Andy Ross writes:

 > Whatever convention we pick should be an easily explainable and
 > identifiable from the *shape* of the airframe only.  Not everyone
 > has a POH handy, very few people have W&B or C.G. numbers, and even
 > things like the centerline are subject to argument on some
 > aircraft.  Referencing the ground plane is especially bad, since
 > the gear are going to compress differently depending on load.
 > 
 > Remember that many/most 3D model authors aren't particularly
 > interested in aerodynamics, and may very well be working from
 > photographs and 3-views only.  Forcing these people to look up a
 > reference datum from an unfamiliar source is only going to
 > discourage them.

Someone has to write an aerodynamic model before a 3D model is any
use.  The aero designer needs to publish the reference datum she used
in a README, and then the 3D designer can simply follow it.  Actually,
all of the aero designers will have to agree on the datum.  I can live
with a modified version of Jon's suggestion:

  x-origin as specified by the TCDS (free online) and/or POH,
    defaulting to the tip of the nose/spinner when not available.
  y-origin at the centreline.
  z-origin at the height of the nose tip.

 > And, quite honestly, what's the actual advantage to using a
 > reference datum anyway?  No one does weight and balance
 > calculations in Blender. :)

Well, it does give you the location of (say) the back seat on the
X-axis.  More importantly, once we implement dynamic W&B more easily
in FlightGear, it will be nice to have the model mesh up; even now,
using the published W&B datum (from the TCDS or the POH) gives you a
few numbers more easily in the aero modelling (like where to put
the fuel tank) -- if you're using the same datum, errors will be
easier to spot and the file will be easier for others to understand.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/

_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to