 2 possible problems here: your video card driver does not support OpenGL, or your audio does not support OpenAL. There are known problems with some audio drivers and OpenAL.. You should check both. Vivian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MPCEE French Bureau Sent: 29 August 2005 19:48 To: flightgear-users@flightgear.org Subject: [Flightgear-users] Startup problem on WinXP Hello: Taken from the download site as V 0.9.8. Video Driver: Trident Video Accelerator Cyber-XP4 v6.4823-104.22_1 Thanks ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Startup problem on WinXP
Minot Opdyke I use almost the same system here. There are no known problems with FG version 0.9.8, certainly not as you describe. I have been unable to reproduce the effects you describe. The problem is likely to be local. Possibly your driver settings, or, dare I even mention it, the display adjustment. I take it that you are using nvidia driver version 77.77? Although earlier versions work with Windows. Regards Vivian . -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sent: 29 August 2005 18:50 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; flightgear-users@flightgear.org Subject: Re: [Flightgear-users] Startup problem on WinXP from the website I downloaded the FG for Windows. I also downloaded the NVDIA driver from their website Minott Opdyke SCT Rose Elementary School 432-2495 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/29/05 10:24 am On Monday 29 August 2005 18:09, Minot Opdyke wrote: 2 days ago I installed the latest FG from the website on my brothers Dell Just to be sure - this is version 0.9.8in both these cases and not CVS? Other info like which video drivers you're using might also be relevant in helping troubleshoot these problems. AJ 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] slow framerates with Nvidia PICExpress underLinux solved !
Josh Babcock Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: On July 28, 2005 12:36 pm, Vivian Meazza wrote: There was a theory going the rounds that it was the PAPI/VASI lights which were/are the cause of the significant drop of frame rate around airports. Vivian Why can't just model them? It is ridiculous to see each light taken only 4 pixels when the camera is only a few meters away. Ampere ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d I agree. Melchior's anticollison lights don't really hit performance at all. Given a property to tell them what color to be, this should be pretty trivial. I'm not sure that the PAPI/VASI lights are the problem. The FLOLS on the carrier does the same job and they are quite vertex intensive, but don't pull the frame rate down noticeably. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] slow framerates with NvidiaPIC Express underLinux solved !
Josh Babcock Curtis L. Olson wrote: Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: On July 28, 2005 12:36 pm, Vivian Meazza wrote: There was a theory going the rounds that it was the PAPI/VASI lights which were/are the cause of the significant drop of frame rate around airports. Vivian Why can't just model them? It is ridiculous to see each light taken only 4 pixels when the camera is only a few meters away. Well, come up with a way where we can adjust the light color/intensity based on relative view angle, and the light is not visible (or barely visible) when viewed from behind. Our current approach is carefully crafted to do this pretty well, but depends on using glPoints for the lights. Smooth points is not implimented in hardware on game cards that I'm aware of. But we are only using a few of them in any scene so we get away with software rendered points just fine. Except nvidia rolls out their next driver version and these software rendered points have gotten excruciatingly slow on some cards ... but that now seems fixed in the latest driver. Curt. Well, I'm using an ATI 8500 and it's hitting me pretty hard, dropping it to about 15%-25% of normal. The code for the FLOLS for the carrier more or less does what Curt requires, with the exception that the light intensity does not vary with azimuth. It was based in part on the PAPI/VASI code. In principle it should be possible to get away from relying on GLPoints. On the other hand, I suspect that the existing code is more efficient than the FLOLS stuff. However, there may be a better way using GL's built in features. In addition PAPI/VASI may not be the only or most significant pull on frame rate. Right now, even on a powerful machine, the performance at night is marginal. Perhaps we need to get a handle on some of these performance issues. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] slow framerates with Nvidia PIC Express underLinux solved !
