Thank you Martin, my last download was jan 2006 and it's been updated june
2006
I stand corrected :-}
cheers
:-D ene
>From: Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],FlightGear developers discussions
>
>To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>Subject: Re: [Flightge
Hi Ben,
bsupnik wrote:
> On the other hand, it's a lot less work to write a client for FG than to
> write a client, server, ATC client, possibly write clients for other
> flight sims to get higher user numbers, write the protocols, find a VoIP
> lib, and also get the servers and donated bandwi
Josh Babcock wrote:
> For instance: translational lift, ground effect, retreating blade stall,
> and VRS. I don't think that there is any kind of realism regarding the
> energy model for the blades. (AFAIK, all they do is spool up to the
> specified rpm when the engines are turned on and then back
"dene maxwell" wrote:
> What was ths source URL for that ..?
French AIP VFR is on:
http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/aip/enligne/UK/home.htm
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
What was ths source URL for that ..?
...it certainly provides that data needed
I would like to add it to my AIP database
Cheers
:-D ene
>From: "Ampere K. Hardraade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: FlightGear developers discussions
>
>To: FlightGear developers discussions
>
>Subject: Re: [
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 00:32, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote:
> > > > IIRC the French
> > > > CAA diagrams don't even have lat/long references apart from the
> > > > various navaid locations.
> > >
> > >Yes they do.
> >
> > Not Toulouse
> > http://airventure2006.blogspot.com/2006/06/toulouse-aip.html
>
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 00:06, dene maxwell wrote:
> but I don't want to "prove you wrong" ... can we agree that TaxiDraw
> provides certain functionality at the moment that works with the current
> format of apt.dat... any replacement should provide the same functionality
> OR a mechanism whereby
Hi Ampere,
I really don't want to pursue an arguement about right and wrong... the
approaches are different and each has it's merits .. I would have really
liked to have your tools available to me when I started converting the
current FAA diagram
>On Monday 12 June 2006 19:47, dene maxwell wr
Martin Spott wrote:
> "Correu PelDavid" wrote:
>
>> Isn't the FDM much good?
>> I thought it would be. What fidelity lacks?
>
> I find the helicopter FDM quite reasonable. I've been flying a model
> helicopter about the time when I finished school but this is
> already 20 years ago, so my m
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:56:02 -0400, Ampere wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Monday 12 June 2006 03:50, Thomas F�rster wrote:
> > The logical layout (taxiway names, aprons, tower locations etc.) is
> > then put on top of that (i.e. extra tags and attributes).
>
> You can group objects i
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:47:10 -0400, bsupnik wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Y'all,
>
> GWMobile wrote:
> > Why not just duplicate vatsim with independent GPL programming?
>
> I think the point of VATSIM (and IVAO) is that they are existing
> communities with user bases that show up
On Monday 12 June 2006 19:47, dene maxwell wrote:
> Unfortunately the data kept by FAA/CAA or what ever the local
> administration is called is often out-of-date or just plain wrong.
> Experience of the last month has taught me that. Poring over aerial photos
> and current third-party documentation
On Monday 12 June 2006 05:55, Hugo Vincent wrote:
> In the case of Inkscape (I don't know about any of the other SVG
> editors), a reasonably simple plugin should suffice for editing the
> non-graphical aspects of the airport layout.
There should be no need for a plugin. Just create a new laye
>On Monday 12 June 2006 04:22, dene maxwell wrote:
> > Hi
> > Having edited airports there are a few things that tools like TaxiDraw
> > provide that are invaluable;
> >
> > 1) super-imposing the airport layout on top of a scaled background
>image
> > to allow placement of taxiways etc in propor
Hi Y'all,
GWMobile wrote:
> Why not just duplicate vatsim with independent GPL programming?
I think the point of VATSIM (and IVAO) is that they are existing
communities with user bases that show up on a regular basis. If you
wrote a pilot client for FG you could then go fly online on any given
On Monday 12 June 2006 15:22, Martin Spott wrote:
> Ok, in theory having a closed source interface _might_ serve the
> licensing issues, _but_:
> - Who likes to have to use a closed source module in order to connect
> their OpenSource flight simulation to VATSIM ?
> - More important, who of th
Why not just duplicate vatsim with independent GPL programming?
