Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
Melchior FRANZ wrote: be aware that the UFO is primarily a means to explore the scenery, to take screenshots, for scenery object placement etc. An UFO cockpit and fancy realistic flight behavior might not be compatible with this purpose. We'd have to take a look at this first. In the end it might be desirable to have two *-set.xml files: one boring development version, and one real UFO. I understand. Leave the existing ufo alone, and I'll need to create a different Unencumbered Flying Object that can be GPL'd. When I stop improving what I've already made, and start creating a new real ufo, I'll get back to you (all). :) Are submodels disabled in the ufo? I believe someone suggested I convert to yasim or jsbsim for some other reason (too)... Stewart - This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
Hi Melchior,
I had tried getting the ufo from cvs last month, had trouble, and didn't have
time to dive in...
From the ufo_20060710.zip dated 2006-Jul-11 25134 bytes:
Using arrow keys gives
Nasal runtime error: non-objects have no members
at /usr/local/FlightGear/data/Aircraft/ufo/ufo.nas, line 717
Failed to execute command nasal
And clicking gives
Nasal runtime error: non-objects have no members
at /usr/local/share/FlightGear/data/Aircraft/ufo/ufo.nas, line 579
if (KbdCtrl.getBoolValue()) {
I think the problem is at line 875 thru 877, these nodes have not been
created. Need arg[1] to be true.
But after fixing that, I still can't get anything to happen (when clicking or
keypress up and down.) except it does bring up the textbox above (0)
Models/fgfsdb/RAFTower.xml
Browsing the internal properties, I see the new nodes are still undefined. If
I set them to 0 or false, then things start working.
But it still ignores the modifier keys. Ctrl, Shift don't function.
Is 0.9.10 missing something here, or what else could it be?
Stewart
Looking at my directory:
Apr-27 9:45:55 [0[pts/7:41]sandreas /4Aircraft/ufo ls
total 44
-rw-r--r--1 sandreas 471 Jan 5 2004 ufo-sound.xml
-rw-r--r--1 sandreas 3667 Jan 17 2005 thumbnail.jpg
-rw-r--r--1 sandreas 3636 Jun 19 2006 ufo-set.xml
-rw-r--r--1 sandreas29705 Jul 10 2006 ufo.nas
drwxr-xr-x2 sandreas 2048 Mar 28 18:59 Models/
Apr-27 9:45:55 [0[pts/7:42]sandreas /4Aircraft/ufo ls Models
total 88
-rw-r--r--1 sandreas33775 Mar 18 2004 ufo.ac
-rwxr-xr-x1 sandreas 699 Apr 5 2004 ufo.xml*
-rw-r--r--1 sandreas 2117 Mar 14 2006 cursor.rgb
-rw-r--r--1 sandreas31620 Mar 14 2006 cursor.ac
-rw-r--r--1 sandreas 8637 Apr 11 2006 sign.rgb
-rw-r--r--1 sandreas 1786 May 1 2006 sign.ac
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Stewart Andreason -- Saturday 10 March 2007:
Perhaps the improvements I made, regarding VTOL or vertical hovering, with
bindings to joystick and now keyboard, could be integrated into your ufo?
Would I check out the current cvs to make proposed patches?
It's not really my UFO, although I kind-of maintain it ATM. It's more
a common project property. But yes, for submitting a patch you should
check out the CVS version, and make a cvs diff against it. You should
be aware that the UFO is primarily a means to explore the scenery, to take
screenshots, for scenery object placement etc. An UFO cockpit and fancy
realistic flight behavior might not be compatible with this purpose.
We'd have to take a look at this first. In the end it might be desirable
to have two *-set.xml files: one boring development version, and one real
UFO.
Also, the formula to make the shadow shrink with altitude could be
a useful idea.
Er ... what?
Many new screenshots available, (but only 4 Mb per hour)
Some of them look really nice. :-)
m.
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
After some research into this, I understand how my models cannot be GPL due to Paramount/Viacom rights regarding their copyrighted material. So I partially take back my wish to replace the ufo. At least the Greys from the Roswell saucer don't have lawyers. ;) But my models are still available. At least That, I think is acceptable. Melchior, Perhaps the improvements I made, regarding VTOL or vertical hovering, with bindings to joystick and now keyboard, could be integrated into your ufo? Would I check out the current cvs to make proposed patches? Also, the formula to make the shadow shrink with altitude could be a useful idea. Also, ... I said I wouldn't do the interior,... was I so wrong. That's turned out to be the best eye-candy yet! Now I've done some work on variable interior lighting to compensate for the sun going down. shuttle6 is now very flyable from the cockpit. And the trek-related insignia can be turned off. But the hull design is still obvious. So, how much would the model have to not resemble star trek, or any of the 2 dozen other space shows that I can think of? to be safe to include in Flightgear? Would a similar model with the _functionality_ of shuttle6 be of interest?? (I can change several (more) aspects of the craft, beyond color and shape, since now 69.4% of the vertices are not based on previous works... but every shape and wing design can resemble some existing space show or game...) This must be why the Area51 saucer and Boeing craft are safe... not from Hollywood. Many new screenshots available, (but only 4 Mb per hour) Stewart GWMobile wrote: Of course it should not be included in the package. Legal 101 :-) On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 9:48 am, Steve Hosgood wrote: Martin Spott wrote: Hi Stewart, Stewart Andreason wrote: I thought I was done, but you know how it goes. I thought of several ideas for improvements, and managed to write the code to do it. How would you define non-profit commercial use. Does your intention meet the demands of the GPLv2 ? Ignoring GPL issues for a moment (important though they may be), the entire concept of the Star Trek® Danube-Class® Landing Craft® is copyright© by Paramount Pictures® until about the year 2845 (assuming the US government manage to keep extending the terms as they have for the last 50 or so years). Is it safe for FG to include such a likely target for Paramount Pictures'® Copyright© Lawyers® (*)? It looks like a great model (from the screenshots) and probably would be nice eye candy and publicity for the FG project, but it could be a ticking bomb for us. I'm rather uneasy about it all Steve (*) Yes, I'm overdoing the ®'s and ©'s for effect :-) Have you ever read the blurb on offical ST merchandise? It's plastered with them - and tm too (which I don't seem to have a symbol for, otherwise I'd have abused that too!). - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
