You're right.
That's why I have implemented quickly a smooth changement
precipitations.
I think that the changement should be refactoring.
Mostly for wind...
Regards,
Le vendredi 19 décembre 2008 à 14:35 -0600, Curtis Olson a écrit :
> I just did a cross country flight with the latest CVS
> cl
Syd wrote:
> John Denker wrote:
>> 46:: Capitalization: Example: As of rc2, on the command line, when
>> specifying --aircraft=dhc2W, the "dhc" must not be capitalized, while
>> the "W" must be capitalized. This does not seem user-friendly. From
>> the user's point of view, this does not mak
Ladies & Gentlemen,
I would just like to announce that I have uploaded the FlightGear 1.9.0 source
and base packages to an -as of yet- undisclosed location (although you can
probably guess).
The source packages are currently being redistributed to higher capacity
servers and will hopefully be
On Fri, 2008-12-19 at 23:28 -0700, John Denker wrote:
> Consider the following scenario: The Sim World c182rg is sitting on
> the runway at KSFO. The propeller control is pulled back, so that the
> engine is operating at relatively low revs, about 1750 RPM in
> contrast to redline which is 2400 RPM
On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 19:47 -0700, John Denker wrote:
> On 12/17/2008 12:18 AM, Ron Jensen wrote:
>
> > I've made the constant "C" a configurable item, but I don't have a good
> > name for it. The patch calls it but there must be a better
> > name... I just can't think of one.
>
> Physically,
On 12/20/2008 01:59 AM, Erik Hofman wrote:
>
> Syd wrote:
>> John Denker wrote:
>>> 46:: Capitalization: Example: As of rc2, on the command line, when
>>> specifying --aircraft=dhc2W, the "dhc" must not be capitalized, while
>>> the "W" must be capitalized. This does not seem user-friendly. Fr
John Denker a écrit :
> On 12/20/2008 01:59 AM, Erik Hofman wrote:
>
>> Syd wrote:
>>
>>> John Denker wrote:
>>>
46:: Capitalization: Example: As of rc2, on the command line, when
specifying --aircraft=dhc2W, the "dhc" must not be capitalized, while
the "W" must be c
Hi Gijs,
On Friday 19 December 2008 16:52:34 Gijs de Rooy wrote:
> Hm, there should be nothing missing. I only included the moved textures, an
> enhanced systems.nas file, 787-8.ac, enhanced 787.xml and the Liveries/...
> files. Though you have updated more files in CVS... like the instruments
> .
* Frederic Bouvier -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
> Well, and what about using a graphical aircraft chooser.
> I know a good one ;-)
... or a shell completion script if you want it "pure"
(-> ./scripts/completion/).
Adding code for guessing what a user's bad input could
have meant is a rather bad
* Durk Talsma -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
> Having said that, I did decide not to swap the 777 for the 787.
I get three nasal errors for the 787 and no turbine sound.
Nasal runtime error: nil used in numeric context
at $FG_ROOT/Aircraft/787/Nasal/system.nas, line 194
Nasal runtime error: setp
On 12/20/2008 02:44 AM, Ron Jensen wrote:
> John,
>
> You've just convinced me you don't have a clue what is happening inside
> this code.
You keep saying that. Even if it were true (which I
doubt), it wouldn't be important.
I call attention again to the scenario I posted:
>> The Sim World c1
Csaba Halász wrote:
> http://kcat.strangesoft.net/openal.html Some distributions (notably
> debian) have switched to this version from the "original"
> implementation.
>
Ahh I see, using Ubuntu here and yes it appears to be this soft version.
--
Hi!
Does this translated strings is using anyware? I did not find references
in source code for this strings.
I was trying to change the file strings-default.xml , but did not see
any differences in GUI.
With respect,
Alex
__
I found some of my notes regarding the changes I made to the c172p.xml
and c172p-set.xml files back in 2007. The changes that seemed to work
the best for me are in the -set.xml file:
1) Change the value from the default 0.027 to a value
between 0.030 and 0.032.
2) Change the value from the defa
Hi James,
James Sleeman schrieb am 20.12.2008 13:21:
Csaba Halász wrote:
http://kcat.strangesoft.net/openal.html Some distributions (notably
debian) have switched to this version from the "original"
implementation.
Ahh I see, using Ubuntu here and yes it appears to be this soft ver
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
> #ifndef HAVE_WINDOWS_H
> #ifdef AL_VERSION_1_2
> #define USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER should work
My openal-soft (svn/head) defines AL_VERSION_1_1 (and _1_0),
but not _1_2. I just defined USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER after that
#if* group, but Doppler did
* Melchior FRANZ -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
> I just defined USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER after that #if* group, but
> Doppler didn't work.
PS: not just after the group, but instead of it, so the other
optional symbols weren't defined.
m.
---
> Well, and what about using a graphical aircraft chooser. I know a good
> one ;-)
>
> -Fred
>
> PS: fgrun if you didn't get it.
>
>
Its great for Windows users , but I dont use such things :)
--
__
Hi Melchior,
Melchior FRANZ schrieb am 20.12.2008 15:56:
* Melchior FRANZ -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
I just defined USE_OPEN_AL_DOPPLER after that #if* group, but
Doppler didn't work.
PS: not just after the group, but instead of it, so the other
optional symbols weren't defined.
m.
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
> Did you try to
>
> #define USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER
>
> instead?
No, AFAICS that enables your "manual" Doppler calculations, which
you added for openal implementations with broken Doppler (or with
correct Doppler that doesn't work with our broken set
On Sat, 2008-12-20 at 04:46 -0700, John Denker wrote:
> On 12/20/2008 02:44 AM, Ron Jensen wrote:
> > John,
> >
> > You've just convinced me you don't have a clue what is happening inside
> > this code.
