Re: [Flightgear-devel] SegFault on Current Git
On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 10:28 -0800, Jeff Taylor wrote: Everything is in sync. I just updated it now, and it still gets the same thing. I ran it with all the defaults, like fgfs --fg-root=/home/jeff/Computer/fg/flightgear/fgdata/ Looking again, it must be the C172P. Running with --aircraft=ufo prevents this crash. Odd, it looks like something uncommon otherwise others would have noticed it instantly (just checked it myself and no problem here). I've synced JSBSim again (the FDM of the c172) and pushed it to git, you could try if that fixes it for you. You also might want to try to run with '--enable-sound' to exclude sound driver problems and you could test with J3 Cub '--aircraft=Cub' to test if you've got the same problems with YASim. Erik -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds and precepitation affects.
2. Clouds rotate in an unrealistic way when doing loops and other maneuvers that involve going to/from inverted (loops, half Cuban eights, split S's ...) but it does not happen when doing rolls. The clouds will flip over 180 degrees at the top and bottom of loops for example. (...) The problem appears to be that the shader that rotates the cloud texture rotates them from upright to inverted and inverted to upright as the aircraft transitions between upright and inverted flight in vertical maneuvers. This is clearly wrong. Is it possible to fix this? The algorithm explicitly breaks symmetry between horizontal and vertical direction, i.e. it assumes that you look more or less horizontally. If you do not do that, you get clouds which roll with you - very bad... so breaking that symmetry is what you need. So, what matters (for that purpose) to the algorithm is your horizontal orientation (heading). This changes continuously if you fly a circle, but it changes discontinuously (or very rapidly) at the top and bottom points of a loop. This discontinuous change in heading makes the unrealistic effect. It is possible to fix that by an algorithm based on position vector rather than view direction, because the relative position between plane and cloud must change continuously at all times. Unfortunately, such an algorithm has other drawbacks (the red sea effect - clouds turn away from you as you approach them). I have last year experimented with a lot of algorithms and schemes, and in the end my conclusion was that Stuart had picked the best one already. In case you're seriously interested, I documented all in the wiki: http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php/Howto:_Modelling_clouds While the unrealistic behaviour in loops can't really be cured, it could be lessened by doing what nature does - using more cloudlets with less features (up-down distinction) and build cloud structure not by texture but by positioning selected cloudlets with better control. That would need a factor of maybe 20-100 more cloudlets per cloud. With the resources of a current PC in the Flightgear environment, you can have 5000-1 cloudlets, i.e. you'd be limited to 50 Cumulus clouds in the sky or so. I concluded that under these circumstances, fixing the aerobatics problem is not worth pursuing. You can experiment with building clouds that way - the local weather menu point has a 'cloudbox' entry, that is designed to build such many-cloudlet clouds (you may have to edit a bit of you want different textures). I have cooked up also schemes with static (non-rotated models) clouds - these would have none of the above problems, but the trouble is that Flightgear (OSG?) doesn't display a stack of multiple semi-transparent surfaces correctly if they are not exactly parallel - so these schemes don't work. So unless Cheers, * Thorsten -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FPS, PFS etc - youtube comments - spam/not spam...
On Sat, 27 Nov 2010 21:14:50 +0100, ThorstenB wrote in message aanlktinrxn-lxv42t=r11d6lazimdazlgmbtxuqqt...@mail.gmail.com: ..interesting. Somebody is covering up this not-a-fraud by handling our fraud tips, as spam. Sounds to me like an intentional fraudulent abuse of such powers. I'm not sure clicking no spam really helps - it might not be a simple voting system. Also, it seems only comments from specific users were marked as spam - while other FG comments stick. Yes, maybe someone did that manually and missed some. But I suspect it might be a YouTube-anti-spam-O-matic at work. Maybe these identical comments were posted too often at too many videos - so they get caught... But I'm still seeing lots of FG comments at the FPS videos - and if we all add some YouTube comments every now and then this will help a lot. Also, when you watch any of these sleazy FlightPS videos, then YouTube already suggests to watch several FlightGear videos next - since these videos are titled FProSim is FlightGear etc. So this works really great! Maybe we can make some of our FPS is FG videos really, really popular (many hits + recommendations), so they stay at the top of the YouTube's suggested related videos for any FPS video. Eventually, we may raise a lot more attention to FG... cheers, Thorsten On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 8:24 PM, Mally wrote: ?I've just been scanning a few of the comments posted on youtube where the various FPS publicity videos have been posted, and I noticed that all the FlightGear.nl comments had been marked as Spam (we can probably guess who by). Well obviously as well as posting a few comments myself (recommending google searches, links are apparently not allowed), I've also taken the opportunity to mark the spam comments from FG NL as Not Spam. I guess spam/not spam thing works this by some sort of voting system, so obviously if you happen to be cruising by one of these videos, click the this comment has been marked as spam entries and then click the not spam button if appropriate. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSP facebook ads
Vivian Meazza a écrit : Torsten wrote It looks like there are only 2 or 3 different ads, but it took clicking on at least 14-16 of them before they stopped appearing on my fb page - nice, those behind FSP are uploading the same ads over and over, and calling them new ones each time... Looks like some FB users found out that not everything that is expensive is acutally good. This is the link to the group within FB: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_125975030795919 Torsten (You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.) [A. Lincoln] There are some very pissed-off people out there who have been ripped off by FSP: http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=130223597035052topic=54#topic_top with a bit of luck they might just nail FSP for us :-) Vivian I joined the group and just sent them a link to the FAQ Alexis -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSP facebook ads
Incidentally, I just did a google search for flightprosim, and our wiki page comes up second. :-) Nice job! Cheers, Durk -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds and precepitation affects.
