Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
I don't think turning turbulance to zero by dedault is a good solution. If the problem is only in JSBSim then it should be fixed. Meanwhile we can pro vide the zero turbulance workaround in a wiki page or some other place. I want to know what is the real cause of the problem. turbulance is just one f actor of the cause, I think. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] landing gear control
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Robert Black wrote: On Wednesday 05 December 2007 12:15:49 am SydSandy wrote: Ok I have another one Can we add a /controls/gear/gear-lever-lock to prevent accidental raising gear while on the ground , on aircraft that have this feature ? The key bindings can be over ridden , but there's also joystick configurations to consider , so the best place to add this would be the controls.nas routine itself... It could simply be added as a bool in the set file of any aircraft that needs it ... Cheers I like the way the Aerostar Super 700 handles the gear. It is one of the only planes that does not crash you if you accidently raise the gear on the ground. It is pretty disappointing to set everything up for a flight and then hit the gear button on the joystick instead of flaps. I don't think the lightning does either. May be because of needed voltage however. /AnMaster -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWTDsWmK6ng/aMNkRCuxHAKC0MK5tH5HmKGSRaGHX9zlsJcq5rQCfRhJJ DFRlllGsbUZDlUxxw1Y4KBI= =EGeE -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] landing gear control
On Wednesday 05 December 2007 12:15:49 am SydSandy wrote: Ok I have another one Can we add a /controls/gear/gear-lever-lock to prevent accidental raising gear while on the ground , on aircraft that have this feature ? The key bindings can be over ridden , but there's also joystick configurations to consider , so the best place to add this would be the controls.nas routine itself... It could simply be added as a bool in the set file of any aircraft that needs it ... Cheers I like the way the Aerostar Super 700 handles the gear. It is one of the only planes that does not crash you if you accidently raise the gear on the ground. It is pretty disappointing to set everything up for a flight and then hit the gear button on the joystick instead of flaps. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
On Friday 07 December 2007 14:40:34 gerard robin wrote: Making the 3D model shape is the easiest (5% of the work, more or less 24 hours of work, but very complicated shape) There is a lot of stuff to do: =the cockpit must completed (versus the A10, Alexy has spent so many time to do it) =the 3D model is missing a lot of details (maybe the user did notice it, but the author knows it) =An improvement of the texture, and probably some variants =the FDM which not right, close to the real one, must be done fully All very true - and this doesn't even really mention all the various systems that might be involved - electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, radars, weapons etc. I agree that we need a better indication of state of completion for the models on the downloads page, but as far as I can see it will have to be a very basic overview. I'm not a fan of simplistic star ratings, but if the stars are for degree of completion and every star has a well-defined meaning, the idea might well have some merit (merely as a rough indication of what to expect). Stars for artistic competence and brilliance of execution should be avoided, I think. We have some stunning models and I personally make a point of mentioning my appreciation to the authors of such, but making any kind of comments on models which might be discouraging to modellers who are still developing their skills would be counter-productive I think. Cheers, AJ - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
On ven 7 décembre 2007, Hans Fugal wrote: The aircraft discussion has been interesting. One stumbling block I've come across when deciding which aircraft to download before is the quality guessing game. The web site lists the author's assessment, but I've found that to be less useful than it could be, because some authors say alpha when in fact the plane is much better than one which says production, esp in the case where a production plane has bitrotted. The subjective judgement by different people is not a good basis for making decisions. For me personally, the decision in question is not the download itself but the hassle of putting the downloaded file in the right place and firing up flightgear for a test flight. For others with slower internet the download may be the big thing. I'm not sure what the solution is, but here's a few random ideas. There could be one person that assigns the subjective quality tags, maybe out of a set, e.g. flies, 3d, realistic or 2d, crashes or whatever. Maybe a committee of 2 or 3, or 2 or 3 individuals that have agreed on what each tag means. Another possibility is some kind of user voting system, but I like that idea less and it probably means more work. Another idea is writing up some guidelines on how the authors should describe the plane in the status field, so that even though it's still a subjective description by many individuals, at least they are based on some common ground. Just my $0.02. You are right that is the problem. How to do with. It must be discussed here. When delivering a model, i usually say it is only 15% done. Why ? Making the 3D model shape is the easiest (5% of the work, more or less 24 hours of work, but very complicated shape) In spite of an acceptable eye candy: =animations done (which include the landing gear with compression extension) =a 3D cockpit, with some instruments =an FDM which seems to be right in order to play with it There is a lot of stuff to do: =the cockpit must completed (versus the A10, Alexy has spent so many time to do it) =the 3D model is missing a lot of details (maybe the user did notice it, but the author knows it) =An improvement of the texture, and probably some variants =the FDM which not right, close to the real one, must be done fully We could try to define some estimated values A, B, C, for each main components theses values could be defined within a range previously defined not by the author only, but by the community. I guess it could be useful for the devel-modeler, sometime the author is going on a lot of details, which could lead to the perfect is the enemy of the good. Cheers -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ Less i work, better i go - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
Nice idea! Why not add a system like: 5 stars for a very complete aircraft like the Senecca II or one for the not so goog like the fokker 70/100? So everyone can see, where is potential to develop?! Regards HHS --- Hans Fugal [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: The aircraft discussion has been interesting. One stumbling block I've come across when deciding which aircraft to download before is the quality guessing game. The web site lists the author's assessment, but I've found that to be less useful than it could be, because some authors say alpha when in fact the plane is much better than one which says production, esp in the case where a production plane has bitrotted. The subjective judgement by different people is not a good basis for making decisions. For me personally, the decision in question is not the download itself but the hassle of putting the downloaded file in the right place and firing up flightgear for a test flight. For others with slower internet the download may be the big thing. I'm not sure what the solution is, but here's a few random ideas. There could be one person that assigns the subjective quality tags, maybe out of a set, e.g. flies, 3d, realistic or 2d, crashes or whatever. Maybe a committee of 2 or 3, or 2 or 3 individuals that have agreed on what each tag means. Another possibility is some kind of user voting system, but I like that idea less and it probably means more work. Another idea is writing up some guidelines on how the authors should describe the plane in the status field, so that even though it's still a subjective description by many individuals, at least they are based on some common ground. Just my $0.02. -- Hans Fugal Fugal Computing - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel __ Ihr erstes Baby? Holen Sie sich Tipps von anderen Eltern. www.yahoo.de/clever - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
