> That's the same error I have on the C172 at simulator startup. FYI.
>
> > JSBsim C310 crashes the sim on gear retraction.
So ... this is an error?
This is the same message I get if I do this in real life.
;-)
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing
That's the same error I have on the C172 at simulator startup. FYI.
> JSBsim C310 crashes the sim on gear retraction.
>
> $PATLA,117.30,119.0,111.80,29.0,266*69
> 182: GEAR_CONTACT 1
> 183: Crash Detected
> 184: GEAR_CONTACT 1
> 185: Crash Detected
> 186: GEAR_CONTACT 1
> 187: Crash Detected
>
JSBsim C310 crashes the sim on gear retraction.
$PATLA,117.30,119.0,111.80,29.0,266*69
182: GEAR_CONTACT 1
183: Crash Detected
184: GEAR_CONTACT 1
185: Crash Detected
186: GEAR_CONTACT 1
187: Crash Detected
188: GEAR_CONTACT 1
189: Crash Detected
190: GEAR_CONTACT 1
191: Crash Detected
192: GEAR_
> I could bind a toggle for the brakes to the indicator.
> I think it's fairly likely somebody might click on it
Good idea, in any case. However, instead of setting the
brakes, how about configuring the weather to have non-zero
wind directly down the runway, just enough to keep the
aircraft fro
> Sounds like we need to organize a focus group. :-)
Yeah, that's what the conferences are for ... to _prove_ to the
doubting new users that the simulator does actually work ...
> I'm worried though that if the new user goes scooting off down the
> runway at 40 knots before they get a chance to
On Thursday 14 February 2002 12:32 am, you wrote:
> Jim Wilson writes:
> > David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > > Curtis L. Olson writes:
> > > > I would think that if we are going to have the engine running at
> > > > startup, we really should have either the parking brake set, or the
Jim Wilson writes:
> David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > Curtis L. Olson writes:
> >
> > > I would think that if we are going to have the engine running at
> > > startup, we really should have either the parking brake set, or the
> > > sim come up paused/frozen.
> >
> > Perhaps,
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Curtis L. Olson writes:
>
> > I would think that if we are going to have the engine running at
> > startup, we really should have either the parking brake set, or the
> > sim come up paused/frozen.
>
> Perhaps, but if we get the idle speeds reasona
Cameron Moore writes:
> Sorry I don't have time to track this down right now, but the httpd
> interface shows a "null ()" entry when viewing the root path. It even
> presents you with a page to change null's value (supposedly). Could
> someone look into fixing this? Thanks
There really is
> Alex Perry writes:
> > Dunno. It was the pre2 prebuilt binary from the Nottingham server ...
Curt asked:
> Is it dumping a lot of console output when it runs?
It was dumping at least the first dozen screenfuls that I'm used to
seeing under Linux ... then I minimized the batch file's window.
Th
Alex Perry writes:
> > Alex Perry writes:
> > > * On a G400 card with lots of memory, I'm getting 4fps out-the-box.
> > > This is down from the high 20s previous versions. It improves
> > > to 14fps if I get rid of the Textures.high directory temporarily.
> > > Thus, the decision making for
> Alex Perry writes:
> > * On a G400 card with lots of memory, I'm getting 4fps out-the-box.
> > This is down from the high 20s previous versions. It improves
> > to 14fps if I get rid of the Textures.high directory temporarily.
> > Thus, the decision making for texture sizing could be bett
Sorry I don't have time to track this down right now, but the httpd
interface shows a "null ()" entry when viewing the root path. It even
presents you with a page to change null's value (supposedly). Could
someone look into fixing this? Thanks
--
Cameron Moore
/ What do you do when you see an
Curtis L. Olson writes:
> I would think that if we are going to have the engine running at
> startup, we really should have either the parking brake set, or the
> sim come up paused/frozen.
Perhaps, but if we get the idle speeds reasonable, it won't be too
bad. Having the brakes on by defaul
Cameron Moore writes:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [2002.02.13 20:45]:
> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 04:19:00PM -0600, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> > > How much memory does your voodoo2 have?
> >
> > Hard to tell. It was a gift, and I have no idea how to probe it.
> > These cards usually h
Alex Perry writes:
> * On a G400 card with lots of memory, I'm getting 4fps out-the-box.
> This is down from the high 20s previous versions. It improves
> to 14fps if I get rid of the Textures.high directory temporarily.
> Thus, the decision making for texture sizing could be better.
