Re: [Flightgear-devel] a small set of minor aircraft model question...
On 03/05/2012 06:40 PM, Gene Buckle wrote: > On Mon, 5 Mar 2012, Gary Neely wrote: > >>> Flying means I need to be able to actually read the instrument, so I often >>> prefer larger fonts and bolder lines than perhaps the original had. >> +1 >> >> I'd think that real aircraft engineers would seek to minimize these >> effects, and that they would manifest significantly in some but not > Every single real aircraft instrument I have in my collection has a > special anti-glare coating on the glass. They don't reflect enough light > to really notice. > > g. > > In a month, I will have been flying real light aircraft for 50 years and I agree totally with the above. The use of the reflection affect on the interior of windows and instruments is totally unrealistic and detracting from my enjoyment of flying such models in fgfs. The unrealistic comment is fact and the detracting comment is my opinion. Dave P. -- Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] a small set of minor aircraft model question...
On Mon, 5 Mar 2012, Gary Neely wrote: >> Flying means I need to be able to actually read the instrument, so I often >> prefer larger fonts and bolder lines than perhaps the original had. > > +1 > > I'd think that real aircraft engineers would seek to minimize these > effects, and that they would manifest significantly in some but not Every single real aircraft instrument I have in my collection has a special anti-glare coating on the glass. They don't reflect enough light to really notice. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home. Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! Buying desktop hardware and installing a server OS doesn't make a server-class system any more than sitting in a puddle makes you a duck. [Cipher in a.s.r] -- Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] a small set of minor aircraft model question...
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Ron Jensen wrote: > On Monday 05 March 2012 02:53:59 Francesco Angelo Brisa wrote: >> * Analogic instruments: >> I was looking at two amazing done aircrafts: the DR400 and the Cessna 337; >> the DR400 has instruments with a glass reflection (Which is very nice and >> realistic) the C337 does not have it. I personally slightly prefer the C337 >> way, a little more clean, but it is just my feeling. the question: what >> would you suggest to do, if I want to take an aircraft, add a instrument, >> which type should I use ? i.e. if I want to add instruments to the C310. > > Personally, I hate the glass shaders covering instruments and windows. I want > to actually fly these aircraft and not drool over how 'real' they look. > Flying means I need to be able to actually read the instrument, so I often > prefer larger fonts and bolder lines than perhaps the original had. +1 I'd think that real aircraft engineers would seek to minimize these effects, and that they would manifest significantly in some but not all lighting conditions. In any case, I greatly dislike these glare/reflection effects on instruments and interior windows, though many effects might be made more user-friendly if the effect was diminished or made more transparent. I know enough to be able to remove these effects from models, but it can be tedious and lots of folks either aren't that handy with modeling or don't have the time. Just my $.02. -Gary -- Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] a small set of minor aircraft model question...