While the unrealistic behaviour in loops can't really be cured, it could be lessened by doing what nature does - using more cloudlets with less features (up-down distinction) and build cloud structure not by texture but by positioning selected cloudlets with better control. That would need a factor of maybe 20-100 more cloudlets per cloud. This is probably right on. With the resources of a current PC in the Flightgear environment, you can have 5000-1 cloudlets, i.e. you'd be limited to 50 Cumulus clouds in the sky or so. I concluded that under these circumstances, fixing the aerobatics problem is not worth pursuing. You can experiment with building clouds that way - the local weather menu point has a 'cloudbox' entry, that is designed to build such many-cloudlet clouds (you may have to edit a bit of you want different textures). I've been looking at the clouds code again recently, which is oddly slow on my monster machine (Phenom II x6, GTX 460) . It has the same problem that the trees code did before a big makeover: it uses instancing techniques on geometry (flat quads) that is to far simple to be treated as an instance. It would be much better to take the same approach we do in trees and treat a cloud as a list of quad or triangle polygons. The messy part is the distance sorting that is not optional for the cloud sprites. It would be nice to have a GPU-based particle system that did the clouds, smoke, etc., but we don't yet. I have cooked up also schemes with static (non-rotated models) clouds - these would have none of the above problems, but the trouble is that Flightgear (OSG?) doesn't display a stack of multiple semi-transparent surfaces correctly if they are not exactly parallel - so these schemes don't work. This is more of an OpenGL / graphics hardware problem. There are schemes to do order-independent transparency, but it's hard to see the benefits of rewriting the entire renderer to take advantage of them. So unless Cheers, * Thorsten -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSP facebook ads
?I'd love to post a comment, but I just can't bring myself to click the Like button in order to have the right to do so... Doh! Mally - Original Message - From: Vivian Meazza vivian.mea...@lineone.net To: 'FlightGear developers discussions' flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2010 10:00 PM Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FSP facebook ads Torsten wrote It looks like there are only 2 or 3 different ads, but it took clicking on at least 14-16 of them before they stopped appearing on my fb page - nice, those behind FSP are uploading the same ads over and over, and calling them new ones each time... Looks like some FB users found out that not everything that is expensive is acutally good. This is the link to the group within FB: http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_125975030795919 Torsten (You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.) [A. Lincoln] There are some very pissed-off people out there who have been ripped off by FSP: http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=130223597035052topic=54#topic_top with a bit of luck they might just nail FSP for us :-) Vivian - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3285 - Release Date: 11/28/10 -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] BGL-file with unknown content
Martin Spott wrote: I have a (ZIP-)file floating around on a disk that I must have found somwhere on the net (the file, not the disk ;-) [...] ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Devel/Chambley.zip This posting was written on Sa, 23 Okt 2004. Chambley AB was the first airfield I've been modelling for FlightGear. It took me weeks to investigate and finally decide on which ICAO id to choose for that one, since the field never had one. So I chose LCHM, which was the id of a former, local weather station (even Robin Peel agreed on that one, since no better option was available ;-) In the meantime, Chambley got an inofficial id LF5424 (didn't work with FlightGear), later it was also known as LF52 (changed in FlightGear as well as in Robin's DB). I've been landing there few times in a Piper Archer II, a couple of years ago, together with my instructor (before I got my license) and I'm still feeling much sympathy for this site. Now, this year the field was assigned an official status and given it's first 'real' ICAO id, LFJY - 55 years after its construction, 45 years after it's retirement From my perspective that's rather funny ;-) Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ProFlightSimulator The Most Realistic
On Sat, 27 Nov 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote: - Gene Buckle ge...@deltasoft.com a écrit : On Sat, 27 Nov 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote: By the way, look what I received in my inbox : Support Requests item #3117965, was opened at 2010-11-24 20:24 [snip] Initial Comment: The proflightsimulator launch control does not launch pro flight *facepalm* I really, really, really hope he gave his email address so you can tell him to get his money back! You can post a comment in the tracker Link? The only bug tracker I know of (http://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/) stops at #187. g. -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ProFlightSimulator The Most Realistic