The aircraft discussion has been interesting. One stumbling block I've come across when deciding which aircraft to download before is the quality guessing game. The web site lists the author's assessment, but I've found that to be less useful than it could be, because some authors say alpha when in fact the plane is much better than one which says production, esp in the case where a production plane has bitrotted. The subjective judgement by different people is not a good basis for making decisions. For me personally, the decision in question is not the download itself but the hassle of putting the downloaded file in the right place and firing up flightgear for a test flight. For others with slower internet the download may be the big thing. I'm not sure what the solution is, but here's a few random ideas. There could be one person that assigns the subjective quality tags, maybe out of a set, e.g. flies, 3d, realistic or 2d, crashes or whatever. Maybe a committee of 2 or 3, or 2 or 3 individuals that have agreed on what each tag means. Another possibility is some kind of user voting system, but I like that idea less and it probably means more work. Another idea is writing up some guidelines on how the authors should describe the plane in the status field, so that even though it's still a subjective description by many individuals, at least they are based on some common ground. Just my $0.02. -- Hans Fugal Fugal Computing - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
If you want to make the simulation more realistic turning up the turbulence is not the best way to do it. At the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, the simulations were operated at 1.4 times real-time to give the pilot a task that resembled the real thing. This technique was developed during the X-15 days but was never documented. Lee gerard robin wrote: On ven 7 décembre 2007, Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Laurence Vanek -- Friday 07 December 2007: Although I like realistic flight my ILS approaches we very unstable with the turb values given in the Preferences.xml file [...] But, but ... some have just told us that we shouldn't make it too easy, or fgfs will be perceived as a toy. So I'd rather turn the values *up*. m. :-P ooohhh :) probably a bad boy. AND you understood i was talking about Aircraft. Yes it may be zero turbulence, yes we can use Metar BY that FG will not be a toy. Cheers - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
I don't think turning turbulance to zero by dedault is a good solution. If the problem is only in JSBSim then it should be fixed. Meanwhile we can provide the zero turbulance workaround in a wiki page or some other place. I want to know what is the real cause of the problem. turbulance is just one f actor of the cause, I think. There are many papers written on turbulence and gust modeling. It's a big topic, really. I wouldn't ask that turbulence be turned off to suit one FDM. If there are other reasons to do so, that's OK. And yes, the real cause of the problem can very well be turbulence modeling. Jon - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
* gerard robin -- Friday 07 December 2007: http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/StampeSV4.jpg Wow, that's a nice one! Unfortunately it will not be available before FG stable will be released :( We can postpone the release for it. ;-) m. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think turning turbulance to zero by dedault is a good solution. If the problem is only in JSBSim then it should be fixed. Meanwhile we can pro vide the zero turbulance workaround in a wiki page or some other place. The problem is the default AC (c172p) with the default turbulence has the 0 to 500 ft boundary layer turbulence set to 0.1 which is enough to set off this oscillation. I want to know what is the real cause of the problem. turbulance is just one f actor of the cause, I think. There is a long thread discussing what appears to be adverse aileron yaw. Since most AP's control roll with aileron only, right aileron causes a roll to the right with a yaw to the left. It is so noticeable with the SenecaII (with no auto coordination) that the ball is eventually pegged at one extreme and then the other and you see the yaw response and aileron inputs from the AP almost 180 degrees out of phase. If you turn on auto coordination, the oscillations disappear. I tried Jon Berndt's suggestion of adding a scaling value. It had only minimal affect. Even with this set to 0.0, the yaw problem persists. -Dave Perry - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
Nice idea! Why not add a system like: 5 stars for a very complete aircraft like the Senecca II or one for the not so goog like the fokker 70/100? So everyone can see, where is potential to develop?! Regards HHS --- Hans Fugal [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: We could give a star for every single part of the development stadia. One start for the 3D Cockpit, one star for the Painting, One star for the 3D Model, One star for the flying performances etc. So if a plane has a 3D Cockpit and an 3d exterior model it gets 2 start by example. PS: If this is added, we may add also something wich let users rate the aircraft? _ http://www.live.com/?mkt=nl-nl Live.nl- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
Hi, --- gerard robin [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: On ven 7 décembre 2007, Heiko Schulz wrote: Yes we must not talk about artistic competences (here the msfs models are better :( ), only to answer the question: does the model simulate the real one ?which degree of simulation ? Right I think- eye candies are only one small part of being realistic, but if we want to be serious, we should attend this. Problem: how should we find out how realistic a aircraft is? Not all aircrafts here are based on save datas or have a real pilot as developer?! Regards HHS An answer only for fun: Yes the f16 is based on save data ( partly yes , however, it is ) Cheers -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ Less i work, better i go I meant that the datas are known and be sur to be the right one! ( and not just guessing!) Regards HHS Heute schon einen Blick in die Zukunft von E-Mails wagen? www.yahoo.de/mail - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
--- AJ MacLeod wrote: I agree that we need a better indication of state of completion for the models on the downloads page, but as far as I can see it will have to be a very basic overview. I'm not a fan of simplistic star ratings, but if the stars are for degree of completion and every star has a well-defined meaning, the idea might well have some merit (merely as a rough indication of what to expect). Quite a few of the aircraft currently use the following scale: - alpha - beta - early-production - production which I think is fairly easy to understand for users, and fit in with the basic software model of improvement over time. However, as others have pointed out, we need a better definition for what each of these mean. As it has worked quite well in the past for collating input, I suggest we set up a wiki page to get a feel for what people consider acceptable for each of the definitions. I'll set it up when I get the chance, unless someone else does so before me. To add to AJs point that we shouldn't be using this to critique model quality (as opposed to completeness of the aircraft), I'd suggest that a fully 3-D cockpit should not be a requirement for a production aircraft. I think that a 2.5D cockpit (i.e. a 2D panel pasted onto a surface) is acceptable for a production aircraft, and I'm not just saying that because I maintain some aircraft that use this feature ;) -Stuart __ Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