Andy Ross Kees Lemmens wrote: On my rather new PIV Linux system with V6600 PCI-Express Nvidia card and the NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-7167 driver FlightGear slowed down to an unacceptable framerate ( 1fps) as soon as an airport became visible. I also have a Geforce 6600 in my desktop system, and saw the same issue. I discovered that it was fixed by ... But ... yesterday I installed the latest NVIDIA-7667 driver and now Flightgear works perfectly well on this system ! That. :) Thanks to NVIDIA for their fine Linux drivers : many other videocard vendors could learn a LOT from the way Nvidia supports Linux ! Well, to be fair, this *was* a performance regression in their drivers in the first place. Even better than fast releases would be drivers that had no bugs at all, or ones where we can try to fix the problems ourselves. NVidia supports Linux as well as they support windows, which is commendable, but for some of us not quite sufficient. I don't know what the problem was in the older driver. Presumably something in the airport scene was triggering a software rendering path. It's a driver bug, so we really don't have to concern ourselves with it. As you note, other cards with the same drivers (the Geforce 440 Go in my laptop, for instance) did not show the same issue. There was a theory going the rounds that it was the PAPI/VASI lights which were/are the cause of the significant drop of frame rate around airports. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Nimitz cables...hard to capture on landing
Mike Rawlins --- Bernhard Auzinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as I now, it's not possible to land on the a/c carrier with version 0.9.8. Try the cvs-version, were it definetly works. Note: Don't forget to put down the tailhook (ctrl + O) if you wish to catch the cables :). IMHO, the seahawk is easier to land on the uss-nimitz. Rgds Berny I am using version 0.9.8 compiled from CVS checkout. The deck is solid, and I have been successful in landing and stopping at end of the deck using the brakes. Then I watched as ship sailed under me and plane rolled off the back! So this would mean it is possible to land on the carrier. I can see (my changing view) that the hook is down. It must be very difficult to catch a wire. Anyone using version 0.9.8 from CVS checkout able to catch a wire? I'll try using the Seahawk. Yup. Seafire's the real test :-). Hint: fly the meatball. Regards, Vivian (P.S. I would say that wouldn't I) ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Nimitz cables...hard to capture on landing
Vivian Meazza Subject: Re: [Flightgear-users] Nimitz cables...hard to capture on landing It could be, that the hunter is not able to catch the wire. I tried it a hour ago with a4, seahawk and hunter. With a4 and seahawk the landing on the carrier works without any problems, but with the hunter I wasn't able to catch the wire either. It is maybe a problem with hunter model? Rgds Bernhard Am Donnerstag 30 Juni 2005 17:47 schrieb Mike Rawlins: --- Bernhard Auzinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as I now, it's not possible to land on the a/c carrier with version 0.9.8. Try the cvs-version, were it definetly works. Note: Don't forget to put down the tailhook (ctrl + O) if you wish to catch the cables :). IMHO, the seahawk is easier to land on the uss-nimitz. Rgds Berny I am using version 0.9.8 compiled from CVS checkout. The deck is solid, and I have been successful in landing and stopping at end of the deck using the brakes. Then I watched as ship sailed under me and plane rolled off the back! So this would mean it is possible to land on the carrier. I can see (my changing view) that the hook is down. It must be very difficult to catch a wire. Anyone using version 0.9.8 from CVS checkout able to catch a wire? I'll try using the Seahawk. Yes there is a problem. I haven't activated the hook in CVS yet. I have a version here ready to go. Noting that the Hunter was hook equipped, but not capable, I haven't given it a catapult launch system. I'll get that one into CVS soonest. No, I was wrong. The CVS version does have a working hook, the 2 tank version does not. I'll bring both into line. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Nimitz cables...hard to capture on landing
Josh Babcock Bernhard Auzinger wrote: Yup. Seafire's the real test :-). Hint: fly the meatball. What is the meatball? Regards Bernhard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d It's the landing signal light. http://www.google.com/search?q=carrier+landing+meatball Josh So-called because it is said to be the same colour as a meatball in tomato sauce, but as I've never seen one, I can't vouch for that. Vivian ___ 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??