Is th
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [2002.02.13 20:45]:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 04:19:00PM -0600, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> > How much memory does your voodoo2 have?
>
> Hard to tell. It was a gift, and I have no idea how to probe it.
> These cards usually have 8 megs, or if I'm lucky, 12.
Jon S. Berndt writes:
> > * On a G400 card with lots of memory, I'm getting 4fps out-the-box.
> > This is down from the high 20s previous versions. It improves
> > to 14fps if I get rid of the Textures.high directory temporarily.
> > Thus, the decision making for texture sizing could be bet
> * On a G400 card with lots of memory, I'm getting 4fps out-the-box.
> This is down from the high 20s previous versions. It improves
> to 14fps if I get rid of the Textures.high directory temporarily.
> Thus, the decision making for texture sizing could be better.
I remember this happenin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 04:19:00PM -0600, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
>
> > From your image, it really looks like you may have a driver bug.
>
> Yes, that is indeed likely. However, it doesn't appear to be a
> memory
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 04:19:00PM -0600, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> From your image, it really looks like you may have a driver bug.
Yes, that is indeed likely. However, it doesn't appear to be a
memory issue. The problem is very specifically trigge
> I've put up a Cygwin compiled binary of the 0.7.9 pre-release
> candidate up at:
>
> http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/~eazdluf/fgfs-win32-bin-0.7.9pre1.zip
>
> in case anyone with windows but without a compiler wants to test
> it.
* On a G400 card with lots of memory, I'm getting 4fps out-the-bo
David Megginson writes:
> Jim Wilson writes:
>
> > > I am convinced that we're best off starting with the engines idling
> > > rather than off, since our default start is always on a runway (even
> >
> > Is there a way to set the parking brake at startup so that the plane doesn't
> > roll d
On Wed, 2002-02-13 at 16:15, Jim Wilson wrote:
> Tony Peden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >
> > The way its set up right now, it should trim in-air if the speed is
> > above 10 knots.
> > >From FGJSBSim::do_trim():
> > if(fgic->GetVcalibratedKtsIC() < 10 ) {
> > fgic->SetVcalibratedK
Jim Wilson writes:
> > I am convinced that we're best off starting with the engines idling
> > rather than off, since our default start is always on a runway (even
>
> Is there a way to set the parking brake at startup so that the plane doesn't
> roll down (or off) the runway as soon as it
Tony Peden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> The way its set up right now, it should trim in-air if the speed is
> above 10 knots.
> >From FGJSBSim::do_trim():
> if(fgic->GetVcalibratedKtsIC() < 10 ) {
> fgic->SetVcalibratedKtsIC(0.0);
> fgtrim=new FGTrim(fdmex,fgic,tGround);
Tony Peden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wed, 2002-02-13 at 14:59, David Megginson wrote:
> > Interesting. I have no objection to removing the binding completely,
> > but it is showing up a more serious problem with JSBSim's ground
> > trimming (it tries to trim to the ground on reset even when
David Megginson wrote:
>
> As long as we're clearing up odds and ends, should we have COM1
> default to 118.85 for KSFO ATIS in 0.7.9? That means that the sim
> will start with the ATIS text scrolling across the top of the screen,
> but users might not know how to get rid of it.
I think that's
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I am convinced that we're best off starting with the engines idling
> rather than off, since our default start is always on a runway (even
Is there a way to set the parking brake at startup so that the plane doesn't
roll down (or off) the runway as soo
On Wed, 2002-02-13 at 14:59, David Megginson wrote:
> Jim Wilson writes:
>
> > Hmmm...that does work, but I'm talking about in flight after starting on the
> > ground. Using it while in flight seems to put the plane on the ground
> > instantly (throws an exception or something).
>
> Inter
Jim Wilson writes:
> Hmmm...that does work, but I'm talking about in flight after starting on the
> ground. Using it while in flight seems to put the plane on the ground
> instantly (throws an exception or something).
