Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
I have just tried it again. The path tag seem to expect a path to the XML file, so specifying a path to a model will result in an error and that stupid "glider". I have also assign the path to the XML file and just animate away. There is no error, but there is no movement in the model either. I then tried animating objects one at a time and all at once to find out if the two would make any difference. The result is still the same -- nothing. Regards, Ampere On June 15, 2004 11:01 pm, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: > I have just tried it. It doesn't seem to work. > > Regards, > Ampere > > On June 15, 2004 08:02 pm, Jim Wilson wrote: > > Well actually... h... Right now we're referencing xml files in the > > "path" property of the model arrays ( tags). What happens when > > you add animation tags inside a tag and make the path reference > > the .ac file instead of another wrapper? I think that might work. > > > > Like this: > > > > > > /pathname/switch.ac > > > > animation definition for this particular switch... > > > > > > > > Repeat for each switch. > > > > Best, > > > > Jim > > > > > > ___ > > 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 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
I have just tried it. It doesn't seem to work. Regards, Ampere On June 15, 2004 08:02 pm, Jim Wilson wrote: > Well actually... h... Right now we're referencing xml files in the > "path" property of the model arrays ( tags). What happens when you > add animation tags inside a tag and make the path reference the .ac > file instead of another wrapper? I think that might work. > > Like this: > > > /pathname/switch.ac > > animation definition for this particular switch... > > > > Repeat for each switch. > > Best, > > Jim > > > ___ > 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] Clickable 3d instruments
I was planning on doing that for the MD11's engines. I will check it out. Regards, Ampere On June 15, 2004 08:02 pm, Jim Wilson wrote: > Well actually... h... Right now we're referencing xml files in the > "path" property of the model arrays ( tags). What happens when you > add animation tags inside a tag and make the path reference the .ac > file instead of another wrapper? I think that might work. > > Like this: > > > /pathname/switch.ac > > animation definition for this particular switch... > > > > Repeat for each switch. > > Best, > > Jim > > > ___ > 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] Clickable 3d instruments
Roy Vegard Ovesen said: > On Tuesday 15 June 2004 14:49, Jim Wilson wrote: > > I can probably answer your question, but I don't know what you mean by > > "alias feature". Is that a 2d panel thing? Maybe that answers your > > question? ;-) > > Yes, the alias feature is a 2d panel thing. It is usefull when you have two > identical instruments that should be "connected" to different properties, for > example two nav radios or two CDIs. With aliases, one defines which > properties to use, for that particular instrument instance, in the panel > config file when including the instrument config file. This is a very usefull > feature, and it would be just as usefull for 3d instruments for exactly the > same reasons as it is for 2d instruments. > > Because of aliases apparently not being implemented, the Piper has two CDIs > that are connected to the same nav radio, and consequently display the same > information. You can have more than one xml wrapper for the same model. It really wouldn't be all that awkward to have something like this: /Aircraft/Instruments-3D/vor/vor-nav1.xml /Aircraft/Instruments-3D/vor/vor-nav2.xml /Aircraft/Instruments-3D/vor/vor.ac /Aircraft/Instruments-3D/vor/vor.rgb For things like switches that are very numerous I'm wondering how big a deal it would be to be able to reference an array of models in a single xml wrapper. Well actually... h... Right now we're referencing xml files in the "path" property of the model arrays ( tags). What happens when you add animation tags inside a tag and make the path reference the .ac file instead of another wrapper? I think that might work. Like this: /pathname/switch.ac animation definition for this particular switch... Repeat for each switch. Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote: Because of aliases apparently not being implemented, the Piper has two CDIs that are connected to the same nav radio, and consequently display the same information. Aliasing is part of the XML layer, so it should still work. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