Josh Babcock Dave Culp wrote: FlightGear is *full* of presets that I don't care for at all, and I went through the learning process that everyone has to go through, wherein you learn how the preferences are read and in what order, and how to configure each run the way you want to. Maybe the folks running FG from the UI get a different concept of what FG is than those who don't? No, I think that the configuration has just plain gotten more complicated than it has to be. Not that there are more options than there should be, just that configurations are getting hidden away in odd places. fg is so powerful that it is easy to abuse. We should probably be asking should I do this a lot more than can I do this. Whenever someone puts something in a file, they should be asking is this the right place to put this, does it make sense, what will it prevent?. Anyway, can someone grab those three files and commit them? They are very simple changes and make two T-38s, one with the radar demo activated and one without: tower:chords$ fgfs --show-aircraft Available aircraft: snip T38 Northrop T-38 T38-radarNorthrop T-38 refueling demo snip Josh, I'm right with you on this one. As I said, we shouldn't unnecessarily muck about with users' preferences, keyboards, joysticks, or whatever. David has a good point too: many user's will never find the refuelling, thermal or carrier stuff. I wonder how many users know that there is a working simulation of the guns on the Spitfire (if they don't it's my fault)? All that's necessary is that where we aircraft designers override users' preferences is that we make clear that we are doing so. Having 2 T38's is perfectly reasonable (c.f. Hunter). BTW leaving .tgz files around in the hope that someone with cvs access is going to pick them up and submit them is a bit of a long shot. Send them to Curt, Erik, or Melchior with a clear explanation of the change and what it is you are trying to do. V. ___ 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??
Fred Vivian Meazza wrote : Fred Is it normal ? WARNING: ssgSGIHeader::: Failed to open 'I:/FlightGear/cvs/fgfsbase/Models/Geometry/Nimitz/rainbow_9.rgb' for reading. ... Object glide-path not found I have lots of reddish quad on the deck, that I suppose are the result of the missing textures. Er ... depends on your definition of normal. I put off uploading those textures - they're big - too big I think. I've been meaning to try to rationalize them, but I've got deeply involved in the Hurricane and supercharger issues. You are the first to complain - now I've got to do something. I'll try to find a chunk of time for that next week. If you don't mind big textures, I could put them up on my server over the weekend. Let me know. It was the first time I am trying the Nimitz and I saw these error accumulating in the fgrun console. As I use the CVS version, I wondered if it is the right way to put a model in the repository without its textures. I suppose it will draw this kind of error report on Avsim when it would hit the mass. In the meantime, apologies for any inconvenience. No need to apologize. There is no inconvenience. I thought I should report that to know the author's stance on the subject. Just a question : If these textures are big, why not using gimp to scale them down and put in CVS only very low resolution version ? It won't affect the model and it won't be worse than the reddish quad. Yup, my face is as reddish as the quads. I had forgotten to do it, and yes I was going to reduce the size of the textures. I'd just diverted myself off onto something more interesting. I'll fix it all soonest. V. ___ 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??
Erik Hofman Vivian Meazza wrote: Josh, I'm right with you on this one. As I said, we shouldn't unnecessarily muck about with users' preferences, keyboards, joysticks, or whatever. David has a good point too: many user's will never find the refuelling, thermal or carrier stuff. I wonder how many users know that there is a working simulation of the guns on the Spitfire (if they don't it's my fault)? All that's necessary is that where we aircraft designers override users' preferences is that we make clear that we are doing so. Having 2 T38's is perfectly reasonable (c.f. Hunter). I haven't followed this discussion closely, but what about adding a menu item that let's one select one of many scenario's at runtime (tanker, carrier, formation flight, etc)? That would be good, but is it easily doable? FGrun could do it quite readily, I would guess. V. ___ 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??
Melchior * Vivian Meazza -- Saturday 25 June 2005 10:59: Erik Hofman what about adding a menu item that let's one select one of many scenario's at runtime (tanker, carrier, formation flight, etc)? That would be good, but is it easily doable? FGrun could do it quite readily, I would guess. Yes, but at some day (which might be nearer than you think), fgfs will allow to switch aircraft at runtime. And this fgrun functionality would be of limited usefulness then. Not sure I follow the logic there - fgrun allows users to select most parameters in a reasonably intuitive way - why not scenarios? It would probably be of more use to be able to switch scenarios on the fly. If we imbed scenarios in aircraft files, then that would be possible, of course, to a limited degree: only some scenarios would be available with certain aircraft. What is certain is that we something better than expecting users to devil around in .XML preference files. I don't have a strong preference to how it might be done. V. ___ 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??
