From: Torsten D. <To...@t3...> - 2011-06-30 21:29:34
|
Hi all, some time ago, Martin announced some special hardware for our FlightGear presentations at FSweekend and LinuxTag. Today, after several month of mostly bureaucratic adventures, he managed to ferry our new toy across roughly half of Germany. This is even more noticeable given the fact, that after several very hot summer days, an intense cold front passed by the last night and left behind some low clouds and local showers. Martin managed to stay safely VFR and find the small grass runway of Wahlstedt (EDHW) in Northern Germany with just basic navigation equipment (no GPS!) after a little more than two hours of flight time. He completed his flight in style with an excellent and smooth landing, ignoring the sometimes gusty winds which are so common in this area. He was welcomed by Alexa and Torsten with a landing beer of a local brewery ("Beugelbuddelbier") and his copy of our famous FlightGear landing certificates. The conversion into a static simulator will take place at my house some 60km south of the airfield, so we will start slicing the bird into smaller chunks for transportation on a truck. This will happen very soon and I fear, it will be the heart-breaking part of this story. Our goal is to be able to present it later in several options of completeness: - complete aircraft - just the fuselage, wing and elevator removed - just the cabin, no wing or elevator, fuselage cut behind the rear window - the cabin with wing, fuselage cut behind the rear window The instruments will be replaced by TFT displays and certainly all controls will be functional, I'd even love to see the control surface move, have force- feedback and (dreaming...) We will keep you updated on the progress... Here are a few images of day #1 of our new project: http://www.t3r.de/d-eeqa/ Greetings, Torsten |
From: Gene B. <ge...@de...> - 2011-06-30 22:01:15
|
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Torsten Dreyer wrote: > Hi all, > > The conversion into a static simulator will take place at my house some 60km > south of the airfield, so we will start slicing the bird into smaller chunks > for transportation on a truck. This will happen very soon and I fear, it will > be the heart-breaking part of this story. > I would recommend you do your disassembly very carefully as you'll be able to recoup your costs by selling off the parts you don't need! The wings & tail should help pay for the whole thing by themselves. :) Congrats and great job guys! g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end. |
From: Arnt K. <ar...@c2...> - 2011-06-30 23:03:17
|
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:00:46 -0700 (PDT), Gene wrote in message <alp...@gr...>: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Torsten Dreyer wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > The conversion into a static simulator will take place at my house > > some 60km south of the airfield, so we will start slicing the bird > > into smaller chunks for transportation on a truck. This will happen > > very soon and I fear, it will be the heart-breaking part of this > > story. > > > I would recommend you do your disassembly very carefully as you'll be > able to recoup your costs by selling off the parts you don't need! > The wings & tail should help pay for the whole thing by themselves. :) ..which diesel, the Thielert 135 hp conversion? It has been certified STC-style as "normal GA", or as "Experimental"? We have this engine properly modeled in FG? > Congrats and great job guys! > > g. ..here Gene makes very good sense. ;o) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. |
From: Hal V. E. <hv...@gm...> - 2011-07-01 00:26:06
|
On Thursday, June 30, 2011 02:31:15 PM Torsten Dreyer wrote: > The instruments will be replaced by TFT displays and certainly all > controls will be functional, I'd even love to see the control surface > move, have force- feedback and (dreaming...) Have you considered using something like this: http://www.simkits.com/products.php?groupid=54 These guys sell fairly compete 172 panels and the protocall/interface to these devices is documeted and available to anyone who asks. You need to specifically ask for the protocall/interface docs since the only docs on-line are about using their (Windows and MS Flight Sim) software. I got a copy of one of the protocall/instaerface docs (I think it was for the altimeter but I can't find it now) about two years ago and it should not be an issue to hook these into FlightGear even on a Linux box. The only drawback I see for these is that they are not cheap at about $400 to $600 per instrument if prebuilt but you can also get these in kit forum and get these for less than 1/2 the prebuilt price. Compared to a TFT panel they would be more realistic in your aircraft. Hal |
From: Hal V. E. <hv...@gm...> - 2011-07-01 00:51:03
|