Stuart Buchanan wrote: --- Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 07 December 2007: - avoiding really difficult to fly aircraft in the default aircraft collection doesn't make fgfs a toy, and Oh, and to take some pressure from the bf109, I declare now the pittss1c the official victim that I'll pick on. That one should definitely not be part of the default aircraft selection. :-P m. That's quite OK. I was originally hoping that the Pitts would be a nice way to transition from the very easy j3cub to the powerful warbirds, but it turned out to be quite handful itself! We have a very nice progression from nose-wheel aircraft to twins for complex/IFR operations: c172p/pa29-161 - c182rg/pa24-250 - Seneca-II However, I don't think we currently have a real equivalent path for taildraggers in terms of handling. The closest I can think of is: j3cub - dhc2W - pittss1c/p51d/bf109/ However, there is a big jump in challenge from the Beaver to the warbirds. Anyone know a good half-way house taildragger ? I've got a Chipmunk T-10 planned when the grob g115 is more complete - was the standard RAF trainer a long time ago, and is still in service for pilots training to fly with the BBMF - would that be suitable? Jon - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
On ven 7 décembre 2007, Stuart Buchanan wrote: --- Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 07 December 2007: - avoiding really difficult to fly aircraft in the default aircraft collection doesn't make fgfs a toy, and Oh, and to take some pressure from the bf109, I declare now the pittss1c the official victim that I'll pick on. That one should definitely not be part of the default aircraft selection. :-P m. That's quite OK. I was originally hoping that the Pitts would be a nice way to transition from the very easy j3cub to the powerful warbirds, but it turned out to be quite handful itself! We have a very nice progression from nose-wheel aircraft to twins for complex/IFR operations: c172p/pa29-161 - c182rg/pa24-250 - Seneca-II However, I don't think we currently have a real equivalent path for taildraggers in terms of handling. The closest I can think of is: j3cub - dhc2W - pittss1c/p51d/bf109/ However, there is a big jump in challenge from the Beaver to the warbirds. Anyone know a good half-way house taildragger ? -Stuart -Stuart Yes i will have that one, i got training on the real one when i was young ( so many years ago). http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/StampeSV4.jpg Unfortunately it will not be available before FG stable will be released :( -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ Less i work, better i go - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
On ven 7 décembre 2007, Heiko Schulz wrote: Yes we must not talk about artistic competences (here the msfs models are better :( ), only to answer the question: does the model simulate the real one ?which degree of simulation ? Right I think- eye candies are only one small part of being realistic, but if we want to be serious, we should attend this. Problem: how should we find out how realistic a aircraft is? Not all aircrafts here are based on save datas or have a real pilot as developer?! Regards HHS An answer only for fun: Yes the f16 is based on save data ( partly yes , however, it is ) Cheers -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ Less i work, better i go - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
* dave perry -- Friday 07 December 2007: What is proposed is to make the default turbulence = 0.0 at start-up, not turning off turbulence modeling. You can still use the weather menu to set the desired turbulence or you can [...] OK, before even more people answer who didn't get what I was writing: - low/no default turbulence doesn't make fgfs a toy - high default turbulence doesn't make it professional just as - avoiding really difficult to fly aircraft in the default aircraft collection doesn't make fgfs a toy, and - including them doesn't make it professional I was just making a comparison! :-) In the end I don't care much, as I (like everyone else here) will not use the default package. The question is only, which defaults are least frustrating for someone who just downloaded 200 MB of data via dial up, and what makes the most sense. That we want maximum realism *and* a way to configure as much as possible and reasonable, was never disputed. m. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Wouldn't turning the turbulence down make other FDMs less realistic? Also if JSBSim autopilots are affected, how come autolanding with Concorde while turbulence is enabled (but no crosswind) works perfectly? Concorde uses JSBSim after all... /AnMaster Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Laurence Vanek -- Friday 07 December 2007: Although I like realistic flight my ILS approaches we very unstable with the turb values given in the Preferences.xml file [...] But, but ... some have just told us that we shouldn't make it too easy, or fgfs will be perceived as a toy. So I'd rather turn the values *up*. m. :-P -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWQE1WmK6ng/aMNkRCg9mAKCdJz3wxaAFStEbtMJ3Xm45rcrK9gCdFkPd M8hKNvsjDlI4GszkI8KLKTU= =g4Wc -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
* Stuart Buchanan -- Friday 07 December 2007: j3cub - dhc2W - pittss1c/p51d/bf109/ BTW: the p51d wasn't considered very realistic in IRC discussions, so I'm not even sure if it should be in the default collection. Being a well known and remarkable aircraft in real life isn't enough. But that's not really my area of expertise. m. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] X-52 Pro joystick configuration
Hi AnMaster, It seems better than mine to me. I'll test it with my X52 (not X52 pro but it looks useful with X52 too). Thanks for your effort!! Tat On Dec 4, 2007, at 4:45 PM, AnMaster wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I have made a joystick config for Saitek X52 Pro: the axis numbers and button numbers differ from the normal X52. This is an early version, I expect it to change as I find what is useful and what isn't. If someone want to put it in CVS, the file is attached. Regards, AnMaster -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHVQWdWmK6ng/aMNkRCsP8AKC1MOvJNtEvUfphX8ABtF47eVsY9wCgoljQ tynBvGtatKqQ/8cJaFOhmtE= =SDTP -END PGP SIGNATURE- ?xml version=1.0? !-- Based on X52.xml and Aviator.xml Modified by Arvid Norlander; 2007-12-03 This file is released under the GPL license. -- !