Melchior * Dave Culp -- Saturday 25 June 2005 15:50: It would be intuitive for the user to reset the sim and have the carrier scenario reset also. 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). :-) diff -u -p -u -0 -r1.4 nimitz_demo.xml --- nimitz_demo.xml 19 Mar 2005 09:56:35 - 1.4 +++ nimitz_demo.xml 25 Jun 2005 14:05:36 - @@ -25,4 +25,4 @@ -latitude37.63/latitude -longitude-122.34/longitude -speed10/speed -heading285/heading +latitude37.688/latitude +longitude-122.683/longitude +speed30.0/speed +heading180/heading m. Give us a break - it's hard enough as it is. On my TODO list is to provide Nimitz with a TACAN beacon. Which is why the Hunter and Seahawk have TACAN receivers. I'm afraid I haven't the slightest idea how right now. Not to mention proper flying courses for launch and recover. Meanwhile, back at the B29. V. ___ 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??
Melchior * Vivian Meazza -- Saturday 25 June 2005 16:25: Melchior 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 Give us a break - it's hard enough as it is. For whom? Everyone should suffer from this ridiculous place, because you find that convenient for development? What about having the carrier on a reasonable place for the majority, and just a locally modified version for you on your hard disk? (It's not for me -- I *do* of course have my carrier fixed.) It seems to me that it's difficult for people to find the carrier, let alone line up and land on it at first. So therefore it makes sense to me for the carrier to be somewhere where it can be seen, and familiar landmarks can be used. When I can get the TACAN done, then this will no longer hold, and we can put the carrier in a more realistic situation. How many queries on the do you want saying: I've started the Nimitz demo, but it doesn't work because I can't find the carrier anywhere? For my testing, of course, I can put it where I like, no problem. If someone could give me a steer (pun intended) on TACAN that would be good. In real life an aircraft controller would give an aircraft a course to recover back to the carrier. That would be nice to implement too. I'd even settle for a Melchior balloon (if pressed). V. ___ 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??
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-users- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Culp Sent: 25 June 2005 15:32 To: FlightGear user discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: the nimitz_demo HOW?? 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? It's high on Mathias' TODO list, but he's busy on the day job right now, so although it's a top priority, it's slipped a bit. I hope that he'll find time and we will be able to start on the carrier soon. We hope to stop it driving through land in due course as well. V. ___ 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??
Paul Surgeon 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? It's nuclear ... but Mathias understands the problem. It's to do with putting the aircraft in the right place then keeping it there. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Spitfire guns
AJ MacLeod On Saturday 25 Jun 2005 09:32, Vivian Meazza wrote: I wonder how many users know that there is a working simulation of the guns on the Spitfire (if they don't it's my fault)? I certainly didn't; grepping just now shows them up right enough. At the risk of appearing really stupid, how does one make it work? AJ Probably the best way is binding one of your joystick buttons to the trigger like this: button descTrigger/desc number unix1/unix windows1/windows /number binding commandproperty-assign/command propertyai/submodels/trigger/property value type=bool1/value /binding mod-up binding commandproperty-assign/command propertyai/submodels/trigger/property value type=bool0/value /binding /mod-up /button If you don't use a joystick then you could use a key. I haven't thought that one through enough to identify a spare key. Melchior's Bo105 also fires things - I'm not sure how he does that. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: Spitfire guns
Melchior * Vivian Meazza -- Saturday 25 June 2005 18:51: Psst. I tell you, but don't tell anyone else: the bo105 doesn't have brakes, so I'm simply polling the brake property and don't have to mess with bindings: m.triggerN = props.globals.getNode(controls/gear/brake-left); m. :-) Wot no rotor brake :-). Cheating - no quick fix there. Another todo - bind trigger to key ... sigh. V. ___ 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??
