Jump to content

arno54

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    318

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

 Content Type 

Posts posted by arno54

    [NEWBEE] scripts path trouble

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    @Ben

    Very kind.

    Obviously, it's not about giving keys to our users, as if I can get it working, the only trouble the end user will have is to close the pop-up, which is really not a big deal in regard of the sum of work Gizmo must have been ! And if I get it working, so that I can use it to improve my planes, I can tell you gizmo will have a greeeeaaaat deal of advertising and donate incitation.

    Anyway, right now I have to fix this dofile() weirdness, or I just won't be able to use gizmo, what would really be a shame as I have great expectations from it !

    [NEWBEE] scripts path trouble

    in General Discussion

    Posted 

    dofile("main.lua")

    Ok, here it is ! I don't think that, as is, it may help a lot ;-)

    Simply : I take the helloworld example, and make it main.lua : nothing happens.

    I make it init.lua : it works as expected.

    Indeed, init.lua & main.lua are side by side, so that's not a pb of path stricto sensu.

    The exemple that is working for Pete doesn't work at all on my system, which is perfectly logical with regard to the dofile() not working.

    Now the question is : how does it come dofile()  as no effects? Mystery...

    [NEWBEE] scripts path trouble

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Goooooooot it working !!!

    I am much, much, much too stupid.

    explanation : I googled around and around and around ... finally finding the sdk-exemple package for gizmo. Cool. First file opened, init.lua and I see... it contains the code ! I try, it works...

    Now I have to figure out why dofile('x') doesn't lauch myscript.lua, but it should go fine and quick from now on!

    [NEWBEE] scripts path trouble

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    All systems are triggered using specific configuration that PM was not supposed to generate, coupled with a lot of show-hide in the cockpit object, allowing to actually change the dr each manipulator acts on.

    For instance, in PM, prop pitch setting are on the range 89.9 - 90. The manipulator inside the plane has a range 0-90, and the DR does not command pitch, but prop speed. As a result, you load the plane with feathered props, but you can't feather them with prop speed handles. The button supposed to feather the prop now is simple toggle on the PM range. These buttons change themselves for themselves (same tris range) but without  dr if electrical are not on. So you cannot unfeather if there is no electrical.

    If you're interested in the tricks i made up, just edit the cockpit.obj file and ctrl+F  "waste-gate". This simple button is worth a good 100lines of code... and there 4 of these...

    Gizmo could allow me to do it in a 500% more easy, more flexible way. Not to speak of the supercharger !

    And so on, for a rough 250 handles and buttons.

    [NEWBEE] scripts path trouble

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Arnaud,

    The Gizmo plugin should be in the Resources > plugins folder, not the aircraft folder.

    it appears you have setup everything OK.

    The "hello world" example is based on panel coordinates and not screen coordinates. So, your script may be running fine but you just don't see the text (at larger screen sizes.  Re-size the XP window to 1024 x 768 and see if the text shows up.

    Jim

    Thanks for the reply.

    Unfortunately I did read somewhere about that screen-vs-panel coords, but my screen is actually 1024x768 (netbook) so I did second check otherwise, by inserting a custom dataref, in case that coords would be the pb.  It turned out that the DR wasn't created.

    Inspecting the log was no clue at all, and I assume that if gizmo had loaded a script, this would be logged...

    [NEWBEE] scripts path trouble

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Hello all,

    this is a newbee question, probably stupid but well... I have to ask.

    I did install gizmo, last current version.

    I did try two ways of setting it:

    in

    resources/plugins/gizmo.plugin/win.xpl

    as well as in

    aircrafts/myplane/plugins/gizmo.plugin/win.xpl

    separately, I did write

    aircrafts/myplane/scripts/init.lua --content : dofile("myplane.lua")

    aircrafts/myplane/scripts/myplane.lua --content : helloworld example file

    In both case, the plugin manager finds and activates it on loading, which is confirmed via log.txt.

    Where things go wrong is that, in both case, win.xpl does not appear to find the scripts. The plugin does work, but it does nothing, as if there was simply no script file.

    Needless to say I went and re-went and re-went through "kickstart", "helloworld" and son on, studied example posted, I guess something huge is in front of me and I do not see it !

    The possibilities this pugin opens to me are so HUGE... my frustration is on the same scale, as scripting is in my humble habilities, I guess I could do much better aircrafts, if I only succeeded to get .xpl find the.lua!

    Thanks by advance for any clue

    Arnaud

    aka Arno54

  15. XPFRs B17

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    There is definitely nothing wrong with your comments, which are perfectly honest, i felt not offended at all. I just wanted to explain why such a choice was done (and don't forget I'm french, my english is crappy so you may read intentions in my sentences that I didn't intended to put into them).

    Back to the subject !  :)

    Yes, the exterior lacks a little bit for polys and texture spatial definition, Khamsin is the first to complain, but I "obliged" him to sacrifice this so that I can use the saved resources for other things.

    Well, frankly, here we're splitting hairs : I guess it's not that bad. It's even very good. It could actually be even much better, but I don't agree with the cpu/gpu cost of that. Khamsin would, without any doubt, but, my godness ! I succeeded in stopping him killing my metbook, don't go and tell him his right, NOW!  :;)

    The plane is so complex : it is a compromise... I hope you'll enjoy her anyway. You sure will. And again, there is no offense because you mentionned she's not perfect. She's not. But I really, in all non-modesty, think that Khamsin and I made her one of the very-best plane up to now  ;D Knowing we still can improve is, somehow, quite rewarding!  :)

    Friendly

    Arnaud

  16. XPFRs B17

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    2) While I get what your saying about throwing the props into HIGH RPM to get more drag on the plane, I was afraid of overspeeding the props at that point.  Its a definite possibility, even with the throttle at idle...

    Yes, that's the beauty of the thing : you will not overtorque the prop if you decide not not be in a hurry. I mean : cut the throttles and climb up very slighty... smoke a cigarette... high rpm.... have a coffee.... lock rpm and level your flight. See what I mean? everything is about anticipation, here. She is so heavy... 2 hours to get to 35000 at cruise speed, 30mn to slow down, an other hour to get back to sea level... 

  17. XPFRs B17

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    While I definitely love the B-17, and this model does an excellent job with system modelling realism, I find it sadly lacks in visual quality...

    The Ercoupe, had absolutely beautiful visual details and was a fully 3D model, why not make a separate high quality, high poly model of the B-17 for those who can use it, along with the current low poly model?  Needless to say, a high poly model, on top of the excellent system modelling would be a dream come true for X-Plane pilots.

    In a sense, you're right. Nonetheless, this is definitely not true about the interior, only for exterior, as the number of textures had to be reduced to a minimum. With default "A" view, exterior should appera just fine - it's not intended to come too close. Interior is, I guess, not lacking in visual graphics, so that's not what you're concerned about. Anyway, why this choice?

    Because it's the one plane ANYONE can fly with FPS confort, and this was part of our desiderata. We do planes, very nice planes I dare say, and planes for everybody, not only for those who have the luck to have a nice computer and the money to buy planes.

    Going with a high poly model is simply redoing the whole stuff... for free? Well... I understand your concern, but it's just not what the plane is intended for...

  19. XPFRs B17

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    1)

    Check-list, block1, line1, item1 : "set the brake primer". There is no braking other wise. At all. With the brake primer fully pushed, it will brake ! much too strongly, but it will ;-) Set it 50% if you're unsure.

    2)

    Try and do it the other way round, it'll go much better!

    - Cut throttles

    - engage HIGH RPM

    - disengage automatic pitch

    -(il needed engage a soft climb, 250 or 300ft/mn)

    you should loose 5/10mph/mn.

×
×
  • Create New...