* Stewart Andreason -- Saturday 10 March 2007: Perhaps the improvements I made, regarding VTOL or vertical hovering, with bindings to joystick and now keyboard, could be integrated into your ufo? Would I check out the current cvs to make proposed patches? It's not really my UFO, although I kind-of maintain it ATM. It's more a common project property. But yes, for submitting a patch you should check out the CVS version, and make a cvs diff against it. You should be aware that the UFO is primarily a means to explore the scenery, to take screenshots, for scenery object placement etc. An UFO cockpit and fancy realistic flight behavior might not be compatible with this purpose. We'd have to take a look at this first. In the end it might be desirable to have two *-set.xml files: one boring development version, and one real UFO. Also, the formula to make the shadow shrink with altitude could be a useful idea. Er ... what? Many new screenshots available, (but only 4 Mb per hour) Some of them look really nice. :-) m. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
Stewart Andreason schrieb: Many new screenshots available, (but only 4 Mb per hour) Stewart Hi Stewart, can you give the link - I lost it somehow. Thank you. Georg EDDW - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
* Georg Vollnhals -- Saturday 10 March 2007: can you give the link - I lost it somehow. http://www.geocities.com/sandreas41/flightgear_aircraft.html m. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
Sure, sorry! http://www.geocities.com/sandreas41/flightgear_aircraft.html Georg Vollnhals wrote: Hi Stewart, can you give the link - I lost it somehow. Thank you. Georg EDDW - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
Oh no, No cockpit! :) Just the VTOL or hover capabilities might be useful. Melchior FRANZ wrote: You should be aware that the UFO is primarily a means to explore the scenery, to take screenshots, for scenery object placement etc. An UFO cockpit and fancy realistic flight behavior might not be compatible with this purpose. Right. We'd have to take a look at this first. In the end it might be desirable to have two *-set.xml files: one boring development version, and one real UFO. Well, the real UFO is what I'm trying to make. For flying purposes. But it seems I will have to make one with no Hollywood ties. and thus it might be original or boring depending on how it is taken. That firefly idea was neat, but definitely un-traditional. Also, the formula to make the shadow shrink with altitude could be a useful idea. Er ... what? When I added shadows to the 3 craft I have, I found it nicer to have the shadow shrink as altitude increases. Many new screenshots available, (but only 4 Mb per hour) Some of them look really nice. :-) Thank you, I think I worked harder on them than I intended to. Stewart - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
Stewart Andreason schrieb: Sure, sorry! http://www.geocities.com/sandreas41/flightgear_aircraft.html Thank you both Melchior and Stewart for the link! Just downloading, the interior stuff looks really nice on the screenshots! Regards Georg - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
* Stewart Andreason -- Saturday 10 March 2007: When I added shadows to the 3 craft I have, I found it nicer to have the shadow shrink as altitude increases. Err ... but they don't in real life. They just *look* smaller when they are farther away, just like in FlightGear already. (Theoretically, they should even get bigger, but you'd need to be at a very high altitude -- let's say a few million km. :-) m. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Stewart Andreason -- Saturday 10 March 2007: When I added shadows to the 3 craft I have, I found it nicer to have the shadow shrink as altitude increases. Err ... but they don't in real life. They just *look* smaller when they are farther away, just like in FlightGear already. (Theoretically, they should even get bigger, but you'd need to be at a very high altitude -- let's say a few million km. :-) Hmm, technically, either one of you guys can be right, depending on which shadow you look at. :-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penumbra Since the sun is not a point light source, the dark core of the shadow, the umbra will get smaller, but the half illuminated edge, the penumbra will get larger. Cheers, Durk - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
Hi M, Well yes, you're right. The outside edge of the shadow should get larger, albeit fractionally. But what I was attempting to replicate was the light that refracts around the object makes the shadow Appear smaller, like you also said. The alternative I guess, would be to make the transparent value increase with altitude. The viewpoint I was addressing, was from a fixed viewpoint, like the tower. Stewart Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Stewart Andreason -- Saturday 10 March 2007: When I added shadows to the 3 craft I have, I found it nicer to have the shadow shrink as altitude increases. Err ... but they don't in real life. They just *look* smaller when they are farther away, just like in FlightGear already. (Theoretically, they should even get bigger, but you'd need to be at a very high altitude -- let's say a few million km. :-) m. - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] announcing star trek runabout shuttle and many comments and questions
Hi Durk, Thanks for the technical tip. I should rename my shadows as Umbra(s) ;D And probably recalculate the % decrease in width. Sounds like a fun math problem. :) Stewart Durk Talsma wrote: Hmm, technically, either one of you guys can be right, depending on which shadow you look at. :-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penumbra Since the sun is not a point light source, the dark core of the shadow, the umbra will get smaller, but the half illuminated edge, the penumbra will get larger. Cheers, Durk - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.phpp=sourceforgeCID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
