RE: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Wright flyer wing warping (Jim Wilson)
According to this site http://www.libraries.wright.edu/special/1903/construction_photos.htm (about halfway down), the fabric of the wings was structurally significant. Quote: Over 8,000 stitches were hand sewn by the volunteers. Howard DuFour Project Director, remarked, It's amazing how much those boys depended on the cloth to hold the plane together. I find it difficult to believe that the aircraft was flyable if a 40N force (4 bags of sugar) would warp the wing nearly 4 meters. Richard -Original Message- From: Marcel Wittebrood [mailto:MarcelW;adse.nl] Sent: 18 October 2002 9:38 am To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Wright flyer wing warping (Jim Wilson) Dear Jim, We made a FEM model of the outboard wing to investigate the shape when warping (see attached pict). I applied 40 N to the model and it warps 3798 mm at the tip. This will not be possible in reality because I did not model the fabric. Because the wing is very thin this influence will be very small however. The model shows that the stiffness against warping is very small. The pilot will thus only feel the aerodynamic stiffness and some extra force due to friction. You can see that the deflection is almost linear to the tip and thus the warping angle will also be almost linear. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: Wright flyer wing warping (Jim Wilson)
Sorry, I made a mistake, I contour plotted the beam bending moment in the last mail and wrote some nonsense to talk the large deflection value straight.:-)) This picture is probably correct (at least better than the previous one) Only 6.011 mm at the back spar tip, 0.8 mm at the front spar tip. So for 80 N force input you get about atan((6.011-0.8) /1180) = 0.25 deg (The aerodynamic forces are working against this value, so the real warping is less !!). The 40 N force input translates to about 300 N at the hip saddle if I am correct (There are 4 wings). Orville had strong hips !!! kind regards, -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-devel-request;flightgear.org] Sent: donderdag 17 oktober 2002 22:53 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Flightgear-devel digest, Vol 1 #1077 - 18 msgs Send Flightgear-devel mailing list submissions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of Flightgear-devel digest... Today's Topics: 1. Changes to SimGear required? (Jon Stockill) 2. Re: Wright flyer wing warping (Jim Wilson) 3. Re: Changes to SimGear required? (Curtis L. Olson) 4. re: Wright flyer (David Megginson) 5. Wright Flyer (Curtis L. Olson) 6. re: Wright flyer (Jim Wilson) 7. Re: Wright Flyer (Jim Wilson) 8. Re: Wright Flyer (Curtis L. Olson) 9. OT: re - Jim Wilson's Employer (C. Hotchkiss) 10. Re: Wright Flyer (John Check) 11. Re: Wright Flyer (Jon Stockill) 12. Re: TC ball (Julian Foad) 13. Re: Wright Flyer (John Check) 14. Re: Wright Flyer (Jim Wilson) 15. Re: Wright Flyer (Jim Wilson) 16. Re: OT: re - Jim Wilson's Employer (Jim Wilson) 17. Re: Wright Flyer (Jon Stockill) 18. Re: Wright Flyer (John Check) --__--__-- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 12:38:33 +0100 (BST) From: Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Changes to SimGear required? Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I've just been trying to compile a current CVS update of both SimGear and FlightGear. Simegear builds properly, but FlightGear falls over in src/Main with: fg_init.cxx: In function `bool fgInitSubsystems()': fg_init.cxx:1046: no matching function for call to `SkySceneLoader::Load (string, double, double)' /usr/local/include/simgear/sky/clouds3d/SkySceneLoader.hpp:51: candidates are: bool SkySceneLoader::Load(SGPath) Which version of SimGear should FlightGear-cvs currently build against? -- Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] --__--__-- Message: 2 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 12:08:42 - To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Wright flyer wing warping From: Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marcel Wittebrood [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Dear Jim, you state that With the 1903 they trussed it all up so that only the trailing edges warped, making it even more aileron like. We also have the smithsonian museum drawings from the 1903 flyer. The inboard wing is trussed up but the outboard wing does not have any truss cables and is thus free to warp when the pilot is moving his hip saddle. Because there is no torsional stiffness, the tip of the outboard wing is fully rotated. Yes, what you are saying about the trussing is true. The intention was to create a stiff platform for the engine. But Orville states that the entire leading edge of the upper and lower planes (wings) remained parallel due to the way the control wire was configured (and probably the rigidity of the leading edge framing). One of the things that I have trouble with is visualizing the warping movement on this particular machine. There aren't many photographs of it and I haven't seen anything that illustrates the degree to which it warps and the shape of the fully warped wing. The rear lateral wing member must have some effect as well so that the warping isn't uniform across the area that moves. Best, Jim --__--__-- Message: 3 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 07:19:13 -0500 From: Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Changes to SimGear required? Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This definitely looks like a version mismatch between simgear/flightgear. Make sure you've build the latest simgear-cvs and then check all the dumb stuff, like you installed it, you don't have extra older versions of simgear floating around your hard drive, etc. etc. Regards, Curt. Jon Stockill writes: I've just been trying to compile a current CVS update of both SimGear and FlightGear. Simegear builds properly, but FlightGear falls over in src/Main with: fg_init.cxx: In function `bool
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Wright Flyer
Jim Wilson writes: I was actualyl joking, but now you come to mention it, it probably would have been quite handy for them keeping the wing level :-) I know, so was I ;-) They did have some instrumentation though. Here's an annotation from Orville's book: Just for the record, a spirit level wouldn't tell you whether the wings were level; it would only tell you whether you were slipping or skidding. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
Martin Spott writes: but in reality not every airport _has_ lightning. Mybe it would be appropriate to stick to the information on airport lightning that is present in the airport database, It's already there. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
John Check writes: If you want to fly this yourself, you can grab: http://www.flightgear.org/tmp/KSFO.btg.gz Does anybody have a copy or a proper link? it seems to be 404. My fault, didn't push my change out to the web server ... Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
Martin Spott writes: Curt, No one commented on my last runway lights message so I figured I'd send some more picts of the latest: Yesterday night it was simply too late to give appropriate comment I am _really_ amazed. In my eyes this this is the most valuable visual feature in FlightGear since I'm watching this project. Essentially the state of things is that if we regen all the airports they will all get as much lighting as I've implimented. but in reality not every airport _has_ lightning. Mybe it would be appropriate to stick to the information on airport lightning that is present in the airport database, Right, our database does have lighitngn information, and the airport generator honors it. If you fly around SFO with the new lighitng you'll see an ALSF-II approach, an SSALS, and SSALR, and a couple REIL's. Also you'll see some runways with centerlines, some without, and some runways have touchdown zone lighting. Our world (once I finishe with the other lighting schemes, and once it's regenerated) will be as close to reality as our database allows. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Wright flyer wing warping
Very interesting, but from the photos there seems to be much more movement than that. Are you sure you are scaled correctly? Also remember that Orville claims the leading edges stayed parallel (although I suppose at 0.8mm it'd be hard to tell). Best, Jim Marcel Wittebrood [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Sorry, I made a mistake, =20 I contour plotted the beam bending moment in the last mail and wrote = some nonsense to talk the large deflection value straight.:-)) =20 This picture is probably correct=20 =20 Only 6.011 mm at the back spar tip, 0.8 mm at the front spar tip. So for = 80 N force input you get about atan((6.011-0.8) /1180) =3D 0.25 deg (The = aerodynamic forces are working against this value, so the real warping = is less !!). =20 The 40 N force input translates to about 300 N at the hip saddle if I am = correct (There are 4 wings) =20 kind regards, =20 =20 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Elite Simulator
I spent most of the time practicing holding patterns. I'm still trying to decide whether to love or hate them: I'll write a tutorial for sim users some day if anyone is interested. I understand that ATC almost never uses holds any more A lot of approach plates, needing a course reversal, either use a procedure turn or a hold. The former is easier, but needs a depicted hold somewhere else in most cases, the latter. Thus, I've been given radar vector, direct to navaid when able, then hold, efc for the approach at specific time. So far, I've never had a hold enroute, before getting into terminal airspace. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Elite Simulator
