Military simulation (from Su-15 Screenshots)

[Thorsten]

I find this thread surprisingly thought-provoking, i.e. seeing how a theoretical physicist -presumably much more familiar with nuclear physics than the average layman, is apparently so opposed to nuclear energy

I'm tempted to make that a 'because', but it's actually not that simple. It's probably the physics background combined with a strong interest in psychology which pretty inevitably leads to that stance...

[Johan G]

A fulfilled life, happiness - these are internal states, they have precious little to do with inventions, progress, technical gadgets. I swear I never saw so many smiling faces anywhere in the world as in the slums of Mumbai. And interestingly enough, while this was probably one of the poorest places I've visited, I got invited to a drink there, and that was the one place in Mumbai people didn't try to rip me off.

So I guess I don't see the real damage of not having nuclear power, but I do see the damage of having it.

You have some very good points there. It quite often quite seems that living standard != happiness.

I would say you often even can see happiness as inversely proportional to living standards, like as if it takes more "effort" to be happy if you "have a better life".


Even more off topic:

Sometimes in the western world it one might get the notion that it is strange that people do not realize that many in fact isolate themselves as they have less contact with people around them, than with say with people they only have contact with over Internet/Facebook. On a typical bus in most parts of Sweden for example, it would be nearly unthinkable for strangers to sit down close to one another if there is other seats available, but at the same time say 50 percent of them are constantly using their Facebook app on their smartphone (are Facebook friends real friends? ). Sometimes people open up, but that is an exception. People greeted with a "Hej" ("Hello"/"Hey") often do not even give a response, and most responses are largely limited to a "Hej, hej." (rather a "meh" than a "Hey, hey!").

[Thorsten]

I actually like this aspect of not having to make small talk - it's the same here in Finland. Doesn't mean people don't talk - we often visit other villagers, and then we all chat merrily. I've found this constant need to appear enthusiastic and to greet everyone cheerfully quite stressful when I was living in the US - Scandinavia suits my personality much better.

Personally, I define a friend as someone who would not hesitate to book a transatlantic flight for the next day if I say 'I really need help right now' or whom I would give 1000 Euros just for the asking without knowing whether they ever can pay it back.

I have a handful of those (and was smart enough to marry one of them...) and I guess facebook friends aren't of that type.

Someone actually compared facebook with a renaissance court - it's all about appearances, you have to appear smart, witty, happy, you have to show what a great life you lead, and it's this competition who can make the smartest remarks (and get the most likes), the best holiday photographs,... I don't think there's that much real that appears in facebook, it's all so carefully managed.

[swampthing]

Down south where am from it just seemed to come naturally. I never felt like it took much effort, here in Missouri on the other hand too many walk around like they have a chip on their shoulder and the attitude is contagious it seems.

[swampthing]

Thorsten it's about quality not quantity. I find Facebook very disturbing.

[vitos]

Whoa, so big topic about me.

Funny. Did't knew of.

Basically, idea to make MPClash protocol, making missiles visible just at screen flying, but not visible to anyone who did not installed protocol, came to me long ago, after some idiot had tried to shoot down my MiG-15 with missiles committed at FG, which had made my screen full of messages as "missile is 15 km from target... 14km..." and so. These nearly closed a view, and it was quite disturbing.

I was not asked something of "could I test my stuff", and did not done anything to provoke that, I just flew my model. Though, it was after Vostok-1 scandal, but scandal is not the reason to shoot someone with missile. So, that should be 2011-2012, and whole Su-15 model, started somewhere near, was made with idea to use it as protocol test pad partially.

Now such intense messaging is uncommon, still You may see messages as "missile of ... aimed at ...", 'missile of ... hit ...", spammed at common chat, visible to anyone not involved at all. Just fly at mp a bit where some military stuff flying - basically, everywhere - and You'll see these. Sometimes these messages are intense enough to annoy, and You need to set ignore option.

You may open Aircrats/f14-b/Nasal/fox2.nas file and see code:

Code (): Select all

var phrase = sprintf( me.type~" exploded: %01.1f", min_distance) ~ " meters from: " ~ me.callsign;
print(phrase~" Reason: "~reason~sprintf(" time %.1f", me.life_time));
if (min_distance < 65) {
me.sendMessage(phrase);
} else {
me.sendMessage(me.type~" missed "~me.callsign~": "~reason);
}

me.ai.getNode("valid", 1).setBoolValue(0);
me.animate_explosion();
me.Tgt = nil;
},

sendMessage: func (str) {
if (getprop("payload/armament/msg")) {
setprop("/sim/multiplay/chat", armament.defeatSpamFilter(str));
} else {
setprop("/sim/messages/atc", str);
},

there, to figure, that at current state simulator dictates military messages to any models around, civil ones including. Though, it says

Code (): Select all

# Future features:
#
# Make ground hitting weapons hit all nearby targets, not just what its locked on.
# ECM disturbance of getting radar lock.
# Lock on jam. (advanced feature)
# After FG gets HLA: stop using MP chat for hit messages.

but stays same way for ages, as

Last updated: (13/01/2017)

Stuart is cautiously optimistic that he may be able to provide the start of a HLA implementation quite soon, as one of the blocking factors may be resolved soon.

