On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 07:10:16 -0800 (PST)
Gene Buckle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unless it's different from the downloaddable version, it does _not_
include any kind of RAD tool.
g.
You are probably thinking of the free Borland C++ 5.5 compiler. The
link I provided refers to the Personal Edition of
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 16:21:19 -
Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That has nothing at all to do with what I said. We are controlling
individual
control surfaces. Period. I don't think we should have subclasses
for each
desired action/process. Only each control surface type. Roll
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 17:42:02 -
Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good point (as is Jon's) but in all such design cases there are tradeoffs.
What I'm looking at is ease of configuration and that may be a
reasonable
tradeoff against the limitations of defining a standard set of
control
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 16:15:41 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree as well. An autopilot driven by the gyro compass should
reflect all of the compass's error's, such as drift; ditto for an AP
driven by a VOR receiver. If we want to model an AP driven by a GPS,
INS, and/or
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 15:09:02 -0600
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW (and hopefully this doesn't mean major breakage) I've been
considering some changes to the autopilot infrastructure to make it
more flexible. For instance, we (or at least I) could really use a
mode to hold speed
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 16:04:32 +
David Luff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm happy to talk if we do get a slot.
Cheers - Dave
Would it be advantageous -- not only now, but for the future -- for
major subsystem leads to write up a short monologue? For instance,
if there was a concise writeup for
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 16:24:42 +0100
Hof Markus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah. Fine. So you left away the setto feature? Does not matter, I'm
sure noone will miss it.
What I don't understand is, how you reset the previous inputs? Which
application uses this? Can you send me the final FGFilter.*
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 11:44:27 -0600
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is an open issue with JSBSim because it has the concept of a
center brake which doesn't directly map to the standard cockpit
controls. Right now I hardwire that to a value of zero.
That may be a misstep on our
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 21:38:06 +0200
Paul Surgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excellent!
Now go spend some time with your kids Jon. ;)
No kidding. Tonight is library night, so I will be spending some
time with the older ones. :-)
What would be really useful and helpful is a step-by-step tutorial
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:52:28 +0100
Roy Vegard Ovesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The solution to this is to stop the intergation when the actuator
goes into saturation.
Aha! Good explanation. Yes, I think this should not be too hard to
fix, but I don't have time to play with that myself at this
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:24:15 +0100
Roy Vegard Ovesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is the solution I'm looking to implement, but sadly my knowlege
about the jsbsim structure is so limited that I could not think of a
way to do it. Maybe the SWITCH component could be used as an if
structure?
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:52:28 +0100
Roy Vegard Ovesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, note that the derivative part of the example wing leveler
control was a complete guess - and I think it actually may not play a
large part (or *any* part) in the maintaining wings-level at all.
I have also
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 22:39:20 +0100
Roy Vegard Ovesen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this should be implemented in the jsbsim source code, not in
the fdm_config xml file.
Yes. And it is true there probably should be an initialization
capability for filters, integrators, etc. I'll try and
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 23:58:35 +0200
Paul Surgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday, 8 January 2004 23:34, Jon S Berndt wrote:
Paul:
We (FDM) simply report the location of the
reference point (I think we agreed it would be the forward-most
position of the aircraft, like the prop hub tip, or nose
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 14:56:27 +0100
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon Berndt wrote:
For JSBSim aircraft, of course, you can by adding in the appropriate
control
channel in the flight control description for hte aircraft. I think
eromatic automatically adds a yaw damper to aircraft
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 21:34:44 +0100
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul Surgeon wrote:
Shucks ... I must be tired or something because this is getting more
and more confusing by the minute.
What is this arbitrary point you are referring to?
It is a location which you can choose. You can
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 20:41:00 +0100
Hof Markus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Other topic: Are there any suggestions about how to build a d/d(t) of
a property in fdm
markus
Markus:
For JSBSim, you can use the flight control components. This is a
quick reply, so maybe I have not thought this all the
Dell doesn't seem to market machines with Linux installed anymore, do
they?
Can anyone point me to a major manufacturer that does?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 17:37:25 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Wojnaroski wrote:
Believe it or not, what makes an airplane turn is LIFT... think
about it.