Once we get full approach lighting implimented it's going to be hard to find significant reasons not to do a 1.0 release ... Instructor console, intuitive enough that non-software-engineers can operate it without being trained by someone already familiar with it. But that's about it. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Licensing issues
Christian (and others): The purpose of my two bits of text, which you quoted, was to formally state on the mailing list what _my_ policy is for _this_ project. I was not trying to tell anybody else how their patches/code should be treated ... I wrote the message to avoid putting GPL copyright notices on the top of every little patch I routinely send through the mailing list. I should explicitly mention that my policy may be different on other projects. Thus, I encourage you to disagree with my personal policy (grin). I think I've said this before. If I submit a patch against someone else's file, the patch is intended to inherit the copyright and any current or future licensing of the containing file or code fragment. When I create a file, or submit a large patch to a file without an identified copyright owner, the intent is to retain the copyright in my name and apply _only_ the then-current GPL license version. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Elite Simulator
Alex Perry writes: Once we get full approach lighting implimented it's going to be hard to find significant reasons not to do a 1.0 release ... Instructor console, intuitive enough that non-software-engineers can operate it without being trained by someone already familiar with it. But that's about it. Yes, good point, a better/more complete GUI is something we would also really need to add. Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
Curtis L. Olson writes: Our world (once I finishe with the other lighting schemes, and once it's regenerated) will be as close to reality as our database allows. Have you patched TerraGear to eliminate runway edge lights for unlighted runways? All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
David Megginson writes: Curtis L. Olson writes: Our world (once I finishe with the other lighting schemes, and once it's regenerated) will be as close to reality as our database allows. Have you patched TerraGear to eliminate runway edge lights for unlighted runways? Well, patched maybe isn't the best word, but essentially yes. Now we only generate the runway lighting schemes that we understand: ASLF-II, MALS, MALSF, MALSR, SSALS, SSALF, SSALR, REIL ... Threshold, edge, and center line lighting are seperate entries in our database and those are generated accordingly. There are still more approach lighting arrangements that need to be implimented ... Robin has a list of 20-25 in his docs. Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Change in runway type...
Hi, Sorry if I'm oftopic. Well, I don't know if it has be solved in 0.8.0 cause I still haven't install it on my new Gentoo GNU/Linux. With previous version of FGFS on Mandrake GNU/Linux, on the airport of my home-little-french-town, there was a runway still in grass, and it's in hard since a long time. _My question is_ : how modify this ? (or : where to ask such questions) In fact, I plan to do a GNU/Linux install-party here, and invite people from airschool to it. Then show them FGFS, and the pretty cool way to have quite all the world scenery for free. Then, I will be very pleased if I could show them by facts the way of Free Libre Software. I mean : your airport is not up-to-date, you're concerned users, then do it if you can, or ask to do it and be active with your software evolution. I hope you see what I mean. So please don't change that runway now ! ;-) Thanks, Fabien ILLIDE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Elite Simulator
Alex Perry writes: A lot of approach plates, needing a course reversal, either use a procedure turn or a hold. The former is easier, but needs a depicted hold somewhere else in most cases, the latter. Thus, I've been given radar vector, direct to navaid when able, then hold, efc for the approach at specific time. So far, I've never had a hold enroute, before getting into terminal airspace. I haven't seen a hold instead of a PT yet in Canadian approaches, but then I haven't looked at approaches for mountainous areas. I can see where a hold (possibly with a shuttle descent) could be valuable near high terrain. By the way, here's an interesting bit of trivia: Canadian approaches have almost completely abandoned OMI markers (completely for middle and inner). Instead, at high traffic airports, they use an NDB a few miles from the threshold for the FAF (and often the IAF as well), so you have to use the ADF (or DME) together with ILS to establish the FAF; there's sometimes another NDB off the far end of the runway for missed approach. It looks like I'm not going to see a marker light at any point in my instrument training. Here's an example from the DAFIF (without a second NDB for the missed approach, since the VOR is nicely lined up): http://164.214.2.62/products/digitalaero/terminals/v0211/CANADA/OTTAWA_MACDONALD_CARTIER_INTL/V_ILS_OR_NDB_RWY_32.PDF I can think of three advantages to switching from OMI to NDB: 1. ATC can still allow instrument approaches using the NDB (to higher minima) when the ILS is U/S. 2. ATC can vector traffic directly to the IAF or FAF more easily. 