Interesting. I have no objection to removing the binding completely,
b
As long as we're clearing up odds and ends, should we have COM1
default to 118.85 for KSFO ATIS in 0.7.9? That means that the sim
will start with the ATIS text scrolling across the top of the screen,
but users might not know how to get rid of it.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson
[EMAI
On Wednesday 13 February 2002 04:49 pm, you wrote:
> John Check writes:
> > On that note... David, do you have the source files for your
> > instruments? I'd like to have a CVS module for the postscripts at least,
> > so that we can regenerate fresh copies and go with 1 instrument per
> > text
Martin van Beilen writes:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> Update:
>
> I deleted, rebuilt and re-installed fgfs-base-0.7.9pre2,
> metakit-2.4.2-32 (included tarball from SimGear),
> SimGear-0.0.17pre2 and FlightGear-0.7.9pre2 from scratch. Build
> logs are available on re
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Update:
I deleted, rebuilt and re-installed fgfs-base-0.7.9pre2,
metakit-2.4.2-32 (included tarball from SimGear),
SimGear-0.0.17pre2 and FlightGear-0.7.9pre2 from scratch. Build
logs are available on request. Unfortunately my problem persists,
and
Curtis L. Olson writes:
> David Megginson writes:
> > I am convinced that we're best off starting with the engines idling
> > rather than off, since our default start is always on a runway (even
> > if you specify a different airport). No C++ code changes are
> > necessary, other than a small bu
David Megginson writes:
> Curtis L. Olson writes:
>
> > This was a *hack* that incremented altitude by 1000'. It was easy to
> > do in LaRCsim. However, it's ugly, not realistic, and I'd rather have
> > a more sensible and complete set of repositioning options instead.
> > I'd be happy to s
Curtis L. Olson writes:
> This was a *hack* that incremented altitude by 1000'. It was easy to
> do in LaRCsim. However, it's ugly, not realistic, and I'd rather have
> a more sensible and complete set of repositioning options instead.
> I'd be happy to see us jettison ^U ...
Personally, I
John Check writes:
> > There's nothing wrong with realism, but since we're cheating in the
> > direction of expediency in so many places already, maybe it makes
> > sense to make the expedient mode the default one. Maybe add a
> > "--pedantic" switch, perhaps, to control the engnie start cod
John Check writes:
> > There's nothing wrong with realism, but since we're cheating in the
> > direction of expediency in so many places already, maybe it makes
> > sense to make the expedient mode the default one. Maybe add a
> > "--pedantic" switch, perhaps, to control the engnie start cod
John Check writes:
> > There's nothing wrong with realism, but since we're cheating in the
> > direction of expediency in so many places already, maybe it makes
> > sense to make the expedient mode the default one. Maybe add a
> > "--pedantic" switch, perhaps, to control the engnie start cod
John Check writes:
> > There's nothing wrong with realism, but since we're cheating in the
> > direction of expediency in so many places already, maybe it makes
> > sense to make the expedient mode the default one. Maybe add a
> > "--pedantic" switch, perhaps, to control the engnie start cod
John Check writes:
> On that note... David, do you have the source files for your instruments?
> I'd like to have a CVS module for the postscripts at least, so that we
> can regenerate fresh copies and go with 1 instrument per texture.
Yes, I have. They're in TGIF's native format, but I can
Jim Wilson writes:
> Just wondering if we should comment out the binding for this since it still
> doesn't work with the default FDM.
I does work, but not when the plane is still and on the ground.
That's because of a new on-ground property that JSBSim uses. Try
starting in flight:
fgfs --
Erik,
> I've uploaded a pre-release version of FlightGear 0.7.9 at:
did you notice that you put the old 0.7.7 binary into that package ? 'inst'
complains about installing an older package as the one already installed,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its frie
BERNDT, JON S. (JON) (JSC-EX) (LM) writes:
> OK. What does Ctrl-U do??
This was a *hack* that incremented altitude by 1000'. It was easy to
do in LaRCsim. However, it's ugly, not realistic, and I'd rather have
a more sensible and complete set of repositioning options instead.
I'd be happy to se
From: "Jim Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[...]
> Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Sorry from this strange heading - as I'm reading this list from my news
server I am posting from 'tin'
>> You don't need high speed to crash the c310 instantly. Just push the
>> nose down. And I don't ag
> On Wed, 2002-02-13 at 09:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > The only thing preventing FlightGear from compiling on FreeBSD is the
> > > missing gcvt function. Jon and I discussed it some yesterday and I sent
him
> > > a fix that places the definition in FGJSBBase.h. Hopefully that has made
i
On Wednesday 13 February 2002 01:24 pm, you wrote:
> Christian Mayer wrote:
> > To the logical side: as long as the plane start *on* the runway it's
> > IMO very unrealistical that the engine isn't running.
>
> Y'know, folks, this is actually a really (really) good point. :)
>
> There's nothing
On Wednesday 13 February 2002 11:23 am, you wrote:
> Jim Wilson writes:
> > This is what I'm getting:
> > http://www.spiderbark.com/fgfs/dc3-leaving-bangor.png
> > http://www.spiderbark.com/fgfs/dc3-on-runway.png
> >
> > Does it look like the mapping is off on the right wing?