Josh Babcock George Patterson wrote: Agreed. A couple of questions though Are the carrier capable aircraft fitted with sufficent radar for doing this?? If you mean in the real world, They have incredible radar range. Remember that their main radar is located at about FL350. That tends to get you a pretty remote horizon. I'm sure they have other tricks as well. In the real world, our current FGFS inventory of carrier capable aircraft were not fitted with suitable radars. TACAN was the best they had. Which is why I want to do that. Alternatively, what about the idea of having the carrier following a series of waypoints, returning to the first point after reaching the last? This was discussed before, it would leave the carrier going downwind about half the time or more. In the real world the lack of headwind would prevent operations. That's why carriers have such big engines, it's not to get places fast. It's to make wind. Even though, a sufficient tailwind can reduce the relative wind to the point where air ops are dangerous. 25 kts wind over the deck is usual for launch and recovery. Axial for launch, down the angle for recovery. Following a 'flight' plan is a good option. Carriers often operate in that way in real life. We also need to add the capability of making the carrier turn to a launch or recovery course relative to the local wind. I did some work on this, but it rapidly went too difficult. I must revisit it. Another quick solution would be to have the position of the carrier exposed in the internal properties. It is - see /ai/models/carrier/position. Most other details are also available. At one time you could set rudder angle and alter course, but I think some recent changes might have broken that ... I'll check. Most of the hooks are there. It just needs some more work. Which would make it possible to see the carrier on radar, with the help of a little nasal scripting. Someday it would be nice if all ships and aircraft would register their position, TCAS transponder and cross section for this purpose. I was also thinking about how to do ground returns for radar navigation and clutter, but could not come up with any ideas except having a whole separate set of ground data with radar reflectiveness, but even that would be a horrible and bloated hack. Every engineer I know who deals with radar systems say their behavior is very complex. Just a few possible ideas David Culp has a radar simulation in the T38 model. I don't see us doing coastlines, and other ground features. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: Spitfire guns
Melchior * Josh Babcock -- Saturday 25 June 2005 19:30: Melchior FRANZ wrote: m.triggerN = props.globals.getNode(controls/gear/brake-left); Well how does it stop? Umm ... releasing the trigger/,-key? Alternatively, if out of ammo, or switching the variant to something civilian ... during flight. :-) I think Josh meant the helo: for me that's usually when I hit the ground :-) V. ___ 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??
Arnt On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 18:35:32 +0100, Vivian wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Josh Babcock George Patterson wrote: This was discussed before, it would leave the carrier going downwind about half the time or more. In the real world the lack of headwind would prevent operations. That's why carriers have such big engines, it's not to get places fast. It's to make wind. Even though, a sufficient tailwind can reduce the relative wind to the point where air ops are dangerous. 25 kts wind over the deck is usual for launch and recovery. Axial for launch, down the angle for recovery. Following a 'flight' plan is a good option. Carriers often operate in that way in real life. We also need to add the capability of making the carrier turn to a launch or recovery course relative to the local wind. I did some work on this, but it rapidly went too difficult. I must revisit it. ..and we can have the carrier(s) orbit thunderstorms to get constant 25 kts winds with and without gusts etc. ;o) Of course. Been there, done that. And the opposite - chasing little wind fields in the Mediterranean to get 25 kts over the deck. V. ___ 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??
Dave Culp Umm ... $ grep -1 scenario $FG_ROOT/Aircraft/T38/T38-set.xml ai scenariorefueling_demo/scenario /ai * Dave Culp -- Monday 20 June 2005 23:10: You can only run one AI scenario at a time. Correct, the scenario defined in an aircraft's *.set file overrides the scenario set in the preferences.xml file. In this case the T-38 is set up as a demonstrator of the airborne radar, so a target (the tanker) is set up in an orbit over KSFO. Now we know. It's a good idea, and of course why would anyone want to play with the T38 and a carrier? A note in the T38 description would perhaps be nice. Vivian ___ 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??
Josh Babcock Vivian Meazza wrote: Dave Culp Umm ... $ grep -1 scenario $FG_ROOT/Aircraft/T38/T38-set.xml ai scenariorefueling_demo/scenario /ai * Dave Culp -- Monday 20 June 2005 23:10: You can only run one AI scenario at a time. Correct, the scenario defined in an aircraft's *.set file overrides the scenario set in the preferences.xml file. In this case the T-38 is set up as a demonstrator of the airborne radar, so a target (the tanker) is set up in an orbit over KSFO. Now we know. It's a good idea, and of course why would anyone want to play with the T38 and a carrier? A note in the T38 description would perhaps be nice. Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d What might be even nicer is to have two versions of the t-38, one with the ai scenario and one without. It should only take a few lines of xml to do it. And as always, I will voice my oppinion that aircrft files should never override configuration settings unless they absoloutely have to. OK, here it is: http://jrbabcock.home.comcast.net/flightgear/t38/T38.tgz I agree: we shouldn't fiddle unnecessarily with a user's settings. If an aircraft file does so for good reason, then this should be readily apparent to the user. V. ___ 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??