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 5:52 pm, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:39:40 -0500, Curtis wrote in message
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Martin Spott wrote:
>>
>> >Ok, in theory having a closed source interface _might_ serve the
On Monday 12 June 2006 04:22, dene maxwell wrote:
> Hi
> Having edited airports there are a few things that tools like TaxiDraw
> provide that are invaluable;
>
> 1) super-imposing the airport layout on top of a scaled background image
> to allow placement of taxiways etc in proportion to the RL l
"Correu PelDavid" wrote:
> Isn't the FDM much good?
> I thought it would be. What fidelity lacks?
I find the helicopter FDM quite reasonable. I've been flying a model
helicopter about the time when I finished school but this is
already 20 years ago, so my memory might play tricks with me. S
On Monday 12 June 2006 03:50, Thomas Förster wrote:
> The logical layout (taxiway names, aprons, tower locations etc.) is then
> put on top of that (i.e. extra tags and attributes).
You can group objects into different layers that you can named. You can also
name an object, such as a polyline, a
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 07:51:46 +1200, dene wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I agree and that's why I still fly helicopters even though I
> can't even follow Rule #5. That's the nice thing about a Sim...
> crashes don't hurt :-)
...the bad habits might, mightily too. ;o)
--
..med ve
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:39:40 -0500, Curtis wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Martin Spott wrote:
>
> >Ok, in theory having a closed source interface _might_ serve the
> >licensing issues, _but_:
> > - Who likes to have to use a closed source module in order to
> > connect their OpenSource
> Question #4: Has anybody tried the Matlab-FlightGear connection without
> perishing on the try? If so, is there any documentation?
>
I don't know if there is any documentation. I kind of remember that
Jon had asked someone to come up with a paper or something... but
there is ofcourse the pro
"Curtis L. Olson" wrote:
> Martin Spott wrote:
>> - More important, who of the OpenSource developers likes to maintain
>> a closed source module, compile it at least for half a dozend
>> different platforms and play the lonesome cowboy to whom bug
>> reports will be adressed - without having
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Josh Babcock -- Saturday 10 June 2006 15:27:
>> Define the name of the texture in the hud.xml file, then map it onto the
>> HUD glass directly in Blender or AC3D.
>
> Yeah. Done. Wasn't even difficult. :-)
>
> m.
>
>
> ___
>
Isn't the FDM much good? I thought it would be. What fidelity lacks?Does anybody pilot R/C helicopters to compare?What is the best FDM in FG for helis?And about the 5th rule... We ought to share a multiplayer sessions someday and take a look at the hover capabilities of the helis users.
David2006/6
>"dene maxwell" wrote:
>
> > Rule #5 Until you can hover indefinitely over the same point on the
>ground
> > and and climb and descend without moving from that point, don't try
>anything
> > fancier...ie practice hovering.
> > Rule #6 When you can hover, practice pulling up from level flight to a
Martin Spott wrote:
>Ok, in theory having a closed source interface _might_ serve the
>licensing issues, _but_:
> - Who likes to have to use a closed source module in order to connect
> their OpenSource flight simulation to VATSIM ?
>
>
Does the bridge module between flightgear and vatsim nee
"Curtis L. Olson" wrote:
> If people don't like Vatsim's approach or their licensing terms, you are
> welcome to your opinion, but maybe you should take it up with the vatsim
> folks rather than firing random shots in the air around here. But if
> you do take it up with vatsim directly, please
Justin Smithies wrote:
>How about we just use our own system based on data from the FG prop tree.
>We already have the google map servers , so all we would need to do is get
>other people to host their own too and become controllers for different
>areas.
>For voip / text we could use a secondary
On Monday 12 June 2006 20:06, Martin Spott wrote:
> Honestly, I'm really curious to know what the _real_ driving force is
> behind this protectionism.
> Is this stupid arrogance ("if they want to participate, they'll have to
> follow our rules - not matter if it makes sense"), simply incompetence
>
How about we just use our own system based on data from the FG prop tree.
We already have the google map servers , so all we would need to do is get
other people to host their own too and become controllers for different
areas.
For voip / text we could use a secondary app which would run on Win ,
Hi Ben,
bsupnik wrote:
> - VATSIM could require a FG-client to use their libs (under some terms)
> as conditions for network approval. I thikn that VASTIM users are
> required as part of their membership agreement with the network to only
> use "approved" clients.
Honestly, I'm really curiou
Solved the mystery of the bounced email, but the FTP problem still remains.