On Monday 05 March 2012 02:53:59 Francesco Angelo Brisa wrote: > Hi > > I was going to take some time to put my hands on some aircraft, before > beginning I have some little questions: > > Aerostar 700: > * The airspeed indicator looks like to be a default one (With no colored > bars for velocities). is this due to the fact that it is as in the real > aircraft or just because nobody worked on it ? > > Generic questions... > * asi-300: > how was the asi-300.rgb (under Aircraft/Instruments-3d/asi300 folder) made > ? is it from some sort of svg ? if yes, where can I find it ? Not the same one, but: http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/temp/asi001.ps http://www.jentronics.com/fgfs/temp/asi001.xcf the postscript file can be edited for different scales... > * Analogic instruments: > I was looking at two amazing done aircrafts: the DR400 and the Cessna 337; > the DR400 has instruments with a glass reflection (Which is very nice and > realistic) the C337 does not have it. I personally slightly prefer the C337 > way, a little more clean, but it is just my feeling. the question: what > would you suggest to do, if I want to take an aircraft, add a instrument, > which type should I use ? i.e. if I want to add instruments to the C310. Personally, I hate the glass shaders covering instruments and windows. I want to actually fly these aircraft and not drool over how 'real' they look. Flying means I need to be able to actually read the instrument, so I often prefer larger fonts and bolder lines than perhaps the original had. > http://i41.tinypic.com/10huog1.jpg > > [image: Immagine in linea 1] > > http://wiki.flightgear.org/images/f/fd/Cessna337-avionics.png > [image: Immagine in linea 2] > > * I was looking on internet to some cockpit image of some FG aircraft. what > I have found is a lot of different custom instruments set of the same > aircraft model. If I want to take an empty cockpit aircraft and I want to > add instruments to it, can I just choose a "cockpit model" and use it as > reference ? or is some kind of basic instruments set for any aircraft type > ? I hope I explained myself well... The original idea to have a basic set of instruments in Instruments-3d hasn't always worked out so well because underlying concepts of how things should work varied from designer to designer. Its my opinion things bit-rot slower if the instrument lives in its own aircraft. Thanks, Ron -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Arduino
Arduino is a nifty little package. I've played with the diydrones ardupilot and turned it into a little 4 channel servo controller and RC receiver monitor with a manual/auto mux that communicates with a more powerful upstream computer (gumstix/linux). I've flown a lot of hours with that little setup on board. :-) Curt. On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Francesco Angelo Brisa wrote: > I work with Arduino, and I have used it to build some controllore for FG... > > If you need anything, just ask; > > 2 years ago I did a little project (Like many others), here you can find > some photo/info: > http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=11017#p114215 > > Tomorrow I will give a check your article... and see if there is something > to discuss. > > Cheers > Francesco > > Il giorno 05 marzo 2012 23:09, Roberto Inzerillo ha > scritto: > > Hi everybody. >> >> I'm spending some time with Arduino lately. I made a few replica of >> input/output systems for FlightGear. It makes fun :-) >> >> For the (very) few who don't know, Arduino is a prototyping platform >> based on ATmel microprocessors, it communicates easily over any serial >> connection and that makes it very easy to interface it with FGFS. >> >> Anyway, now I'm starting to write some pages on Arduino's Playground; >> it's kind of a public wiki where everybody can contribute. It helped me >> a lot when I first started with Arduino. I hope the guides I'm going to >> publish will be usefull to others. I'll try and explain the basics >> first, then I hope I can dig deeper and add some more sophisticated >> scenarios in the next future. >> >> This is the first guide I wrote: >> http://arduino.cc/playground/Main/FlightGear >> >> I'm asking you people in the devel mailing list to give a quick look at >> what I'm writing because I'm no FlightGear developer at all, and I may >> miss some details when explaining what's going on with the FlightGear >> side of things. I'd appreciate if someone would share >> opinions/comments/suggestions so that the Arduino Playground pages about >> FlightGear may not mislead any reader. >> >> >> Thank you in advance, >> Roberto >> >> >> -- >> Try before you buy = See our experts in action! >> The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers >> is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, >> Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 >> ___ >> Flightgear-devel mailing list >> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel >> > > > > -- > Try before you buy = See our experts in action! > The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers > is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, > Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel > > -- Curtis Olson: http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/ http://www.flightgear.org - http://gallinazo.flightgear.org -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Arduino
