Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Options saving patches
On Saturday 17 December 2005 11:40, Erik Hofman wrote: > Lighten up, I just started looking at this patch since Fred promised to > fill in the missing gaps. I was delighted to see a form of the options saving patches going into CVS, since I've been using the earlier versions with no troubles at all for some time now. I was less delighted to find that SG no longer builds... sg_path.cxx: In member function `void SGPath::create_dir(mode_t)': sg_path.cxx:203: error: `subdir' undeclared (first use this function) sg_path.cxx:203: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in.) make[3]: *** [sg_path.o] Error 1 I really hope this is made to work at least as well as the earlier patches because I think it's a _great_ feature and one that makes life with FG that little bit more pleasant... Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Problems in the latest CVS version
On Tuesday 15 November 2005 16:17, Vivian Meazza wrote: > Hunter starts with the brakes on by default. It works here with cvs as of > this morning. OK, I can confirm Dai's problem. Using GCC-4.0.2 (as standard on the latest Ubuntu) there are no initially apparent problems compiling or running today's CVS, but starting on the carrier the hunter immediately starts "slipping" back along the deck despite the brakes being on. Machine is an AMD64 running the latest 32bit Ubuntu distro. This apparently does not happen on a similar setup running the 64bit version of the same distro, although I can't personally confirm that. It doesn't happen on my own 32bit AthlonXP Gentoo box either (with an older GCC - 3.4.4). Hope that narrows down the likely culprit a bit for someone... Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Segfaults with recent and latest CVS
On Friday 02 December 2005 06:16, Mathias Fröhlich wrote: > Sorry that I did not respond to that thread earlier ... Just a confirmation that whatever you did (My brain does not have the capacity to follow the terrain stuff in any detail :-) obviously worked as the problem no longer exists as far as I can tell. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] Segfaults with recent and latest CVS
Last night (using completely up-to-date CVS) I noticed that fgfs segfaults
reliably if one relocates the a/c to KOAK using the "position a/c on ground"
menu.
After a bit more investigation, it appears that this is caused by a nan in the
yasim turbulence stuff, because it's being fed garbage. Using a JSBSim a/c,
one is unceremoniously dumped into the sea.
Starting the sim at KOAK does not display the problem, one must start
somewhere else (anywhere, as far as I can tell) and relocate for the problem
to show.
AJ
GDB shows;
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread -1225333040 (LWP 32321)]
yasim::Turbulence::getTurbulence (this=0xfc39620, loc=0xa1e0c008,
alt=nan(0x40), up=0xbfc60cc0, turbOut=0xbfc60d10) at
Turbulence.cpp:100
100 static inline float c2fu(unsigned char c) { return
(c+0.5)*(1.0/256); }
(gdb) bt
#0 yasim::Turbulence::getTurbulence (this=0xfc39620, loc=0xa1e0c008,
alt=nan(0x40), up=0xbfc60cc0, turbOut=0xbfc60d10) at
Turbulence.cpp:100
#1 0x081d2843 in yasim::Model::localWind (this=0xfc31bac, pos=0xbfc60df0,
s=0xbfc60f10, out=0xbfc60e00, alt=-1.52296607e-18) at Model.cpp:537
#2 0x081d2113 in yasim::Model::calcForces (this=0xfc31bac, s=0xbfc60f10)
at Model.cpp:399
#3 0x081cf70c in yasim::Integrator::calcNewInterval (this=0xfc31bb0)
at Integrator.cpp:176
#4 0x081c79d4 in yasim::FGFDM::iterate (this=0xfc31ba8, dt=0.0083377)
at FGFDM.cpp:91
#5 0x081c1b70 in YASim::update (this=0xbc03698, dt=0.22352000276247658)
at YASim.cxx:213
#6 0x08051b45 in fgUpdateTimeDepCalcs () at main.cxx:168
#7 0x08052714 in fgMainLoop () at main.cxx:476
#8 0x08089ac9 in fgOSMainLoop () at fg_os_sdl.cxx:232
#9 0x080551b0 in fgMainInit (argc=2, argv=0xbfc61824) at main.cxx:1007
#10 0x080515da in main (argc=-1579106296, argv=0xa1e0c008) at
bootstrap.cxx:193
(gdb)
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Autopilot
On Thursday 01 December 2005 09:48, Steve Hosgood wrote: > I knew there was an autopilot on the cockpit display, but on my monitor > at home (1024x768) it was a bit difficult to read. This is a "problem" for many instruments in many a/c - on higher resolution screens too. The "solution" is to make frequent use of the FOV keys and the mouse controlled view direction - in other words, "look at" the relevant instrument with the mouse and "zoom in" a little with the x key. Usually, you can find a balance between keeping some kind of visual reference to what the a/c is doing and being able to see the particular instrument or device clearly enough to use. With a little practice, this becomes almost automatic. Outside of a clever head and eye tracking system, I doubt there's a much better way of replicating what your eyes and visual processing systems do so effortlessly IRL. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Displaying Multiple Views/Using cockpit controls
On Tuesday 29 November 2005 22:32, Buchanan, Stuart wrote: > Absolutely - I just had a look at the Carrier HowTo on the Wiki and it > looks like exactly what is required. I assume no-one will mind. Yes, no-one is fine with that ;-) I don't think Vivian is likely to sue you for breach of copyright over his additions either... > Of course, any changes to the Getting Started Guide will only be present > in the next release for most users, so we'll have a fair few questions > until then... Of course - which is where the Wiki comes in as I see it. Up to date information that's very easily kept that way... Not a replacement for the conventional docs, but I do feel the link on the FG website could be slightly more prominent - even folk who were actively looking for it have failed to find it. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Displaying Multiple Views/Using cockpit controls
On Tuesday 29 November 2005 21:41, Buchanan, Stuart wrote: > Hint taken ;). I was thinking of writing a section on various features > such as the Nimitz, multiplayer and multiple displays anyway. > > Unfortunately I only have a single PC, so I'll be writing blind. Would you > be able to review my text for me? Rather than re-inventing the wheel, why not take the carrier-howto and multiplayer howto from the wiki and include them (editing as you see fit for style etc)? You don't need more than one PC to experience multiplayer of course, but I'm sure you knew that. A section on multiple displays would be of interest to quite a few people I think - it comes up now and again on the IRC channel and isn't something I have experience of with FGFS. AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Download/Install App
On Saturday 26 November 2005 14:25, Arthur Wiebe wrote: > The idea is for an aircraft application. This application would > download (preferrably an XML file) from a server, parse, and through a > GUI have the ability to select aircraft, see details including > previews, press a button to download and install. > The application would guess the most likely places for where to > install. But let the user change it of course. > The application would be written in C++ using the wxWidgets framework > so that it will look and work right on all platforms. This hypothetical application sounds very much to me like an extension to the existing fgrun... > But there's no way I'm going to take it on myself. /me sick of that. > So any takers? Or is it a rotten idea I should never have posted > about? Or perhaps even something already discussed. Personally, I think it's a good idea, particularly for a certain class of users who often seem to have absolutely no concept of what goes on behind those mesmerising icons. At the moment, they either flood the users list with the same old repetitive emails (which is part of what it's there for, of course), or much worse, just give up on FG as being "over their heads". Apps with similar facilities are not uncommon; I'm sure it could be done fairly easily. But again, not by me since I'm not a C/C++ programmer and have enough to work on as it is, even with fgfs related things... It maybe sounds about right for a project idea for undergraduate students, as has been requested here recently... Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Gear animation tutorial
