Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
Hi, Curtis, well we went quite offtopic, the real topic was, why some people don't want "Taylor's" ( is this his real name?) competition... ;-) I just was surprised as I understood you said that we aren't far away from fully FAA-certificable, but I could remember from older dicussions the thing with the instructor station... ;-) To answer Jon S. Berndt here I like the idea of a competetion and I'm sure everyone else here too. Even there is only a TShirt to win... But I don't like when this competetion is made by a man who apparently try earn money with others work! If he would just say hey, this is Flightgear and I did some improvements- but he renamed it, and nothing on the named Homepage makes clear what's really inside. I wonder what would happen if I take JSBSim, rename it to HHSim, sell this and count me to the "HHSim-Developer-Team" using pics stolen from other userHow would the JSBSim-developers react? That's one the "best" article I found about ProFlightSim: http://ezinearticles.com/?Flight-Pro-Sim-is-the-Best-Simulator&id=2813712 Or this is quite good: http://flightsimulator.ning.com/forum/topics/fsx-verses-flight-pro-sim And even here is a recent discussion about: http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:-10DWxBH8BgJ:forums1.avsim.net/index.php%3Fshowtopic%3D261982+Flight+pro+Sim&cd=13&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de Regards HHS > > I see I'm going in circles here so it's time to > stop. :-) > > Best regards, > > Curt. > -- > Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ > > > -Integrierter Anhang folgt- > > -- > Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer > Conference in SF, CA > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. > Jumpstart your > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to > market and stay > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. > Register now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf > -Integrierter Anhang folgt- > > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel > -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] mpserver02 downtime
On Sat, Oct 03, 2009 at 03:33:11AM +0100, Pete Morgan wrote: > pigeon, how can we move toward having the navaids data base "seperate". > > albeit it might be on the same google map, however the data sources > would be seperate eg available on desktop file with sqllite rather than > remote, or an fg-get .. ? Hi. Sorry I might have mistaken your question, but the fgmap/navaids has nothing to do with the mpserver as such. Are you asking about the possibility of having a standalone fgmap? Pigeon. -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [Simgear-cvslogs] CVS: source/simgear/misc strutils.cxx, 1.4, 1.5 strutils.hxx, 1.4, 1.5
Hi Jim, Thanks for the quick fix on the strutils. In this case, (haha, so to speak) yes, I think if code is already referencing OpenGL, then it would be fair to replace that with code that references OSG. And yes, if you can generate png's instead of the 42x larger ppm format, that would be a big nice convenience. Thanks! Curt. On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 4:54 PM, James Turner wrote: > > On 30 Sep 2009, at 19:44, Curtis Olson wrote: > > > I just noticed you added an OSG dependency to strutils.cxx/hxx If > > possible it would be nice to avoid adding graphics system > > dependencies to these text manipulation libraries. SimGear and > > SimGear code is used in a variety of places beyond FlightGear, even > > in embedded systems where compiling opengl and OSG is completely > > impossible. > > I have a pending change to replace the screenshot code in SimGear > (simgear/screen/screen-dump.cxx) with a version using osgDB. The major > advantage being that we would create screenshots as .pngs instead of > PPMs. > > Is it 'safe' (from your point of view) to use OSG code in this place? > It's already code that directly calls OpenGL, so I *guess* it's not > used on your embedded device? > > Regards, > James > > > > -- > Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel > -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [Simgear-cvslogs] CVS: source/simgear/misc strutils.cxx, 1.4, 1.5 strutils.hxx, 1.4, 1.5
On 30 Sep 2009, at 19:44, Curtis Olson wrote: > I just noticed you added an OSG dependency to strutils.cxx/hxx If > possible it would be nice to avoid adding graphics system > dependencies to these text manipulation libraries. SimGear and > SimGear code is used in a variety of places beyond FlightGear, even > in embedded systems where compiling opengl and OSG is completely > impossible. I have a pending change to replace the screenshot code in SimGear (simgear/screen/screen-dump.cxx) with a version using osgDB. The major advantage being that we would create screenshots as .pngs instead of PPMs. Is it 'safe' (from your point of view) to use OSG code in this place? It's already code that directly calls OpenGL, so I *guess* it's not used on your embedded device? Regards, James -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