You can post a comment in the tracker Link? The only bug tracker I know of (http://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/) stops at #187. The link was in my original post. It's the fgrun tracker Regards, -Fred -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] First time build
A word of thanks and praise among the build problems posted periodically here. I just wanted to report that a first attempt to download and build FlightGear/SimGear/etc. following the instructions in the wiki went along without a hitch. Only (minor) problem was that the required package libungif4 is now part of giflib-tools instead a separate entity. (Ubuntu 10.10, 32bit) Another inconvenience was the time required to download fgdata. (Took more than a day with my low-end DSL connection, all the time crossing fingers for a power-glitch free session.) I am not familiar with git, but surely something can be done to create a smaller data set (with just a few airplanes and airports, for example) that will allow people to get up and running in a shorter time. (Will be glad to take a stab at this after I learn more about the system.) My long term interests are to build a multiple computer/multiple monitor system, (already have an X-Plane based system like that, want to try FlightGear) and to try to use/port/convert Microsoft's FS scenery with FlightGear. (Megascenery in particular) Any pointers to get started will be appreciated Again, thanks for making this project what it is. -- Roberto Waltman -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Bouncing JSBSim aircraft
Hi all, after updating fgdata from Gitorious this evening and installing the win32 nightly binary from Hudson (28-nov-2010 7:00:55), JSBSim aircraft suddenly bounce, when at the ground. Some aircraft bounce more than others (747-400 and C172P for example crash due to the extreme forces), while the followme car only bounces up and down a little. I was able to drive around normally (apart from the bouncing) with the followme. So it looks like it depends on the gear compression/spring settings of the aircraft being operated. The YASim aircraft I tried did not show this behaviour. I suspect the problem arised after this commit by Erik: http://www.gitorious.org/fg/flightgear/commit/ad51a9bde2995605984161af1b4273b28ce4fddc Any clue on what's wrong? Can anyone confirm this behaviour? Cheers, Gijs -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Bouncing JSBSim aircraft
2010/11/28 Gijs de Rooy gijsr...@hotmail.com: Hi all, after updating fgdata from Gitorious this evening and installing the win32 nightly binary from Hudson (28-nov-2010 7:00:55), JSBSim aircraft suddenly bounce, when at the ground. Some aircraft bounce more than others (747-400 and C172P for example crash due to the extreme forces), while the followme car only bounces up and down a little. I was able to drive around normally (apart from the bouncing) with the followme. So it looks like it depends on the gear compression/spring settings of the aircraft being operated. The YASim aircraft I tried did not show this behaviour. I suspect the problem arised after this commit by Erik: http://www.gitorious.org/fg/flightgear/commit/ad51a9bde2995605984161af1b4273b28ce4fddc Any clue on what's wrong? Can anyone confirm this behaviour? Cheers, Gijs Hi Gijs, I could not reproduce the problem you described. Tested last git revision for SimGear (1cb8f9237cb7fa47eb8e4a89f135ac17656315a5), FlightGear (1cf207e0540712d3344c48f936a7aade3c5c2797) and data (115032a7c5828c7e82462ca8e57ab0be444d4120). I tried the following commands fgfs --fg-root=/path/to/my/copy/of/fgdata and fgfs --aircraft=747-400 --fg-root=/path/to/my/copy/of/fgdata AFAICT, these are supposed to run the C172P and 747-400. I played a bit with the Cessna (taxiing, taking-off, landing, hard landing, ...) and it behaved correctly. Since I cannot pilot the 747-400, I taxied it a bit and took off and everything went well (well, except that I crashed it while trying to land it). Since I am mostly involved in the landing gears code of JSBSim, I would be interested in having more details about the problem you experienced. Cheers, Bertrand. -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Bouncing JSBSim aircraft
There was an update to the gear code yesterday. I suppose it's possible that the new update has side effects. We'll look into it. Does anyone know when the last good code is dated? Jon Sent from my Samsung Captivate(tm) on ATT Gijs de Rooy gijsr...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi all, after updating fgdata from Gitorious this evening and installing the win32 nightly binary from Hudson (28-nov-2010 7:00:55), JSBSim aircraft suddenly bounce, when at the ground. Some aircraft bounce more than others (747-400 and C172P for example crash due to the extreme forces), while the followme car only bounces up and down a little. I was able to drive around normally (apart from the bouncing) with the followme. So it looks like it depends on the gear compression/spring settings of the aircraft being operated. The YASim aircraft I tried did not show this behaviour. I suspect the problem arised after this commit by Erik: http://www.gitorious.org/fg/flightgear/commit/ad51a9bde2995605984161af1b4273b28ce4fddc Any clue on what's wrong? Can anyone confirm this behaviour? Cheers, Gijs -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Bouncing JSBSim aircraft