On Saturday 26 November 2005 03:09, Josh Babcock wrote: > I just made up a tutorial about making gear retraction animations run > smoothly with complicated landing gears. It's still missing the final > animation code, but I thought I'd throw it up to see what everybody > thinks. You have no idea how good your timing is on this one :-) I've been putting off doing the gear animation on my Lightning for a while now, but with this sort of insight I'm certain the job will be much quicker. Like so many other things in the modelling process, a step by step example can save so many hours of slaving away learning the hard way. > It's got lots of in-line images, so be warned. I'm considering > changing this to in-line thumbnails hotlinked to the full sized images. I like it just as it is, myself - I find that having to open bigger pictures from in-line thumbnails is just a nuisance when trying to juggle several open windows or browser tabs, even with a sane window management setup. Of course, having had broadband available here for less than a year I remember well the plight of the dial-up user; but even then, for tutorials I just downloaded the whole lot and _then_ read them; saved time and bandwidth in the long run. The full-size in-line pictures probably make that process even simpler, if anything. > Please give feedback. OK, it's great - thanks! Obviously the final animation code will be nice to finish it off, but as it stands it looks excellent. I'll let you know if I get baffled at any point once I start working through it. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Realistic daytime skycolor
On Tuesday 22 November 2005 15:41, Erik Hofman wrote: > The skylight model we are using is also based on physical properties and > isn't far off from the model you describe. That model however doesn't > allow for some of the cloud colorings features we are doing. Like in the dawn screenshot where I tried to show that off; http://www.adeptopensource.co.uk/personal/fg/747-Heathrow-dawn_moon.jpg > In fact our model still has a lot of potential left. > I wouldn't want to trade it for another approach. I don't know anything about the theory of it all, but I do know that the sky in FG looks truly amazing at dawn and dusk in particular (colours, moon phases, star positions etc) - and I think we are _really_ underselling FG by not having a few screenshots illustrating that on the website. I'm sure others can come up with much nicer ones than I have... they're all going to offend the "darkness police" whatever :-) Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] .tgz extractors for windows
On Monday 21 November 2005 15:52, Curtis L. Olson wrote: > Can someone post a link to a good, free, unencumbered windows > uncompresser that handles the .tgz format? I'd like to post a link on > the aircraft downloads page to assist those windows users who aren't > familiar with this format and don't happen to have a working extractor > already installed on their systems. I use this if I'm working on someone else's windows box... http://www.7-zip.org/ AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 0.9.9 Bug
On Friday 18 November 2005 22:16, Arthur Wiebe wrote: > > Yes, that is correct. But, if I enable sound, the bug still shows > > up. In other words, if I start with --enable-sound then it starts > > with sound, as it should, but the dialog box does not allow me to > > turn it off. > I noticed that too but never thought anything of it. So I can confirm it. Must be platform specific - it works perfectly on Linux/x86. AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [0.9.9] screenshots for flightgear.org
On Thursday 17 November 2005 23:29, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: > Other than the one taken during daytime, I think the rest should be kept > away from being presented. They are simply too dark. Erm.. it's called atmosphere. FG looks very impressive around dawn and dusk, and some of the rougher edges in the scenery are hidden. AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [0.9.9] screenshots for flightgear.org
On Thursday 17 November 2005 15:45, Melchior FRANZ wrote: > I don't mind if you (Curt) don't use them. But we should *really* put new > ones up before 0.9.9 is released. All people who see the release note > will check the HP and would be disappointed to see only old screenshots. > That leaves a bad taste before they even tried fgfs. Even worse: > reviewers will have the same experience! I agree that new screenshots are probably the first thing some folk will look for before deciding to bother downloading... So here are a couple of airliners in case they're wanted - no idea why I have so many screenshots of the things when I almost never fly them! http://www.adeptopensource.co.uk/personal/fg/747-Heathrow-dawn_moon.jpg http://www.adeptopensource.co.uk/personal/fg/737-Inverness-ground-dawn.jpg http://www.adeptopensource.co.uk/personal/fg/747-Heathrow-daytime.jpg AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Problems in the latest CVS version
On Tuesday 15 November 2005 15:02, Dai Qiang wrote: > I actually did nothing but started with the following > commmand: fgfs > --fg-root=/home/azuron/Project/CVS/FG/data > --aircraft=hunter --carrier=Nimitz > The situation was like what I just decribed from the > beginning. I just tried that myself - SG and FG from late last night; the Hunter seemed to stay in the one place as it should with the brakes on... > I have tried Shift + b and it was the same. It's > especially weired that when I pressed P to pause the > simulation, Hunter started to move forward according > to the carrier. I am really confused. :-/ I do know that the carrier is not really compatible with pausing the sim (at least that was the case a month or two ago; I've been working on other stuff recently and not testing the carrier much. I'd be suspicious that you haven't got a clean cvs tree there and still have some old stuff hanging around. You did remember to "make install" didn't you? I know I've forgotten at times in the past... Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Problems in the latest CVS version
On Tuesday 15 November 2005 13:18, Dai Qiang wrote: > I am using the latest CVS version of SimGear, > FlightGear data and source. After I enabled the Nimitz > demo, I found the Hunter plane moved backward slowly > when it's landed on the Nimitz, because Nimitz was > moving forward, and Hunter remained at its original > position. Just checking the obvious - you have engaged the parking brake, haven't you? (Shift - b) Likewise, on land, if the 747 is sitting on a sloping runway without the brakes on, it will naturally roll downhill. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: freeglut on SuSE 10
On Tuesday 15 November 2005 03:13, Steve Knoblock wrote: > I've got Flight Gear 0.9.8 running. I will try installing the CVS > version soon or the prerelease. Good stuff - as far as I can think, you ought to have a fairly straightforward time building either now that you have the glut problem sorted out. > I may show up on IRC in time. I don't frequent any other IRC channels, but #flightgear is generally quite a pleasant place, and great for getting quick answers to wee questions that you might not want to bother a mailing list with... Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: freeglut on SuSE 10