3. VFR traffic can use the NDB to line up in marginal VMC conditions. Can anyone think of other benefits to throwing out the OMI markers? What are the disadvantages? As you might guess, it's rare to see an IFR Canadian plane without an ADF radio, especially since the majority of approaches at smaller airports are still NDB or NDB/GPS, and many smaller towns are joined by NDB air routes rather than Victor airways. Without RNAV, I could not even fly to Kingston from Ottawa IFR without an ADF. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Elite Simulator
Alex Perry writes: Instructor console, intuitive enough that non-software-engineers can operate it without being trained by someone already familiar with it. But that's about it. Course plotting should be part of that. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : David Megginson writes: Curtis L. Olson writes: Our world (once I finishe with the other lighting schemes, and once it's regenerated) will be as close to reality as our database allows. Have you patched TerraGear to eliminate runway edge lights for unlighted runways? Well, patched maybe isn't the best word, but essentially yes. Now we only generate the runway lighting schemes that we understand: ASLF-II, MALS, MALSF, MALSR, SSALS, SSALF, SSALR, REIL ... Threshold, edge, and center line lighting are seperate entries in our database and those are generated accordingly. There are still more approach lighting arrangements that need to be implimented ... Robin has a list of 20-25 in his docs. There are airports that have intermitent, remotely switchable with onboard radio, lighting. When you arrive in the vicinity of such an airport, you push (sorry, lack of english vocabulary here) say 7 times in 5 seconds on the radio button to switch it on. It switch off automatically after 15 minutes or you can switch it off with 9 pushes. Is there description for such an arrangement in the airport database? Usually, details on this are in the Sectional Chart. Cheers, -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
re: [Flightgear-devel] Change in runway type...
Fabien ILLIDE writes: _My question is_ : how modify this ? (or : where to ask such questions) The easy part is to edit the entry in $FG_ROOT/Airports/default.apt.gz. The hard part is to regenerate the scenery for that tile. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Licensing issues
Erik Hofman wrote: Okay, here's my view. I've spent numurous hours of work into FlightGear (sometimes even almost as a day job) not only for the fun of it, but also because it's Free (for everyone). The fun would stop for me if I noticed my work ens up in a commercial application as an easy way to make money. You don't want to know how much time I've spent creating the F-16 configuration file and some of the texture (realy, you don't). That said, if the product will clearly state it's based on FLightGear _and_ provided the URL to the website, I'm willing to accept almost anything because that assures me there won't be any commercial compettitor which directly affects FlightGear. For instance, if there ever will be a sailing simulator based on large parts of FLightGear, I would have no obligations because it doesn't affect FlightGear itself. However, if for example the textures end up included in a commercial flight simulator just because it saves them time, I will strongly disagree. On the other hand, if one or more of the active FlightGear developers get the opportunity to spent their life developing FlightGear that way (which *is* a donation to FlightGear if you ask me) I would have no obligations at all. Erik Erik, I don't think there's any movement to change the license on the base package. I believe this discussion is on moving useful code routines from fg to sg, to make simgear a more useful and attractive platform. --Brandon Bergren ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Panel font crash
I grabbed current CVS last night for the first time in a while, and got bitten by a bug with the 3D panel support. Has anyone else noticed this? What happens is that on an aircraft with no 2D panel at all (a4, c172-3d, but oddly not the j3cub), the sim crashes at startup. The first problem was that the gcc 3.2 optimizer made a total hash out of the stack, and gdb was useless. I don't know if that's a feature or a bug... Recompiling with -O1 showed that the led_font object in panel.cxx was never initialized. This is a static object that gets created in Panel::init(). Well, init() doesn't get called for 3D panels, because it touches static state. I clearly said so in my comment. :) But since no 2D panel gets created, this is left null at runtime. The attached one-liner fixes the problem, but someone with more knowlege should probably think of a better solution. We shouldn't be initializing static state from within a member initializer. Maybe there's a need for a panel subsystem as separate from the individual FGPanel objects? A minor bug, too, is that this leaks memory. One font gets created per panel, and then dropped on the floor when the next panel is initialized. I'm not sure if it allocates an OpenGL texture object for each one or not. If it does, then this is definitely something we should fix. Andy diff -u -r1.1.1.1 panelnode.cxx --- panelnode.cxx 10 Sep 2002 01:14:08 - 1.1.1.1 +++ panelnode.cxx 18 Oct 2002 18:02:08 - @@ -14,6 +14,8 @@ // it -- those methods touch static state. _panel = fgReadPanel(props-getStringValue(path)); +_panel-init(); + // Read out the pixel-space info _xmax = _panel-getWidth(); _ymax = _panel-getHeight(); -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
Frederic BOUVIER writes: There are airports that have intermitent, remotely switchable with onboard radio, lighting. When you arrive in the vicinity of such an airport, you push (sorry, lack of english vocabulary here) say 7 times in 5 seconds on the radio button to switch it on. It switch off automatically after 15 minutes or you can switch it off with 9 pushes. ARCAL lighting is very common in Canada as well, and, I assume, at smaller airports in the U.S. As far as I can tell, it is not supported in the current database; you can look at docs-mini/AptNavFAQ.FlightGear.html in the FlightGear distro for details. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Elite Simulator
Alex Perry writes: I get the impression that the US intends to transition from NDB/VOR service to VOR/GPS service, in which case the GPS will fulfil all the roles of the NDB in the above list, allowing NDBs to be shut down. I noticed that between a Canada Air Pilot (Ontario) from 2000 and a copy from this year, non-precision GPS approaches have been popping up like weeds. Part of the reason for that is downloading from the federal government: nearly all airports have been pushed down to the municipalities, and GPS approaches eliminate the cost of maintaining an NDB (giving the airport a slightly better chance of staying open). As far as I know, however, we have only one plane at our flying club with an IFR-certified GPS, while they all have ADF radios. Since our VOR network is much less dense than the American one (often with 100nm or more between stations), we cannot use VOR approaches that often, though there are a couple around Ottawa. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
re: [Flightgear-devel] Panel font crash
Andy Ross writes: The attached one-liner fixes the problem, but someone with more knowlege should probably think of a better solution. We shouldn't be initializing static state from within a member initializer. Maybe there's a need for a panel subsystem as separate from the individual FGPanel objects? It's a hard call. The J3Cub shows that it's possible to have a true 3D panel, using 3D models rather than a projected 2D panel. We'll still need the 2D panel for some applications, but I'd like to start deemphasizing it when we can. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
John Check writes: On Friday 18 October 2002 8:35 am, Curtis L. Olson wrote: John Check writes: If you want to fly this yourself, you can grab: http://www.flightgear.org/tmp/KSFO.btg.gz Does anybody have a copy or a proper link? it seems to be 404. My fault, didn't push my change out to the web server ... Curt. Curt, What do you think about tossing this in the base package? Just wondering That's fine, although it's not elevated and has large gaps where it meets the surround terrain ... CUrt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
Curtis L. Olson writes: Yes, we have CAL and CAL-II in the database, but no ARCAL. ARCAL describes how the lights are activated, not their configuration; presumably, Calvert I and Calvert II approach lighting systems could be ARCAL, but since those are used (I think) mainly at military installations, I doubt they would be. On Canadian VNCs, airports with ARCAL lighting have an L with a box around it under the airport name. Clicking the microphone several times in fast succession turns the runway and taxiway lights on for a while (the beacon is always on). It would be a very dramatic effect to add to FlightGear. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Panel font crash
Andy Ross writes: I continue to believe that a 2D panel layout is an easier problem for cockpit wonks to deal with than a 3D modelling application is, FWIW. Some instruments, like the gyro ball, really are inherently 3D and can't be easily placed on a 2D panel. But pretty much everything else is simpler there -- move the altimeter a little to the left by decreasing its Y coordinate, etc... You are almost certainly right, but we can allow the same thing in the regular 3D modelling code by putting a transform above everything. My concern is that cockpit wonks already have to use the 3D animation code for some things (throttle, yoke, etc.) so forcing them to learn another method for placing gauges is a little rough. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
I would also like to add the ability to turn runway/approach lighting on/off from the instructor station (i.e. tower control). But that's step n+1 assuming I'm working on step n right now. Curt. David Megginson writes: Curtis L. Olson writes: Yes, we have CAL and CAL-II in the database, but no ARCAL. ARCAL describes how the lights are activated, not their configuration; presumably, Calvert I and Calvert II approach lighting systems could be ARCAL, but since those are used (I think) mainly at military installations, I doubt they would be. On Canadian VNCs, airports with ARCAL lighting have an L with a box around it under the airport name. Clicking the microphone several times in fast succession turns the runway and taxiway lights on for a while (the beacon is always on). It would be a very dramatic effect to add to FlightGear. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Boeing Unveils Bird of Prey Stealth Technology Demonstrator
FYI http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/q4/nr_021018m.html ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
John Check writes: Curt, What do you think about tossing this in the base package? Just wondering That's fine, although it's not elevated and has large gaps where it meets the surround terrain ... CUrt. John: Are you going to go ahead with this? When it gets in the base package (you do mean the develpment package?), are you going to post an announcement? I am going to try and build FGFS again with the new base package. Haven't had time to do this lately. But I want to wait for the runway stuff. Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Wright flyer wing warping (Jim Wilson)
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002 10:37:45 +0200, Marcel Wittebrood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dear Jim, We made a FEM model of the outboard wing to investigate the shape when ..fem model, cool, url? warping (see attached pict). I applied 40 N to the model and it warps 3798 mm at the tip. This will not be possible in reality because I did ..erm. I'm 1805 mm tall. ;-) not model the fabric. Because the wing is very thin this influence will be very small however. The model shows that the stiffness against warping is very small. The pilot will thus only feel the aerodynamic stiffness and some extra force due to friction. You can see that the deflection is almost linear to the tip and thus the warping angle will also be almost linear. The wires are steel 2.6 mm diameter. the ribs are 2 spruce beam elements (20x10 mm) glued to the front and back spar (spruce, 28 x 48 mm). (I did not post the picture to the flightgear mailing list, those who are interested can email me) ..why not post the urls to the model and the pictures? kind regards, marcel wittebrood -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
On Friday 18 October 2002 7:13 pm, Jon Berndt wrote: John Check writes: Curt, What do you think about tossing this in the base package? Just wondering That's fine, although it's not elevated and has large gaps where it meets the surround terrain ... The last time we had KSFO with lights in there it had some problems too. I think it's worth the tradeoff but if you think it's going to break anything I can hold off. CUrt. John: Are you going to go ahead with this? When it gets in the base package (you I have to try it first. Yes, that would be the unstable (main) branch. You shouldn't need to do anything special. do mean the develpment package?), are you going to post an announcement? I Well, commits automagically generate posts to fg-cvslogs, but I'll give you a heads up. am going to try and build FGFS again with the new base package. Haven't had time to do this lately. But I want to wait for the runway stuff. Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] runway lighting
John Check writes: The last time we had KSFO with lights in there it had some problems too. I think it's worth the tradeoff but if you think it's going to break anything I can hold off. I'd prefer to put in a complete rebuild from William Riley if he has time to redo the base package. I'm going to try building w130n30 and w080n40 myself tonight, but (for whatever reason) William's scenery always looks a little better than mine. I did a small experiment with the tile around CYOW, and the new lighting turned out extremely well, aside from two nit-picks: 1. I'm still getting a triangle with three points for each of the lights, both in 16bpp and 24bpp (usually called 32bpp). 2. The PAPI isn't functional yet, but I'm not sure that it's supposed to be. On all other points, *very* nice. If William doesn't have time, I may be able to contribute some temporary scenery; we don't want another case where the edges don't match up. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