On Tuesday 15 June 2004 14:49, Jim Wilson wrote: > I can probably answer your question, but I don't know what you mean by > "alias feature". Is that a 2d panel thing? Maybe that answers your > question? ;-) Yes, the alias feature is a 2d panel thing. It is usefull when you have two identical instruments that should be "connected" to different properties, for example two nav radios or two CDIs. With aliases, one defines which properties to use, for that particular instrument instance, in the panel config file when including the instrument config file. This is a very usefull feature, and it would be just as usefull for 3d instruments for exactly the same reasons as it is for 2d instruments. Because of aliases apparently not being implemented, the Piper has two CDIs that are connected to the same nav radio, and consequently display the same information. -- Roy Vegard Ovesen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
Jim Wilson wrote: Josh Babcock said: Jim Wilson wrote: Ok, so I have this nice generic fuel pump toggle switch that I made for my x-100, which has a panel tilted at 15 deg. I want to also use it in my x-200, which has a panel with a vertical orientation. If I just plug it in, one of them will have a switch that is off by 15 deg. Now, I can reuse the .ac model, but I need to rotate it somehow, so I have to create a second .xml file for the x-200 that has a -15 deg rotation animation in it. Problem with this is a) I have to create a new fuel-toggle.xml file, b) the x-200 is doing a rotation transformation every frame that it doesn't have to and c) I would expect to find rotation orientation in the same place as the offsets. In other words, all six degrees of freedom of movement for the model as a whole should be defined in the same place. So being able to define a rotation for instruments in the x-200-model.xml file instead of the fuel-toggle.xml file would be good. Being smart enough to recognize that it only needs to be done once is also good, though not nearly as important. Got it...I think. AFAIK it is already in the same place as the offsets. From the 3D modeling howto: /offsets/x-m The distance to reposition the model along the x-axis. /offsets/y-m The distance to reposition the model along the y-axis. /offsets/z-m The distance to reposition the model along the z-axis. /offsets/heading-deg The angle by which to rotate the model around the z-axis. /offsets/roll-deg The angle by which to rotate the model around the x-axis. /offsets/pitch-deg The angle by which to rotate the model around the y-axis. Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel Wait, I recognize this. This was the first thing I tried, and I remember it only working for the aircraft model, and not for the included instruments. I will have to go back and try this again, because Fred seems to have it working. Josh ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
Frederic Bouvier wrote: Josh Babcock wrote: Jim Wilson wrote: Josh Babcock said: and bitmaps. However, one of the things that can currently only be done in the control's model file is orientation. I think this is a mistake. Orientation, like placement, should be defined outside the xml for a given control. Otherwise, it is impossible to reuse a control unless you plan on doing it in the same orientation. It should be possible for the aircraft's model file to define a one-time transformation where you define the location of the instrument. Can you explain, or give an example? It could be that I am not understanding your use of the term orientation. Ok, so I have this nice generic fuel pump toggle switch that I made for my x-100, which has a panel tilted at 15 deg. I want to also use it in my x-200, which has a panel with a vertical orientation. If I just plug it in, one of them will have a switch that is off by 15 deg. Now, I can reuse the .ac model, but I need to rotate it somehow, so I have to create a second .xml file for the x-200 that has a -15 deg rotation animation in it. Problem with this is a) I have to create a new fuel-toggle.xml file, b) the x-200 is doing a rotation transformation every frame that it doesn't have to and c) I would expect to find rotation orientation in the same place as the offsets. In other words, all six degrees of freedom of movement for the model as a whole should be defined in the same place. So being able to define a rotation for instruments in the x-200-model.xml file instead of the fuel-toggle.xml file would be good. Being smart enough to recognize that it only needs to be done once is also good, though not nearly as important. The 747 and the A320 share ( because I am lazy ) the same instruments but they have different position and orientation. for example, a320-fb.xml has : Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-pfd-jw.xml -17.17 -0.59 -2 -15.0 while boeing747-400-jw.xml has : Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-pfd-jw.xml -18.90 -0.55 2.885 -20.0 but they use the same instrument animation file -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel Oh, I looked all over for that. Damn. Josh ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
