Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airport of Hell?
On Dienstag 29 November 2005 22:21, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote: > Just to aid the investigation/possible fixing: > in case you missed it, a similar crash (ground-minding models)/teleport to > hell (ufo) happens in a slightly different scenario I had reported -- > see > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1354007&group_id=5 >83&atid=100583 for description/screenshots. > > If you use the --offset-distance workaround to taxi onto the white cut-out > areas in, say, a cessna, you fall down to the hell. > > (That was a marvelous description of the problem). Vassilii, that is something different. If there is no surface to roll on, you will just fall down. The scenery generation must be fixed in this case. Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airport of Hell?
On Dienstag 29 November 2005 22:21, Vassilii Khachaturov wrote: > Just to aid the investigation/possible fixing: > in case you missed it, a similar crash (ground-minding models)/teleport to > hell (ufo) happens in a slightly different scenario I had reported -- > see > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1354007&group_id=5 >83&atid=100583 for description/screenshots. > > If you use the --offset-distance workaround to taxi onto the white cut-out > areas in, say, a cessna, you fall down to the hell. > > (That was a marvelous description of the problem). Thanks, I will look into that today evening. May be I can reproduce that one. Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airport of Hell?
> On Samstag 26 November 2005 19:47, Joacim Persson wrote:
> > fgfs --airport=EGLL --aircraft=ufo
> >
> > ...puts you in a mysterious place with thick fog, where ground level is
> > about 6 million m below sea level. This must be the airport of Hell.
> >
> > While trying to investigate this, I found the following peculiar logic in
> > FDM/groundcache.cxx, line 364:
> >
> > if (0 < sgdScalarProductVec3( off, down ) || !found_ground) {
> > found_ground = true;
> >
> > Which reads "if ground is not found, then ground must be found". ?:-P
> Well that must be logic from hell ...
> Seriously, I can reproduce, I am currently investigating ...
>
Just to aid the investigation/possible fixing:
in case you missed it, a similar crash (ground-minding models)/teleport to
hell (ufo) happens in a slightly different scenario I had reported --
see
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1354007&group_id=583&atid=100583
for description/screenshots.
If you use the --offset-distance workaround to taxi onto the white cut-out
areas in, say, a cessna, you fall down to the hell.
(That was a marvelous description of the problem).
Vassilii
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airport of Hell?
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005, Mathias Fröhlich wrote: Seriously, I can reproduce, I am currently investigating ... Hmm, was too fast, I had some changes because of your mail in this area. These changes made me able to 'reproduce'. That is: I have no problem with this. I have no idea if that line had something to do with it. It just looked odd to me. I then had a go with mutating it (|| to && and !found_ground to found_ground), thinking it may be a typo, but the result was the same, so that particular line is probably not the problem, however odd it looks. ;). I suspect there is something wrong with the EGLL scenery file. If I take the ch47, I even get a sigsegv (down in yasim someplace, but it's being fed nonsense numbers from above). But only if I set Heathrow as --airport and only if I don't specify a runway. Inspecting EGLL in daylight setting, I saw some flickering triangles on runway 9R--27L, at five places, the largest one just by the landing line mark at the 9R end. Perhaps that has something to do with it? But even so, if EGLL has scenery bugs which causes this, FG should catch it and point it out. So, since I do not see that problem: Do you have any modifications in your local tree? None on the source tree that cvs reports about. The scenery I get with terrasync.___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airport of Hell?
On Samstag 26 November 2005 20:30, Mathias Fröhlich wrote:
> On Samstag 26 November 2005 19:47, Joacim Persson wrote:
> > fgfs --airport=EGLL --aircraft=ufo
> >
> > ...puts you in a mysterious place with thick fog, where ground level is
> > about 6 million m below sea level. This must be the airport of Hell.
> >
> > While trying to investigate this, I found the following peculiar logic in
> > FDM/groundcache.cxx, line 364:
> >
> > if (0 < sgdScalarProductVec3( off, down ) || !found_ground) {
> > found_ground = true;
> >
> > Which reads "if ground is not found, then ground must be found". ?:-P
>
> Well that must be logic from hell ...
> Seriously, I can reproduce, I am currently investigating ...
Hmm, was too fast, I had some changes because of your mail in this area. These
changes made me able to 'reproduce'.
That is:
I have no problem with this.
The logic you found strange makes indeed some sense. Even if one might find an
other solution to that too ...
That check is only made if the line from the aircraft intersects some triangle
in the scenegraph. The found_ground value is used together with that altitude
value computed at this point as a fallback value if the aircraft is not near
the ground so that we still have some ground elevation even if the small ball
around the aircraft does not contain ground triangles.
For initialization we need some ground level even if the initial altitude is
0ft like it is at the moment. That is: accept any ground level we can find
even if the aircraft is actually below.
So, since I do not see that problem:
Do you have any modifications in your local tree?
Greetings
Mathias
--
Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airport of Hell?
On Samstag 26 November 2005 19:47, Joacim Persson wrote:
> fgfs --airport=EGLL --aircraft=ufo
>
> ...puts you in a mysterious place with thick fog, where ground level is
> about 6 million m below sea level. This must be the airport of Hell.
>
> While trying to investigate this, I found the following peculiar logic in
> FDM/groundcache.cxx, line 364:
>
> if (0 < sgdScalarProductVec3( off, down ) || !found_ground) {
> found_ground = true;
>
> Which reads "if ground is not found, then ground must be found". ?:-P
Well that must be logic from hell ...
Seriously, I can reproduce, I am currently investigating ...
Greetings
Mathias
--
Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] Airport of Hell?
fgfs --airport=EGLL --aircraft=ufo
...puts you in a mysterious place with thick fog, where ground level is
about 6 million m below sea level. This must be the airport of Hell.
While trying to investigate this, I found the following peculiar logic in
FDM/groundcache.cxx, line 364:
if (0 < sgdScalarProductVec3( off, down ) || !found_ground) {
found_ground = true;
Which reads "if ground is not found, then ground must be found". ?:-P
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