-- Common Axis/Buttons + Roll/Pitch/Throttle/Rudder: As There are + Top stick hat: Airelon / Elevator trim + Bottom stick hat:View directions (Increase/Decrease visibility Zoom In/Out when shifted) + Throttle foreside hat: Up/down: View cycles (Shift: flaps up/ down). Left/right: Rudder trim + Throttle slider: Boost Control (if available) + Tirgger: Apply all brakes + Fire button: Toggle parking brake + Stick button A:Gear up (Shift: gear down) + Stick button B:HUD master switch + Stick button C:Reset view (hackish) (shift: Toggle speedbrake) + Pinkie button: Shift switch + Throttle button D: Right brake + Throttle button E: Left brake + Throttle button i: PTT (Push to talk, for fgcom) + Throttle mouse button: Start Selected Engine(s) + T1/T2: Hook up/down (Increase/Decrease spoilers when shifted) + T3/T4: Increase/Decrease slats + T5/T6: Increase/Decrease Speedbrake (Increase/Decrease magneto when shifted) Mode 1: Propeller Aircraft + Top rotary dial: Mixture + Bottom rotary dial: Prop Advance + Throttle mouse button: Start Selected Engine(s) Mode 2: Jet Aircraft + Top rotary dial: Carb Heat Mode 3: Not implemented yet Linux Axis Numbers (no idea about window/mac ones, and they are not same as plain X52 axis numbers on linux at least): 0 Roll (positive == right) 1 Pitch (positive == down/back/nose-up) 2 Throttle (positive == back/down/idle) 3 Bottom rotary dial on the throttle (positive == CW) 4 Top rotary dial on the throttle (positive == CCW) 5 Rocker switch (rudder control) on the throttle (positive == right) 6 Slider on the throttle (positive == forward) 7 Lower right hat horizontal axis (positive == right) 8 Lower right hat vertical axis (positive == down (Mac positive is UP)) 9 Mouse Y (positive = up) 10Mouse X (positive = right) Button Numbers (Probably identical b/w Linux/Windows/Mac): 0 Trigger (half pressed) 1 Stick top Fire switch 2 Stick top A switch 3 Stick top B switch 4 Stick top C switch 5 Stick pinkie switch 6 Throttle D switch 7 Throttle E switch 8 T1 9 T2 10 T3 11 T4 12 T5 13 T6 15 Throttle mouse switch 16 Throttle forefinger wheel scroll down 17 Throttle forefinger wheel scroll up 18 Throttle forefinger wheel click 19 Upper left hat in up position 20 Upper left hat in right position 21 Upper left hat in down position 22 Upper left hat in left position 23 Throttle forefinger hat in up/back position 24 Throttle forefinger hat in right position 25 Throttle forefinger hat in down/forward position 26 Throttle forefinger hat in left position 27 Mode 1 28 Mode 2 29 Mode 3 30 Throttle i switch 31 Function wheel (below MFD) click (don't use, it is for timer) 32 START/STOP (don't use, for features in joystick itself) 33 RESET (don't use, for features in joystick itself) 34 Function wheel (below MFD) up 35 Function wheel (below MFD) down 36 MFD-select wheel below MFD up 37 MFD-select wheel below MFD down 38 MFD-select wheel below MFD click $Id: $ -- PropertyList nameSaitek X52 Pro Flight Control System/name nameSaitek Saitek X52 Pro Flight Control System/name !-- No idea if there are more names for it, mine matches the last entry here. -- !-- Custom section for storing some properties, based on Aviator.xml -- data modifier type=boolfalse/modifier mode type=int0/mode /data nasal script ![CDATA[ var self = cmdarg().getParent(); var data = self.getNode(data); var modifier = data.getNode(modifier); var mode =
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
On ven 7 décembre 2007, Jon Stockill wrote: I've got a Chipmunk T-10 planned when the grob g115 is more complete - was the standard RAF trainer a long time ago, and is still in service for pilots training to fly with the BBMF - would that be suitable? Jon that one ? http://www.spyflight.co.uk/chipmunk.htm Better choice , less risk to caught a cold. Cheers -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ Less i work, better i go - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
--- Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 07 December 2007: - avoiding really difficult to fly aircraft in the default aircraft collection doesn't make fgfs a toy, and Oh, and to take some pressure from the bf109, I declare now the pittss1c the official victim that I'll pick on. That one should definitely not be part of the default aircraft selection. :-P m. That's quite OK. I was originally hoping that the Pitts would be a nice way to transition from the very easy j3cub to the powerful warbirds, but it turned out to be quite handful itself! We have a very nice progression from nose-wheel aircraft to twins for complex/IFR operations: c172p/pa29-161 - c182rg/pa24-250 - Seneca-II However, I don't think we currently have a real equivalent path for taildraggers in terms of handling. The closest I can think of is: j3cub - dhc2W - pittss1c/p51d/bf109/ However, there is a big jump in challenge from the Beaver to the warbirds. Anyone know a good half-way house taildragger ? -Stuart -Stuart -Stuart __ Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
* Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 07 December 2007: - avoiding really difficult to fly aircraft in the default aircraft collection doesn't make fgfs a toy, and Oh, and to take some pressure from the bf109, I declare now the pittss1c the official victim that I'll pick on. That one should definitely not be part of the default aircraft selection. :-P m. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease
On ven 7 décembre 2007, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote: Goorg, and Melchir, Thanks for your report and opinion. On Dec 8, 2007, at 1:09 AM, Georg Vollnhals wrote: Hi Tat, tested this on OpenSUSE 10.2 86_64 with FG 9.11 Prerelease S76 Helicopter 1. DList stack overflow (snip) NEGATIVE Yes, my fingers are aching ... pressed more than 30 times SHIFT-ESC = NO problem here OK, so this is a Mac OS specific bug. 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz. Don't worry, it is not only a Mac OS specific bug it is an old bug. I have it on PC with Linux Best, Tat Cheers -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ Less i work, better i go - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
On ven 7 décembre 2007, AJ MacLeod wrote: On Friday 07 December 2007 14:40:34 gerard robin wrote: Making the 3D model shape is the easiest (5% of the work, more or less 24 hours of work, but very complicated shape) There is a lot of stuff to do: =the cockpit must completed (versus the A10, Alexy has spent so many time to do it) =the 3D model is missing a lot of details (maybe the user did notice it, but the author knows it) =An improvement of the texture, and probably some variants =the FDM which not right, close to the real one, must be done fully All very true - and this doesn't even really mention all the various systems that might be involved - electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, radars, weapons etc. That is right, we could add the autopilot, i only wanted to define the minimum acceptable, we could find a lot of others features which are specific to the model. I agree that we need a better indication of state of completion for the models on the downloads page, but as far as I can see it will have to be a very basic overview. I'm not a fan of simplistic star ratings, but if the stars are for degree of completion and every star has a well-defined meaning, the idea might well have some merit (merely as a rough indication of what to expect). Stars for artistic competence and brilliance of execution should be avoided, Yes we must not talk about artistic competences (here the msfs models are better :( ), only to answer the question: does the model simulate the real one ?which degree of simulation ? I think. We have some stunning models and I personally make a point of mentioning my appreciation to the authors of such, but making any kind of comments on models which might be discouraging to modellers who are still developing their skills would be counter-productive I think. Cheers, AJ Cheers -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ Less i work, better i go - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
Yes we must not talk about artistic competences (here the msfs models are better :( ), only to answer the question: does the model simulate the real one ?which degree of simulation ? Right I think- eye candies are only one small part of being realistic, but if we want to be serious, we should attend this. Problem: how should we find out how realistic a aircraft is? Not all aircrafts here are based on save datas or have a real pilot as developer?! Regards HHS __ Ihre erste Baustelle? Wissenswertes für Bastler und Hobby Handwerker. www.yahoo.de/clever - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease
Goorg, and Melchir, Thanks for your report and opinion. On Dec 8, 2007, at 1:09 AM, Georg Vollnhals wrote: Hi Tat, tested this on OpenSUSE 10.2 86_64 with FG 9.11 Prerelease S76 Helicopter 1. DList stack overflow (snip) NEGATIVE Yes, my fingers are aching ... pressed more than 30 times SHIFT-ESC = NO problem here OK, so this is a Mac OS specific bug. 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz. POSITIVE Found the S76 on the water and the carrier moving away :-( Got it! On Dec 8, 2007, at 2:12 AM, Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Tatsuhiro Nishioka -- Friday 07 December 2007: 1. DList stack overflow I've seen them on other occasions in fg/plib. Haven't tried with Shift-Esc, but I think that's a plib problem. Don't think that's something we can fix before the release. It's definitely not one of bugs that people usually report. More of a Doctor, it hurts problem. :-) Haha, though I don't think it's Doctor, it hurts thing since it actually occurs on Mac OS, I understand that we can't fix it before the release. So I'm going to notice that there is a problem on sequential resets on Mac OS X in the release note if I can't find the cause of the problem by the time of the release. I'm going to trace some code that uses DList push/pop during reset. If someone already know what functions uses these on reset, please let me know. 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz. I've been told that this is a ... feature. :-/ Oh... but I don't buy that idea since it's not a product made by MS :-p Anyway, I'm trying to find the cause of this issue, finding the ground elevation gets negative value when reset. I force adjusted the ground elevation value when reset on Nimitz for test, but A6M2 fell down onto the sea anyway. so that's not the real cause. I hope I can find the real cause of this soon. Best, Tat - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
Err ... there's a 2D exterior? And a 3D cockpit is not necessarily better than a 2D. 2D is less demanding on frame rate, and can be just as effective as a 3D cockpit. And some of those are by no means brilliant. Horses for courses. Our most detailed ac need high end computers to run on, with good graphics cards. Not everyone has such a machine, and we have to have regard for them. Vivian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gijs de Rooy Sent: 07 December 2007 14:30 To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality Nice idea! Why not add a system like: 5 stars for a very complete aircraft like the Senecca II or one for the not so goog like the fokker 70/100? So everyone can see, where is potential to develop?! Regards HHS --- Hans Fugal [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: We could give a star for every single part of the development stadia. One start for the 3D Cockpit, one star for the Painting, One star for the 3D Model, One star for the flying performances etc. So if a plane has a 3D Cockpit and an 3d exterior model it gets 2 start by example. PS: If this is added, we may add also something wich let users rate the aircraft? _ Windows Live Messenger het beste van de toekomst Download NU! Windows Live Messenger! http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=nl-nlsource= joinmsncom/messenger - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Helicopter simulations
Hi, You should have the latest CVS-Version or the pre-Release-version. It has the latest YASim with improved helicopter-fdm. In the DOC's you will find further information about. Regards HHS --- Lee Duke [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: I'm trying to build a simulation model of a helicopter and a tiltrotor aircraft. I see there are a couple of rotary-winged models in the FlightGear inventory. Does anyone know which FDMs were used for these models. I'm looking for some information on how these aircraft and rotor models were put together. Lee Duke - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel __ Ihr erstes Baby? Holen Sie sich Tipps von anderen Eltern. www.yahoo.de/clever - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
Gerard robin wrote Sent: 07 December 2007 15:44 To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality On ven 7 décembre 2007, Heiko Schulz wrote: Yes we must not talk about artistic competences (here the msfs models are better :( ), only to answer the question: does the model simulate the real one ?which degree of simulation ? Right I think- eye candies are only one small part of being realistic, but if we want to be serious, we should attend this. Problem: how should we find out how realistic a aircraft is? Not all aircrafts here are based on save datas or have a real pilot as developer?! Regards HHS An answer only for fun: Yes the f16 is based on save data ( partly yes , however, it is ) Sorry, run that hog by me again - what is save data? Vivian - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease
Hi there, I want to know if the bugs that I reported before are Mac OS specific or not. So I want you guys to check if the following bugs occur on your platform(s). 1. DList stack overflow When I reset fgfs by pressing Shift-ESC for several times (maybe 10 times), DList stack overflow occurs. This problem has something to do with the flying instruments problem that I posted before since the instruments start flying when DList stack overflows occur 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz. If these are Mac OS specific, then I'm going to find the causes to make patches. By the way, can I have a CVS account? Thanks in advance. Tat - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
On ven 7 décembre 2007, Vivian Meazza wrote: Gerard robin wrote Sent: 07 December 2007 15:44 To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality On ven 7 décembre 2007, Heiko Schulz wrote: Yes we must not talk about artistic competences (here the msfs models are better :( ), only to answer the question: does the model simulate the real one ?which degree of simulation ? Right I think- eye candies are only one small part of being realistic, but if we want to be serious, we should attend this. Problem: how should we find out how realistic a aircraft is? Not all aircrafts here are based on save datas or have a real pilot as developer?! Regards HHS An answer only for fun: Yes the f16 is based on save data ( partly yes , however, it is ) Sorry, run that hog by me again - what is save data? Vivian I understood it to be result of measurements from the real Aircraft, tunnel wind data , others useful information about the flight specifications Cheers -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ Less i work, better i go - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Helicopter simulations
I'm trying to build a simulation model of a helicopter and a tiltrotor aircraft. I see there are a couple of rotary-winged models in the FlightGear inventory. Does anyone know which FDMs were used for these models. I'm looking for some information on how these aircraft and rotor models were put together. Lee Duke - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem
* AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007: Melchior FRANZ wrote: aircraft minus model? :-} Well what do you suggest for storing /sim/aircraft in otherwise? Err, looks like you didn't get the hint. A '-' in programming context is a minus, not a hyphen. Although some people seem to not like this old tradition, as we can read in Lockheed1049.nas: # current nasal version doesn't accept : # - too many operations on 1 line. # - variable with hyphen (?). Yeah, no hyphens in variables. Later nasal versions won't change this, I'm afraid. ;-) m. PS: though one can always work around that by referencing a hpyhen variable via namespace hash/bracket notation. PPS: the too many operations complaint is bogus - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease
Hi, I found kind of a hint of the cause of DList stack overflow. After reset, the number of ssgTransform increases a lot. so maybe this has something to do with the cause of the problem since ssgTransform::cull calls _ssgPushMatrix and _ssgPopMatrix. these two show DList stack overflow error. Plus, this problem doesn't happen when --disable-ai-models is specified. When I commented outscenarionimitz_demo/scenario from preferences.xml, this DL stack overflow doesn't happen even without --disable-ai-models. So resetting carrier object in AICarrier::init() or methods called from init() probably generates redundant or unexpected ssgTransform objects. I'll dive deeper tomorrow. If any of you have any idea on what causes this, please let me know. Best, Tat On Dec 8, 2007, at 2:49 AM, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote: Goorg, and Melchir, Thanks for your report and opinion. On Dec 8, 2007, at 1:09 AM, Georg Vollnhals wrote: Hi Tat, tested this on OpenSUSE 10.2 86_64 with FG 9.11 Prerelease S76 Helicopter 1. DList stack overflow (snip) NEGATIVE Yes, my fingers are aching ... pressed more than 30 times SHIFT-ESC = NO problem here OK, so this is a Mac OS specific bug. 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz. POSITIVE Found the S76 on the water and the carrier moving away :-( Got it! On Dec 8, 2007, at 2:12 AM, Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Tatsuhiro Nishioka -- Friday 07 December 2007: 1. DList stack overflow I've seen them on other occasions in fg/plib. Haven't tried with Shift-Esc, but I think that's a plib problem. Don't think that's something we can fix before the release. It's definitely not one of bugs that people usually report. More of a Doctor, it hurts problem. :-) Haha, though I don't think it's Doctor, it hurts thing since it actually occurs on Mac OS, I understand that we can't fix it before the release. So I'm going to notice that there is a problem on sequential resets on Mac OS X in the release note if I can't find the cause of the problem by the time of the release. I'm going to trace some code that uses DList push/pop during reset. If someone already know what functions uses these on reset, please let me know. 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz. I've been told that this is a ... feature. :-/ Oh... but I don't buy that idea since it's not a product made by MS :-p Anyway, I'm trying to find the cause of this issue, finding the ground elevation gets negative value when reset. I force adjusted the ground elevation value when reset on Nimitz for test, but A6M2 fell down onto the sea anyway. so that's not the real cause. I hope I can find the real cause of this soon. Best, Tat - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem
* AnMaster -- Friday 07 December 2007: scriptaircraft.HUD.cycle_color()/script [...] Yet I get this for button: Nasal runtime error: No such member: HUD at /input/joysticks/js/button[3]/binding, line 1 You probably defined a variable named aircraft somewhere else in the joystick driver file, and this overwrote the aircraft namespace created by $FG_ROOT/Nasal/aircraft.nas. You have to know that all Nasal in a joystick driver is in a common Nasal namespace. m. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I wanted a button to turn off/on HUD on my joystick so I took a look at the keyboard binding for it: key n=104 nameh/name descHUD Master Switch/desc binding commandnasal/command scriptaircraft.HUD.cycle_color()/script /binding /key Now I tried to insert that in my joystick config: !-- Button B -- button n=3 descHUD Master Switch/desc binding commandnasal/command scriptaircraft.HUD.cycle_color()/script /binding /button Yet I get this for button: Nasal runtime error: No such member: HUD at /input/joysticks/js/button[3]/binding, line 1 While the keyboard binding works fine. Any idea what could cause this? By the way this problem happens in both osg and plib and it worked just 2 days ago in both. Regards, AnMaster -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWdA8WmK6ng/aMNkRCqo0AKCLajQ1xFzFY/6Gv9TZ+ESPUeNXUQCeOQGK UsJr2pxbk8ftufQT2/BvHM4= =Vfp4 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
Am Freitag 07 Dezember 2007 schrieb LeeE: ...[end user rating scheme is bad idea]... I propose that we identify the different areas of development i.e. 3d model, FDM, Cockpit, flight control systems etc. and then just state the level of development for each of those areas. While this is probably the most neutral scheme a few questions arise to me. If its not coming from the users, who is going to do the evaluation? According to which criteria/set of standards? The result might also be too complex for new users (for which this rating system was intended in the first place), so we also need some defined procedure (e.g. weighted scores of the categories) to cut it down to a few easily understood levels (like we have now in the hangar, i.e. alpha, early production, production, maybe not that developer centric). I favour school grades over stars because you get a decimal for finer distinction. Anyway I like the idea of having 'Stiftung Warentest' (THE german consumer goods evaluator) for aircraft. Thomas Note: haven't read the whole thread so bear with me if I'm just restating other's ideas. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
On Dec 7, 2007 2:43 PM, LeeE wrote: I'm not sure that a rating scheme, where the ratings are given by end users, is a good idea. I'm not sure the value of debating and discussing and designing a system that probably no one will step forward to build. But that said, if you allow multiple user ratings with attached comments, I would think that would be useful. Sure there's always going to be a chance that a bad apple gets in there and claims the world will end if anyone downloads this aircraft, but that is set again the 99% of thoughtful reviews and comments and experiences. I don't think it's possible to have a completely objective system since we are often don't have good truth references for historic or exotic or new or classified aircraft. Is there a way we could abuse the flightgear forum for this purpose? We could start a forum thread for each aircraft and link to that thread from the downloads page. It would be kind of clunky and a bear to maintain, so we'd have to find someone who is pretty passionate about rating aircraft and tracking user comments. But something like this could be interesting ... authors could post update notices for their aircraft, and all this information would be consolodated in one place. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ Unique text: 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
On Friday 07 December 2007 20:25, Curtis Olson wrote: On Dec 7, 2007 2:20 PM, AnMaster wrote: Just an idea: A rating system for users. (Please rate this aircraft after you tried it for a bit!) However we can't know how well the users know how it should be. Maybe we should ask them if they are pilots/if the flew that aircraft in reality. Some sort of rating/comments system is a good idea, but someone is going to have to step forward to design and build such a system (or find one that does just what we want) and hopefully tie it in with the aircraft downloads page. Curt. I'm not sure that a rating scheme, where the ratings are given by end users, is a good idea. It would be too easy for small-minded people who simply don't 'like' a particular aircraft for whatever personal reasons or because they wish to promote a different aircraft, or even because they don't like a particular person associated with an aircraft, to give that aircraft a bad rating when it might not be deserved. Sorry, but people _are_ that small-minded and it _will_ happen. I propose that we identify the different areas of development i.e. 3d model, FDM, Cockpit, flight control systems etc. and then just state the level of development for each of those areas. LeeE - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote: Hi there, On Dec 8, 2007, at 5:01 AM, SydSandy wrote: Quite a few of the aircraft currently use the following scale: - alpha - beta - early-production - production (snip) I agree with most of the discussion , but the above scale means nothing to me , it doesn't give ME any indication of what I'm downloading it only means something from an authors point of view , IMHO. Im trying to think as a user :) I do agree that we need something more informative . What about the following perspectives? 