I remember you very well, Francesco. You were very helpfull :-) > I work with Arduino, and I have used it to build some controllore for FG... > > If you need anything, just ask; ... > Tomorrow I will give a check your article... and see if there is > something to discuss. > > Cheers > Francesco -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Arduino
I work with Arduino, and I have used it to build some controllore for FG... If you need anything, just ask; 2 years ago I did a little project (Like many others), here you can find some photo/info: http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=11017#p114215 Tomorrow I will give a check your article... and see if there is something to discuss. Cheers Francesco Il giorno 05 marzo 2012 23:09, Roberto Inzerillo ha scritto: > Hi everybody. > > I'm spending some time with Arduino lately. I made a few replica of > input/output systems for FlightGear. It makes fun :-) > > For the (very) few who don't know, Arduino is a prototyping platform > based on ATmel microprocessors, it communicates easily over any serial > connection and that makes it very easy to interface it with FGFS. > > Anyway, now I'm starting to write some pages on Arduino's Playground; > it's kind of a public wiki where everybody can contribute. It helped me > a lot when I first started with Arduino. I hope the guides I'm going to > publish will be usefull to others. I'll try and explain the basics > first, then I hope I can dig deeper and add some more sophisticated > scenarios in the next future. > > This is the first guide I wrote: > http://arduino.cc/playground/Main/FlightGear > > I'm asking you people in the devel mailing list to give a quick look at > what I'm writing because I'm no FlightGear developer at all, and I may > miss some details when explaining what's going on with the FlightGear > side of things. I'd appreciate if someone would share > opinions/comments/suggestions so that the Arduino Playground pages about > FlightGear may not mislead any reader. > > > Thank you in advance, > Roberto > > > -- > Try before you buy = See our experts in action! > The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers > is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, > Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel > -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Arduino
Hi everybody. I'm spending some time with Arduino lately. I made a few replica of input/output systems for FlightGear. It makes fun :-) For the (very) few who don't know, Arduino is a prototyping platform based on ATmel microprocessors, it communicates easily over any serial connection and that makes it very easy to interface it with FGFS. Anyway, now I'm starting to write some pages on Arduino's Playground; it's kind of a public wiki where everybody can contribute. It helped me a lot when I first started with Arduino. I hope the guides I'm going to publish will be usefull to others. I'll try and explain the basics first, then I hope I can dig deeper and add some more sophisticated scenarios in the next future. This is the first guide I wrote: http://arduino.cc/playground/Main/FlightGear I'm asking you people in the devel mailing list to give a quick look at what I'm writing because I'm no FlightGear developer at all, and I may miss some details when explaining what's going on with the FlightGear side of things. I'd appreciate if someone would share opinions/comments/suggestions so that the Arduino Playground pages about FlightGear may not mislead any reader. Thank you in advance, Roberto -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Project Rembrandt - next steps
On Monday 05 March 2012 13:27:00 thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi wrote: > > There is an important issue though, the functions appear to be different > > for objects and terrain. > > What?? Both model-default.eff and terrain-default.eff refer to > terrain-haze.vert/frag as shaders - how can the fog function be different > if they're using the same shader code??? > > I think you're mistaken here. > > The fog function is different for clouds and rain layers (because clouds > and fog are the same stuff, so there need to be different rules) and for > the skydome (because the atmosphere fogs in a different way looking > straight up than looking straight down). > > Cheers, > > * Thorsten > Sorry, my bad, I remembered something like that, but it was in fact me thinking that it would need a separate function for objects. Anyway, first thing i noticed while looking more carefully at the code is this (terrain-haze.vert line 126): // now the light-dimming factor earthShade = 0.9 * smoothstep(terminator_width+ terminator, - terminator_width + terminator, yprime_alt) + 0.1; which has undefined behaviour. smoothstep(a, b, x) requires specificaly that a < b. Also, all light terms should have alpha 1.0 not 0.0. Will report more as i find them :) Cheers, Emilian -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Project Rembrandt - next steps