Yeah, problems is fixed! I had --model-hz=30. Setting it to 120 (so it was omitted from the commandline by FGRun) fixed the problem. For what it's worth (I do think it is weird that some aircraft are not affected by low model-hz, while others are), some more info below: Bertrand wrote: Since I am mostly involved in the landing gears code of JSBSim, I would be interested in having more details about the problem you experienced. After takeoff, bouncing stops. After landing, bouncing continues. When braking, the intensity of the bounces increases significantly. Apparently not all JSBSim aircraft bounce (see list below). There are three categories of bouncing to be distincted: No bouncing: 737-300 (J) 777-200ER (Y) Storch (J) F-117 (J) Small bouncing: b1900d (J) Bravo (J) ercoupe (J) followme (J) Extreme bouncing: 747-400 (J) c172p (J) Cheers and thanks for the help! Gijs -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Bouncing JSBSim aircraft
2010/11/28 Gijs de Rooy gijsr...@hotmail.com: Yeah, problems is fixed! I had --model-hz=30. Setting it to 120 (so it was omitted from the commandline by FGRun) fixed the problem. (...snip...) After takeoff, bouncing stops. After landing, bouncing continues. When braking, the intensity of the bounces increases significantly. Apparently not all JSBSim aircraft bounce (see list below). To make a long story short, this kind of behaviour is driven by the eigenfrequencies of the system. They are the frequencies at which a system naturally oscillates. A very rough estimate of these frequencies can be obtained by the square root of k/m where k is the sum of the stiffnesses of all the gears and m is the mass of the airplane. It is thus obvious that this frequency varies from one airplane to the other. As far as I remember, the simulation rate must be as greater as possible than these frequencies otherwise bouncing issues may arise. Hence the disappearance of the issue when you set the simulation time rate back to its default 120 Hz. Cheers and thanks for the help! You are welcome :-) Cheers, Bertrand. -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] ProFlightSimulator The Most Realistic
On Sun, 28 Nov 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote: You can post a comment in the tracker Link? The only bug tracker I know of (http://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/) stops at #187. The link was in my original post. It's the fgrun tracker Ah, ok. Thanks! g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end. -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds and precepitation affects.
Hal Just built FG, simgear, OSG from GIT yesterday. My previous build was from before the new environment stuff went in. 1. The clouds in general look better than in the past. In non-aerobatic flight these look very realistic to me. But... 2. Clouds rotate in an unrealistic way when doing loops and other maneuvers that involve going to/from inverted (loops, half Cuban eights, split S's ...) but it does not happen when doing rolls. The clouds will flip over 180 degrees at the top and bottom of loops for example. This is actually a long standing issue with clouds that has been there for as long as I have been using FG (since 0.7). From checking the list archives I see that the same basic algorithm is used for both the old and newer cloud code. Stuart's 3d clouds and mine are based on very similar technology. There is a collection of textures for cloudlets, and these are rotated in the scenery towards the viewer by vertex shaders (I adapted Stuart's shaders for my purposes, so they are almost identical and I checked that my modifications did not change the performance significantly). (From Thorsten's note to this list dated 11/17). The problem appears to be that the shader that rotates the cloud texture rotates them from upright to inverted and inverted to upright as the aircraft transitions between upright and inverted flight in vertical maneuvers. This is clearly wrong. Is it possible to fix this? 3. Precipitation for some reason is not deflected by the windshield/canopy and goes directly through the windshield/canopy into the cockpit.I am not sure if this is an issue with the precipitation code or my model. Is anyone else seeing this? This has been an issue from the beginning. There is a workaround in FG though, which turns off the rain in internal views, and instead puts a moving rain texture on the canopy. It's not perfect but it is quite a bit better than rain-in-the cockpit. Try the Spitfire IIa to see it in action. The script is generic, and is in data\Nasal\aircraft.nas. I don't think it has been widely adopted though. Vivian -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] p51d-jsbsim merge request.