JD Fenech wrote:
>I can't tell if this is just me, or everyone, but ftp.flightgear.org
>seems to be having a major problem right now.
>This one is serious because it seems to lock up firefox. MSIE doesn't
>seem to choke
* Josh Babcock -- Saturday 10 June 2006 15:27:
> Define the name of the texture in the hud.xml file, then map it onto the
> HUD glass directly in Blender or AC3D.
Yeah. Done. Wasn't even difficult. :-)
m.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-
Hi,
Ralf Gerlich schrieb:
> When they switched to the new radar client, I tried to keep up, but with
> the team at that time (not their head, Julian Smart, but instead those
Kudos to the right people...somehow I managed to mix up Julian Smart and
Jason Grooms. I should get an appointment at my
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:05:28 -0400, Tony wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 6/12/06, Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Justin Smithies wrote:
> > On the other hand I was told that certain people didn't care about
> > licensing and hacked the VATSIM authentication protocol
>
> f
Hi Martin,
Martin Spott wrote:
> Well, at least in theory FlightGear would 'only' need to make use of
> the communication protocol, not of any third-party library that you
> mention (which apparently implements the protocol).
In theory, yes. In practice there could be additional issues:
- VATSI
Hi Ben,
bsupnik wrote:
> The authentication protocol has been overhauled, and if you were offered
> an NDA more than months ago, the NDA is overhauled too. But
> there is still an NDA and there is still restrictions on the licensing
> of the lib. (It's not just the NDA that would be a restr
Hi,
Martin Spott schrieb:
> The story _I_ was told reads like this:
>
> They have severe difficulties with their user authentication because
> the protocol they use is considered to be "braindead" (TM). So they try
> to hide the drawbacks of their authentication protocol by forcing
> people to si
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:25:58 -0500, Curtis wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Justin Smithies wrote:
>
> >Just got a reply from Vatsim ive pasted it it below.
> >
> >: it's certainly viable to start such a client. However, in order to
> > connect to the VATSIM network, it needs to be using
On 6/12/06, Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Justin Smithies wrote:
> On the other hand I was told that certain people didn't care about
> licensing and hacked the VATSIM authentication protocol
for reference ...
http://news.com.com/Blizzard+wins+lawsuit+on+video+game+hacking/2100-1047_3
"Curtis L. Olson" wrote:
> Vatsim would be a "competitor" to our native multiplayer system, right?
Well, we might need some more users of our own system to really
compete with VATSIM :-)
> It goes against the windows philosophy of cramming everything into a big
> monolithic application, [...]
Hi Martin,
The authentication protocol has been overhauled, and if you were offered
an NDA more than months ago, the NDA is overhauled too. But
there is still an NDA and there is still restrictions on the licensing
of the lib. (It's not just the NDA that would be a restriction on
clients -
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:13:49 + (UTC), Martin wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Arnt Karlsen wrote:
>
> > ..any chance these _timed_ entries versions of KOSH can replace
> > your current version of KOSH?
>
> Wrong thread, please don't always hijack threads that deal with a
> totally d
Justin Smithies wrote:
> Just got a reply from Vatsim ive pasted it it below.
> > it's certainly viable to start such a client. However, in order to
> > connect to the VATSIM network, it needs to be using libraries whose
> > source code is proprietary to VATSIM (i.e. its source code is under Non
Justin Smithies wrote:
>Just got a reply from Vatsim ive pasted it it below.
>
>:
>
>it's certainly viable to start such a client. However, in order to
>connect to the VATSIM network, it needs to be using libraries whose
>source code is proprietary to VATSIM (i.e. its source code is under Non
>
Just got a reply from Vatsim ive pasted it it below.
:
it's certainly viable to start such a client. However, in order to
connect to the VATSIM network, it needs to be using libraries whose
source code is proprietary to VATSIM (i.e. its source code is under Non
Disclosure Agreement).
If that'
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> ..any chance these _timed_ entries versions of KOSH can replace
> your current version of KOSH?
Wrong thread, please don't always hijack threads that deal with a
totally different topic. This thread is about the structure, not about
the content,
Martin.
--
Unix _
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Melchior FRANZ -- Monday 12 June 2006 13:53:
>
>> Of course, this is a bad example, as those extensions make the format
>> basically useless for any other purpose than for the AI subsystem. No
>> other subsystem in fgfs can load them, which is why I would rather get
>>
Hi,
Sorry to barge in again, but I work with the VATSIM guys and can tell
you: you may have licensing issues...email Lefteris to find out about
such a thing, but you may want to find out up-front if the licensing on
the VATSIM VoIP stuff is compatible with FG (either legally or
philosophically
Is anyone working on a plugin / client to enable us FG users to use the vatsim
network with voice too ?