>
> Yes, it is.
Please send patches. :-)
Cameron Moore writes:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Curt Olson) [2002.02.13 12:32]:
> > Paul Deppe writes:
> > > Gents,
> > >
> > > With CVS as of 1200 EST, 2/13/2002, --time-offset does not work properly
> > > when used in conjunction with --start-date-whatever. For example:
Cameron Moore writes:
> I've been meaning to bring this up for a while, but I've always
> wondered why we don't have a --runway-id= option so we can choose
> which runway we start on. Just a thought...
It's a good thought, please submit patches / additions to impliment
this option at any time. :
David Megginson writes:
> I am convinced that we're best off starting with the engines idling
> rather than off, since our default start is always on a runway (even
> if you specify a different airport). No C++ code changes are
> necessary, other than a small bug-fix to JSBSim.cxx; I've just chan
Martin van Beilen writes:
> Whoa there! I didn't even have the opportunity to try pre1 yet.
>
> Anyway, this is my first try since the FlightGear-2.7.8 release.
>
> Build status: Success
> Processor:Intel Pentium II 233 MHz
> Graphics Card:the venerable Voodoo2
> OS: RedHat
Just wondering if we should comment out the binding for this since it still
doesn't work with the default FDM.
Best,
JIm
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * David Megginson -- Wednesday 13 February 2002 21:15:
> > It's OK, but I haven't tried a lot of long cross-countries. I haven't
> > put much work into the prop model for the C310 compared to the C172 or
> > C182, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's spin
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Curt Olson) [2002.02.13 12:32]:
> Paul Deppe writes:
> > Gents,
> >
> > With CVS as of 1200 EST, 2/13/2002, --time-offset does not work properly
> > when used in conjunction with --start-date-whatever. For example:
> >
> > --start-date-gmt=2002:02:12:17:00:00
> > --time-off
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erik Hofman) [2002.02.13 12:31]:
> Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> >Thanks for everyone who has been beating on the 0.7.9 pre-releases. I
> >have made the pre2 release available and am currently pushing it out
> >to the mirrors (that I can push to.) Just a couple of tweaks between
Hi,
I just wanted to let you know I almost completely elliminated the white
spots in the scenery by explicitly telling the compiler *not* to
optimize floating point opperations.
This might be true for other compilers also.
Erik
___
Flightgear-de
BERNDT, JON S. (JON) (JSC-EX) (LM) wrote:
>>Hmm, I have two issues:
>>
>>Ctrl+U gives an exception
>>c310 doesn't work for me right now.
>>
>
> Refresh my memory: what's wrong with the C310?
Alright, the c310 doesn't cause (a real?) problem at once (no long run
tested though).
About the Ctrl+U
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Curt Olson) [2002.02.13 12:51]:
> Alex Perry writes:
> > One of the original reasons for the preferences file (and heirarchy) is
> > exactly Christian's point. Last time we had this discussion (or whatever
> > you want to call it 8-) the conclusion was that the aircraft shoul
* David Megginson -- Wednesday 13 February 2002 21:15:
> It's OK, but I haven't tried a lot of long cross-countries. I haven't
> put much work into the prop model for the C310 compared to the C172 or
> C182, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's spinning out of control by
> producing excess power at
David Megginson wrote:
>
> If Curt and the rest of you hate this change, I'm happy to roll it
> back out, but I've been hearing some very strong arguments against
> putting 0.7.9 out with engines off by default and no arguments in
> favour. Since this is a config-file change rather than a change
BERNDT, JON S. (JON) (JSC-EX) (LM) writes:
> David M.: do you see a problem with the C310? I can't fly now - my "big"
> machine is in the shop.
It's OK, but I haven't tried a lot of long cross-countries. I haven't
put much work into the prop model for the C310 compared to the C172 or
C182, so
On Wed, 2002-02-13 at 09:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > The only thing preventing FlightGear from compiling on FreeBSD is the
> > missing gcvt function. Jon and I discussed it some yesterday and I sent him
> > a fix that places the definition in FGJSBBase.h. Hopefully that has made it
> > to h
David Megginson writes:
> > To the logical side: as long as the plane start *on* the runway it's IMO
> > very unrealistical that the engine isn't running.
>
> I've thought about that as well (though FLY! does the same thing).