On Sunday 13 November 2005 20:15, Steve Knoblock wrote: > I installed the downgrade of freeglut, but I still get a missing > header error. I think this header is in the freeglut-devel but did not > download that module. I cannot seem to access the 9.3 RPMs in the Yast > repositories. Can someone point me in the right direction where to get > these files? If you are building software with a compile-time dependency on a package, you will need the -devel RPM too. I'm astonished you haven't yet come across RPMFind.net... http://www.rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/search.php?query=freeglut-devel&submit=Search+...&system=suse&arch= > This is getting tiresome. Of course we'd all rather this problem hadn't been introduced in freeglut; but at the same time, it shouldn't be difficult to work around. In your case, manually install the two freeglut-2.2 RPMs, or just compile FG with --enable-sdl (assuming you have libsdl and associated headers installed). Let us know how you get on, or better, if you're still stuck, ask for real-time help on the IRC channel. There has been a steady stream of such, I dare say another one wouldn't hurt... Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear v0.9.9-pre2
On Thursday 10 November 2005 17:02, Steve Hosgood wrote:
> The latter few lines of "strace fgfs" look like this:
> open("/usr/share/FlightGear/data/cloudlayers.xml", O_RDONLY) =
> -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
I'm sure I saw an hour or so ago on this list that this file was mistakenly
omitted from the release? If it's not there, grabbing it from CVS and trying
to run fgfs again would be my first step.
AJ
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Joystick issues with throttleAxis()
On Wednesday 09 November 2005 20:56, Buchanan, Stuart wrote: > Mine does, but then since I sent in the patch I probably don't count... You certainly do, because the new config does nothing except implement normal behaviour... > I wonder if it is OS or USB specific? I've got a USB version and run under > WinXP. Might be... My understanding is that all these sticks are USB but could operate through some sort of optional adapter for gameport use. Certainly I'm using mine just plugged into a USB port. I'm on Linux (2.6) here - don't have a windows box to compare with. Ralf, do you? Any other Force-3D users out there? AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Which aircraft to include in v0.9.9?
On Wednesday 09 November 2005 19:31, Curtis L. Olson wrote: > Just glancing through the list very quickly, potential candidates for > inclusion might be the b1900d, Citation Bravo, Concorde, dhc2, F-8E, > Hurricane, Marchetti, MiG-15, seahawk, Spitfire, tu154 ... (?) > Any opinions? Note that if you propose adding an airplane, you also > have to say which one we remove from the existing list ... I think, especially in view of the spate of posts a short while ago, it would be wise to only include (by default) aircraft which are quite complete - i.e. with populated cockpits etc. People who know what they want and what they're doing can easily download the others. My vote would probably go for the Spitfire - that way you actually get two planes for the price of one, and one of those is carrier capable - I think we should make sure we have at least one or two carrier capable planes distributed by default. To remove... probably the one of the Cessnas (purely personal tastes!) or the Wright Flyer (which I'd say is kind of "special interest" and not that useful for general flying). Anyway, like you say anything removed would still be there for download... AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Joystick issues with throttleAxis()
On Wednesday 09 November 2005 19:04, Dave Culp wrote: > That configuration file applies an offset of -0.3 prior to the scale. That > shouldn't be allowed, and I guess someone's personal configuration snuck in > by accident? I don't think so in this case. That offset apparently worked for most people with this stick - I know my throttle's been "broken" since using the new nasal based config, in that I can never get the throttle input less than 0.24. If an offset fixes a problem for everyone with this stick, I can't see any valid argument against it. If the offset required is completely unpredictable of course, it's not an acceptable solution. I would be interested to know if anyone has a Wingman Force 3d which gives the correct full range of throttle values with the new config... Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS "make" error (Cygwin)
On Monday 07 November 2005 15:02, Kevin Jones wrote: > CVS FG source at 2:30pm (UK time) Monday 7th November fails to "make" > on Cygwin with the following error: > make[2]: Entering directory /source/src/MultiPlayer > make[2]: *** No rule to make target `tiny_xdr.cpp', needed by > `tiny_xdr.o'. Stop. Not just on cygwin, lots of people (including me) will have been finding that. Try "make distclean" first. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] LibGL error
On Monday 07 November 2005 12:05, Martin Spott wrote: > You should have a closer look at the upcoming XOrg-6.9/7.0 that'll > contain OpenSource drivers for the ATI Radeon X8x0 series. Good news indeed - I knew there were OS drivers for ATI cards in exisistance, but hadn't heard too much about their usability yet... > This is why I typically buy ATI: There _is_ a chance that OpenSource > drivers appear after some time while you still have closed binary > drivers to fill the gap. With nVidia you can be certain that you'll > _never_ see OpenSource drivers. I think this makes an essential > difference. I agree with you, of course; only if one is working on a project which needs solid graphics support _now_ then one doesn't have quite the same flexibility. From what I see, the ATI binary drivers are a good bit behind nvidia in the "fit and forget" hassle-free stakes. For my own (FG!) use, though, I'll be watching the progress of those open source drivers closely because my own nvidia card is nearing retirement age and I have an aversion to running any non-open source drivers. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] LibGL error
On Sunday 06 November 2005 14:47, Mathias Fröhlich wrote: > But looking at those problems with ATIs closed source drivers, I must say > that NVidia seems to work better. Certainly I've stuck with nvidia for all jobs involving graphics ever since Matrox fell behind, and I've not had reason to regret it so far... > On the other hand, many people see massive performance hits with current > NVidia drivers in presence of OpenGL points (all our lights are such > points ...). The NVidia card at work does not show any problem with FG at > night, but that one is a extremely expensive Quadro card certified for > professional CAD use (often many points/lines). AFAIK this bug disappeared a while ago - it only affected a particular driver release (or releases, I'm not certain). Certainly I upgraded the nvidia drivers on an affected machine last week and framerates were back to normal. > All together no 'better choice' ... I really don't like closed source anything, and device drivers in particular, but IME nvidia's offerings are about as good as could be hoped for in the circumstances (although obviously not perfect.) I'd switch allegiance in a flash if well performing, stable, open source drivers were available for some other reasonably priced cards though. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Buildings?????
On Friday 04 November 2005 12:36, Buchanan, Stuart wrote: > I may take another look then. I've been using AC3D for buildings are > aircraft, but it isn't particularly easy for some tasks - like modifying > the cockpit. I think that's more a reflection on the relative complexity of the two tasks... if you think modifying a cockpit isn't easy in AC3D, which you're obviously used to, I will be amazed if you find it easier in Blender :-) I find it helps to hide as much of the aircraft as possible and make good use of the "lock" facility in AC3D when working on the more intricate parts of the cockpit. Oh and thanks for adding the Forth bridges - I never twigged at all that the rail bridge was just a repainted Golden Gate! Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Instrument Making
On Wednesday 02 November 2005 01:53, Innis Cunningham wrote: > Now that I have been converted to 3D instrument making > I am wundering if we should start an instrument repository > like we have for the Aircraft and Scenery. I do quite like the idea in some respects, but to be honest I don't think it's really necessary... > For this to work each instrument would have to be totally > self contained like the instruments in the 747 and hunter > and a few others that don't come to mind. And that's why I don't think it's necessary - for my Lightning cockpit, I've been able to make use of the Hunter instruments (which I'm guessing have family ties with the p51 instruments?) to get me started. Because I have a strange attraction to dials and gauges, and a plentiful supply of cockpit photos I took for the purpose, I've made a fairly complete set of my own, but I could equally just have borrowed any or all of the Hunter ones. Although Syd's work on the b1900, citiation and beaver cockpits is exemplary (and I'm never likely to equal it) I do think it's a good idea for people to make instruments self contained if they don't mind working that way for the reasons you suggest. > Anyway thems is my thoughts what do you think I don't think there's really a need to maintain a special repository as such - since they're all GPL'd one can easily just use any suitable instrument from an existing FG aircraft. Having said that, if someone did go ahead with the idea, I'd be very happy to submit all the ones I've done. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] freeglut cursor problem
On Monday 31 October 2005 14:05, Bram Stolk wrote: > I get this from a fresh flightgear/simgear from cvs: > freeglut (fgfs): Failed to create cursor As the archives will quickly tell you... there have been loads of people finding that freeglut 2.4 contains a bug which should be fixed in their latest CVS - if you don't want to upgrade that, you can downgrade to freeglut 2.2, or recompile SG and FG using SDL instead. If you _are_ using recent freeglut CVS, I'm stuck :-) Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] New joystick bindings XML file for WIngman Force 3D USB
On Sunday 23 October 2005 09:14, Buchanan, Stuart wrote: > I've created a new XML binding file for the USB > version of the Wingman Force 3D joystick. I've been using a USB Wingman Force3D stick with FG (under Linux) for quite a few months now using the current config (OK, a hacked version for my own setup). Which axes did you have trouble with? Never mind, the config file was ripe for updating, so thanks for bringing it under scrutiny :-) > Annoyingly the axes assignments are different from the > Wingman Force 3D (assuming that file is correct), so > it isn't just a case of adding a new name field to > wingman-force-3d.xml. I think we've determined now that one file is all that that's necessary for this stick and your problem was due to windows assigning the order of the axes differently to linux? Following on, On Sunday 23 October 2005 09:43, Melchior FRANZ wrote: > BTW, this looks fishy, too: > >/controls/engines/engine[0]/throttle >-.3 >-1.0 > > Did you write this for an uncalibrated joystick? Really -0.3? I think has come about because the throttle (on my stick at least, but going from that entry, probably on others too) does not map nicely from 0 to 1, but from about 0.25 to 1. Calibration shouldn't be necessary on this stick, and it always gives the same values for min and max positions, unlike an uncalibrated analogue stick that generally gives different numbers each time it's plugged in until calibrated. Unfortunately, I've never got round to tweaking the config so that it moves the throttle value from min right through to max, but I might have a play with it if I find the time. Anyway, and most importantly, this _is_ as far as I can tell, a straight replacement for the current wingman-force-3d.xml, so can we please ensure that it has the current two tags added to it before it's committed? As always, I'm ready to be corrected if someone out there has a wingman force 3d stick that doesn't work properly under the new config - mine appears to after adding the correct tag although I've not tested the rudder part as I have pedals on a different interface. As an aside, I much prefer the two big buttons on the base for gear up and gear down, the left hand set of stick-top buttons for flaps and the RHS ones for elevator trim, but each to their own and all that - I'm perfectly happy modifying my own config to do what I want. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Winter Textures
On Friday 21 October 2005 17:09, Erik Hofman wrote:
> I've downloaded the winter.tar.bz2 file again and it's working fine for me.
It might well be, but it's not for the rest of us :-)
Error 550 here ("Not a directory") for both those files.
I'm looking forward to having some variation in the FG scenery especially with
winter now approaching again..,
Cheers,
AJ
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] a question on Sound/fg_fx.cxx /sim/sound/pause
On Thursday 13 October 2005 18:11, Curtis L. Olson wrote: > Back to serioiusness, I think since most FlightGear participants are not > active licensed pilots, there would be some need for flexibility and > education on the proper procedures ... just like in real life, but > obviously without real lives directly at stake so we can afford to allow > more mistakes and more active learning. Phew, a sense of proportion, and much more coherent than my intended reply :-) Like you say, most FG users are not pilots IRL, and speaking personally, the new MP capability has increased my knowledge and understanding of basic airfield operations in a way that just reading a book could not. I currently know practically _nothing_ about ATC procedures, but if the facility was in place in conjunction with the MP servers, I (and plenty others) would obviously have the chance to learn and practice the basics... Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] a question on Sound/fg_fx.cxx /sim/sound/pause processing
On Thursday 13 October 2005 14:42, Oliver Schroeder wrote: > Which reminds me of another thing. Is it possible to use /dev/dsp in a > non-blocking mode? I want to start a second application which uses /dev/dsp > while flightgear is running. Not as far as I'm aware - with ALSA, one should use /dev/adsp which is nonblocking IIRC, but of course ALSA is only on Linux. No idea what the options are for a cross-platform solution.. > I was investigating several applications which can serve as a "radio" for > multiplayermode and noticed that it is not possible. I think something like this is badly needed - trying to fly with any degree of coordination with other people is practically impossible using any system which involves typing. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [PATCH] mice.xml: fix the view recentering
On Thursday 13 October 2005 12:12, Richard Bytheway wrote: > Can the patch be modified so that clicking the middle and left buttons > simultaneously recentres the offset? Might make things a bit tricky for those of us whose "middle button" is actually a mini-joystick or other non-clickable scrolling device (or simply have a two-button mouse) and therefore must emulate the middle click with the other two buttons... I must admit I don't use the view offset adjustment myself, only the direction mode... AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [PATCH] README.multiplayer update
On Wednesday 12 October 2005 16:30, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote: > Quoting the Wiki multiplayer docs at > http://www.seedwiki.com/wiki/flight_gear/flightgear_multiplayer_documentati >on.cfm?wpid=203209 "This document can be found at > http://www.o-schroeder.de/fg_server/ Please check there for later > versions." As far as I know that comment's wrong - I wrote the Howto that's on the wiki and it isn't on OS' site as far as I can see (his site points to the wiki entry). I'll remove the comment from the Wiki for the sake of clarity unless anyone has reason to object? > I did point to the latter URL though. Do you think I should > point to the Wiki from the README.multiplayer as well nevertheless? Definitely - the howto covers quite a few things that have been tripping up an awful lot of people without requiring a very great deal of knowledge of networking issues, etc - which is why I wrote it :-) Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [PATCH] README.multiplayer update
On Wednesday 12 October 2005 01:27, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote: > I've updated README.multiplayer to reflect the recent changes. > I'm not addressing the released/cvs incompatibility issue in there, > hopefully this is fine. You might also note that there's an up-to-date multiplayer howto on the Wiki which should provide a little more help for those who need it... save us trotting out the same old routine on the IRC channel... Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Never ending story: Building SimGear CVS under Cygwin
On Saturday 01 October 2005 17:29, Georg Vollnhals wrote: > It is strange, it seems for me that these make-errors are due to errors > in code - if so, why > do *I* get the problems with make and not all other who compile the CVS > stuff? The errors you've found so far were all experienced by others too, don't feel like you're being picked on :-) In fact, I was about to reply to your last email with the necessary fixes, when Erik committed them... As to your latest errors... all I can say (knowing very little German) is that if it's any encouragement I have checked out and successfully built today's CVS SG and FG under cygwin, using GCC-3.3(.3 IIRC). I suppose you've already done a "make clean" in the SG tree before trying again to build it? If you do make it past this stage, I give you warning that the FlightGear build will probably fail in the GPSsmooth part of Utils - I just removed the "utils" directory from the makefile as a temporary work-around since I didn't want anything in that directory anyway. The error was in MIDG-II.cxx, but I don't have access to that machine now to post it; I can do so another day if required. Keep at it, you'll get there eventually! Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] new multiplayer patch
On Wednesday 21 September 2005 19:54, Oliver Schroeder wrote: > The problem lies in XDR_encode_double() and XDR_decode_double(). Making all > arguments "const &" did the trick. You can find my updated version here: > http://www.o-schroeder.de/fg_server/tinyxdr.tgz > please test it. I can confirm that it works perfectly here, thanks. AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] SimGear and OpenAL files/Cygwin
On Wednesday 21 September 2005 23:17, Georg Vollnhals wrote: > I would be very glad if someone could help me. Building FlightGear 0.9.8 > from source would be the first step to building it > from CVS. I just used Norman's pre-compiled version from here; http://www.vso.cape.com/~nhv/files/cygwin/cyg_openAL.tgz Which worked perfectly with CVS from Saturday past, IIRC. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] new multiplayer patch
Sorry about that - I was too quick to test and didn't read the cvs log carefully enough :-) Here's the output of your swap test UI32: (normal) 1234567 UI32: (swapped) 67452301 UI64: (normal) 123456789abcdef UI64: (swapped) efcdab8967452301 AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] new multiplayer patch
On Wednesday 21 September 2005 10:46, Erik Hofman wrote: > > That's odd. This *should* indicate that it still would work with our own > > definition of these functions ??!? I should note here that I'm a really only a simple sysadmin and not a programmer, so I'm saying nothing as to what should work or shouldn't - I can only say what does or doesn't :-) > I've updated the code slightly to swap two 32-bit bytes on 32-bit > hardware. Could you test it again? Certainly... Unfortunately it appears that the problem (for whatever reason) is still there... http://www.adeptopensource.co.uk/personal/fg/server_map_screenshot.png Sorry I can't suggest a solution, but if there are any tests you would like run I'm happy to do so... Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] new multiplayer patch
On Tuesday 20 September 2005 14:57, Erik Hofman wrote: > Hmm, that should be correct. > What does the utility output if you include byteswap.h instead off our > own functions? Swapping #include instead of "tiny_xdr.hpp" I get exactly the same result here.. AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] new multiplayer patch
On Tuesday 20 September 2005 10:36, Erik Hofman wrote: > I've added a byte swap test utility in the MultiPlayer directory so you > can easily test if it really makes a difference. On my machine all > (should) work(s) fine. Are you sure? It doesn't here since yesterday (Linux x86. ) FG runs OK, and connects to the server, but the position values are all messed up. The byte swap test utility you added today gives this; UI32: (normal) ffaaccee UI32: (swapped) eeccaaff UI64: (normal) bbaaddffaaccee UI64: (swapped) eeccaaffddaabb00 Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Segfaults with real weather fetch
On Thursday 15 September 2005 18:12, Lee Elliott wrote: > since updating from cvs yesterday I now seem to get segfaults > whenever I try to use real-weather-fetch. This has been happening with yasim A/C since some of Harald's changes a few weeks ago. Using a JSBSim a/c you will find (if this is the same bug) that FG runs, but visibility is set to 0 - selecting Metar from the appropriate dialogue box will set things correctly. Harald knows where the problem lies, I think, and has reproduced it on his own setup. Or have you found another bug? I must confess I've not updated from CVS for about a week now... AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Question: Online forums?
On Wednesday 14 September 2005 18:03, Curtis L. Olson wrote: > What would people think of abandoning our mailing lists and converting > over to online/web-based forums? Personally, I very much prefer mailing lists. I can quite see the advantages of web-based forums, but I'm not convinced they outweigh the disadvantages. For one thing, it's much easier to keep up with the mailing lists, as I monitor my email through most of the day for real work purposes anyway. In contrast, although I do visit some web-based forums now and again, it's very infrequently, and you have to keep revisiting to see whether anything's been posted or not - automatic emails to say something's been posted would obviously be very annoying. The spam issue I'm not certain I've grasped properly - if you mean that "moderators" of these lists are getting bombarded with spam that's destined for the mailing lists, can't this just be automatically dumped? AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] MSVC problems with 0.9.8 tarball
On Wednesday 14 September 2005 14:36, Mike Rawlins wrote: > v0.9.8 comes with scenery for the 10x10 degree block > with corner 130W, 30N. Did you start the sim at KSFO? > If you started it in a region outside of central > California no scenery will show. You're right, of course - but you should always see water if there's no scenery installed for your start location. Patrick isn't seeing _anything_ other than the hud and menus AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Automated builds on Linux
On Tuesday 13 September 2005 11:35, Richard Bytheway wrote: > I have a nice tidy script to build and install all of plib, SimGear, > FlightGear and Atlas, which works beautifully on Cygwin, but it fails on > Linux because it, understandably, needs root privs for the "make install" > sections. > How does everyone else here manage this problem? I can't believe everyone > rebuilds everything manually, and I know that you don't _have_ to install > the packages, but I would like to. I rebuild "everything" manually, but more importantly, for my CVS builds of FG&SG I build and install both under my home directory. This allows me to also keep, system-wide, the latest release for testing/comparison purposes. Considering that I use the latest _release_ for plib, and that most FG code changes occur in FG rather than SG, and also that these changes mostly only require a very quick partial rebuild of FG, you can see that it's not really very much work at all. No more than checking out the latest code and doing the usual make&&make install in fact... If you are just building the latest _releases_ of Flightgear et al, I'd suggest a distro like Gentoo might be better suited than FC - the portage system handles the entire process; a simple "emerge flightgear" grabs, compiles and installs all the dependencies and FlightGear itself. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - Cywin Problems
On Tuesday 30 August 2005 20:21, Vivian Meazza wrote: > This behaviour has been confirmed by AJ on a similarly specified machine. I would maybe also just add that I was working with a different version of GCC (3.3.3) but obtained identical symptoms to what Vivian has already described. AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: very long startup time
On Friday 26 August 2005 07:34, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: > I think that problem is due to metar data being too old. I don't know; however, 0.9.8 seems perfectly happy with the same data. Also, I've not once managed to get yesterdays' CVS to start with METAR enabled - surely the data would be unlikely to be "out of date" for every station (in several countries) I've tried over almost 24 hours? I've just noticed that starting 0.9.8 at KSFO I get the following output in the terminal Altitude = 13 Temp at alt (C) = 12 Temp sea level (C) = 12.0251 Altitude = 13 Dewpoint at alt (C) = 11 Dewpoint at sea level (C) = 11.0026 And seconds later, starting yesterdays CVS I get Altitude = 13 Temp at alt (C) = 0 Temp sea level (C) = 0.0240539 Altitude = 13 Dewpoint at alt (C) = 0 Dewpoint at sea level (C) = 0.0026 So something's messed up there somewhere; does FG just set the variables it thinks are out of date to "zero"? No proxies of any sort involved here I should add. Anyway, since it's probably outside my capabilities to fix it, I'm sticking to testing and reporting. Would be happy to try any tests or patches required to get to the bottom of it though. AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: very long startup time
On Thursday 25 August 2005 18:12, Erik Hofman wrote: > I noticed this too. You will need to set the weather scenario to a > different value than "none". I don't know if this is exactly what you noticed, but I've just found that with today's CVS, if you have "real-weather-fetch" true in preferences.xml, FG won't start properly at all, but "hangs" immediately after startup in a manner almost identical to the current cygwin problem. AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D Cockpit view, L410 Turbolet
On Thursday 11 August 2005 00:51, Jon Berndt wrote: > Those of you who have read the newsletter have probably seen (and drooled > over) the wonderful 3D model of the L410 Turbolet created by Jiri and Jiri > Javurek. I have, and would love to see it added to the FG collection - it appears to be a thoroughly thought-out model. However, it's just too much trouble for me to keep a third copy of FG for the sake of one model. What is the general opinion of the modifications done to the FG source in particular - are they likely to be introduced into CVS any time soon? It seems a pity for such an amount of work to miss wider exposure. Does the new JSBSim version do what their model requires? AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] SimGear RenderTexture changes causing compile problems
On Tuesday 02 August 2005 18:30, Andy Ross wrote: > You might not have the NVIDIA headers installed. Check > /usr/include/GL/gl.h to see if it has an NVIDIA copyright at the top > or an x.org one. I think some of the non-NVIDIA binary distributions > of the driver include only the libraries and X server extension, and > not the development stuff. I'm using nvidia's headers all right... From /usr/include/GL/gl.h /* ** Copyright 1998-2002, NVIDIA Corporation. ** All Rights Reserved. ** > FWIW, I think this is silly. The driver release is for users, who > don't care about header versions. I dare say... the fact the drivers are closed source is the bit that I really take issue with :-) Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] SimGear RenderTexture changes causing compile problems
On Sunday 31 July 2005 11:12, Paul Surgeon wrote: > SimGear WILL NOT compile with nVidia 6629 headers (like it used to). > I updated to 7667 OpenGL headers and it compiles now. I should perhaps mention here for those not keen on updating to the newer nvidia drivers yet that SimGear CVS (on 1st August 2005) _does_ compile here on nVidia 6629 and runs fine, so it's worth trying... AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Wolfram's hangar for FlightGear Flight Simulator
On Tuesday 02 August 2005 16:03, Corrubia, Stacie K wrote: > I used to be able to get to Wolfram's hangar for FlightGear Flight > Simulator models through the link but now all I get is a T-mobile web > page. Is his site still out there in the ether somewhere? I don't know of a current host, but you can get some of the old site and models at www.archive.org Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Startup / environment scripts
On Friday 29 July 2005 15:35, Craig Martin wrote: > Is there a script or a batch file that sets the following start-up > parameters for FGFS; > Environment conditions, Aircraft, View, Systems Statuses (engine, etc.), > Scenery active... At least some of those can be set in data/preferences.xml AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel]
On Saturday 09 Jul 2005 11:10, Martin Spott wrote: > Oh, sorry this was intended to be a private EMail, Well, if my comprehension of it was any indication, it pretty much was :-) AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Code Typo?
On Wednesday 06 Jul 2005 20:50, Patrick Quirk wrote: > In file Main/viewer.cxx, in function MakeVIEW_OFFSET(...), on line ~118 > where the third matrix is being made, there is the following line: > tmp = t * axis2[1]; It's still in there... You don't have to do a cvs checkout to view the current state of any file, by the way, there's an interactive browser at http://cvs.flightgear.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/FlightGear/?cvsroot=FlightGear-0.9 Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] clickable panel button release event
On Thursday 30 Jun 2005 23:20, Josh Babcock wrote: > Is there a way to get button-release events from the clickable panels, > or do they just sense a button-press and touch off the command then? I > want to make some instantaneous switches for the B-29. Like the fuel gauge in the Spitfire? AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Opengl rendering
On Thursday 16 Jun 2005 19:34, Harald JOHNSEN wrote: > I was thinking of using some pixel shader for one or two effects. > But before starting anything like that I first want to know if : > 1) people have program shader capable cards (ie FX5200+ or ati9500+) Personally speaking, no, I don't; I've a lowly MX420 which has been perfectly adequate for my use so far. However > 2) you think it's a good idea to enhance a bit some visual aspect of > Flightgear or you think that only simulation count > and all the rest is useless eye candy ;) That's not to say that if the eye candy was available in FG I wouldn't upgrade to take advantage of it! I don't think there's any doubt that the "physics" and avionics simulation is the most important thing in this particular project. At the same time, the visual aspects are not unimportant, as they are also a big part of the overall "feel". So long as the eye candy is easily disabled by those with creaking hardware, it can only be an improvement in my view. AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Hurricane
On Wednesday 15 Jun 2005 17:18, Josh Babcock wrote: > I have found that 3-views are good for laying out the basic shapes, but > to really get a model right you need lots of reference photos. The > quality of these photos makes a big difference too. I would recommend > starting the model, then once you know what parts are confusing go take > your own photos. I'm beginning to find that you're right; to get the lightning wings looking even reasonable, I've been using a plethora of photos, mostly from airliners.net. The 3-views are just completely muddled on an item like that. It's quite addictive this 3d stuff... I've done simple modelling for CFD work in the past, but producing something you're actually interested in and can fly at the end of it (if one ever reaches that stage) is much more fun! AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Hurricane
On Wednesday 15 Jun 2005 08:47, Vivian Meazza wrote: > > Still not tempted by a Bucc? ;-) Oh well, one mustn't be greedy! > Yes - I went as far as to look at a cockpit section at the Manston Museum > last year. Daunting! Certainly... It didn't take me long to decide that I certainly wasn't going to manage a Bucc as a first attempt! They're not short of difficult-looking curves. > I was also put off by the arrangements of BLC, blown > flaps etc. I haven't abandoned the idea yet, but lack of technical data is > holding me back. There is a bit more stuff available on the web now than there was about a year ago when I last looked, but I don't know of the pilot's notes being around anywhere. I really struggled to find 3-views of any worth on the web too, but found pretty reasonable ones at http://www.airwar.ru/other/drawe.html - it seems like a pretty good resource (and has a couple of Sea Vixen drawings too). Apologies if everyone else already knows about it! > I'm researching the Sea Vixen right now. 14 (yes 14!) fuel > tanks, and a tail which is linked to the flaps (as was the Buccaneer's). > All very complex. So far I've only modelled aircraft for which I've had > access to the pilot's notes, and, in the case of the Seahawk and Hunter, a > pilot. It is a pretty interesting plane, I've a few clips from the British Pathe site which feature the Sea Vixen. I don't directly know any Buccaneer pilots, although I do slightly know the father of one. There must be plenty of them still about though, since it's only been out of service ten years! > I use AC3D - I dislike Blender with a passion - too complex and > non-intuitive. I gave up in frustration. The latest AC3D has some nice > features. Others can do great things with Blender - Melchior can make it > sit up and beg. Funnily enough, I surprised myself by what I was able to produce "by sight" in Blender, random household objects etc. Producing something reasonably exact from 3-views has proved a completely different story though... > Have you seen the recent Aeroplane magazine? It has comprehensive series of > articles on the Lightning: excellent source data. I haven't, no. Will look out for it though, thanks. > Keep at it - it just takes time - you can hijack most of the Hunter > instruments for the interior. If I ever reach that stage, I will! > > I must confess I didn't, but if I get a chance tomorrow, I'll give it a > > go. Well, I've tried it and the sky hasn't fallen on my head yet, seems to work as advertised. Will continue to test it, but no ill effects noticed yet... AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Hurricane
On Tuesday 14 Jun 2005 22:57, Vivian Meazza wrote: > Is this in roll only? The ailerons are much more powerful, but also damped. > There shouldn't be any rapid movement in the ailerons, but the stick > reflects the input. Look at the ailerons in an external view - are they > jumping around too? Yes to both - it's in roll only (although once the plane is bucking around like that, pitch starts to become involved as well!) I was wondering if the wind moving ailerons, e.g. at rest on the ground (is that even modelled?) moved the stick but obviously if the stick represents what my joystick input is, then that's the problem. > There is the gyro effect of the prop, and the tail is offset to compensate, > but it shouldn't be too difficult. Try the rudder trim. Yes, I was assuming that those effects should be controllable fairly easily; although I've certainly not flown a Hurricane or Spit (or anything other than a Bocian, for that matter!) the amplitude of this effect feels entirely out of proportion with "reality" even as modelled in the rest of the sim. > What joystick are you using? I have to say that I suspect a hardware > problem by your description. So do I, which is why I was tentatively checking that I'm not just a completely useless pilot (although that's