Same thing -- one wing develops more lift than the other, the plane
banks and wants to slip sideways, but as it does the
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 00:09:08 +0100
Hof Markus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Take the A320 (on FG) and watch the ball. All I want to know, which
property to use for trigger function to keep the ball centered.
since you discussed this topic so deeply, I'm sure someone can name
me the property...
I've
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 07:12:21 -0800
Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But the hard part is that this only works for YASim. I think the other
FDMs get their control inputs indirectly, via the FGControls
C++ class, instead of out of the property tree. This code would have to
be modified before
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:12:26 -0800
Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That convention only works for tricycle gear airplanes with three
wheels, though. The problem is that the current input mappings map
the following properties to those values:
/controls/wheel/gear[0]/brake -- left
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:34:15 -0800
John Wojnaroski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In JSBSim, for a 747, we would associate both left main gear with
the
left brake input, etc.
Let's not forget that the higher end equipment also has stuff like
anti-skid
systems which determine when/where and how the
I believe we (JSBSim team) will soon have a rudimentary model of the
Martian environment integrated within JSBSim. This leads me to a
question about FlightGear/SimGear: What is the potential for modeling
a planetary body that is different from earth in the following ways:
1) Different radius
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:59:06 +0200
Paul Surgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The minus sign on an INPUT in a JSBSim FDM causes FlightGear to
crash.
I know the INVERT keywork is being depreciated but it doesn't look
like the
minus sign is working too well at the moment.
You probably don't have the
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 15:49:30 -0600
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David, (Andy?)
It appears that in the latest cvs, we have lost the ability to control
the engines independently. Previously you could type Shift-1
Shift-2 Shift-3 ... etc. to select an engine. Then '{' and '}'
would
Thinking of the X-15 and its flight profile: does FlightGear do any
sky darkening as the aircraft flies up past 100,000 feet altitude? It
doesn't seem to me that it would be that hard to do.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks for the overwhelming response to my request for dot. I now
have what I need. I'll be trying it out this evening or weekend on
the sourceforge site. The dot utility is useful in creating the
diagrams such as those seen in the JSBSim documentation I uploaded to
the JSBSim.org site. I
Paul Surgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's the way Boeing USED to make them.
Compare that cockpit to a new 737-800 ...
The new cockpits must make pilot's lives pretty boring.
Paul
http://tinyurl.com/xkxh
Yep.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 19:42:06 -
Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This should settle the issue:
!GASP!
He fell OFF!
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 23:56:34 -0600
Cameron Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jon S Berndt) [2003.11.27 20:37]:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:11:26 +
Matthew Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10:47 Thu 27 Nov , Erik Hofman wrote:
Yeah, but then you'd get a fight over which flag
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:11:26 +
Matthew Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10:47 Thu 27 Nov , Erik Hofman wrote:
Yeah, but then you'd get a fight over which flag is put in first and
which flag is shows just for 0.1 usec (e.g. the last flag) ...
Erik
Maybe randomise the order ?
All the
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 16:22:28 +0100 (CET)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The FlightGear logo on the top of the website.
Yes, I know. I am familiar with it: I made it. :-)
What don't you like about it?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
A good article on the National Geographic web site:
http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0312/feature1/index.html
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:27:04 -0600
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David,
Now I'm imagining a script that sets up all the initial conditions
(altitude, speed, pressure, temp, etc.) as well as specfic logging
fields, flies an FAA certification test, logs the results, and graphs
the
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:49:58 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andy Ross wrote:
1. The default log level is now FG_ALERT, or at least, it's supposed
to be (though some FG_WARN messages inexplicably still get
through).
What about the presumptively useful stuff like the JSBSim
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:01:45 -0600
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Someone needs to whip up a quick flight dynamics model for it. :-)
Curt.
http://jsbsim.sourceforge.net/aeromatic.html
:-)
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:07:45 -0600
Jon S Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:01:45 -0600
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Someone needs to whip up a quick flight dynamics model for it. :-)
Curt.
http://jsbsim.sourceforge.net/aeromatic.html
:-)
Jon
Relevant info
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:16:57 +
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hahaha!
Aeromatic is *for* the end user. The next simplest thing would be
to
fly to wherever the user is and hold their hand as they type.