Mine are visible at my screens only, and for someone else who installed protocol and started it by adding some code at set file of exact model , and are not visible to anyone else at all. You need to do something to see these, other way these never would bother You at all - right opposite approach. Since

Sat Dec 12, 2015 2:08 pm
Updates:

Missiles. working trough mp for anyone with same model, visible to opponent, at screen with engine smoke and trasser, at warner with sound, and with lamp of catch at opponents radar, which allows some more or less realistic training. Plus fictional active radar missile for protocol tests - more efficient than normal, to check possible future additions of other, modern, missiles types.

and protocol was proposed as GPL version too somewhere near. It could be used for radar and missile of any model, but not one else did join me, I suppose, as not one committed protocol.

Though, it could sometimes crash FG running, but it does not do anything else than calling standard FG procedures from regular nasal code, so it's not to me, and could do that if it was installed and started intentionally only, with exact model running, never could not cause any problems to civil ones. While some seems to be civil Carreidas model could crash FG to anyone just closing near to see it, as something is wrong with it - and it's committed, so could be downloaded automatically by FG running, while it's up to You to set LOD or something to make it not bother You.

As I can remember, instead of just to use my protocol working, I was proposed to join these people with HLA - then mine stuff would not work for four years too, while I would be subordinated to people not as smart as me to make their stuff just work somewhere at least, but smart enough to make impression of hard working all those times. Of course I rejected - I can not stand people as those, and knew they are that way. Anyway, could not find other HLA implementation than missiles flying, it's directly mentioned at committed fox2.nas code of homing missile of model which is part of FG since ages and is major part of its distribution - just open gallery from main page of site, and it's first - so, it's not true that FG would be less military then, if it could work even.

If my proposition was accepted, then there would not be military spam at common chat for four years already.

Ignoring of fact, that mine solution is much more suitable than one which had committed into FG long ago, and polluting common mp chat everyday, and what mine works, instead of third, community proposed one; starting some topics by matter of existence of mine, with clear attempt to start a wave and rid of me somehow, is just clear example of unfairness of some person.

I suppose, manners of that person, and missiles spamming at common chat, are just of same style. What should I do with people which are not aggressive only, but unfair too? Nothing.

[Thorsten]

If my proposition was accepted, then there would not be military spam at common chat for four years already.

I can't recall any such proposition being made on the mailing list though - the fact of the matter however seems to be that you created an Su-15 (including your missile system) which is non-GPL, which is by the license excluded from being adapted inside FG, so naturally your license terms have been respected and nobody considered your system for wider use.

You really have to make up your mind what you want when you license...

[vitos]

I will not converse with starter of that topic, and will not read what he saying, as I proved another time, that what he said, that time at the beginning of this topic - I had seen that since quotation by other - is just not truth. And, after all, anyone could start mp or open code - of 3.0 version f-14b from 24.11.2012 including - to check it. Also You may open my MiG-15 of that time code, to check, could it bother someone, or not.

Me is not aggressor, and is not liar. Instead, I tried to propose some civil way - as response at aggression, and, partially, to check if that community is peaceful, or my senses are right.

Basically, if You are allowing one dude to shoot other with missile and to other not, by reasons as "we are against missiles", by strange way applied to some cases only, and not to initial ones, You are worse, than if You do allowing to both. Not only indirect aggressor, but unhonest liar too. At real life, where rules are just same to anyone, You would get by Your own one with it. With some commits it's just same way as with other things.

While I did proposed way to settle it down and filter these things out of civil airspace. And made really working solution. It's not used? I don't care. Worse ones are used anyway, for quite long time, and it all says much more bad things about You than me then.

[Thorsten]

I will not converse with starter of that topic,

You won't talk you yourself? Do you habitually do that otherwise?

You started the topic - it's just the split by a moderator that places me at first post, but I sure didn't start this thread.

[Necolatis]

Did take 2 ideas from you Vitos. But not damage from missiles, we came up with that ourselves.