Josh Babcock said: > Jim Wilson wrote: > > Ok, so I have this nice generic fuel pump toggle switch that I made for my > x-100, which has a panel tilted at 15 deg. I want to also use it in my x-200, > which has a panel with a vertical orientation. If I just plug it in, one of > them will have a switch that is off by 15 deg. Now, I can reuse the .ac model, > but I need to rotate it somehow, so I have to create a second .xml file for the > x-200 that has a -15 deg rotation animation in it. Problem with this is a) I > have to create a new fuel-toggle.xml file, b) the x-200 is doing a rotation > transformation every frame that it doesn't have to and c) I would expect to find > rotation orientation in the same place as the offsets. In other words, all six > degrees of freedom of movement for the model as a whole should be defined in the > same place. > > So being able to define a rotation for instruments in the x-200-model.xml file > instead of the fuel-toggle.xml file would be good. Being smart enough to > recognize that it only needs to be done once is also good, though not nearly as > important. > Got it...I think. AFAIK it is already in the same place as the offsets. From the 3D modeling howto: /offsets/x-m The distance to reposition the model along the x-axis. /offsets/y-m The distance to reposition the model along the y-axis. /offsets/z-m The distance to reposition the model along the z-axis. /offsets/heading-deg The angle by which to rotate the model around the z-axis. /offsets/roll-deg The angle by which to rotate the model around the x-axis. /offsets/pitch-deg The angle by which to rotate the model around the y-axis. Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
Josh Babcock wrote: > Jim Wilson wrote: > > Josh Babcock said: > > > > > >>and bitmaps. However, one of the things that can currently only be done in the > >>control's model file is orientation. I think this is a mistake. Orientation, > >>like placement, should be defined outside the xml for a given control. > >>Otherwise, it is impossible to reuse a control unless you plan on doing it in > >>the same orientation. It should be possible for the aircraft's model file to > >>define a one-time transformation where you define the location of the > > > > instrument. > > > > Can you explain, or give an example? It could be that I am not understanding > > your use of the term orientation. > > > > > Ok, so I have this nice generic fuel pump toggle switch that I made for my > x-100, which has a panel tilted at 15 deg. I want to also use it in my x-200, > which has a panel with a vertical orientation. If I just plug it in, one of > them will have a switch that is off by 15 deg. Now, I can reuse the .ac model, > but I need to rotate it somehow, so I have to create a second .xml file for the > x-200 that has a -15 deg rotation animation in it. Problem with this is a) I > have to create a new fuel-toggle.xml file, b) the x-200 is doing a rotation > transformation every frame that it doesn't have to and c) I would expect to find > rotation orientation in the same place as the offsets. In other words, all six > degrees of freedom of movement for the model as a whole should be defined in the > same place. > > So being able to define a rotation for instruments in the x-200-model.xml file > instead of the fuel-toggle.xml file would be good. Being smart enough to > recognize that it only needs to be done once is also good, though not nearly as > important. The 747 and the A320 share ( because I am lazy ) the same instruments but they have different position and orientation. for example, a320-fb.xml has : Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-pfd-jw.xml -17.17 -0.59 -2 -15.0 while boeing747-400-jw.xml has : Aircraft/747/Models/boeing747-400-pfd-jw.xml -18.90 -0.55 2.885 -20.0 but they use the same instrument animation file -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
Jim Wilson wrote: Josh Babcock said: and bitmaps. However, one of the things that can currently only be done in the control's model file is orientation. I think this is a mistake. Orientation, like placement, should be defined outside the xml for a given control. Otherwise, it is impossible to reuse a control unless you plan on doing it in the same orientation. It should be possible for the aircraft's model file to define a one-time transformation where you define the location of the instrument. Can you explain, or give an example? It could be that I am not understanding your use of the term orientation. Ok, so I have this nice generic fuel pump toggle switch that I made for my x-100, which has a panel tilted at 15 deg. I want to also use it in my x-200, which has a panel with a vertical orientation. If I just plug it in, one of them will have a switch that is off by 15 deg. Now, I can reuse the .ac model, but I need to rotate it somehow, so I have to create a second .xml file for the x-200 that has a -15 deg rotation animation in it. Problem with this is a) I have to create a new fuel-toggle.xml file, b) the x-200 is doing a rotation transformation every frame that it doesn't have to and c) I would expect to find rotation orientation in the same place as the offsets. In other words, all six degrees of freedom of movement for the model as a whole should be