> > Do you mean that v1.1 as posted on the forum can't be committed > > as is to git ? > > Technically it could, but at the expense of forcing everyone to use > lightfield shaders. It overwrites for instance the default terrain > and model shaders. > > The reason why this is implemented in that way is that I have no clue > how an effect file should be properly structured. I can change an > existing effect file to insert new property-to-unifrom mappings, I > can change the filename of the shader to be used, but my attempts > to do more have so far gone terribly wrong and broken the effect. > > So what needs to be done for a clean commit is: > > * rename the special shader files where they overlap with default > files > * add conditionals to the effect files that if skydome scattering > shader is on the lightfield files should be used, otherwise the > defaults as they are (* not essential, but currently true camera > altitude above MSL is obtained from Nasal and written into the > tree - I'm fairly sure we have it somewhere better, I just don't > know where) > > It's not much work, but it requires some better knowledge of how > effect files work. Which is the point where I need help. I think that you have to add new techniques (an XML element) to existing effect file. You leave the current intact and copy/paste it in the same file, add or change what is needed and Modify its predicate. Look at model-default.eff that implements 2 techniques. Techniques can have a predicate that can test a property. Yesterday, I implemented the operator that was creating syntax errors until then. Techniques (with their predicate) are tested in ascending order of their index (the "n" attribute), so you can create a new technique with a lower index than the one for the current technique and add a predicate that test (for example) /sim/rendering/lightfield. Regards, -Fred -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Project Rembrandt - next steps
> There is an important issue though, the functions appear to be different > for objects and terrain. What?? Both model-default.eff and terrain-default.eff refer to terrain-haze.vert/frag as shaders - how can the fog function be different if they're using the same shader code??? I think you're mistaken here. The fog function is different for clouds and rain layers (because clouds and fog are the same stuff, so there need to be different rules) and for the skydome (because the atmosphere fogs in a different way looking straight up than looking straight down). Cheers, * Thorsten -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Project Rembrandt - next steps
On Monday 05 March 2012 12:02:26 Frederic Bouvier wrote: > Hi Thorsten, > > > De: thorsten i renk > > > > > I agree that we should merge the project rembrandt work sooner > > > rather than later. However, we should also take some time and > > > effort to make sure Thorsten's sky/haze/horizon effects are > > > accounted for as well. I don't know what issues we will find > > > when trying to merge these two efforts, but they both need to > > > be considered together. > > > > Yes please. > > > > Or if someone could just help in creating an effect structure > > thatone can switch these things on and off so that installing > > the lightfields doesn't have to overwrite everything and that > > it would be on GIT? Then we can worry about how to merge later? > > Lightfields would work optionally, there's no fundamental > > obstacle here. > > > > I know there's the idea to get everything perfectly merged in an > > elegant way by factoring out light and haze functions, but I'd > > be happy with a simple optional structure now and the rest later. > > Be sure that I am extremely interested in merging your work into > Rembrandt. It is just too early for me, and as the discussion > raised the point of the compatibility with older hardware, the > mockup (from by clone) can't be merged as is. So, in order to > have the less disturbing migration path as possible, things will > take even more time. > > But i will come back to you to see how decoupling light and haze > can be done in the future framework. > > > It's getting somewhat frustrating... Not so much for myself, but > > for others who want to try it, and it's starting to look silly > > when I have to tell everyone who is interested 'Sorry, it's > > ready since a month ago, but we haven't been able to put it > > on GIT yet, so you still need to go through a tricky manual > > installation process'. > > Do you mean that v1.1 as posted on the forum can't be committed > as is to git ? > > Regards, > -Fred No it can't. The fog/light functions need to be extracted and put into include_fog.*, and there needs to be a check in that one that switches between the different models based on the sky shader setting. There is an important issue though, the functions appear to be different for objects and terrain. That's not quite optimal IMHO, and will lead again to diverging fog models (what I've been trying to avoid by using a common fog function). And just throwing them in and splattering all the other shaders with fog functions in them will triple the work required later. So it's better to do this right from the beggining. Regards, Emilian -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Project Rembrandt - next steps
