Syd wrote
> Sent: 04 October 2007 01:39 > To: FlightGear developers discussions > Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] oil platform... > > > On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 17:29:54 -0700 > Syd&Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > If you define it to be > > > <type>carrier</type> > > > you can define > > > <solid>Object</solid> > > > and you may define a park position > > > > > > no need to have wire and catapult > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > -- > > > Gérard > > > http://perso.orange.fr/GRTux/ > > > > > > > ah thanks ! > > I tried <type>ship<type> and <type>static<type> ... > > Didn't try carrier though... > > > > -- > > Syd&Sandy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > so I guess my next question is , is this an option that could > be added to all demo objects ? Cheers > > Of course, anything is possible, but it's only applicable to ships and static objects. If a ship can operate an ac, the it could be called a carrier anyway. So why not leave it as it is, and call a static oil rig a carrier. Any drawback to doing that? Hmm. I have some difficulty with putting oil rigs in locations where they aren't in RL. Realism is our watchword. After all, there are hundreds, if not thousands of the darned things all over the shallow oceans for you to put one in the right place. Vivian ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