February 2016: Used text messages from Alexii missiles to damage components of the aircraft we hit. (did not even know of SU-15 when made this)

Some months later learned that your SU-15 had missiles. Took a look, they were JSBSim, probably fly alot more realistic than ours.
Problem with that is that they require ALOT more info on the missile, like each control-surface drag/lift and movement speed and how much it can move. Not to mention body CoG and inertia etc etc.
We are never going to find that detailed info for the 50+ weapons we use. So we will stick with 'simple' Nasal weapons.
But we respect that you have created something cool.

We then found out that SU-15 missiles could be seen over MP. We took that idea and made our missiles visible over MP also. (Yes, we took your idea, but not your code)
Later we stopped using that, it was too limited when having 4 missiles flying to use lots of MP properties.

I also took another of your ideas from Mig15: https://github.com/NikolaiVChr/flightgear-saab-ja-37-viggen/blob/master/Aircraft/JA37/Nasal/crash-and-stress.nas
And yes, used your code and adapted it. Today its used on many JSBSim aircraft.
And you are listed as author.

But if I should be angry every time someone took one of my ideas then I could be angry all the time. In fact, I am happy every time someone does that.

As for spamming text messages, yeah I hate it too. We want to replace it, we are just a bit slow to do it.

You should be proud we took some ideas from you. Not angry.

[vitos]

You should be proud we took some ideas from you. Not angry.

Matter is MiG-15, which You taken code from, is of 2010. And then it was not included at main package, while much more unmade models did. Vostok-1, model of 2011, did not brought me any coworkers, topic was closed instead, while using its ideas Shuttle of 2015 or something had dozens of contributors. And then, with Su-15 of 2015, not one used my protocol, but took its ideas instead, while topics was closed by moderators.

I don't think these ideas are so innovative, though. I think these was innovative for that community. Which constantly preferred not to work with someone who brings it, but just took these instead.

As of anger, when someone acting that way it's not good, but it's not making me angry. It just led me to conclusion not to contribute anything new to that community. Initially I had doubts about reasonability of contributing to core - I do know C++, but made model instead, as it's easier, as test - then at means of GPL code providing, then of any code, of just conversations - now it's nothing at all. But it's cold solution, without any emotion behind it, just calculation, accounting that people, who are stupid enough not to comprehend someone with new ideas is valuable, are not worth to work with.

Later we stopped using that, it was too limited when having 4 missiles flying to use lots of MP properties.

My protocol uses 6 strings for 4 missiles, emission warning and catches information. Plane model itself is fully visible with that trough mp, with all gears and surfaces moving, canopy, nozzles and chute including, and You may notice if something was tear apart by improper use. And I do know how number could be reduced even further, but would not tell.

Maybe You just did not figured out how protocol works. D'You know what I mean?

We want to replace it, we are just a bit slow to do it.

Yeah, five years passed, still result is nothing. For some people such time is more than enough to create completely new simulator, and much better than that one is now. So I suppose current common solution with spam at chat is not suitable to me, as I made protocol and using it for these five years, but suits You really, as You don't.

Which does make me angry, it's when moderator closing my topic after some insulting at me going there, instead of putting at place people who did so, and then someone uses my ideas, and he is praised wildly with basically same thing for which I had insulted. Or when someone lying he did not took these, while whole his thing would never even started without mine.

Or, as that case, when someone acts to put me as aggressor knowingly, lying military stuff is not committed at simulator, while whole my thing was started after aggression at me with committed military stuff, and my thing was reasoned to make something to eliminate occasions as that, took me time, but did not committed, leaving things as is.

Though, solution is just same - not to bring anything at all to those people; but sometimes to say truth at forums, to make people know for whom they would spent their efforts. If I did knew for sure that community having such morale, I would never start to make something with at all. So, let they do know.

[Thorsten]

Matter is MiG-15, which You taken code from, is of 2010. And then it was not included at main package, while much more unmade models did. Vostok-1, model of 2011, did not brought me any coworkers, topic was closed instead, while using its ideas Shuttle of 2015 or something had dozens of contributors

Again, that's definitely not the matter - as you've been explained a few times, the Shuttle has not used ideas from Vostok-1. I'm not sure why you opt to repeat that lie.

You cast the whole thing as a conspiracy - the community studies your brilliant work, then decides to get rid of you and then implement all ideas without you.

In reality, it's a coincidence of unrelated things:

a) You don't have any co-worker because you refuse to work with people. The option they get is to work for you, do exactly as you say. It's your way or the highway (not that I hadn't tried). And the problem with that is that you're often off on a wrong tangent. I wrote a fair share of FGs rendering code and I know how to implement things in there - yet when I started to explain that to you, you insisted that you know best. Naturally I don't work for you under these conditions and the end result is that you have a plane with half the framerate of another one with comparable visuals and complexity.