The project my company is working on will use FG v1.9.1 (with additions) to seek FAA Certification. But there are several things lacking in the "production" release--the instructor's station is the main thing. I haven't read the FAA Advisory Circular that governs certification of these things (PC-ATD's) in awhile, but I do not recall seeing a requirement for a GPS. But as I said, they have just changed the requirements, and I am not sure just where that leaves our effort. But for the record, our project is really *not* selling FG; as much as it selling an IFR training platform built on FG. For example, we really only plan on a couple aircraft right now. But we do plan to release scenario-based training content, as this will be the logical representation of the training product. But Curt is right that it takes an enormous amount of work to get this to the point where the FAA will evaluate it, and the software really is just the beginning. However the requirements are indeed published and if you make sure that your product meets or exceed these, then certification is pretty straightforward, as Curt mentioned. I want the developer community to know that, while there is proprietary code involved with bringing our product to the market, there will also be ample code contributed back to the FG development community--although I am not sure how much most users will find useful, quite honestly. Much of it will be related to driving flight controls. And up until the last 6-9 months, I really didn't hear many people even mention the IFR training opportunity that is being missed with FG; shoot, most people I talked to 1-2 years ago (when I was trying to learn how to modify the 2D panel in the 172) couldn't understand why I was even wasting my time by not going 3D! I have said this many times over the past 3-4 years--I have flown just about every PC-based flight simulation package that's been on the market in the past 15-20 years, and Flight Gear flies as well as any of them. The issue is functionality, at least in terms of training student instrument pilots. Develop that, and FG will have absolutely no problems earning FAA certification. By the way, our proposed timeline to make that application is within the next 6-9 months...with any luck. TB -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Screenshots and text for promotional materials
Hi Everybody, In preparation for FSWeekend, I would like to make some posters highlighting FlightGear, it's open source concept, and some exciting new features of the upcoming release. I you happen to have some nice screen shots, that you would be willing to donate, or have a few text snippets to be included, I'd be more than willing to include it on a poster. Please note that screen shots should adhere to the same standards that we apply to the annual screen shot "competition" that we've had in recent years following each release. To summarize: No faking, except for pausing and/or using one of the position capturing scripts that Melchior once posted here. Also try to make them look nice by using an adequate anti aliasing setting and choosing appropriately nice lighting conditions. Space on a poster is always tight, so I can only include a selected number of screen shots, and will therefore make a selection of the best and/or most appropriate when necessary. Cheers, Durk -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Solid MP Models
Hi Mathias, On Saturday 26 September 2009 03:08:52 pm Mathias Fröhlich wrote: > Hi, > > On Thursday 17 September 2009 17:58:47 Durk Talsma wrote: > > with no or insufficient parking. Each successive call to > > getGroundElevation would put the lowest aircraft on top of the other, and > > slowly the > > pairs/triplets/whatever would climb up in the air. > > Ok, that pretty much matches my expectations of the behavior of the code. > Each aircraft does not see itself, but any other aircraft. > Hmm, ok. > Durk, any chance to fix that problem at its root - that is have only one > aircraft at one point or do we need anything that works around that > problem? > Let me think a little about this. The only way to really prevent this would be to ensure that aircraft would never get on top of each other, but for airports without a ground network that would be rather tricky, and for airports with insufficient capacity, the same holds. Cheers, Durk -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSWeekend: Lelystad, November 7, and 8, 2008
Hi Wolfram, Long time no hear, welcome back. :-) I'm sorry I'm a little late responding, but my teaching obligations have been a little intense the last couple of weeks. In any case, I'm looking forward to seeing you there. I'll try to see whether I can get you a discount coupon for the show (unfortunately for us, it's a little tricky to get free entrance passes for non-registered participants). CU later. :-) Cheers, Durk On Friday 25 September 2009 10:25:11 pm Wolfram Kuss wrote: > Hi Durk and everyone that still knows me! > Long time no talk ;-). > I have been very busy working on "Battle of Britain", actually we just > shipped a new patch a few days ago. Sorry I didnt keep in touch. > I see quite a few names on the list from back then (Curt, Eric, Martin, > Mathias etc). Glad to see you guys in here :-). > > I will try to attend FS Weekend as a visitor, it would be great meeting you > again! > > BTW - tomorrow is a flightsim exhibition in Paderborn, Germany: > http://www.fskonferenz.de/ > I guess noone from this newsgroup will attend? > > Bye bye, > Wolfram > > > --- >--- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Heiko Schulz wrote: > So it is just the GPS? Or still more? > As with all things, it's maybe not that simple. We can already plug in a real gps and run with that. I've messed with a Garmin 295 and a Garmin 400 (which means we should be able to support a real G430/530 as well.) So it depends what gps you want and if you don't mind putting in a real one, or if you want a full software emulation, and if you want a software emulation, how far do you have to go? Is it just some basic features we need or do we need to mimic the entire thing down to the boot messages, and correct satellite positions for the date/time? Pretty close does not mean in my eyes that we are FAA-certificable yet- But > woulden't be that a nice goal to be? > Well again, I can sit here and say anything, but the reality is that no matter how much work we do in advance, when it comes down to putting *your* system together, you'll find things that are missing or not quite the way you want them and you will want to do extra work. A good instructor station is another items that is missing from the open-source world. The instructor station I've worked with in my FAA certification efforts has been a commercial product that talks to flightgear via it's network interfaces. What it boils down to, is that anyone who is going through the actual process to achieve FAA certification, is going to be doing it for business reasons (at some level.) So there's a careful dance that goes on to protect business interests at the same time as participating in and supporting open-source goals. It's easy to chit chat about these things and toss wishful thinking back and forth, but how many people have actually dug in and read the FAA certification specs? The people who have are probably the ones actually pushing forward with a FlightGear based certified simulator product. The reason FlightGear is currently being used as part of FAA certified simulators is that it's easily good enough for that purpose, and has many advantages in terms of openness, adaptability, interfaceability, extensibility, and cost. The reason we haven't pushed for some sort of blanket certification is that so far, the people going through the process have been working for their own business interests, contributing back the open-source changes to be sure, but also not giving away the complete store when they do something separate to achieve the final certification status. Even the "lowly" PC-ATD certification ... we have a project for that, but how many people have signed up to advance that forward? The people that want to get to FAA certification with FlightGear can do it already, but building an FAA certified simulator is very time consuming and costly and generally a significant distance beyond what a hobbiest would have time or motivation to achieve? What is FAA certification good for? Answer: so that you can log hours in the simulator and save money/time over practicing certain tasks in a real aircraft. It's no where near cost (or time) effective to build your own sim for your own personal training. The only way it makes any kind of financial sense is if you are a school and offering sim time to your students. In that case it's way more effiicent to buy something existing than build it yourself. FAA Certification == ability to sell hours in your sim. FAA certification == lots of cost and effort. There's not a lot of motivation within the hobby community to jump into that world, and if you do jump into that world, you might as well make a few bucks from all your time and effort. I see I'm going in circles here so it's time to stop. :-) Best regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
Hi, O.k. there was one misunderstood from my site regarding the pieces... > I think we are pretty close. So it is just the GPS? Or still more? Pretty close does not mean in my eyes that we are FAA-certificable yet- But woulden't be that a nice goal to be? I think John Denker did already a big work to it, and if there are really people to have a competition, so that Mr. Taylor can sell his Flight Pro Sim, so to be fully certificable would be a nice goal. Cheers HHS -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Heiko Schulz wrote: > To be more clear: > Quote from http://www.x-plane.com/pg_levels.html > > "In other words, the copy of X-Plane that can be purchased right here for > under $50 has all the features required for FAA certification built in--you > just have to buy USB keys (one per computer) to unlockthem all! > > Please note that using these keys makes X-Plane certifiable by the FAA; it > does not automatically confer certified status. The FAA only certifies the > combination of the hardware and the software used in a simulator, and users > who want to certify their sim must do so through the FAA." > Ok, sounds like they've clarified their web page since I saw it. This sounds reasonably fair, except they don't say what specific FAA certification. I can fill in myself that it's probably "Advanced ATD", but it would be helpful if they state that. > Of course you still need some professional controlls, cockpits etc. to be > fully FAA-certified at least. > > So does our last stable version 1.9.1 does have all features needed to be > certifiable by the FAA ? > I think we are pretty close. A GPS might be one outstanding item, but Dave Luff has done a tone of work on a KLN-89 emulator. It may very well be that it is already far enough along to satisfy FAA requirement "Advanced ATD" requirements, but I don't know for sure yet. I don't believe they require a GPS that is certified for instrument approaches, however, that's something that a lot of people want so it's a good thing to have. Really? Let's pull the software pieces together and sell them for a cheaper > price than X-Plane... > We we have the pieces, we have the price point. The problem is that building an FAA certifyable simulator is still a *lot* of work!!! That's why it often remains in the domain of for profit businesses because they have access to the resources and funds to engineer and build enclosures, physical flight controls, realistic instrument panels, do motion bases, wrap around visual systems, and pull all the pieces together into a solid, easy to use simulator that can be handed off to a non-technical person to use. That's still a very hard and very time consuming process, even if all the software components are ready to go. Ask anyone who's built a cockpit themselves ... it's a ton of work. But it's a great hobby and if anyone is thinking about trying, it will be a tremendous learning experience for you and if you are successful at many of the tasks that are needed, you will develop real, marketable skills. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Minor GUI Update
On 5 Oct 2009, at 17:17, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > Adding a "Change View" dialog, or enhancing one of the existing > dialogs would > be very straightforward - especially as I've already got most of the > Nasal code ;) I would enhance / improve the frankly confusing 'view options' dialog, which makes very little sense to me, and I guess, totally baffles novice users. (It would help if aircraft-specific views were given clear human-readable names in their definitions, instead of just numerical codes such as '101') Regards, James -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
Hi Curtis, > > If you read that X-Plane is FAA certified, they certainly > mean that X-Plane was one component in an FAA certified > simulator, not that the software itself is FAA certified, > however they don't work very hard to make that > distinction clear to their users. To be more clear: Quote from http://www.x-plane.com/pg_levels.html "In other words, the copy of X-Plane that can be purchased right here for under $50 has all the features required for FAA certification built in--you just have to buy USB keys (one per computer) to unlockthem all! Please note that using these keys makes X-Plane certifiable by the FAA; it does not automatically confer certified status. The FAA only certifies the combination of the hardware and the software used in a simulator, and users who want to certify their sim must do so through the FAA." Of course you still need some professional controlls, cockpits etc. to be fully FAA-certified at least. So does our last stable version 1.9.1 does have all features needed to be certifiable by the FAA ? > Fun stuff ... there's nothing here that FlightGear > can't already do, it's just a matter of going > through a sometimes an intense amount of work to pull all > the pieces together and verify and document that the entire > simulator as a whole meets all the requirements and there is > a lot more to it than just software work. Really? Let's pull the software pieces together and sell them for a cheaper price than X-Plane... Regards HHS -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Minor GUI Update
Curtis Olson wrote: > I don't know if this would overly clutter the gui, but perhaps it would be > useful to add a short blurb reminding the user that they can still change > views using the normal mechanism during the replay. My initial reaction > when I first saw the view selection dialog box was that I wondered if people > might think that by offering a dialog box, their choice would lock them > into a specific view for the entire replay? That's a good idea. The dialog is pretty small, and already lists the keys, so adding some explanatory text should be easy. I'll investigate. >Here's a random idea ... thinking as I type here ... > > What about adding a view selection dialog box to the main menu bar > that users can easily find and use during all phases of flight and during > replay? Adding an easy to use menu/dialog box option is the way to > counter hidden keyboard commands that many new users might not > stumble upon for quite a while ... ? That's another good idea. You'd better be careful that your foot doesn't fall off* Adding a "Change View" dialog, or enhancing one of the existing dialogs would be very straightforward - especially as I've already got most of the Nasal code ;) I'll take a look. -Stuart * Bonus points for non-Brits who get the reference. -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Minor GUI Update
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 3:00 AM, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > The main reason for including it is that I find that I rarely want to play > the replay from > the cockpit. I'm typically trying to judge how good my 3-point taildragger > landing was, > which is best done from a different view. > > I'm guessing most people use replays to see what happened from a different > viewpoint. > > As Tom points you, you can change view very quickly. However, we now have a > very > large number of different views, and aircraft can (and do) add their own. > While developers > like ourselves are very au-fait with cycling between the views, I think > more in-experienced > users may struggle. Some may not even be aware that other views are > available. > > Providing a convenient way for the user to select their initial view, and > in particular using > the view names themselves makes things a lot easier. > > Note that the drop-down defaults to the currently selected view, so there's > no change in > function if you just press OK. > > I don't know if this would overly clutter the gui, but perhaps it would be useful to add a short blurb reminding the user that they can still change views using the normal mechanism during the replay. My initial reaction when I first saw the view selection dialog box was that I wondered if people might think that by offering a dialog box, their choice would lock them into a specific view for the entire replay? Here's a random idea ... thinking as I type here ... What about adding a view selection dialog box to the main menu bar that users can easily find and use during all phases of flight and during replay? Adding an easy to use menu/dialog box option is the way to counter hidden keyboard commands that many new users might not stumble upon for quite a while ... ? Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 7:28 AM, Heiko Schulz wrote: > I really would like to admit your sentences. > But - on their website I can't see any reference, hint or link to Project > FlightGear. > > But I see that he earns money with our work. I do know that this allowed > under or licence. But is this moral? > I do understand that he sells this without any offical reference to > FlightGear- if he woulden't no one would buy it because it is downloadable > for free for anyone. > > I can see other big OpenSource Projects like Blender, which have have this > kind of support- without beeing sold. > > If really both sides wants to win, then we should make a derivative work of > FGFS like a FAA-licenced, one which is beeing sold then. That would really > help this project to gain some more respect and even a lot of more > seriousness to our project. Even now, as Microsoft ESP is stopped and > Aerososft is coming with a replacement 2012. > > Just my thoughts, correct me If I'm wrong with some facts. > There is a PC-ATD certification, but if you read the spec, it requires certain things with control inputs that you cannot achieve with a $20 walmart joystick. We meet most of the spec, but there are a few gaps that go beyond just software. Take a look at http://www.sf.net/projects/fgatd/ However, the PC-ATD certification is very limited in terms of how many hours you can log with it. For more serious pilot / IFR training, the entry level is usually Advanced ATD certification, (or more historically Level 3 FTD certification.) However, these certifications are for the "whole simulator", and not just a certification for a software application. In fact, the idea of getting FAA certification for a software application is really misleading because it's not something that they directly do. They certify a whole simulator which includes software, flight dynamics, physical controls (with correct size, placement, and control loading), and often a full enclosure, as well as a visual system. Interesting things that are required for Advanced ATD certification are a GPS and a Flight Director/Autopilot. If you read that X-Plane is FAA certified, they certainly mean that X-Plane was one component in an FAA certified simulator, not that the software itself is FAA certified, however they don't work very hard to make that distinction clear to their users. For the "Official Record": FlightGear is also been a key software component in several FAA certified simulators, just like X-Plane. So we can make the same claims that they are able to make (if we want to be misleading.) I've been involved in the FAA certification process and my experience is that if you (a) meet the certification requirements that the FAA lays out (which is doable but a lot of work) and (b) you schedule an FAA inspector to come on sight and verify that you meet the requirements and sign off on it, then you too can have an FAA certified simulator. The inspectors I've dealt with have been very fair and generally look more towards ways to pass you instead of trying to find any little thing they can fail you on. Interestingly, for the Level 3 FTD certification, the FAA requires that each installation be individually certified. Even if you relocate the simulator, you need to have an FAA inspector come out and recertify the sim. It's my understanding that for an Advanced ATD certification (which allows you to log essentially the same things as Level 3 FTD) the FAA certifies a product and then you can replicate it and sell it and the FAA doesn't need to come out and sign off on each one. Fun stuff ... there's nothing here that FlightGear can't already do, it's just a matter of going through a sometimes an intense amount of work to pull all the pieces together and verify and document that the entire simulator as a whole meets all the requirements and there is a lot more to it than just software work. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
Hi Jon, > > Before > you guys have a knee-jerk response that poisons the > atmosphere you need to take > a deep breath, re-read the statement from FlightProSim, and > make some > constructive remarks – and it might not hurt to > re-read the license under > which we operate. > > > > First, > the most recent email from FlightProSim states: > “as we can > not code in house hopefully our contribution of money will > help the project.” > > > > > Second, > I’m sure a lot of open source projects would love to > have this kind of > support. > > > > > I > think it’s an idea to be appreciated – > don’t make it more > complicated than it is. It might be a way to appreciate > your fellow developers, > as well. There are obviously some details to work out, but > surely those are > minor issues compared to creating FlightGear in the first > place, no? > > > > > Jon > I really would like to admit your sentences. But - on their website I can't see any reference, hint or link to Project FlightGear. But I see that he earns money with our work. I do know that this allowed under or licence. But is this moral? I do understand that he sells this without any offical reference to FlightGear- if he woulden't no one would buy it beacuse it is donwloadble for free for anyone. I can see other big OpenSource Projects like Blender, which have have this kind of support- without beeing sold. If really both sides wants to win, then we should make a derivative work of FGFS like a FAA-licenced, one which is beeing sold then. That would really help this project to gain some more respect and even a lot of more seriousness to our project. Even now, as Microsoft ESP is stopped and Aerososft is coming with a replacement 2012. Just my thoughts, correct me If I'm wrong with some facts. HHS -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
Before you guys have a knee-jerk response that poisons the atmosphere you need to take a deep breath, re-read the statement from FlightProSim, and make some constructive remarks - and it might not hurt to re-read the license under which we operate. First, the most recent email from FlightProSim states: "as we can not code in house hopefully our contribution of money will help the project." Second, I'm sure a lot of open source projects would love to have this kind of support. I think it's an idea to be appreciated - don't make it more complicated than it is. It might be a way to appreciate your fellow developers, as well. There are obviously some details to work out, but surely those are minor issues compared to creating FlightGear in the first place, no? Jon From: ArthurX [mailto:arth...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 6:40 AM To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers I totally agree with Peter Clemenko, that it would be an error to accept any money from FPS. It is not an fair sponsor and the way the money will be divided will more create a divide between the developers than build it into a team of freely cooperating people. Greetings Arthur On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Peter Clemenko wrote: With all due respect FPS, it would be better off if you were to submit any modified code you make back INTO FGFS. adhering to the GPL V2. and for the FG devs, if FG is under the v3, ether switch it to LGPL or the v2, as that way you have some control over your code. I really personally don't like the idea at all of selling FGFS as 99 no 69 no 49 dollars, as it feels to me like profiteering, especially when you won't specify in on your site exactly what you have changed other than changing the wrapper. If you want to regain any respect from people like me, specify EXACTLY what you have changed, and submit any changes you have made (except for the rebranding of course) back in to the FGFS CVS. -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- http://www.arthurx.org -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
I totally agree with Peter Clemenko, that it would be an error to accept any money from FPS. It is not an fair sponsor and the way the money will be divided will more create a divide between the developers than build it into a team of freely cooperating people. Greetings Arthur On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Peter Clemenko wrote: > With all due respect FPS, it would be better off if you were to submit > any modified code you make back INTO FGFS… adhering to the GPL V2… and for > the FG devs, if FG is under the v3, ether switch it to LGPL or the v2, as > that way you have some control over your code… I really personally don’t > like the idea at all of selling FGFS as 99 no 69 no 49 dollars, as it feels > to me like profiteering, especially when you won’t specify in on your site > exactly what you have changed other than changing the wrapper… > > > > If you want to regain any respect from people like me, specify EXACTLY what > you have changed, and submit any changes you have made (except for the > rebranding of course) back in to the FGFS CVS… > > > -- > Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel > > -- http://www.arthurx.org -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] October $250 Flight Gear Developers
With all due respect FPS, it would be better off if you were to submit any modified code you make back INTO FGFS. adhering to the GPL V2. and for the FG devs, if FG is under the v3, ether switch it to LGPL or the v2, as that way you have some control over your code. I really personally don't like the idea at all of selling FGFS as 99 no 69 no 49 dollars, as it feels to me like profiteering, especially when you won't specify in on your site exactly what you have changed other than changing the wrapper. If you want to regain any respect from people like me, specify EXACTLY what you have changed, and submit any changes you have made (except for the rebranding of course) back in to the FGFS CVS. -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] New Sound system committed
Alan Teeder wrote: > Sorry to be the messenger, but compilation of soundmgr_openal.cxx and all > flightgear files using soundmgr_openal.hxx fails under VC90. No problem, I already was expecting these reports since I can't test on all platforms. > See attached build log. It's beyond me why gcc didn't complain (I did compile with halt on all warnings) but I failed to include alc.h. Should be fixed in CVS now. Erik -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] New Sound system committed
Sorry to be the messenger, but compilation of soundmgr_openal.cxx and all flightgear files using soundmgr_openal.hxx fails under VC90. See attached build log. I am using the 3rd part libraries as per flightgear/source/projects/VC90/README.msvc. i.e. (Precompiled librairies and headers for compiling Win32 executables with VS2008 : ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Win32/MSVC/fgfs-win32-VS90-3rdParty +OSG-20090628.zip) Same error with more recent fgfs-win32-VS90-3rdParty+OSG-20090820. Do I need a more recent version of OpenAL? Alan -Original Message- From: Erik Hofman [mailto:e...@ehofman.com] Sent: 05 October 2009 08:45 To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] New Sound system committed Curtis Olson wrote: > Hi Erik, > > One quick question: will the sound configuration xml files need to > change to match the new system or will there be backwards compatibility? It's backwards compatible. I do plan a new format change to be able to position the sounds in 3d-model space instead of OpenAL/OpenGL space. That will require adding a a new xml tag but the omission of it will still mean the previous format. Erik -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel ÿþ< h t m l > < h e a d > < M E T A H T T P - E Q U I V = " C o n t e n t - T y p e " c o n t e n t = " t e x t / h t m l ; c h a r s e t = u t f - 1 6 " > < / h e a d > < b o d y > < p r e > < t a b l e w i d t h = 1 0 0 % b g c o l o r = # C F C F E 5 > < t r > < t d > < f o n t f a c e = a r i a l s i z e = + 3 > B u i l d L o g < / f o n t > < / t a b l e > < t a b l e w i d t h = * c e l l s p a c i n g = 0 c e l l p a d d i n g = 0 > < t r > < t d w i d t h = 0 b g c o l o r = # E D E D F 5 > & n b s p ; < / t d > < t d w i d t h = 0 b g c o l o r = # F F F F F F > & n b s p ; < / t d > < t d w i d t h = * > < p r e > < h 3 > B u i l d s t a r t e d : P r o j e c t : S i m G e a r , C o n f i g u r a t i o n : R e l e a s e | W i n 3 2 < / h 3 > < / p r e > < / t a b l e > < t a b l e w i d t h = 1 0 0 % b g c o l o r = # D F D F E 5 > < t r > < t d > < f o n t f a c e = a r i a l s i z e = + 2 > C o m m a n d L i n e s < / f o n t > < / t a b l e > < t a b l e w i d t h = * c e l l s p a c i n g = 0 c e l l p a d d i n g = 0 > < t r > < t d w i d t h = 0 b g c o l o r = # E D E D F 5 > & n b s p ; < / t d > < t d w i d t h = 0 b g c o l o r = # F F F F F F > & n b s p ; < / t d > < t d w i d t h = * > < p r e > C r e a t i n g t e m p o r a r y f i l e " d : \ f g \ S i m G e a r \ p r o j e c t s \ V C 9 0 \ W i n 3 2 \ R e l e a s e \ R S P 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 6 9 6 5 1 2 4 . r s p " w i t h c o n t e n t s [ / O b 1 / I & q u o t ; . . \ . . & q u o t ; / I & q u o t ; . . \ . . \ s i m g e a r & q u o t ; / I & q u o t ; . . \ . . \ . . & q u o t ; / I & q u o t ; . . \ . . \ . . \ i n s t a l l \ m s v c 9 0 \ O p e n S c e n e G r a p h \ i n c l u d e & q u o t ; / I & q u o t ; . . \ . . \ . . \ 3 r d p a r t y \ i n c l u d e & q u o t ; / I & q u o t ; . . \ . . \ . . \ b o o s t _ 1 _ 3 9 _ 0 & q u o t ; / D & q u o t ; H A V E _ C O N F I G _ H & q u o t ; / D & q u o t ; N D E B U G & q u o t ; / D & q u o t ; W I N 3 2 & q u o t ; / D & q u o t ; _ U S E _ M A T H _ D E F I N E S & q u o t ; / D & q u o t ; _ C R T _ S E C U R E _ N O _ W A R N I N G S & q u o t ; / D & q u o t ; N O M I N M A X & q u o t ; / D & q u o t ; _ C R T _ N O N S T D C _ N O _ W A R N I N G S & q u o t ; / D & q u o t ; _ V C 8 0 _ U P G R A D E = 0 x 0 7 1 0 & q u o t ; / D & q u o t ; _ M B C S & q u o t ; / G F / F D / E H s c / M D / G y / F o & q u o t ; W i n 3 2 \ R e l e a s e \ \ & q u o t ; / F d & q u o t ; W i n 3 2 \ R e l e a s e \ v c 9 0 . p d b & q u o t ; / W 3 / c / Z i . . \ . . \ s i m g e a r \ s o u n d \ s o u n d m g r _ o p e n a l . c x x . . \ . . \ s i m g e a r \ s o u n d \ s a m p l e _ o p e n a l . c x x ] C r e a t i n g c o m m a n d l i n e " c l . e x e ...@ d : \ f g \ S i m G e a r \ p r o j e c t s \ V C 9 0 \ W i n 3 2 \ R e l e a s e \ R S P 0 0 0 0 0 7 5 6 9 6 5 1 2 4 . r s p / n o l o g o / e r r o r R e p o r t : p r o m p t " < / p r e > < / t a b l e > < t a b l e w i d t h = 1 0 0 % b g c o l o r =
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Minor GUI Update
Curtis Olson wrote: >One comment/question. I never understood the inclusion of a view selection >box > for the replay? When I run the replay I'm usually flipping all around > between views > using the normal view selection keys, and often panning the view with the > mouse. > It's very rare that I sit and watch an entire replay from a fixed view that I > decided > upon at the start of the replay. I could be the oddball, and it doesn't hurt > anything to have a view selection dialog box ... just making a comment. :-) The main reason for including it is that I find that I rarely want to play the replay from the cockpit. I'm typically trying to judge how good my 3-point taildragger landing was, which is best done from a different view. I'm guessing most people use replays to see what happened from a different viewpoint. As Tom points you, you can change view very quickly. However, we now have a very large number of different views, and aircraft can (and do) add their own. While developers like ourselves are very au-fait with cycling between the views, I think more in-experienced users may struggle. Some may not even be aware that other views are available. Providing a convenient way for the user to select their initial view, and in particular using the view names themselves makes things a lot easier. Note that the drop-down defaults to the currently selected view, so there's no change in function if you just press OK. -Stuart -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GPS / route-manager landing
On 5 Oct 2009, at 08:33, Dave wrote: > That all sounds like good stuff. I'll try and migrate the KLN89 > towards > using it and depreciating the dclgps stuff - that should give it some > testing. Sounds good to me. I've been going through the KLN89 manual, and there's definitely some more subtle options that will require extra features / flags (off the top of my head, resuming LEG mode from OBS mode, and the ability to DTO without recentering the d-bar). Many things should be achievable with a bit of Nasal glue, obviously I've tried to make simple building block functionality as much as I can. If you think an API or design is poor, or missing a feature, let me know and I'm happy to add it - I'd far rather get the core code sensible, than have each GPS device work around the same bug! In terms of API examples, I will be committing a new GPS dialog, which shows off most of the new features, and will also allow the GPS to be used in aircraft without real hardware, if we want that. I'm also going to create a wiki page for the GPS, to document what it can (and can't do). Regards, James -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] New Sound system committed
Curtis Olson wrote: > Hi Erik, > > One quick question: will the sound configuration xml files need to > change to match the new system or will there be backwards compatibility? It's backwards compatible. I do plan a new format change to be able to position the sounds in 3d-model space instead of OpenAL/OpenGL space. That will require adding a a new xml tag but the omission of it will still mean the previous format. Erik -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GPS / route-manager landing
James Turner wrote: > Just a notification / warning - I'm planning to land my GPS / FMS / > route-manager re-write tomorrow (Monday). It's not perfect (yet) but > already much more usable than the previous code. I'm sure I'll regress > a few things initially, but of course I'll work through any issues > that people report. > > > > > Hi James, That all sounds like good stuff. I'll try and migrate the KLN89 towards using it and depreciating the dclgps stuff - that should give it some testing. Cheers - Dave -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] shader menu proposal
On 5 Oct 2009, at 00:20, syd adams wrote: shader menu V2 http://imagebin.org/66379 Seems good to me, only concern from a usability point of view is people who don't know what a shader is - 'advanced graphics settings' might better (but too long for comfort). However, FG has many, many places where we use technical terminology in the UI, this would not be the worst offender :) Regards, James -- Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