-Original Message- From: Hal V. Engel [mailto:hven...@gmail.com] I just created a merge request to move updates to the JSBSim p51d into fgdata. Changes include: ... Hal Would love to see a video of a flight showing these updated features. I think it would be a really nice showcase for what FlightGear can do. JB -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] First time build
Roberto Waltman wrote: Another inconvenience was the time required to download fgdata. (Took more than a day with my low-end DSL connection, all the time crossing fingers for a power-glitch free session.) Did you check if the download really maxes out your DSL link ? Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] First time build
On 11/28/2010 06:36 PM, Martin Spott wrote: Did you check if the download really maxes out your DSL link ? Yes. It did, but not all the time. I saw numbers ranging from 120 Kb/sec (the maximum I ever get,) down to 35 Kb/sec. -- Roberto Waltman -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] p51d-jsbsim merge request.
There is tons of stuff that remains to be done still. You sound like me: always seeing what is yet left to be done. From my point of view, your work on this model is at the top of the charts. There are also things that I have not attempted to implement yet because they are not supported by JSBSim. The most significant of these for this model is support for liquid cooled piston engines. The doors on the dog house for engine and oil cooling control exist and have animation hooks but there is currently no way to setup the cooling system since the JSBSIm piston engine model assumes air cooling and almost none of the cooling related stuff is exposed in the property tree. Even if all of these were exposed I am not sure if it would be possible to fake the behavior of a liquid cooled engine. Remember that we have implemented pre and post functions in engine modeling. That is, any arbitrary function can be defined and set to execute either before or after the main engine model code. That won't help if the appropriate properties are not exposed, though, of course. Do you have a list of which properties you still need from the engine model? Jon -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] p51d-jsbsim merge request.
On Sunday 28 November 2010 21:02:48 Jon S. Berndt wrote:
There is tons of stuff that remains to be done still.
You sound like me: always seeing what is yet left to be done. From my point
of view, your work on this model is at the top of the charts.
There are also things that I have not attempted to implement yet
because they
are not supported by JSBSim. The most significant of these for this
model is
support for liquid cooled piston engines. The doors on the dog house
for
engine and oil cooling control exist and have animation hooks but there
is
currently no way to setup the cooling system since the JSBSIm piston
engine
model assumes air cooling and almost none of the cooling related stuff
is
exposed in the property tree. Even if all of these were exposed I am
not sure
if it would be possible to fake the behavior of a liquid cooled engine.
Remember that we have implemented pre and post functions in engine
modeling. That is, any arbitrary function can be defined and set to execute
either before or after the main engine model code. That won't help if the
appropriate properties are not exposed, though, of course. Do you have a
list of which properties you still need from the engine model?
Jon
I've been sitting on my cooling patch for a long, long time. Maybe its time
to share! :)
I added two properties:
cooling-factor {number} /cooling-factor
cylinder-head-mass unit={KG | LBS} {number} /cylinder-head-mass
The cooling-factor is exposed as the property propulsion/engine/cooling-factor
so it may be adjusted during the run to simulate cowl flaps opening and
closing or ... Its default value is 0.514, a number that was hard-coded
before. This number scales the apparent airflow in the engine so increasing
it results in more cooling, decreasing it results in less cooling. Not
exactly liquid cooling, but it is a flexible control.
Cylinder-head-mass is per cylinder and defaults to 2kg. This number comes
from the old hard-coded default of 8 divided by the 4 cylinders the original
model represented. Increasing the value increases the time it takes the
engine to heat up. So we can use this value to adjust how long we can run
at maximum power before the engine starts to overheat.
Overheating doesn't do anything by default, but cylinder head temperature is
also now available as propulsion/engine/cht-degF so you could play with bsfc
or volumetric efficiency as the engine heats up.
Thanks,
Ron
diff --git a/src/models/propulsion/FGPiston.h b/src/models/propulsion/FGPiston.h
index 13072af..f7ee05b 100644
--- a/src/models/propulsion/FGPiston.h
+++ b/src/models/propulsion/FGPiston.h
@@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ CLASS DOCUMENTATION
bore unit={IN | M} {number} /bore
stroke unit={IN | M} {number} /stroke
cylinders {number} /cylinders
+ cylinder-head-mass unit={KG | LBS} {number} /cylinder-head-mass
compression-ratio {number} /compression-ratio
sparkfaildrop {number} /sparkfaildrop
maxhp unit={HP | WATTS} {number} /maxhp
@@ -101,6 +102,7 @@ CLASS DOCUMENTATION
takeoffboost unit={INHG | PA | ATM} {number} /takeoffboost
air-intake-impedance-factor {number} /air-intake-impedance-factor
ram-air-factor {number} /ram-air-factor
+ cooling-factor {number} /cooling-factor
/piston_engine
@endcode
@@ -160,8 +162,7 @@ CLASS DOCUMENTATION
config file (and is above RATEDBOOST1), then the throttle position is
interpreted as:
-- 0 to 0.95 : idle manifold pressure to rated boost (where attainable)
-- 0.96, 0.97, 0.98 : rated boost (where attainable).
+- 0 to 0.98 : idle manifold pressure to rated boost (where attainable)
- 0.99, 1.0 : takeoff boost (where attainable).
A typical takeoff boost for an earlyish Merlin was about 12psi, compared
@@ -200,21 +201,21 @@ public:
std::string GetEngineValues(const std::string delimiter);
void Calculate(void);
- double GetPowerAvailable(void) {return PowerAvailable;}
+ double GetPowerAvailable(void) const {return PowerAvailable;}
double CalcFuelNeed(void);
void ResetToIC(void);
void SetMagnetos(int magnetos) {Magnetos = magnetos;}
- double GetEGT(void) { return EGT_degC; }
- int GetMagnetos(void) {return Magnetos;}
+ double GetEGT(void) const { return EGT_degC; }
+ int GetMagnetos(void) const {return Magnetos;}
- double getExhaustGasTemp_degF(void) {return KelvinToFahrenheit(ExhaustGasTemp_degK);}
+ double getExhaustGasTemp_degF(void) const {return KelvinToFahrenheit(ExhaustGasTemp_degK);}
double getManifoldPressure_inHg(void) const {return ManifoldPressure_inHg;}
- double getCylinderHeadTemp_degF(void) {return KelvinToFahrenheit(CylinderHeadTemp_degK);}
+ double getCylinderHeadTemp_degF(void) const {return KelvinToFahrenheit(CylinderHeadTemp_degK);}
double getOilPressure_psi(void) const {return OilPressure_psi;}
- double getOilTemp_degF (void) {return KelvinToFahrenheit(OilTemp_degK);}
- double getRPM(void) {return RPM;}
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds and precepitation affects.
Hi, This has been an issue from the beginning. There is a workaround in FG though, which turns off the rain in internal views, and instead puts a moving rain texture on the canopy. It's not perfect but it is quite a bit better than rain-in-the cockpit. Try the Spitfire IIa to see it in action. The script is generic, and is in data\Nasal\aircraft.nas. I don't think it has been widely adopted though. Vivian Yes and no. Frederic had another workaround which creates a zone around the cockpit view without precipitation. Some weeks ago it worked o.k. for me. Did not test it yet with newer builds heiko -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] SegFault on Current Git
On 28/11/10 02:05 AM, Erik Hofman wrote: On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 10:28 -0800, Jeff Taylor wrote: Everything is in sync. I just updated it now, and it still gets the same thing. I ran it with all the defaults, like fgfs --fg-root=/home/jeff/Computer/fg/flightgear/fgdata/ Looking again, it must be the C172P. Running with --aircraft=ufo prevents this crash. Odd, it looks like something uncommon otherwise others would have noticed it instantly (just checked it myself and no problem here). I've synced JSBSim again (the FDM of the c172) and pushed it to git, you could try if that fixes it for you. You also might want to try to run with '--enable-sound' to exclude sound driver problems and you could test with J3 Cub '--aircraft=Cub' to test if you've got the same problems with YASim. OK. So the Cub works, the ufo works. (also updated to current git) Maybe you meant --disable-sound? I tried both --enable-sound, and --disable sound, and neither worked. Maybe it's something more specific to the C172? I guess I would be able to work around this if it's just one aircraft, but I'd hate to see someone trying Flightgear who doesn't want to go to the trouble to work around it. Is there any other info I could pull out of the debugger that would help? Jeff -- Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App Earn a Chance To Win $500! Tap into the largest installed PC base get more eyes on your game by optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