So you have to look in the mirror to understand why other projects have many active contributors - it requires the ability to team-work.

(Actually, it's not even true that there were no co-workers - there are significant contributions to Vostok-1 which you have not authored (automated guidance, visualization of staging, thruster flames and smoke visuals,...) - the issue isn't that people wouldn't want to contribute, it's just impossible to deal with your attitude).

b) if any of your forum threads get closed or you get a ban, it's because of what happens inside that thread. If you attack others, provoke a flamewar or generally refuse to read what is said, then you find a thread closed sooner or later. What your contribution track record ottherwise is does not matter.

The fact of the matter though is that you've been given ample room in this forum to detail your thoughts.

c) You're not the lone genius of FG who alone is able to figure things out and all others have to take your ideas. Long before you created the MiG-15bis, there was another Korean war fighter aircraft by David Culp - the F-86, also a (for the time) really nice JSBSim model.

Should we now assume that you could not possibly have created the MiG-15 on your own on the grounds that you somehow must have used the model that existed before? If we're to credit you for the ability to come up with something yourself - why is it so hard for you to accept that others can do the same?

d) The 'main package' inclusion means that back when the FG distribution still came pre-packed with 5 aircraft rather than the launcher and its automated download of the catalog, the MiG-15 wasn't one of these. So although being under discussion, it wasn't actually picked among the 300+ other aircraft to represent the 'fighter jet' category. To bring this up after so many years serving as an example of how greatly the communty wronged you is plain ridiculous. I'm not sure what kind of mindset is required to even see this as an insult, just over-inflated ego doesn't seem to cover it.

accounting that people, who are stupid enough not to comprehend someone with new ideas is valuable

And there we go again with the lone genius.

In reality, and idea is not valuable because it is new, it also needs to be good. And in a collaborative project, the most valuable skill is to be able to collaborate.

People comprehend well that you could have contributed quite a lot - but they also comprehend well that with your inability to actually collaborate, that won't happen, so they sigh and continue without you.

For some people such time is more than enough to create completely new simulator, and much better than that one is now.

Yeah, for instance for people at Microsoft who do this as a full-time job and have a million-dollar budget to work with. The people in the OpenSource world who do this are, sadly, completely fictional.

as that case, when someone acts to put me as aggressor knowingly, lying military stuff is not committed at simulator

I think the general consensus has shifted during the last years, as more and more of the active contributors are actually doing military aviation. It's in the nature of such things to happen in OpenSource, and the situation 6 years ago isn't the situation today.

not to bring anything at all to those people; but sometimes to say truth at forums, to make people know for whom they would spent their efforts

I think the observation that there's projects with a large number of contributors but these are not yours tells you that people are quite aware with whom (not for whom) they want to work. I don't think your conspiracy theories or rants won't change that in any way.

[vitos]

Don't know, what that dude said, but he did not started topic as "we got to do something with annoying military messages at mp chat", he started topic "Military simulation (from Su-15 Screenshots)".

Writing here, let me requote this,

As for the missile work, you may not be aware of it, but there's a consensus among the core contributors that FG is supposed to be a civilian simulator

while all Su-15 was started after someone shoot me at mp with committed to basic packages model missile way allowing me, and any other civil pilot at mp around, to know about that annoyingly, and that committed missile flying everyday at mp, less annoyingly, still annoyingly way. If someone shoot it around, does not matter at whom, You has message at Your screen, just fly mp at populated time and place, and You'll see these.

And that dude is quite same person, who made next orbital craft at FG after mine Vostok-1. And he has some credibility with that community after that, while me is not.

So, whole his messages becomes having meaning as "We officially against that thing, and recommending to close Your eyes at this other thing is existed, and was existed before that thing. Does not matter if that thing would remove this thing from Your sight, it's bad just because it deals with same as this thing, which You should just ignore. Also notice way my position was bought, and what's that other guy is not welcome here.".

For me that's more than enough to conclusion, and I will not change my mind.

[Thorsten]

Don't know, what that dude said, but he did not started topic as "we got to do something with annoying military messages at chat", he started topic "Military simulation (from Su-15 Screenshots)".

Actually, as already explained, you started the topic and a moderator branched it. I didn't start anything.

And he has some credibility with that community, while me is not.

You might ask yourself why...

[vitos]

My mind is more about community, which that dude suits more than me. So relax, kid. Yeah, You are You know who You are, but You are good for same people as You.