<snip a lot of good reasons for using an fdm/autopilot combination for AI traffic from David Megginson and Alex Perry>
(Following an OS re-install I can reply now!) OK, I can see the point of wanting a proper simulation when within reasonably close visual distance of the target. My concern was that if there were a lot of traffic being simulated, a lot of it known to the pilot only through the radio communication, then using an fdm thats updating at 120Hz and simulating right down to the exhaust gas temperature is overkill, and that using a greately simplified model with basically a look-up table of typical speeds and climb/descent rates would allow the additional traffic to be updated in a queue with, say, only one plane updated per timestep if far enough away from the viewer. My concern was that updating a number of fdms per timestep could possibly introduce a noticable delay. I can accept the fact that when reasonably close the realistic behaviour of other aircraft provides useful piloting cues - I hadn't recognised the full significance of that. I personally think that a switch from a full autopilot/fdm combination to a greatly simplified where-to-fly/how-to-fly logic when beyond a certain distance/direction from the user is probably eventually justified (IMHO). Still, regardless of how much get ripped out and rewritten eventually, its still progress for now... Cheers - Dave _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel