Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Now with a different 'approach'. Starting on ground ...
$ fgfs --lon=-122.4998 --lat=37.5845 --heading=275
... and very slowly taxiing over the border. Right when I pass over
I get thrown on my back. Ouch ... :-|
That did it. There is
* Jim Wilson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 15:22:
That did it. There is definately something at this location, on my display
driven by V3-3000 I see a white line (right side of picture):
http://www.spiderbark.com/fgfs/SanAndreas.png
Yes. These small artifacts were always there. But they have
When I was working on getting the agl calculation functioning with all the
viewer changes, I toyed with the idea doing something that ignored sudden
(and/or unreasonable) variations to AGL, at least for a few frames. It
was
mostly in response to what happens when a very fast aircraft
John Wojnaroski [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Perhaps that explains the problem I've been seeing. When performing autoland
approaches in the 747 (approach speeds around 137-150KIAS) the aircraft
would suddenly level off at decision height ( 200 ft) and then dive for the
runway as it tried to
Jim Wilson wrote:
When I get some time I'll run further tests and maybe come up with a
patch to avoid this sort of glitch. It would be helpful if someone
happened to know why this gap happens in the scenery data sometimes.
I'm sure Curt can talk in more detail, but my guess is that this is
* Jim Wilson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 18:26:
Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
A huge value would probably only make the AGL radar flash a wrong value
but it wouldn't have further, malign effects.
Crash detection is triggered in some cases which will basically shutdown fdm.
Any
Andy Ross writes:
Jim Wilson wrote:
When I get some time I'll run further tests and maybe come up with a
patch to avoid this sort of glitch. It would be helpful if someone
happened to know why this gap happens in the scenery data sometimes.
I'm sure Curt can talk in more detail, but my
Melchior FRANZ writes:
* Jim Wilson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 18:26:
Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
A huge value would probably only make the AGL radar flash a wrong value
but it wouldn't have further, malign effects.
Crash detection is triggered in some cases which will
* Curtis L. Olson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 19:32:
When I've been the only one to see weird problems it has often helped
to do a complete make clean; make; make install
Hmmm ... but I interpreted Jim's That did it. There is definately
something at this location... that I'm not the only one.
That's probably an issue with the autopilot and the 747. It's been
difficult
finding control factors that work for all the different speeds, compounded
by
the giant mass of the 747. At those lower speeds the effectiveness of the
elevator can change dramatically with relatively small
* Melchior FRANZ -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 19:41:
But I will now eradicate all my object files and make everything clean.
Done. Same problem. Unfortunately, I'm neither familiar with the scenery
handling, nor with the vector stuff. But I'll try to find out more ... :-/
m.
Melchior FRANZ writes:
* Melchior FRANZ -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 19:41:
But I will now eradicate all my object files and make everything clean.
Done. Same problem. Unfortunately, I'm neither familiar with the scenery
handling, nor with the vector stuff. But I'll try to find out more ...
Melchior FRANZ writes:
* Curtis L. Olson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 21:30:
Can you dump out the ground elevation every frame and see what that
does as you fly over a seam and hit the invisible wall?
I did this already and posted the results in this thread. Do you want
to see more? A
Melchior FRANZ writes:
* Curtis L. Olson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 21:35:
It would be interesting to also see the actual ground elevation along
with the other numbers you posted.
Ahh, sorry. I mixed up altitude with ground elevation. May take a while,
I'm not sure if the jsbsim log
Jim Wilson writes:
Did you try rolling out from the position that Melchior included in this
mornings message (the one with the agl data)? I couldn't replicate before but
I can by rolling on the ground (a couple feet) from that position.
Just curious to know if you do.
I thought Melchior
Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
* Jim Wilson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 18:26:
Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
A huge value would probably only make the AGL radar flash a wrong value
but it wouldn't have further, malign effects.
Crash detection is triggered in some
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Jim Wilson writes:
Did you try rolling out from the position that Melchior included in this
mornings message (the one with the agl data)? I couldn't replicate before but
I can by rolling on the ground (a couple feet) from that position.
Just
* Curtis L. Olson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 21:39:
You could also insert a cout/printf in the main loop ...
Plan B was to use the built-in logger. But apart from the table head I don't
get any information. Now up to cout then ...
m.
___
* Jim Wilson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 21:55:
I'm sorry, must have misunderstood your message. I was only describing the
effect from a programmer's perspective, not stating that it was acceptible.
My question was just to discover if you noticed anything else, like your
monitor exploding,
Melchior FRANZ writes:
Never mind. I just try to be a serious pilot, and dying in a plane crash
is pretty dramatic. And, as a non-Micros~1 user, random crashes are
generally undesirable for me. :-]
Ignoring my own previous statement about avoiding politics -- I've
seen a lot of varient
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I agree that random/periodic bugs are insidious and frustrating and
makes the software look like crap; therefore we should have a
'culture' of agressive pursuit of these problems. But, unfortunately
I can't replicate your particular problem here which makes it
* Andy Ross -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 22:30:
Now, 2m doesn't sound like a lot to worry about [...]
Well, I wouldn't like to drive my car in a 2m high wall. That must
be quite unpleasant even at lower speeds.
m.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
* Curtis L. Olson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 22:29:
[...] but I hadn't seen MICROS~1 yet ... got a chuckle out of it. :-)
Hey, that's how they are spelling their name themselves, even on NT-boxes.
I didn't know whether I should be amused or shocked when I saw it first. :-
m.
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Melchior FRANZ writes:
Never mind. I just try to be a serious pilot, and dying in a plane crash
is pretty dramatic. And, as a non-Micros~1 user, random crashes are
generally undesirable for me. :-]
Ignoring my own previous statement about
* Jim Wilson -- Wednesday 03 July 2002 22:45:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q143395
OK, we want to avoid politics ... but when Windows 98 was released, Apple
had an advertisement campain which basically consisted of the string
C:\CONGRTLS.W98
m.
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002 23:00:45 +0200
Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
C:\CONGRTLS.W98
I don't get it.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002 23:00:45 +0200
Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
C:\CONGRTLS.W98
I don't get it.
It was actually for the release of Windows 95 and it translates to
Congradulations Windows 95
g.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Jon S Berndt writes:
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002 23:00:45 +0200
Melchior FRANZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
C:\CONGRTLS.W98
I don't get it.
In unix this would probably translate to something like cw98 (to save
typing.)
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project
Andy Ross wrote:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I agree that random/periodic bugs are insidious and frustrating and
makes the software look like crap; therefore we should have a
'culture' of agressive pursuit of these problems. But, unfortunately
I can't replicate your particular problem
* Curtis L. Olson -- Tuesday 02 July 2002 20:56:
I see no problems at all crossing that tile border. There were some
semi-recent height above terrain code changes. Perhaps the new code
makes assumptions about the scenery scene graph which aren't valid for
older scenery???
Er, sorry -- that
* Jim Wilson -- Tuesday 02 July 2002 21:59:
I can't make this happen...is this with current scenery from cvs?
Yes, and with plib/SimGear/FlightGear CVS-HEAD from today.
I almost fall over and hear a bump from the gear touching the ground
(which cannot be, of course). No tire squeal, though. And
On Tue, 2002-07-02 at 13:39, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Jim Wilson -- Tuesday 02 July 2002 21:59:
I can't make this happen...is this with current scenery from cvs?
Yes, and with plib/SimGear/FlightGear CVS-HEAD from today.
I almost fall over and hear a bump from the gear touching the ground
Unfortuenately I couldn't make jsbsim's logging feature work yet.
I tried both TERMINAL and TABULAR instead of NONE. No effect.
Could be interesting to see which column makes the values jump first.
Did you try CSV?
Yes, terminal and tabular are not implemented, yet.
smime.p7s
33 matches
Mail list logo