Jon
LOL, I'm free this Sunday if you are, Jon
I'm booked for the rest of my life. My wife
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:03:39 +0100
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While the wheel dynamics allow the wheels to move sideways easily,
the landing gear dynamics does not allow the landing gear to move
sideways (easily).
So apart from the the individual wheel dynamics we also need to
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:33:35 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Again, I'm wondering if this is an aerodynamic problem (aside from
the bouncing-around-sitting-still thing). Because of its lifting
surfaces, a plane is certainly more vulnerable to the wind than a car,
even when it is
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 11:20:42 -0800 (PST)
Gene Buckle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any interest in getting that detailed on the WB calcs? When
duplicating a real-world instrument, the weights are easily available
and a generic weight could be assigned to avionics that don't model a
specific
Is there any designed rhyme or reason to the layout of the properties
from the top down in FlightGear? Any particular conventions? I think
there ought to be something written down if there is not in order to
allow the FDM authors (and others) to splice in nicer.
Jon
Is there a README, FAQ, or manual on making instruments for a panel
and/or creating the panel itself?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Suggestion: for debugging purposes (if nothing else) it would be
useful to have this command:
fgfs --version
also spit out info on other pertinent version numbers, e.g. for:
plib
simgear
jsbsim
yasim
etc.
JSBSim has this available in a header file, and IIRC it is also
available in a function
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:38:23 -0500
John Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking at creating a new protocol module to handle the low level
details of the connection, and a hud overlay like the OLK code to
handle
Here's a red herring - er ... I mean side note:
One thing I've been playing
On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 13:32:14 -0500
David Culp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The command line switch --enable-freeze, as well as the properties
/sim/freeze/master and /sim/freeze/position don't work (at least not
with
JSBSim or Yasim). I don't know if they ever have, or if they are a
work in
On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 15:24:27 -0500
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon S Berndt writes:
On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 13:32:14 -0500
David Culp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The command line switch --enable-freeze, as well as the properties
/sim/freeze/master and /sim/freeze/position don't work
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 18:36:58 +0200
Matevz Jekovec [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, nVidia graphic cards have drivers capable of twin-view in Linux.
You just have to edit your XF86Config file, to match your
configuration. Detonator README covers all questions btw.
I've used the GeForce card I have
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 17:15:02 -0400
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are still some problems we need to work out. For example, if
you set the wind to 0 and turn off the engine, the helicopter still
slides backwards and turns -- we'll have to figure out why there are
forces acting on
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 22:11:55 +0100
Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you sure the differential tail deflections can't be done in JSBSim?
Well, it's not so much that it can't be done. However, there are some
factors to consider. Depending on the flight conditions and modes, the
flight
Could anyone provide a screen dump image of this aircraft flying in
FlightGear?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:55:05 -0500
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrei Barbu has revamped the flightgear web site layout and made
quite a few improvements. I have placed the proposed changes here:
http://www.flightgear.org/www.andrei/
Outstanding.
Jon
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:02:26 -0500
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did anyone change anything with property names recently? My flight
recorder is also broke now. :-(
What's the date on JSBSim.cxx? There were some changes that were made
to that file for engines, I think. If that was
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 11:42:18 -0500
David Culp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Failed to untie property /consumables/fuel/tank[0]/level-gal_us
Failed to untie property /consumables/fuel/tank[1]/level-gal_us
Failed to untie property /engines/engine[0]/fuel-flow-gph
Failed to untie property
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003 16:01:59 +0100
James Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- a similar elevator effect to that martin described,
when deploying the flaps at high speeds
- very odd high pitch angle behavior ... I can't really
describe it, alas. It seems like way too much lift is
getting developed
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 16:15:48 -0500
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes.
Curt.
Is it worth a new screen shot?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Which is better:
awk
gawk
nawk
??
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 18:31:11 -0400
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon S Berndt writes:
Which is better:
awk
gawk
nawk
perl
David
I'm going to take a wild guess here: I'll bet you and Curt
didn't do to well in multiple choice tests in school?
;-)
Jon
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 23:37:25 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Curtis is going to do a new scenery release but is unable
to get the SRTM30 data include due to time restrictions
(they should be generated within a day or two).