On Thursday, June 30, 2011 05:25:52 PM Hal V. Engel wrote: > On Thursday, June 30, 2011 02:31:15 PM Torsten Dreyer wrote: > > The instruments will be replaced by TFT displays and certainly all > > controls will be functional, I'd even love to see the control surface > > move, have force- feedback and (dreaming...) > > Have you considered using something like this: > > http://www.simkits.com/products.php?groupid=54 > > These guys sell fairly compete 172 panels and the protocall/interface to > these devices is documeted and available to anyone who asks. You need to > specifically ask for the protocall/interface docs since the only docs > on-line are about using their (Windows and MS Flight Sim) software. I got > a copy of one of the protocall/instaerface docs (I think it was for the > altimeter but I can't find it now) about two years ago and it should not > be an issue to hook these into FlightGear even on a Linux box. > > The only drawback I see for these is that they are not cheap at about $400 > to $600 per instrument if prebuilt but you can also get these in kit forum > and get these for less than 1/2 the prebuilt price. Compared to a TFT > panel they would be more realistic in your aircraft. > > Hal Also there are these guys: http://www.flightillusion.com/ I don't know if they make the protocall/interface docs available or not. But might be worth a try. Hal |
From: Gene B. <ge...@de...> - 2011-07-01 01:52:27
|
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Hal V. Engel wrote: > On Thursday, June 30, 2011 02:31:15 PM Torsten Dreyer wrote: >> The instruments will be replaced by TFT displays and certainly all >> controls will be functional, I'd even love to see the control surface >> move, have force- feedback and (dreaming...) > > Have you considered using something like this: > > http://www.simkits.com/products.php?groupid=54 > > These guys sell fairly compete 172 panels and the protocall/interface to Hal, for the money they'd be better off buying a copy of Mike Powell's Buiding Simulated Aircraft Instruments and building the Big Six from scratch. I've got the book and it's very, very well done. See http://www.mikesflightdeckbooks.com g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end. |
From: Curtis O. <cur...@gm...> - 2011-07-01 15:43:02
|
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 1:23 AM, Torsten Dreyer <To...@t3...> wrote: > Hell, No! > Isn't buying a complete plug'n play panel contrary to the spirit of an > open-source project? Despite the fact that it it goes way beyond the > limits of our budget, our own tool fgpanel is able to deliver convincing > results for the gauges. > At LinuxTag and FSWeekend, we were able to fool many visitors with our > setup and some still did not believe what they saw untilt they actuallty > touched the screen. > I'll back up Torsten on this! There's a sim company (ATC Flight Sim) in California that I've done some work for over the years. They use FlightGear as their software core (and have achieved FAA certification for their sim by the way ... which means FlightGear is FAA certified or is FAA certifiable depending on how carefully the marketing guys want to word things ... other sims like X-Plane perhaps are a little sloppy with how they refer to their own sim with respect to FAA certification). ATC Flight Sim does exactly what Torsten does ... draw the instrument gauges in 2D on an LCD display and then put a flat panel over the top with holes cut out for the instruments to show through. ATC goes a step further and machines bezels to go around the perimeter of the openings and even has knobs right on the panel where they are supposed to be. We took their simulator to an AOPA convention one year and it was quite entertaining to listen to comments as people walked up. Guys would approach and quite confidently say ... "Oh, they are using Company ABC's gauges." People would sit down, fly for 10 minutes, and afterwards not believe us when we told them the gauges were all drawn with computer graphics on an LCD screen. We had to let some people touch the screen before they'd believe us and even then I'm not sure. Lots of advantages to using an LCD screen: no calibration or adjustment, instant startup, no need to unwind the altimeter for 60 seconds to start the next session on the ground. No rats nest of wires behind the panel, no need for a boatload of little embedded cpu's to drive all the PWM out signals. Another issue is the radio stack (which is unfortunately missing mostly > in our Cessna). I'm looking for a used, preferrably nonfunctional stack > of King (kx155/165 etc.) radios, so I can use the original controls and > replace the electronics by some microcontroller driven hardware. Yeah, that's a harder one. ATC actually designed their own stack with very realistic looking seven segment displays, knobs, and panels. They did all the backend hardware and computer interface too. Doing this on a second display with computer graphics would be an option, but the knobs would be in the wrong place and it just wouldn't be nearly as convincing or nice as dedicated hardware. (Please ignore how I start this message praising 2d graphics on an LCD screen and then finish the message praising dedicated hardware.) :-) Looking forward to seeing what you guys come up with. Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/ http://www.flightgear.org - http://gallinazo.flightgear.org |
From: Torsten D. <To...@t3...> - 2011-07-01 06:24:01
|
> Have you considered using something like this: > > http://www.simkits.com/products.php?groupid=54 > > Hell, No! Isn't buying a complete plug'n play panel contrary to the spirit of an open-source project? Despite the fact that it it goes way beyond the limits of our budget, our own tool fgpanel is able to deliver convincing results for the gauges. At LinuxTag and FSWeekend, we were able to fool many visitors with our setup and some still did not believe what they saw untilt they actuallty touched the screen. Another issue is the radio stack (which is unfortunately missing mostly in our Cessna). I'm looking for a used, preferrably nonfunctional stack of King (kx155/165 etc.) radios, so I can use the original controls and replace the electronics by some microcontroller driven hardware. Torsten |