defined in the same place. So being able to define a rotation for instruments in the x-200-model.xml file instead of the fuel-toggle.xml file would be good. Being smart enough to recognize that it only needs to be done once is also good, though not nearly as important. Another exception that might also be nice to have a way of passing parameters to included instruments so the instrument can do a one-time transformation on one of it's parts to adjust it's stall speed line, for instance, to the aircraft it is being installed in. I don't know how to implement this though. That probably is not currently practical. So we'll have to have seperate models. If you wanted to get fancy (which I don't recommend for this) you could do a texture rotation based on some arbitrary value set in the aircraft configuration. Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel Yeah, not to hard to just make a new texture for the face of the dial for each aircraft you want to use it in. Not to much work and you only have to touch one file. Josh ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
Josh Babcock wrote: the non-common instruments are (or should be) more frequent. Actually, the opposite is true, at least for general aviation I read this to mean throttles, trim wheels, levers switches, yokes and such. Jim mentioned instruments rather than controls. As far as controls go, making them clickable is nice but it's not essential -- no one's going to fly the plane (at least not too far) by manipulating a 3D yoke and throttle with the mouse. Making less-common controls like electrical switches, carb heat, etc. clickable might make more sense. The biggest benefits will come from clickable instruments and avionics, so that you can put in an altimeter setting, adjust the heading indicator, and tune the radio, to give three common examples. Another exception that might also be nice to have a way of passing parameters to included instruments so the instrument can do a one-time transformation on one of it's parts to adjust it's stall speed line, for instance, to the aircraft it is being installed in. I don't know how to implement this though. I've thought about this problem as well, but have not yet come up with a good answer. The issue appears mainly for the decals on the airspeed indicator, but also for the tachometer (for example, newer 172's redline at 2400 rpm while older ones redline at 2700 rpm). The faces for fuel gauges tend to be different on every plane, as do oil pressure/temperature and fuel pressure gauges. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
Josh Babcock said: > and bitmaps. However, one of the things that can currently only be done in the > control's model file is orientation. I think this is a mistake. Orientation, > like placement, should be defined outside the xml for a given control. > Otherwise, it is impossible to reuse a control unless you plan on doing it in > the same orientation. It should be possible for the aircraft's model file to > define a one-time transformation where you define the location of the instrument. Can you explain, or give an example? It could be that I am not understanding your use of the term orientation. > Another exception that might also be nice to have a way of passing parameters to > included instruments so the instrument can do a one-time transformation on one > of it's parts to adjust it's stall speed line, for instance, to the aircraft it > is being installed in. I don't know how to implement this though. > That probably is not currently practical. So we'll have to have seperate models. If you wanted to get fancy (which I don't recommend for this) you could do a texture rotation based on some arbitrary value set in the aircraft configuration. Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
David Megginson said:
> Jim Wilson wrote:
>
> > Hmmm...maybe reusability isn't the most important issue here. While I know
> > that there are many stock devices that are the same in different aircraft, it
> > almost seems that numerically, with the number aircraft we have modeled now,
> > the non-common instruments are (or should be) more frequent.
>
> Actually, the opposite is true, at least for general aviation: almost all
> instruments and avionics are stock -- aircraft manufacturers buy them all
> off the shelf, as do owners upgrading their planes. For example, a United
> altimeter, a Bendix-King transponder, or a Garmin 430 GPS/COM is just as
> likely to appear in a Cessna 172 piston single as in a Beech King Air twin
> turboprop. Even the new general-aviation glass cockpits use mostly standard
> stuff.
What I meant was with the number of aircraft we have modeled now, it seems
there are fewer common items. We are in some cases sharing things that aren't
accurate to the original. The war aircraft do seem to use a lot of different
instrumentation, probably so they can spend $10 million on some "nit pickin'"
new feature and while keeping the military industrial complex running in high
gear.