We might be able to get it going for him if there are
MEDIA RELATIONS OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov
Nancy Lovato (818) 354-9382
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
David E. Steitz
[Sorry if this ends up being a duplicate post]
MEDIA RELATIONS OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov
Nancy Lovato (818) 354-9382
Jet
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 18:32:18 +0100 (BST)
Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Matevz Jekovec wrote:
I think S-3 Viking.
C130
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0097.shtml
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 11:23:07 -0500
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but it may give us many more options for moving forward with new and
better graphic effects.
My uneducated, gut feeling, leads me to opt for the route
that gives the most promise for the future.
Jon
On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 17:41:33 -0400
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you are flying fast enough (i.e. a dive). Any
suggestions? JSBSim
does not handle windmilling properly either.
Any suggestions?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 19:36:15 +0100 (BST)
Paul Morriss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Mass Multiplayer Server (MAYS) - Instead of a single
How do you get MAYS from Mass MultiPlayer Server? Should
it not be MMS, or MMPS? This is serious. The correct
acronym is critical in getting project support!
On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 16:03:33 -0400
Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes this is *very* annoying :-)
Yep. I haven't quite figured out how to work this into my
batch build script. If I could figure out how to latch
into the result code when simgear checks to whether the
latest metakit is
On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 15:14:57 -0400
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's a problem with JSBSim models in general -- most of them tend to
drop a wing in the stall. The problem is that JSBSim only recently
started supporting wing washout
We did?
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 16:35:52 +0200
Arnt Karlsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do we have drag shutes modelled?
I've thought about this extensively. There are lots of
reasons I'd like to model it. It would not be too hard,
either. It's the *time*.
Jon
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 10:07:22 -0500
David Culp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
..cool, then we don't need my F-16 drag shute housing
pics. ;-)
Do we have drag shutes modelled?
Yes. There exists a property called
/controls/flight/drag-chute which takes a
boolean value.
In JSBSim you could add a
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:36:11 +0200
Matevz Jekovec [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's amazing!
Are there any F16 models planned for FlightGear in early
future? Because I have few friends from Falcon community
who could lend us their models and skins with no problem.
There already is. There is a
On 1 Jul 2003 17:20:40 GMT
Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm happy to see those in CVS, I yet have to verify if this breaks build on
other platforms. BTW, we have to give notice to Jon about these changes,
otherwise he'll revert them on the next JSBSim update.
Would anyone commit the fix
Some of you may know that JSBSim has the ability to make
scripted runs. I would like to be able to do this for
JSBSim when integrated with FlightGear. It won't be
terribly difficult at all - I'll just need to add a few
lines inside JSBSim.cxx. If no script is specified, no
effect is made on
What's the potential of creating contrails for such a
thing as the X-15 rocket engine? Wingtip vortices? etc.?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003 16:00:22 +0200
Martin Dressler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You should be able hide your aircraft in Hangar. If I
remember it. Even new hits routine has some support for this.
Madr
I think Norman may know the answer to this one. However,
JSBSim simply gets a terrain height
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003 17:00:45 -
Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
/sim/rendering/enhanced-lighting
toggle enhanced runway lighting on or off
/sim/rendering/distance-attenuation
add distance attenuation to the enhanced runway
lighting
What is the
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:31:22 +0200 (CEST)
Frederic BOUVIER [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin Spott wrote:
Just an update on the A320 model :
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/frbouvi/flightsim/a320-fgfs-02.png
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/frbouvi/flightsim/a320-fgfs-03.png
What was the flight model for
What's a wiki?
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 19:54:45 +0200
Pieter Pareit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Op woensdag 11 juni 2003 19:37, schreef Jon S Berndt:
What's a wiki?
http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?search=wikigo=Go
In short, a web page that can contain anything, that can
be updated by anyone at anytime.
Hmmm
On Fri, 6 Jun 2003 10:27:39 -0700 (PDT)
Gene Buckle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If he flies for Aeroflot, they may not notice the
difference. *gdr*
You guys are scaring me. ;-)
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 4 Jun 2003 20:40:42 +0200
Jorge Van Hemelryck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It will be easy to convert the 737 model to an A320.