> Do you mean that v1.1 as posted on the forum can't be committed > as is to git ? Technically it could, but at the expense of forcing everyone to use lightfield shaders. It overwrites for instance the default terrain and model shaders. The reason why this is implemented in that way is that I have no clue how an effect file should be properly structured. I can change an existing effect file to insert new property-to-unifrom mappings, I can change the filename of the shader to be used, but my attempts to do more have so far gone terribly wrong and broken the effect. So what needs to be done for a clean commit is: * rename the special shader files where they overlap with default files * add conditionals to the effect files that if skydome scattering shader is on the lightfield files should be used, otherwise the defaults as they are (* not essential, but currently true camera altitude above MSL is obtained from Nasal and written into the tree - I'm fairly sure we have it somewhere better, I just don't know where) It's not much work, but it requires some better knowledge of how effect files work. Which is the point where I need help. * Thorsten -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Project Rembrandt - next steps
Hi Thorsten, > De: thorsten i renk > > > I agree that we should merge the project rembrandt work sooner > > rather than later. However, we should also take some time and > > effort to make sure Thorsten's sky/haze/horizon effects are > > accounted for as well. I don't know what issues we will find > > when trying to merge these two efforts, but they both need to > > be considered together. > > Yes please. > > Or if someone could just help in creating an effect structure > thatone can switch these things on and off so that installing > the lightfields doesn't have to overwrite everything and that > it would be on GIT? Then we can worry about how to merge later? > Lightfields would work optionally, there's no fundamental > obstacle here. > > I know there's the idea to get everything perfectly merged in an > elegant way by factoring out light and haze functions, but I'd > be happy with a simple optional structure now and the rest later. Be sure that I am extremely interested in merging your work into Rembrandt. It is just too early for me, and as the discussion raised the point of the compatibility with older hardware, the mockup (from by clone) can't be merged as is. So, in order to have the less disturbing migration path as possible, things will take even more time. But i will come back to you to see how decoupling light and haze can be done in the future framework. > It's getting somewhat frustrating... Not so much for myself, but > for others who want to try it, and it's starting to look silly > when I have to tell everyone who is interested 'Sorry, it's > ready since a month ago, but we haven't been able to put it > on GIT yet, so you still need to go through a tricky manual > installation process'. Do you mean that v1.1 as posted on the forum can't be committed as is to git ? Regards, -Fred -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Windturbines facing in wrong wind direction
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 15:33:20 +, TDO wrote in message : > > I also suspect that the speed of wind turbines is not just directly > proportional to wind speed. As far as I know, the speed is generally > regulated either by increasing the turbine load or by changing the > blade pitch, to avoid them getting damaged in high wind. In extreme > gusty gales they are probably stopped with the blades feathered. ..some are "turned off" by yawing the mill head "out of the wind" until the blade chords face the wind. > It would be nice to see one or two turbines randomly stopped for > maintenance in a wind farm. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...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. -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] a small set of minor aircraft model question...
Hi I was going to take some time to put my hands on some aircraft, before beginning I have some little questions: Aerostar 700: * The airspeed indicator looks like to be a default one (With no colored bars for velocities). is this due to the fact that it is as in the real aircraft or just because nobody worked on it ? Generic questions... * asi-300: how was the asi-300.rgb (under Aircraft/Instruments-3d/asi300 folder) made ? is it from some sort of svg ? if yes, where can I find it ? * Analogic instruments: I was looking at two amazing done aircrafts: the DR400 and the Cessna 337; the DR400 has instruments with a glass reflection (Which is very nice and realistic) the C337 does not have it. I personally slightly prefer the C337 way, a little more clean, but it is just my feeling. the question: what would you suggest to do, if I want to take an aircraft, add a instrument, which type should I use ? i.e. if I want to add instruments to the C310. http://i41.tinypic.com/10huog1.jpg [image: Immagine in linea 1] http://wiki.flightgear.org/images/f/fd/Cessna337-avionics.png [image: Immagine in linea 2] * I was looking on internet to some cockpit image of some FG aircraft. what I have found is a lot of different custom instruments set of the same aircraft model. If I want to take an empty cockpit aircraft and I want to add instruments to it, can I just choose a "cockpit model" and use it as reference ? or is some kind of basic instruments set for any aircraft type ? I hope I explained myself well... Thanks for any suggestion cheers Francesco Angelo Brisa -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