probably still true :-) It's a cheap (and fairly nasty) analogue stick made by InterAct. And it's almost nine years old. Looks like it's time to spend a few quid then! I normally fly the Hunter though and it doesn't show any misbehaviour unless I've forgotten to calibrate the stick first, which is why I've not investigated further before. > Sea Hurricane next, when I've done with this one. Then back to re-work the > Spitfire and Hunter. Probably a year's work! Still not tempted by a Bucc? ;-) Oh well, one mustn't be greedy! I'm currently attempting a Lightning, using AC3D rather than Blender this time, with tips from the (pretty good) series of tutorials posted here a short time ago. So far I've got a fuselage, tail and 80% of the wing done and looking almost reasonable, which is a whole lot more than I've managed before... whether or not it turns out to be remotely near releasable quality remains to be seen! Are most you (or most people here) using AC3D or something else? > Did you try the yasim.diff yet (posted to the list earlier) - if you > haven't I would be grateful for any feedback - it shouldn't break anything, > and enables several other features such as the boost gauge and the Boost > Control Cutout. The modified supercharger output should make landing much > easier too. I must confess I didn't, but if I get a chance tomorrow, I'll give it a go. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Hurricane
On Monday 13 Jun 2005 15:14, Vivian Meazza wrote: > There remains some more eye-candy to do: nav lights, beam approach marker > lamps, realistic rad and oil temperature readings etc. In the meantime I > would be grateful for any comments, not least that it all downloads and > installs correctly! Installed the version from today's CVS and it seems to run fine here (Linux-x86 & Nvidia). I have to say I had high expectations after the Hunter and Spit, and you haven't disappointed! There are so many nice touches that I've noticed already. One thing (not necessarily a bug) that I've sometimes found with the both Spit and the Hurricane is that they can be incredibly "over-twitchy"; this might well be directly related to my rather rubbish joystick. It seems that fairly often the stick is flicking about wildly in the cockpit, usually to one side in particular, and no amount of leaning on it is enough to resist that pull. Is this by design (crosswinds/prop wash, + nervous handling) or is it just that my stick is rubbish (it does give constantly "flickering" values, even when calibrated correctly) and that the sensitivity is set higher than usual for these planes? I haven't noticed any trouble with the hunter/seahawk etc, I can manage things like carrier landings with these OK. I'm Looking forward to the next plane already! Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] Re: [Jsbsim-devel] crash]
On Saturday 11 Jun 2005 21:28, Gerard Robin wrote: > Sorry ,I probably, missed something but i have no access to CVS respective > changelog entry, You can subscribe to the flightgear-cvslogs mailing list or check the archive here; http://baron.flightgear.org/pipermail/flightgear-cvslogs/ Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airports Data + Zoom + SHIPs
On Tuesday 07 Jun 2005 23:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 1) I am using FGFS Version 0.9.4, I noticed that the Airport Data file > extensions changed to tgz, does the data can be used on the version 0.9.4. Have you any reason not to upgrade? There's been a fair amount of improvement since 0.9.4 really. > 3) Is there others boats, or just the sail boat? There's a working aircraft carrier! (it's working in CVS at least, I'm not certain about the last release.) It's great, by the way, those of you who worked on it - really impressive. Yet another way to have fun with the excellent Hunter and Seahawk! The way it travels through land is a bit disconcerting, mind you ;-) AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Colditz Glider
On Sunday 05 Jun 2005 16:41, Josh Babcock wrote: > Smarter "instrument" > Shadow > .ac tweaks That's a really nice model - the textures are great, as is the animated yaw-string. Makes me wish I had the ability to produce these things - I do regularly try, but always give up in disgust quite quickly! I might manage a building or two one of these days though. Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [ANN] Blender 2.37
On Thursday 02 Jun 2005 23:30, Sam Heyman wrote: > Can one create a new texture > using Blender? I would like to paint my aircraft (RC UAV) white and have 2 > blue stripes on the wings, the trouble is I have no idea where to start... I am just the opposite of an expert on these matters, but I think the general idea is that you actually create the textures in something like the GIMP and you can apply them using Blender. Which I've just figured out how to do myself... A basic guide on how to produce textured ground objects (say a building) for flightgear preferably using Blender and Gimp since they're cross-platform and free would be very useful indeed. The general ideas can be learned from the wealth of blender tutorials out there, but something specific would be great. I'm just feeling my way around myself at the moment, and not qualified to write it! Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Anyone likes helping with italian scenery?
On Friday 27 May 2005 21:01, Oliver C. wrote: > First, installing CGAL systemwide is a nightmare, so i decided against it > to do that. Probably wisely. At least, I did the same... > After that i went back to compile fgsd. > But now i get the following compiler error: > The used gcc version is 3.3.4. If you'd read the README you'd have seen a note to that effect; apparently 3.2 and 3.4 are OK, but 3.3 produce this error. No, I didn't read the README either, until after I'd found this out the hard way! Cheers, AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Anyone likes helping with italian scenery?
On Thursday 26 May 2005 19:56, Martin Spott wrote: > Aaah, don't bet on that. I managed to built all prerequisites but now I > get an "internal compiler error" when compiling FGSD sources - and I > don't have a different platform/compiler available :-/ This stopped me too. After fiddling with it for ages, I finally gave in and read the README. Quoted directly... "First, the bad news : g++ v3.3.x is unable to compile fgsd correctly. It produces internal Compiler Errors" Bah. Whoever reads these things first, anyway? :-) I also tried the win32 version under WINE which works without crashing, but is unusable due to some problem with the "ordering" of layers in the interface, the green background covers everything. AJ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