From: jorg v. d. v. <jor...@go...> - 2011-07-01 08:38:20
|
Outstanding! |
From: Torsten D. <To...@t3...> - 2011-07-01 16:07:36
|
> > ATC Flight Sim does exactly what Torsten does ... draw the > instrument gauges in 2D on an LCD display and then put a flat panel > over the top with holes cut out for the instruments to show through. > ATC goes a step further and machines bezels to go around the > perimeter of the openings and even has knobs right on the panel where > they are supposed to be. I have them, too! http://wiki.flightgear.org/File:Pmpt-FrontDetail.jpg > > Yeah, that's a harder one. ATC actually designed their own stack with > very realistic looking seven segment displays, knobs, and panels. > They did all the backend hardware and computer interface too. And this, too: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Howto:_Build_your_own_procedure_trainer#Radio_Stack You knew that, did you? ;-) Torsten |
From: John W. <ca...@mm...> - 2011-07-04 14:38:35
|
HI, Have been digging into the source trying to better understand the structure of the FG lighting system and constructs. Keep coming across this function "toOsg" as in bb.expandBy(toOsg(_lights[i].position)); or fog->setColor(toOsg(fogColor)); and light->setDiffuse(toOsg(l->scene_diffuse())); Have tried "grepping" through OSG, flightgear, and simgear but unable to find anything that defines it. Where can I find a definition and what is it's purpose? Thanks John |
From: Mathias F. <Mat...@gm...> - 2011-07-04 15:54:14
|
Hi, On Monday, July 04, 2011 16:38:26 John Wojnaroski wrote: > HI, > > Have been digging into the source trying to better understand the > structure of the FG lighting system and constructs. > > Keep coming across this function "toOsg" as in > bb.expandBy(toOsg(_lights[i].position)); > or > fog->setColor(toOsg(fogColor)); > and > light->setDiffuse(toOsg(l->scene_diffuse())); > > Have tried "grepping" through OSG, flightgear, and simgear but unable to > find anything that defines it. > > Where can I find a definition and what is it's purpose? That's just data type conversion from a simgear own datatype to something that is in the osg api. It is implemented in simgear/math/<datatype>.hxx Mathias |
From: Ron J. <wi...@je...> - 2011-07-04 15:57:47
|
On Monday 04 July 2011 08:38:26 John Wojnaroski wrote: > toOsg Converts SG Vectors to OSG Vectors simgear/simgear/math/SGVec2.hxx simgear/simgear/math/SGVec3.hxx simgear/simgear/math/SGVec4.hxx toOsg(const SGVec2d& v) { return osg::Vec2d(v[0], v[1]); } -- toOsg(const SGVec2f& v) { return osg::Vec2f(v[0], v[1]); } -- toOsg(const SGVec3d& v) { return osg::Vec3d(v[0], v[1], v[2]); } -- toOsg(const SGVec3f& v) { return osg::Vec3f(v[0], v[1], v[2]); } -- toOsg(const SGVec4d& v) { return osg::Vec4d(v[0], v[1], v[2], v[3]); } -- toOsg(const SGVec4f& v) { return osg::Vec4f(v[0], v[1], v[2], v[3]); } |
From: castle <ca...@ma...> - 2011-07-04 18:45:28
|
He, he Now it makes more sense. Thanks guys John On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 09:57:32 -0600, Ron Jensen wrote: > On Monda 04 July 2011 08:38:26 John Wojnaroski wrote: >> toOsg > > Converts SG Vectors to OSG Vectors > > simgear/simgear/math/SGVec2.hxx > simgear/simgear/math/SGVec3.hxx > simgear/simgear/math/SGVec4.hxx > > > toOsg(const SGVec2d& v) > { return osg::Vec2d(v[0], v[1]); } > -- > toOsg(const SGVec2f& v) > { return osg::Vec2f(v[0], v[1]); } > -- > toOsg(const SGVec3d& v) > { return osg::Vec3d(v[0], v[1], v[2]); } > -- > toOsg(const SGVec3f& v) > { return osg::Vec3f(v[0], v[1], v[2]); } > -- > toOsg(const SGVec4d& v) > { return osg::Vec4d(v[0], v[1], v[2], v[3]); } > -- > toOsg(const SGVec4f& v) > { return osg::Vec4f(v[0], v[1], v[2], v[3]); } > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously > valuable. > Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, > security > threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and > makes > sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Fli...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel |
From: Durk T. <dur...@gm...> - 2011-07-04 19:42:36
|
On 30 Jun 2011, at 23:31, Torsten Dreyer wrote: > Hi all, > > Our goal is to be able to present it later in several options of completeness: > - complete aircraft > - just the fuselage, wing and elevator removed > - just the cabin, no wing or elevator, fuselage cut behind the rear window > - the cabin with wing, fuselage cut behind the rear window > I was away cleaning up my house in Enschede and moving out my remaining personal belongings, so I'm a little late in responding, but nevertheless, Iwould like to second the many ohhs, and ahhs, that have already been uttered. I feel priviliged to be part of the next FSWeekend meeting. May I already reserve a seat. :-) Cheers, Durk |
From: Martin S. <Mar...@mg...> - 2011-08-02 13:55:16
|
Durk Talsma wrote: > I was away cleaning up my house in Enschede and moving out my > remaining personal belongings, so I'm a little late in responding, but > nevertheless, Iwould like to second the many ohhs, and ahhs, that have > already been uttered. I feel priviliged to be part of the next > FSWeekend meeting. May I already reserve a seat. :-) I doubt it'll be ready for upcoming FSweekend as there's still a lot of stuff to work on. It's still not disassembled and we hope to move it off the airfield later this month. Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- |