>
> You keep saying that. Even if it were true (which I
> doubt), it wouldn't be important.
Hi Melchior,
Melchior FRANZ schrieb am 20.12.2008 17:54:
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
Did you try to
#define USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER
instead?
No, AFAICS that enables your "manual" Doppler calculations, which
you added for openal implementations with broken Doppler (or
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
> And the manual calculation works quite fine. And if it works with
> openal-soft we should use it with openal-soft.
Ah, ok. I re-tried with USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER, and that only worked
for a very short time (less a minute), and then there was no sound
at
Melchior FRANZ schrieb am 20.12.2008 18:29:
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
And the manual calculation works quite fine. And if it works with
openal-soft we should use it with openal-soft.
Ah, ok. I re-tried with USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER, and that only worked
for a very short t
Typically, the bendable trim tabs on aileron and rudder are used in real
life to get near hands off performance at typical cruise with the ball
centered. So a modeller will use the property browser and adjust the
values to achieve this so the ball is centred with wings level and no
aileron inp
There's no reason the chooser can't be made to run on any of our supported
platforms. It's written in fltk I believe and I've had it running in Linux
in the past. The only reason it might seem like it's a win32 only app is
that Frederic is really the only one who has taken the time to bundle it
w
Curtis Olson wrote:
> There's no reason the chooser can't be made to run on any of our
> supported platforms. It's written in fltk I believe and I've had it
> running in Linux in the past. The only reason it might seem like it's a
> win32 only app is that Frederic is really the only one who ha
* Maik Justus -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
> Melchior FRANZ schrieb am 20.12.2008 18:29:
> > I re-tried with USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER, and that only worked
> > for a very short time (less a minute), and then there was
> > no sound at all.
> Strange, in this mode I only modify the pitch value in the s
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Jon Stockill wrote:
> Curtis Olson wrote:
> > There's no reason the chooser can't be made to run on any of our
> > supported platforms. It's written in fltk I believe and I've had it
> > running in Linux in the past. The only reason it might seem like it's a
> >
* Melchior FRANZ -- Saturday 20 December 2008:
> Unfortunately, the sound isn't muted when pausing ...
Pfff ...
| /*
| alcSuspendContext
|
| Not functional
| */
| ALCAPI ALCvoid ALCAPIENTRY alcSuspendContext(ALCcontext *pContext)
| {
| // Not a lot happens here !
| (void)pContext
Hi,
Melchior FRANZ schrieb am 20.12.2008 20:01:
> Yes, USE_SOFTWARE_DOPPLER works with openal-soft.
Is there any chance to get to know at compile time, that openal-soft is
used?
If not: is there any chance to get to know at runtime, that openal-soft
is used?
if yes: we need to change the concep
On Sat, 2008-12-20 at 13:09 -0600, Curtis Olson wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Jon Stockill wrote:
> Curtis Olson wrote:
> > There's no reason the chooser can't be made to run on any of
> our
> > supported platforms. It's written in fltk I believe and
>
Ron Jensen wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-12-20 at 13:09 -0600, Curtis Olson wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Jon Stockill wrote:
>> Curtis Olson wrote:
>> > There's no reason the chooser can't be made to run on any of
>> our
>> > supported platforms. It's wr
On 12/20/2008 10:24 AM, Ron Jensen wrote:
> Lets look instead at finding out the real reasons why the output
> behavior is not as it should be.
>
> First question, prop_81in2v.xml gives a minimum and maximum propeller
> pitch of 12.0 and 31.8. Any idea if these numbers are right or are they
> ju
I was reminded [off list] that as of 2008, you can get by
without ADF in the US but not necessarily elsewhere.
Therefore I retract my half-suggestion that the ADF could
be removed entirely. Item 22 now reads:
22:: c172p: No GPS? Is it realistic to fly without a GPS these days?
Suggestion: Re
On Sat, 2008-12-20 at 15:11 -0700, John Denker wrote:
> On 12/20/2008 10:24 AM, Ron Jensen wrote:
>
> > Lets look instead at finding out the real reasons why the output
> > behavior is not as it should be.
> >
> > First question, prop_81in2v.xml gives a minimum and maximum propeller
> > pitch of
On 12/20/2008 04:37 PM, Ron Jensen wrote:
>> You don't need to tell me the propeller and engine interact.
>> I'm pretty sure I knew that already. That's exactly why
>> they should be tested separately.
>
> And yet, you are testing them together and posting your results.
I report my results in
On Sat, 2008-12-20 at 18:30 -0700, John Denker wrote:
> On 12/20/2008 04:37 PM, Ron Jensen wrote:
>
> >> You don't need to tell me the propeller and engine interact.
> >> I'm pretty sure I knew that already. That's exactly why
> >> they should be tested separately.
> >
> > And yet, you are tes
On 12/20/2008 08:52 PM, Ron Jensen wrote:
> Yes, 2400 is full fine. I asked about full coarse. I was under the
> impression, perhaps mistaken, that you expected the engine to turn
> faster than 1750 rpm with the lever back (coarse):
OK, sorry, most recently I misread course/fine. My bad.
Howe
On Fri, 2008-12-19 at 23:28 -0700, John Denker wrote:
> An alternative approach is diagrammed at
> http://www.av8n.com/fly/throttle.htm#fig-x1xt
>
> This is more plausible in terms of the physics of the situation, and
> more consistent with everyday Real World pilot experience.
Here is a dynamom
40 matches
Mail list logo