JB -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sent: 23 June 2005 01:20 To: FlightGear user discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: the nimitz_demo HOW?? Okay, I can now see the Nimitz! I had to choose the Hunter (carrier capable) aircraft before it would show. The question I now have is: Why? I know, I know, you can't land a T38 on a carrier, so why should it show. But that's not the point, I specified that it be there, it should be there regardless of the type of AC I've chosen. The Hunter isnt fully carrier capable (no launch system). It has a hook, but in real life this was only intended for shore based training. Only the A4, Seahawk, and Seafire are fully equipped. I guess the next question is: Where is it defined that the carrier show when flying a specific AC? A quick cursory examination of the Hunter xml file showed nothing specific to the Nimitz Demo, nor does the Nimitz demo specify a specific craft, so where is it? I mean, maybe I want to TRY and land a C172 on the carrier (seems more than possible to me), or even a T38 (baracade?) ... or the Concorde even just for giggles :-)) Correct. The display of Nimitz does not depend on the aircraft chosen. There is nothing that I am aware of that should cause this. Depending on the version of Flightgear that you are running, no aircraft, YASim, or YASim and JSB aircraft will work with Nimitz. As you can see from: http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/vmeazza/FlightGear/fgfs-screen-015.jpg A non-carrier capable aircraft will work quite happily with Nimitz. Can you specify the carrier as your airport and do cat launches? Not yet, but Mathias Froelich is working on it, but he is very busy with the day job when he gets the time. Cat launches are already possible for those aircraft so equipped. Line up on the cat (not easy with differential braking). Press L to engage the cat, then C to fire the cat. So, are the other AI's AC dependent? Sailboat; T-Storm; Refueling...? NO V. ___ 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??
Melchior FRANZ * Vivian Meazza -- Thursday 23 June 2005 09:38: Correct. The display of Nimitz does not depend on the aircraft chosen. There is nothing that I am aware of that should cause this. Umm ... $ grep -1 scenario $FG_ROOT/Aircraft/T38/T38-set.xml ai scenariorefueling_demo/scenario /ai * Dave Culp -- Monday 20 June 2005 23:10: You can only run one AI scenario at a time. Sorry, I meant to say, in the Hunter or Nimitz code . As you point out, the T38 code will prevent the Nimitz being displayed when the T38 is used. Of course, the scenarios can be combined. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: Another question or 2
Melchior * Vivian Meazza -- Thursday 23 June 2005 09:53: --airport-id=1o2 (or whatever) has been declared depreciated a long time ago. Please do only use options that are listed by $ fgfs --verbose --help. I guess only removing it finally solves the ambiguity. That's now just: --airport=1o2 Yes, I'd forgotten that. --airport-id is what 'KSFO' actually is, and it's been in my system for a long time now. I guess there is a good reason for the change. V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Another question or 2
Kristin Vivian, I searched my hard disks for System.fgfsrc it is not there. This is the windows distribution. Any other ideas as to what file or files control the starting location. --- Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kristin It's all done for you. Otherwise, edit system.fgfsrc to look like this: --airport-id=1o2 (or whatever) --runway= 23R (or whatever) You don't need it if you start FlightGear using fgrun. Have you tried it? It really will do everything you want. If you want to use the command line then create system.fgfsrc and put it here: ~\FlightGear\data. I've just started 0.9.8 both ways, so I can confirm it works. Try fgfs --help -v Any of these options can be included in system.fgfsrc V. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] A few questions