I am convinced that we're best off starting with the engines id
On Wed, Feb 13, 2002 at 12:43:05PM -0600, BERNDT, JON S. (JON) (JSC-EX) (LM) wrote:
>
> Hilarious. That's right. Why would anyone be on the runway, ready to take
> off, with the engine off.
It happens - with multi-engine aircraft anyway. Some years ago a plane
(747 I believe) taking off from Tok
Christian Mayer writes:
> To the logical side: as long as the plane start *on* the runway it's IMO
> very unrealistical that the engine isn't running.
I've thought about that as well (though FLY! does the same thing).
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Thanks for everyone who has been beating on the 0.7.9 pre-releases. I
> have made the pre2 release available
Whoa there! I didn't even have the opportunity to try pre1 yet.
Anyway, this is my first try since the FlightGear-2.7.8 release.
Build
"Curtis L. Olson" wrote:
>
> What I've seen done in more advanced sims is for the operator gui to
> provide a set of positioning options such as:
>
> - at gate
> - position and hold
> - 3 mile final
> - 7 mile final
> - etc.
Yup, that is what we should aim for.
But for 0.7.9 we need
Hi Curt,
This is a three line fix for some inconsistancies between the gui dialogs and
the panel controls for the autopilot. The heading dialog would only show the
last setting you did through it, even if it was later tweaked with the bug on
the hsi. The altitude dialog did a similar thing. N
David M.: do you see a problem with the C310? I can't fly now - my "big"
machine is in the shop.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
This may not be for the near term, but did anyone ever decide we could do
aircraft landing lights?
> Jon
>
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
BERNDT, JON S. (JON) (JSC-EX) (LM) wrote:
>>Hmm, I have two issues:
>>
>>Ctrl+U gives an exception
>>c310 doesn't work for me right now.
>>
>
> Refresh my memory: what's wrong with the C310?
If you don't see the problem it might be a local compile problem.
I'm recompiling from scratch right now
Alex Perry writes:
> One of the original reasons for the preferences file (and heirarchy) is
> exactly Christian's point. Last time we had this discussion (or whatever
> you want to call it 8-) the conclusion was that the aircraft should either
> * Appear on the runway as though told to position-
> Christian Mayer wrote:
> > To the logical side: as long as the plane start *on* the
> runway it's
> > IMO very unrealistical that the engine isn't running.
>
> Y'know, folks, this is actually a really (really) good point. :)
Hilarious. That's right. Why would anyone be on the runway, ready
> Hmm, I have two issues:
>
> Ctrl+U gives an exception
> c310 doesn't work for me right now.
Refresh my memory: what's wrong with the C310?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgea
One of the original reasons for the preferences file (and heirarchy) is
exactly Christian's point. Last time we had this discussion (or whatever
you want to call it 8-) the conclusion was that the aircraft should either
* Appear on the runway as though told to position-and-hold (which implies
t
What about just making "e" the automagic engine start key like CFS2, Fly!,
etc. do? That way the gear heads can start the engine(s) the "right" way,
and the sunday fliers can smack the keyboard once and be on their way.
g.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Andy Ross wrote:
> Christian Mayer wrote:
> > To
Paul Deppe writes:
> Gents,
>
> With CVS as of 1200 EST, 2/13/2002, --time-offset does not work properly
> when used in conjunction with --start-date-whatever. For example:
>
> --start-date-gmt=2002:02:12:17:00:00
> --time-offset=+01:15:00
>
> ...starts up at 1/1/1970 1:15:00.
As best as I ca
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> Thanks for everyone who has been beating on the 0.7.9 pre-releases. I
> have made the pre2 release available and am currently pushing it out
> to the mirrors (that I can push to.) Just a couple of tweaks between
> pre1 and pre2.
>
> Hey, should we bump up the release da
Christian Mayer wrote:
> To the logical side: as long as the plane start *on* the runway it's
> IMO very unrealistical that the engine isn't running.
Y'know, folks, this is actually a really (really) good point. :)
There's nothing wrong with realism, but since we're cheating in the
direction o
On the HSI I notice that the heading "bug" doesn't wrap properly even though a
wrap value is specified in the hsi.xml. The autopilot heading value goes
negative as the "bug" travels left of North and then jumps to 0 as soon as you
click to increase the value.
Does anyone familiar with the panel
Jim Wilson wrote:
>
> Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > > * Many improvents with piston engine and propeller modeling. Engine
> > > startup procedures work, and engine guages work.