ASI is specific to the aircraft generally (or at least markings), altitude
indicators will be shared by aircraft operating at similar altitudes, but
many of the others are, as you said, from stock being more universal depending
on their applications (e.g. gps, radios).
What we haven't done in FlightGear is name the files with manufacturer and
model ("united-5934-altimeter.ac" instead of just "alt.ac") like we have with
the bendix radio.
Best,
Jim
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
David Megginson wrote: Jim Wilson wrote: Hmmm...maybe reusability isn't the most important issue here. While I know that there are many stock devices that are the same in different aircraft, it almost seems that numerically, with the number aircraft we have modeled now, the non-common instruments are (or should be) more frequent. Actually, the opposite is true, at least for general aviation: almost SNIP David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel I read this to mean throttles, trim wheels, levers switches, yokes and such. I suppose that in less expensive aircraft these may be stock material used in the design of a plane, but I seem to see a lot of variation here in cockpit pictures of larger aircraft. I agree with you for basically anything with screws in the corners though. I also think that all the attributes of a control or instrument, except it's placement, should be contained in a portable package, ie the .xml file, model and bitmaps. However, one of the things that can currently only be done in the control's model file is orientation. I think this is a mistake. Orientation, like placement, should be defined outside the xml for a given control. Otherwise, it is impossible to reuse a control unless you plan on doing it in the same orientation. It should be possible for the aircraft's model file to define a one-time transformation where you define the location of the instrument. Another exception that might also be nice to have a way of passing parameters to included instruments so the instrument can do a one-time transformation on one of it's parts to adjust it's stall speed line, for instance, to the aircraft it is being installed in. I don't know how to implement this though. Josh ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
Jim Wilson wrote: Hmmm...maybe reusability isn't the most important issue here. While I know that there are many stock devices that are the same in different aircraft, it almost seems that numerically, with the number aircraft we have modeled now, the non-common instruments are (or should be) more frequent. Actually, the opposite is true, at least for general aviation: almost all instruments and avionics are stock -- aircraft manufacturers buy them all off the shelf, as do owners upgrading their planes. For example, a United altimeter, a Bendix-King transponder, or a Garmin 430 GPS/COM is just as likely to appear in a Cessna 172 piston single as in a Beech King Air twin turboprop. Even the new general-aviation glass cockpits use mostly standard stuff. Back in the 1970's, Cessna did stamp its brand name on some radios (they have a bad reputation), and altimeters require different decals for every aircraft to show the correct stall speed, etc., but those are exceptions. If I have a problem with the #2 radio in my plane, I will post to a list mentioning that I have a problem with a KX 170B, not that I have a problem with a Piper Warrior radio. The person offering me advice might well be flying a Cessna 310, but the radio works the same way. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Clickable 3d instruments
Roy Vegard Ovesen said: > > The "switch-hotspots.xml" file is a small (10x10) panel with one big > instrument with one big hotspot. This worked as expected. I was also able to > reuse the switch instrument at different locations in the cockpit, as > expected. Is there perhaps a limit to how many 2d panels with hotspots one > can include? > > This method adds instrument-specific hotspots to true 3d instruments. It's a > bit ugly but it works and is more reusable than the Hunter and Mustang way of > doing it. Hmmm...maybe reusability isn't the most important issue here. While I know that there are many stock devices that are the same in different aircraft, it almost seems that numerically, with the number aircraft we have modeled now, the non-common instruments are (or should be) more frequent. The thing I like about defining clicks per model this way is you can adjust the model position without having to then adjust the click positions, since they are relative to the model. Unfortunately I can't comment on issues like overhead and performance with your technique (those are possible limiting factors), but it does look like an excellent model for a permanent solution. > I would also like to redirect you attention to my post: > > http://baron.flightgear.org/pipermail/flightgear-devel/2004-May/028549.html > > Thanks! > Can anyone confirm that the alias feature can not be used for the 3d animation > code?! I can probably answer your question, but I don't know what you mean by "alias feature". Is that a 2d panel thing? Maybe that answers your question? ;-) Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