I myself can't find anything at all , maybe some of us could get together and
start such a project ?
Regards,
Justin Smithies
___
Flightgear-devel
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:24:05 -0400, bsupnik wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Martin Spott wrote:
>
> > It would be extremely nice to have at least one single, completely
> > working example that really matches the proposed spec. This would
> > significantly help to understand the schema b
"dene maxwell" wrote:
> Rule #5 Until you can hover indefinitely over the same point on the ground
> and and climb and descend without moving from that point, don't try anything
> fancier...ie practice hovering.
> Rule #6 When you can hover, practice pulling up from level flight to a
> stationa
Hi Martin,
Martin Spott wrote:
> It would be extremely nice to have at least one single, completely
> working example that really matches the proposed spec. This would
> significantly help to understand the schema by having a means to
> cross-check what I've grasped from the idea behind the new s
Hello Ben,
bsupnik wrote:
> Martin Spott wrote:
>> 100 08x 49 02 2 0.25 1 2 1 35.04420900 -106.59855700 300 200 3 2 1 1 2 \
>> 2 3.00 35.04420900 -106.59855700 0300 3 2 0 1 1 2 3.50
>>
>> How is this gonna work when the thresholds of the opposing runway ends
>> are situated at the same lo
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 14:53:13 -0400, Ampere wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Friday 09 June 2006 21:50, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > ..Roberto _ is_ stretching understatement as concept, last years
> > AirVenture put over 10 000 planes on KOSH. My initial idea
> > was "paint parked planes" w
* Melchior FRANZ -- Monday 12 June 2006 13:53:
> Of course, this is a bad example, as those extensions make the format
> basically useless for any other purpose than for the AI subsystem. No
> other subsystem in fgfs can load them, which is why I would rather get
> rid of this sooner than later [..
Hi Martin,
Martin Spott wrote:
> FlightGear uses this compilation aproach for ages and we're currently
> working on improving the process - this is why a foresighted airport
> description format would come very handy right now ;-)
Well, I think you need both things...you need a high level format
Hi Ralf,
Ralf Gerlich wrote:
>>Well, there is the problem: if you want to database the highest level
>>layout info, you need to standardize the high level model.
> Then that's where we need to work with you and Robin Peel regarding the
> next generation database ;-)
Just to play devil's advoc
Hello Ben,
bsupnik wrote:
> X-Plane has ended up more and more using a 'compiler' approach to our
> scenery, where we view the process of making scenery as a series of
> transformations on data.
FlightGear uses this compilation aproach for ages and we're currently
working on improving the proc
Hi Ben,
bsupnik schrieb:
> Ralf Gerlich wrote:
>>There was criticism of the physical storage model of apt.dat, as it has
>>been and probably will continue to be in version 850. I just wanted to
>>say that, if the FlightGear project were to "invent" its own format -
>>let's call it FGAPT for sim
Hi Ralf,
Ralf Gerlich wrote:
> There was criticism of the physical storage model of apt.dat, as it has
> been and probably will continue to be in version 850. I just wanted to
> say that, if the FlightGear project were to "invent" its own format -
> let's call it FGAPT for simplicity - and wou
Hi Ben,
bsupnik wrote:
> Ralf Gerlich wrote:
>>As it seems, the X-Plane authors are not keen to go away from the
>>apt.dat format, so if FlightGear would go away from bidirectional
>>compatibility with apt.dat, this would result in a clear split of the
>>databases and in ceasing the up to now f
* Ralf Gerlich -- Monday 12 June 2006 13:42:
> BTW: Durk Talsma's AI-extension using external XML-files shows us that
> we _can_ extend the format without changing apt.dat at all.
Of course, this is a bad example, as those extensions make the format
basically useless for any other purpose than fo
Hi,
BTW: Durk Talsma's AI-extension using external XML-files shows us that
we _can_ extend the format without changing apt.dat at all. However, we
still have the problem of keeping extensions like that in sync with
changes from Robin Peel's database.