Kristin I have the 0.9.8a windows version working 50% stable on my PC. I have even been able to find Lampson field 1O2 in Lake County CA! However there are several errors showing up on the FGFS dos window. For instance I am flying from Sonoma Valley 0Q3 with aircraft pa28-161 and I get the following message. Failed to find runway 28R at airport 0Q3 WARNING: Legacy engine definition in YASim configuration file. Please fix. Sonoma has runway # 07x, 17x, 25, 35 I left the runway on default. Do I need to specify the runway? You don't have to. Use --runway= if you want How do I fix the YASim engine problem? You don't: it's down to the aircraft developer for that particular model If I select location/position in air and specify Lampson 1o2 I get this error. Unknown runway code 07x passed to GetReverseRunwayNo(...) Failed to find runway 07x at airport 0Q3 WARNING: Legacy engine definition in YASim configuration file. Please fix. Failed to find runway 28 at airport 1o2 Failed to find a good runway for 1o2 WARNING: Legacy engine definition in YASim configur I also have seen something about stability % once or twice and the aircraft was not managable at all. I don't know how this works under Unix but in the flightgear wizard there is an advanced button and I am also unable to modify any of the parameters under the General heading. For instance it shows the airport, aircraft and runway but I cannot enter another airport etc... Is there a file I need to edit to change the default startup values? I would like to fly out of Lakport CA Lampson field as I know the area pretty well now I have been here 6 years. It's kind of a pain to keep having to position back to 1O2/Lampson everytime I start the program. There is, (system.fgfsrc), but that's not easy for beginners: fgrun will do everything you need. Another weird thing was I saw something in the FGFS dos window about missing scenery like tall buildings/skyscrapers, HA we don't even have 10 foot of railroad track in this county let alone skyscrapers. I didn't know there was anywhere in the US that didn't have a few rail lines but Lake county has none. I came from New Jersey and there were rail lines everywhere. Use --disable-random-objects. Anyone know what 10 degree segment has north New Jersey on it? I could download that instead as I am also familiar with most of NJ from NY border to about Trenton east to west. No - use the graphical scenery download interface. I am looking to learn some basics of flying, perhaps getting a student permit a year or so from now and would really like to get FG working with a good set of data that is in an area I know from the ground. FGFS is a good route to go down. Try using the Hunter first off - that's probably the easiest to fly, if your hardware is up to it. Otherwise use the default aircraft. But you'll have to get used to the prop effects. Basically you have a working 0.9.8a system, so far as I can see. Ignore the warnings and learn to fly. Regards, Vivian ___ 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??
Bernhard Auzinger Well, ai-traffic is enabled just as in your example. If the nimitz is there, it must be that new stealth carrier ;-/ cause I don't see it in the bay or off shore. Where exactly should I look for it. Very strange. The uss-nimitz at the default scenery should be right of the KSFO (the default airport when starting fgfs in the default scenery). Take a look: http://stud3.tuwien.ac.at/~e0026053/uss-nimitz1.jpg http://stud3.tuwien.ac.at/~e0026053/uss-nimitz2.jpg http://stud3.tuwien.ac.at/~e0026053/uss-nimitz-flyby.jpg This is an extract of my preferences.xml file: ai-traffic enabled type=boolfalse/enabled level type=int1/level /ai-traffic traffic-manager enabled type=boolfalse/enabled /traffic-manager ai enabled type=booltrue/enabled scenarionimitz_demo/scenario !-- scenarioaircraft_demo/scenario -- /ai Nimitz works here. Who needs a hook? http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/vmeazza/FlightGear/fgfs-screen-015.jpg You should be able to see the carrier while at the end of 28R at ksfo. Regards Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] next trick
Andy Ross Josh Babcock: What would everybody out there like to see? If I could pick anything: Definitely a Harrier -- any of the original generation (Gr.3, AV-8A, Sea Harrier FRS.1, the AV-8B has a much more complicated set of avionics and isn't nearly as interesting for a pilot). The FDM model is a ton of fun, and is just dying for some glitz. It's in the Hurricane/Seahawk/Hunter lineage, so I've looked at it briefly. I haven't researched it in any detail, so I haven't got any really good data on which to model it yet. It's at/near the bottom of my TODO list. (FRS1 of course :-) ) Regards, Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: building the cvs version
Melchior * [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Monday 20 June 2005 14:16: I tried to build the cvs version of flightgear-0.9, but I got some errors from the linker You also have to use SimGear and the base package from CVS/HEAD! Using plib cvs/head is sometimes required, but currently the last stable version should be enough. and OpenAL Regards, Vivian ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