> >
> > I think it should be pointed out _explicitly_ that you _have_ to start your
> > engine(s) man
Gents,
With CVS as of 1200 EST, 2/13/2002, --time-offset does not work properly
when used in conjunction with --start-date-whatever. For example:
--start-date-gmt=2002:02:12:17:00:00
--time-offset=+01:15:00
...starts up at 1/1/1970 1:15:00.
Cheers,
Paul
Paul R. Deppe
Veridian Engineering (
D Luff writes:
> In atis.cxx, line 163:
>
> cout << "cloudbase = " << cloudbase << endl;
>
> This one can be commented out.
>
By 'eck - the fix appeared in the cvslogs list before this post even
made it back to me!!
Cheers - Dave
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've put up a Cygwin compiled binary of the second 0.7.9 pre-
release candidate up at:
http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/~eazdluf/fgfs-win32-bin-0.7.9pre2.zip
in case anyone with windows but without a compiler wants to test
it.
Cheers - Dave
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
In atis.cxx, line 163:
cout << "cloudbase = " << cloudbase << endl;
This one can be commented out.
And in runways.cxx, lines 84 and 124:
cout << "index = " << index << endl;
should be either commented out or turned into an SG_LOG
Cheers - Dave
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
> The only thing preventing FlightGear from compiling on FreeBSD is the
> missing gcvt function. Jon and I discussed it some yesterday and I sent him
> a fix that places the definition in FGJSBBase.h. Hopefully that has made it
> to him. I know it may be too late now to get it into 0.7.9 though
> Curtis L. Olson writes:
> > As I understand it, in recent versions of plib, they have fixed the
> > bug/feature that prevented oversized textures from being properly
> > scaled down for voodoo users. So in theory, voodoo owners should
> > still see the textures, but they will be a bit blurr
The only thing preventing FlightGear from compiling on FreeBSD is the
missing gcvt function. Jon and I discussed it some yesterday and I sent him
a fix that places the definition in FGJSBBase.h. Hopefully that has made it
to him. I know it may be too late now to get it into 0.7.9 though.
Best
> I've made prelease tarballs of SimGear-0.0.17 and FlightGear-0.7.9 and
> put them on the ftp server:
The best FlightGear I've ever seen. I'm still hunting for bugs that I knew
from previous releases and CVS checkouts (falling down on runways on startup
etc.). Even effects similar to this one:
Thanks for everyone who has been beating on the 0.7.9 pre-releases. I
have made the pre2 release available and am currently pushing it out
to the mirrors (that I can push to.) Just a couple of tweaks between
pre1 and pre2.
Hey, should we bump up the release date and make a valentines release?
M
* Mally -- Wednesday 13 February 2002 15:08:
> My old Voodoo Banshee would happily load 512x512 textures but automatically
> reduce them to 256x256. I suspect these textures will be OK for Voodoo users
> despite the 256x256 limit.
Yes, that also seems to be the case for my V3-3000. The new textu
Curtis L. Olson writes:
> As I understand it, in recent versions of plib, they have fixed the
> bug/feature that prevented oversized textures from being properly
> scaled down for voodoo users. So in theory, voodoo owners should
> still see the textures, but they will be a bit blurrier. Thi
Jim Wilson writes:
> Dang! The textures can still be reduced to 256x256 by Voodoo users
> and more or less mapped correctly, right?
Yes. I will reduce them myself if there's an outcry (PLIB might
actually do that automatically now -- it used to be broken, though).
Can you try
fgfs --aircr
I've succeeded in using the Blender to create textured models for
FlightGear, thanks to valuable help from Willian Germano. Here's how
I did it:
1. Get Blender 2.23.
2. Install Python 2.0 (*precisely* that version). I compiled and
installed a copy under /usr/local, even though Debian and al
Jim Wilson writes:
> David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > John Check writes:
> >
> > > We could do it like we do panel_2, it's no biggie. Mind you,
> > > 256x256 can only hold so much text, although we could use generated
> > > text. Or possibly do it as a HUD with static text.
> >
> * David Megginson -- Wednesday 13 February 2002 13:26:
> > Just a quick note -- right now, I'm using 512x512 textures for the
> > DC-3 model, effectively leaving it untextured for Voodoo3 users (but
> > making my life a lot easier, since I have to map from only 2 texture
> > files rather than 8)
* David Megginson -- Wednesday 13 February 2002 13:26:
> Just a quick note -- right now, I'm using 512x512 textures for the
> DC-3 model, effectively leaving it untextured for Voodoo3 users (but
> making my life a lot easier, since I have to map from only 2 texture
> files rather than 8).
I'm not
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