Cheers,
Ralf
Hi Ralf,
Ralf Gerlich wrote:
> As it seems, the X-Plane authors are not keen to go away from the
> apt.dat format, so if FlightGear would go away from bidirectional
> compatibility with apt.dat, this would result in a clear split of the
> databases and in ceasing the up to now fruitful exchang
Hi,
Thomas Förster schrieb:
>>Ralf Gerlich schrieb:
>>Erm...I just wanted to add, that I don't mean that TaxiDraw isn't a
>>proper tool right now %-) The intention was to express the direction of
>>TaxiDraw towards a more flexible tool with the possibility for more
>>high-level support in airport
Hi Guys,
First I must say I have not read the past FG-dev discussion on this ...
if someone can point me to a thread title name or date range I will
catch up. The 850 apt.dat format came out of about 3 years of banging
our head on the problem inside LR, but I suspect that the things we've
str
Hi Ralf
Hi,
dene maxwell wrote:
> it's not just layout that is important, there have been instances where
> people have wanted uni-directional runways... this could just as equally
> apply to taxiways (I haven't come across any examples of this YET!)...
> defining taxi-ways as unirdirection or
Am Montag, 12. Juni 2006 12:28 schrieb Ralf Gerlich:
> Hi,
>
> Ralf Gerlich schrieb:
> > However, given proper tools - which is what TaxiDraw is going for - we
> > can make the tool support the user, by, e.g., automatically placing
> > lines of borderlights around any new pavement polygon and allow
Hi,
Ralf Gerlich schrieb:
> However, given proper tools - which is what TaxiDraw is going for - we
> can make the tool support the user, by, e.g., automatically placing
> lines of borderlights around any new pavement polygon and allow the user
> to edit them or remove them as they wish.
Erm...
Hi,
dene maxwell wrote:
> it's not just layout that is important, there have been instances where
> people have wanted uni-directional runways... this could just as equally
> apply to taxiways (I haven't come across any examples of this YET!)...
> defining taxi-ways as unirdirection or bidirect
Hi
> > This idea actually _does_ have appeal - hey, I'm right now busy with
> > creating an SVG drawing - but I see one drawback here:
> > Airport-creators or -maintainers are not _forced_ to think of the
> > logical layout. Let's assume some flight simulation does not honour the
> > logical layout
On 12/06/2006, at 9:37 PM, Thomas Förster wrote:
>
> Of course this also means that only an svg editor is not enough to
> fully
> specify an airport.
In the case of Inkscape (I don't know about any of the other SVG
editors), a reasonably simple plugin should suffice for editing the
non-gra
> This idea actually _does_ have appeal - hey, I'm right now busy with
> creating an SVG drawing - but I see one drawback here:
> Airport-creators or -maintainers are not _forced_ to think of the
> logical layout. Let's assume some flight simulation does not honour the
> logical layout at all and w
Hi
Hallo Thomas !
Thomas Förster wrote:
> Which brings me to an idea. What if the airport format is enriched svg.
That
> way the physical airport layout is in svg and might be viewed with a
standard
> svg viever/editor. Converting electronic airport charts to svg works
already.
> The logical
Hi Ben,
bsupnik wrote:
> I just wanted to make a few comments on how this format has evolved that
> might be of bearing to future FG development:
Do you follow the "apt.dat changes" thread on this list ?
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends a
Hallo Thomas !
Thomas Förster wrote:
> Which brings me to an idea. What if the airport format is enriched svg. That
> way the physical airport layout is in svg and might be viewed with a standard
> svg viever/editor. Converting electronic airport charts to svg works already.
> The logical layo
Hi
Having edited airports there are a few things that tools like TaxiDraw
provide that are invaluable;
1) super-imposing the airport layout on top of a scaled background image to
allow placement of taxiways etc in proportion to the RL layout.
2) providing lat/long readout for any point on th
Thomas Förster wrote:
> Don't know wether svg editors will preserve unknown tags and attributes. If
> they do, the physical airport layout can then be changed with a standard svg
> drawing program (e.g. inkscape).
>
That's the nice thing about XML: you just have to put your own tags and
attr
Am Montag 12 Juni 2006 01:10 schrieb Ampere K. Hardraade:
> On Saturday 10 June 2006 13:15, Tony Pelton wrote:
> > heck, even taking the records, and stuffing those records, as they are
> > now, into XML would be a start.
>
> Already in XML format...
>
> http://www.cs.yorku.ca/~cs233144/export_cyyz
82 matches
Mail list logo
