On Saturday 10 January 2004 15:47, Andy Ross wrote: > Alan King wrote: > > The 'nose' is a bad choice for either the viewing center or the FDM > > center. > > Except for the obvious fact that it's 100% unambiguous. It's not > uncommon for the FDM definition and 3D model to be done by different > authors. Take 21 people and ask them to identify the "POS" (or > quarter chord point, or aerodynamic center, or even c.g.) and you'll > get 21 different answers. Any child over six can find the tip of the > nose on a photograph. > > Having the FDM coordinates and model coordinates match up is > critically important for collision issues like gear compression. > > Andy
The tip of the nose is fine with me but we need to clarify whether the tip includes any nose-mounted pitots or probes. I'm specifically thinking about the TSR2 here, which has a nose mounted probe but there will probably be others, if there aren't already. This is probably more of an issue for experimental a/c as most production a/c seem to have them elsewhere, which makes sense to me as it'll cut down the ground-space requirements. I'd be inclined to ignore any probes and specify the tip of the nose 'cone', or fuselage. I'm not sure that nose mounted probes are always drawn to the correct size in the drawings we use for modelling, so it's probably not a good idea to use them as reference points. LeeE _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