I'll send you one.
What about fly-by-wire ? How can it be taken into account
?
Since David is making a JSBSim version of the A-310, you
can use the JSBSim flight
On Tue, 3 Jun 2003 12:55:11 -
Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway, we really need this before I animate another
model, that is going to
have to be reanimated or offset with a special patch it
up for jsbsim
model.xml file when this problem finally gets fixed.
Best,
Jim
I thought
On Tue, 3 Jun 2003 16:08:50 -0400
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's something else to worry about before the release:
a recent bug fix in JSBSim
?? Which fix ??
meant that all of the JSBSim-based
propeller planes are now badly out of trim. I fixed the default C172P,
but I need
On 03 Jun 2003 15:30:46 -0700
Tony Peden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The roll trim was bound to the yaw trim props and vice-versa. Probably
the fault of the guy who did the properties for JSBSim, can't remember
his name offhand, though, ...
Well, we'll have to dock his pay when we find out who he
On Mon, 2 Jun 2003 14:38:32 -0500
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to get all the latest JSBSim stuff in there.
When would you need it?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 19:00:30 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
For me, FlightGear just dies with the message FlightGear
aborted for
JSBSim models or simply Aborted for yasim models. :-(
I'm totally dead in the water here. This needs to get
resolved quickly.
The
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:26:46 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Curt prefers complete files and I prefer diffs -- what
will Erik choose?
The suspense is riveting. What *will* Erik choose?
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 22:26:31 +0100
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They encountered a problem where the aircraft could fly
past 2 degr. aoa. It took them quite long to learn that
the wing root of the F-16 (the part of the fuselage that
extends to underneath the canopy and where the wings
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 10:50:04 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JSBSim, on the other hand, assumes no fuel in the tanks, and does an
additional calculation of the moment for the fuel when the tanks are
full. Hence our (possible) problem.
It is possible to calculate offline, and log
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 16:12:48 -
Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon Berndt [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Is this a mesh, or what? I'm trying out AC3D, now.
Take a look at this:
http://www.wingswithwires.com/chickencoop/se5a/index.htm
This is way cool. I've been looking for a tool that could
In my quick viewing of the AC3D documents this morning I
thought I had seen that AC3D could create a surface given
formers placed appropriately. This would be very useful
if one has cross sections of a vehicle. Have you tried
this feature? I was also impressed that it would let you
place
On 11 Mar 2003 17:52:00 +
Christopher S Horler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Blender can skin profiles, that's how I created my
spitfire wings.
Does it work in windows? Link?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 12:10:44 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon S Berndt writes:
I understand that it would be convenient for an FCS to be built-into
standalone JSBSim, but in FlightGear, as long as the FDMs publish all
of the information that an FCS would need as input, we can
On Wed, 5 Mar 2003 17:19:30 -0600
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.flightgear.org/images/crop-variety.jpg
Wow. Now that looks like the areas surrounding Mpls.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 27 Feb 2003 15:06:19 -0600
Cameron Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was going to make a joke about FG not supporting the
dropping of bombs, but... ;-p
--
Cameron Moore
That won't necessarily always be true. Now that we have an
F-16 (etc.) that can carry them, and it sort-of works (I
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003 15:48:35 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Basler) wrote:
John,
the correct link ist of course:
www.nasawatch.com
Regards, Michael
Thanks.
And to think I proofread that posting before I made it ...
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel
Anyone know where a good report on this aircraft might be
found? Aero, mass props, etc.?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 14:24:29 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sounds good -- I was hoping to provoke Jon into doing something like
that. Note that we do also model horizonal wind gusts (of longer
duration) through FGEnvironment.
Here is what's in Turbulence(), now:
--- start
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 11:51:29 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For the cockpit view, it might be interested to add
optional
acceleration effects to make up for the lack of full
motion -- I think
I first noticed this trick in Battle of Britain. The
FDMs already
publish the
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 13:29:34 -0500
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andy Ross writes:
I'd give this more general idea a shot first, before
trying
axis-specific code.
The axis-specific stuff is easier for me to understand --
perhaps
someone with a stronger physics background could
201 - 300 of 513 matches
Mail list logo
