Le samedi 05 novembre 2005 à 09:56 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : Snip > > I have two major questions. > > First, can we and do we need to define aircraft status? (See next > long discussion > > Second shouldn't comments and status be subdivided based on what it > effects within an aircraft "model"? (Long discussion below) > > I think a "complete" aircraft and development of the same can be > divided in too some key area's, needing different talents, and > potentially interesting to different individuals. i.e. perfect for > GPL development if the WIKI can be used has a needs list and the > standard CVS methodology for updating the aircraft. The key is who > defines status and how are the aircraft verified, etc. Assuming that > the final goal of an aircraft is to be completely finished and > included in the standard release package or GPL-hanger. > > Through probable lack of knowledge I see the aircraft model as having > a basic structure like this. > > Aircraft > 3 D Model > Basic Model (how it appears in flight) > Textures > Accuracy Fit and Finish > Animations (there are examples of these on some aircraft and > others have some or none implemented) > Landing Gear > Flaps > Rudder > Propeller > Sounds > > Engines > Propellers > > FDM (this has multiple choices and some models have be > implemented in more than one) > YASIM (appears to be the easiest to create based on > documentation and questions I asked previously) > JSBSIM (has a tool to build a basic model based on size and > specific operating characteristics) > > Cockpit > 2D - Instruments > 3D - Instruments > HUD > Radar > > Systems > Electrical > Auto Pilot > Other > Vacuum > Hydraulic > Static > Pitot > > Sub-models ( I have seen or read about the following examples) > Contrails > Weapons (of course) > > So a minimally aircraft needs a 3D model, the generic cockpit, generic > systems and an FDM in order to "fly" under flightgear. Status PRELIM > > If you add actual Engine(prop) and a specific FDM for the aircraft > would that be status TEST. > > To achieve an ALPHA status the aircraft would need at least some > animation and an accepted specific FDM. (who tests/accepts) > > For a BETA status add a specific Cockpit and Sounds. > > For a RELEASE status what is minimal requirements? > > What Status for a plane that has, photo realistic model, everything > defined specifically for it and accurate. 100% GOLD (like in classic > cars) ;-) > > Ray Mc
Hi Ray, Your check list cannot be more completed, we can find everything. Well but isn't it a third question: Because we stand in a binary system, the question is which criteria to decide if an a/c will be official ? I defend the idea that every good work, i mean productive work must be official, the a/c which are available are productive work. It was said: an author go on an other model, and the existing one which is still on the workbench is not completed, every a/c is never completed, only the author can say if the degree of completion is acceptable, only the author could say if it is Alpha, Beta, or anything else (he is alone to know which target). You put the finger on "Animations (there are examples of these on some aircraft and others have some or none implemented)": we accept it, these a/c have FDM, they fly and because they are official we know them and that could encouraged one to start in developing a new simple model). An other example of work which is a productive work, an FDM for Harrier A/C has been developed by Andy, no cockpit, no 3Dmodel: on my side with a "non GPL" 3Dmodel and for my personal use i could experiment and later on use that FDM. We can find a very good FDM f15 (thanks Erik) no cockpit, no 3Dmodel. And so on.. To conclude, i think we have had, many mail about a subject which could have been useful in a company which try to make profits, decide to increase the quality of the products, and trash the oldies (null default, low cost). It is not useful for us, only to remember that the main engine which make us working is the pleasure to do "beautiful" and FREELY Stop me if i am wrong , every developers who are here do use that engine. Cheers -- Gerard _______________________________________________ Flightgear-users mailing list [email protected] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