1. Flight model stability (at least flyable without easily noticeable weird behaviors) That would cause a lot of less experienced users to think ground loops with tail dragers = weird behaviour. And even for experienced users, some plane had weird behaviour in reality. 2. 3D model completeness (at least shape is acceptable, textured, and gears are animated) That should be easier to check. 3. Instruments completeness (it doesn't have to be 3D but should be working properly, most of instruments should be implemented) 4. Interior completeness (at least cockpit room, throttle, canopy are implemented) We still need to know how to rate aircraft objectively using these perspectives. Considering authenticity is a big problem to me. for 3D model, Instruments and interior, some people can rate aircraft, but for Flight model, I have no idea how to rate especially historical aircraft since there exists few data or aircraft itself. Indeed. However some issues are clear. Autopilot not working well (like altitude hold on 787) are very likely a problem in aircraft model for example and not a quirk with the real aircraft. /AnMaster -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWbA8WmK6ng/aMNkRChwDAKCNTvL7NGDNdJocKT7yKp//v7Rn6ACeMmHp qTlg/6z2Y9WdZMMUFO7rFwQ= =b8+r -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 SydSandy wrote: On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 15:39:53 + (GMT) Stuart Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- AJ MacLeod wrote: I agree that we need a better indication of state of completion for the models on the downloads page, but as far as I can see it will have to be a very basic overview. I'm not a fan of simplistic star ratings, but if the stars are for degree of completion and every star has a well-defined meaning, the idea might well have some merit (merely as a rough indication of what to expect). Quite a few of the aircraft currently use the following scale: - alpha - beta - early-production - production which I think is fairly easy to understand for users, and fit in with the basic software model of improvement over time. However, as others have pointed out, we need a better definition for what each of these mean. I agree with most of the discussion , but the above scale means nothing to me , it doesn't give ME any indication of what I'm downloading it only means something from an authors point of view , IMHO. Im trying to think as a user :) I do agree that we need something more informative . Cheers Just an idea: A rating system for users. (Please rate this aircraft after you tried it for a bit!) However we can't know how well the users know how it should be. Maybe we should ask them if they are pilots/if the flew that aircraft in reality. /AnMaster -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWar6WmK6ng/aMNkRCqYvAKC0Zz7y8a1d1srYxjNv467+71XQGQCfYPEI y6XVV2YmVInOqZUejhVWvrI= =tN/0 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 15:39:53 + (GMT) Stuart Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- AJ MacLeod wrote: I agree that we need a better indication of state of completion for the models on the downloads page, but as far as I can see it will have to be a very basic overview. I'm not a fan of simplistic star ratings, but if the stars are for degree of completion and every star has a well-defined meaning, the idea might well have some merit (merely as a rough indication of what to expect). Quite a few of the aircraft currently use the following scale: - alpha - beta - early-production - production which I think is fairly easy to understand for users, and fit in with the basic software model of improvement over time. However, as others have pointed out, we need a better definition for what each of these mean. I agree with most of the discussion , but the above scale means nothing to me , it doesn't give ME any indication of what I'm downloading it only means something from an authors point of view , IMHO. Im trying to think as a user :) I do agree that we need something more informative . Cheers -- SydSandy [EMAIL PROTECTED] - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] X-52 Pro joystick configuration
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote: Hi AnMaster, It seems better than mine to me. I'll test it with my X52 (not X52 pro but it looks useful with X52 too). Please note that the axis and button numbers differs between X52 and X52 Pro at least if your config was correct for *nix. Also I'm working on a use for the third mode (aircraft specific) as well as some other features. The mouse button/axes I want to use in X11 to control the mouse if possible, haven't got around to investigating if that is possible yet however. If you want I can mail you my current config but it is not in a state to be put in CVS currently. Thanks for your effort!! Tat On Dec 4, 2007, at 4:45 PM, AnMaster wrote: I have made a joystick config for Saitek X52 Pro: the axis numbers and button numbers differ from the normal X52. This is an early version, I expect it to change as I find what is useful and what isn't. If someone want to put it in CVS, the file is attached. Regards, AnMaster -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWaogWmK6ng/aMNkRCr1lAKC1mOtQGULEh9FJ/oRYl+MlyRBusgCeM7c5 UNdhW5S03IZqFTNCuNqFB9U= =mB7m -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote: Hi there, I want to know if the bugs that I reported before are Mac OS specific or not. So I want you guys to check if the following bugs occur on your platform(s). 1. DList stack overflow When I reset fgfs by pressing Shift-ESC for several times (maybe 10 times), DList stack overflow occurs. This problem has something to do with the flying instruments problem that I posted before since the instruments start flying when DList stack overflows occur Happens here too on Gentoo Linux (x64_64) but not often. 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz. Happens here too. If these are Mac OS specific, then I'm going to find the causes to make patches. By the way, can I have a CVS account? Thanks in advance. Tat -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWajMWmK6ng/aMNkRChpRAKC+MDYd0ww6Hjd8culSyDu+vm90UwCdFDAd tycH16Y1znnzE5cwaT4sOvc= =nzjR -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease
Georg Vollnhals Sent: 07 December 2007 16:10 To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease ... Snip ... 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz. This is a bug which we never got around to fixing, so I guess we should call it a feature now. Vivian - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
gerard robin wrote: that one ? http://www.spyflight.co.uk/chipmunk.htm Better choice , less risk to caught a cold. Yup, that's the one. Obviously it won't be ready before the next release, but should be available to fill the taildragger gap before the first osg release. Jon - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease
* Tatsuhiro Nishioka -- Friday 07 December 2007: 1. DList stack overflow I've seen them on other occasions in fg/plib. Haven't tried with Shift-Esc, but I think that's a plib problem. Don't think that's something we can fix before the release. It's definitely not one of bugs that people usually report. More of a Doctor, it hurts problem. :-) 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz. I've been told that this is a ... feature. :-/ m. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear prerelease
Tatsuhiro Nishioka schrieb: Hi there, I want to know if the bugs that I reported before are Mac OS specific or not. So I want you guys to check if the following bugs occur on your platform(s). Hi Tat, tested this on OpenSUSE 10.2 86_64 with FG 9.11 Prerelease S76 Helicopter 1. DList stack overflow When I reset fgfs by pressing Shift-ESC for several times (maybe 10 times), DList stack overflow occurs. This problem has something to do with the flying instruments problem that I posted before since the instruments start flying when DList stack overflows occur NEGATIVE Yes, my fingers are aching ... pressed more than 30 times SHIFT-ESC = NO problem here 2. Aircraft shows up under a carrier on reset This happens when I reset FlightGear (Shift-ESC) on Nimitz. POSITIVE Found the S76 on the water and the carrier moving away :-( Regards Georg EDDW - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Melchior FRANZ wrote: * AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007: Melchior FRANZ wrote: aircraft minus model? :-} Well what do you suggest for storing /sim/aircraft in otherwise? Err, looks like you didn't get the hint. A '-' in programming context is a minus, not a hyphen. Although some people seem to not like this old tradition, as we can read in Lockheed1049.nas: Ah, that depends on programming language. Some does allow - in variable names. Yes I renamed the variable now. # current nasal version doesn't accept : # - too many operations on 1 line. # - variable with hyphen (?). Yeah, no hyphens in variables. Later nasal versions won't change this, I'm afraid. ;-) m. PS: though one can always work around that by referencing a hpyhen variable via namespace hash/bracket notation. PPS: the too many operations complaint is bogus What complaint? Oh btw I think this would be easier to discuss on IRC channel. Regards, Arvid Norlander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWeIbWmK6ng/aMNkRCmWyAJ411FXgjiKHqMlJhavk2iyZYEnqQgCgsHaH or5QypzZhBtmMaQOn+NusnE= =+JKt -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fwd: Preparing the vmap0 Data / TerraGear
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 15:34:37 + will Pink wrote: Hello, Can anyone help with the attached ? I have checked and everything is there and the permissions are correct. I just really need to get over this hurdle as it is being used in quite a large Flight Simulator project and im delaying its progress! So any help is appreciated! If it's what I think it is, I wrote about it in my Building and Running TerraGear wiki page. Your error message is: } processing failed with VPF exception: failed to open VPF table } file /usr/local/src/Scenery/data/vmap0/vmaplv0/noamer/bnd/g/k/fbr There's two possible problems here; both can be resolved by checking that the path above is correct, *including the fact that it's case-sensitive*. I'm pretty sure that directory you've called k, for instance, is in fact K. -c -- Chris Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (remove snip-me. to email) As a child I understood how to give; I have forgotten this grace since I have become civilized. - Chief Luther Standing Bear signature.asc Description: PGP signature - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Melchior FRANZ wrote: * AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007: Indeed that was what I did, as a way to do aircraft specific mappings. Now I renamed the variable to aircraft-model. aircraft minus model? :-} Well what do you suggest for storing /sim/aircraft in otherwise? Doing getprop on each access I understood as being slower than using a variable as this variable won't change between each time I access it. Correct? /AnMaster -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWdrsWmK6ng/aMNkRCginAJ0Tmt5jqH8uetT5N1Irxh97NKwLqACeKAre U3kytF8dDDdpOe+oMJTCIgY= =O89a -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Melchior FRANZ wrote: * AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007: Melchior FRANZ wrote: You probably defined a variable named aircraft somewhere else in the joystick driver file, and this overwrote the aircraft namespace Ah, should call it aircraft-model or something then. Thanks I was not aware that nasal would do this. Nasal doesn't do this by itself. That's a joystick driver feature. The same is true in the keyboard.xml file and dialog XML files. It allows to define generic parts like functions and variables in a separate nasal block, and to use them in all nasal bindings. If you define a local aircraft variable, then this will have precedence over the a global one. Indeed that was what I did, as a way to do aircraft specific mappings. Now I renamed the variable to aircraft-model. /AnMaster -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWdeEWmK6ng/aMNkRCrDhAKCgJ4IcDijoPDgYr0E+oC/LAdtNWwCeLsyN J9ntvNOcxViwLvGsPfcDq6c= =dwPr -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem
* AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007: Melchior FRANZ wrote: You probably defined a variable named aircraft somewhere else in the joystick driver file, and this overwrote the aircraft namespace Ah, should call it aircraft-model or something then. Thanks I was not aware that nasal would do this. Nasal doesn't do this by itself. That's a joystick driver feature. The same is true in the keyboard.xml file and dialog XML files. It allows to define generic parts like functions and variables in a separate nasal block, and to use them in all nasal bindings. If you define a local aircraft variable, then this will have precedence over the a global one. m. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Melchior FRANZ wrote: * AnMaster -- Friday 07 December 2007: scriptaircraft.HUD.cycle_color()/script [...] Yet I get this for button: Nasal runtime error: No such member: HUD at /input/joysticks/js/button[3]/binding, line 1 You probably defined a variable named aircraft somewhere else in the joystick driver file, and this overwrote the aircraft namespace created by $FG_ROOT/Nasal/aircraft.nas. You have to know that all Nasal in a joystick driver is in a common Nasal namespace. Ah, should call it aircraft-model or something then. Thanks I was not aware that nasal would do this. /AnMaster -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWdKzWmK6ng/aMNkRCjKjAJ4hWNJEmKK64LuhNUwjAg+RYRoL0wCgnGi5 iC9Ifr7JAsDf07rmIFBRT0o= =HZrl -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Curtis Olson wrote: On Dec 7, 2007 2:20 PM, AnMaster wrote: Just an idea: A rating system for users. (Please rate this aircraft after you tried it for a bit!) However we can't know how well the users know how it should be. Maybe we should ask them if they are pilots/if the flew that aircraft in reality. Some sort of rating/comments system is a good idea, but someone is going to have to step forward to design and build such a system (or find one that does just what we want) and hopefully tie it in with the aircraft downloads page. Curt. As I guess PHP would be prefered I sadly lack the experience to code such a system. /AnMaster -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHWa5LWmK6ng/aMNkRCrpeAJ9GmtmClJ2EQ3g5SRWPkiEezTyEmACeKsj1 l+gOmFKXx9YJlLVSnNyhlmU= =eOcy -END PGP SIGNATURE- - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Downloading and Quality
On Dec 7, 2007 2:20 PM, AnMaster wrote: Just an idea: A rating system for users. (Please rate this aircraft after you tried it for a bit!) However we can't know how well the users know how it should be. Maybe we should ask them if they are pilots/if the flew that aircraft in reality. Some sort of rating/comments system is a good idea, but someone is going to have to step forward to design and build such a system (or find one that does just what we want) and hopefully tie it in with the aircraft downloads page. Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ Unique text: 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] nonzero turbulence set by Preferences.xml?
On ven 7 décembre 2007, Melchior FRANZ wrote: * gerard robin -- Friday 07 December 2007: http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/StampeSV4.jpg Wow, that's a nice one! Unfortunately it will not be available before FG stable will be released :( We can postpone the release for it. ;-) m. No, don't wait i am not predicable . Cheers -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ Less i work, better i go - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Weird recent nasal problem
* AnMaster -- Saturday 08 December 2007: Indeed that was what I did, as a way to do aircraft specific mappings. Now I renamed the variable to aircraft-model. aircraft minus model? :-} m. - SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
