[Flightgear-devel] Alias in 3d instruments
Hi! I tried to use the alias feature in a 3d instrument config-file: PropertyList pathfuel_gauge.ac/path params tank-selectconsumables/fuel/tank[0]/level-lbs/tank-select /params animation typerotate/type object-nameNeedle/object-name property alias=../../params/tank-select/ interpolation entryind0/inddep-216/dep/entry entryind700/inddep-90/dep/entry entryind1400/inddep36/dep/entry /interpolation axis x-1/x y0/y z0/z /axis /animation /PropertyList And that worked OK, the gauge showed the contents of tank[0], the default. When I wanted to show the contents of another tank (tank[1]) , I used the same approach as for 2d instruments. I added this to the model config file: model nameFUEL/name pathAircraft/king-air-200/Instruments/fuel_gauge.xml/path params tank-selectconsumables/fuel/tank[1]/level-lbs/tank-select /params offsets x-m2.809/x-m y-m-0.757/y-m z-m0.556/z-m pitch-deg-38/pitch-deg heading-deg90/heading-deg /offsets /model But the gauge still shows the contents of tank[0]. Is the alias feature unavailable for 3d instruments, or have I used the params tag incorrectly in the model config file? I was planning on using the alias feature for a lot of switches, instead of making a lot of 3d-instrument config files. -- Roy Vegard Ovesen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] flightgear and hardware: mailinglist created
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 09:56:08 -0700 (PDT) Gene Buckle wrote: And then... simpits is not fgfs specific. Most discussions tend to be fighter pit based and mostly on MSFS or Falcon. There's not a whole lot of FGFS discussion because it's not a drop and go solution like MSFS or Falcon (and soon to be Lock On: Modern Air Combat) is. If it was easier for non-programmer types to interface to, I'm sure more people would use it. Having a FlightGear cockpit evangelist wouldn't hurt either. :) Two aspects to the problem: 1) Not a good interface for hardware, and not much of a demand to design one (kind of the chicken and egg argument) 2) and trying to design one can be a little exasperating. The code keeps changing and things get broken. (e.g, I was working on a 747 braking system and now I see in release 0.9.4 the control interface has reverted to a single left brake and right brake -- go figure). I've got an interface card that runs with a linux driver, but it's not a direct connect to FG. Seems FG needs something akin to the EPIC cards and a defined, stable, and backward compatible interface definition. Besides we're running out of keystrokes ;-) Kind of doubt if FG and cockpit builders will ever reach critical mass Regards John W. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spoiler control
On Sunday 30 May 2004 01:46, Innis Cunningham wrote: Hi Lee Lee Elliott writes In general I'd say no, but specific a/c could be configured to have this feature. Spoilers and speed-brakes have different functions so a link between them wouldn't seem to be appropriate to me. Not true on most Boeing commercial A/C the speed brake and spoiler function are very much intergrated as they use the same control surfaces. And seeing the B52 is a Boeing product and has no ailerons I would not be surprised if it did not do the same but I could be wrong. To use spoilers as roll control you would only need a property between 0 and 1 as the spoilers only go to faired with A/C I am farmilar with. This should be able to be implemented with the current property tree by summing the output of the aileron property with the speed brake position. With regard to the L/E slats the ones I am familar with are either in or out predicated on flap position.This does not mean that all slats are out at once. The 747 has two sets one that comes out at 1deg flap and the remaing set at 5deg. So if what you are proposing will lead to a more flexable system then. I am all for it. Was there a specific a/c that prompted your question? Probably MD11 but that is just a guess(LOL). LeeE Cheers Innis As I understand it, the spoilers are primarily to dump lift, although they'll usually increase drag as well, producing a braking effect, so on a/c that only have spoiler surfaces and no specific speed-brake surfaces the spoilers may be used to give a braking effect. The primary purpose of speed-brakes, on the other hand, is to dump speed but not necessarily lift. Ideally, the course of the a/c shouldn't change when speed-brakes are used but spoilers should increase sink and this is how the spoilers can be used differentially for roll control - on the Buffs, raising the spoilers on one wing only will reduce the lift on that wing causing it to drop, producing roll. On most of the a/c I can think of, off hand, the speed-brakes are fuselage mounted, to avoid effecting the lift from the wings I guess, but spoilers out of necessity must be wing mounted if they're going to reduce lift from the wing. Having said that, the Avro Vulcan has speed-brakes mounted in the wings that extend vertically above the upper wing, but when they're fully deployed they are clear of the airflow over the upper wing surface. The problem with using spoilers for roll control in YASim is that because the spoiler range is clamped to 0 to +1, when you 'split' the input for differential control it only works on one side of the a/c - through the 0 to +1 range - to get it to work on the other side it needs a -1 to 0 range but it can't do it, or at least it couldn't when I last tried. That was on the YF-23, and I was trying to use the flaps differentially, instead of the spoilers, but I think the same thing applies (the YF-23 used the ailerons and flaps in opposition for speed-braking and could deploy them on one side only for manuevering). The change I proposed just really allows customisable spoiler settings for each a/c, as can be done with the flaps - I needed this for the B-52F, which has seven segment spoilers with seven positions (although from a few pics I found it didn't look like the segments are fully raised one at a time but progressively 'ripple' up, with several segments at intermediate positions, but that's beside the point). Re the slats: I realised that there currently isn't a mapping for them already assigned in keyboard.xml and as this is a bit of a hot topic atm I'm not going to try suggesting one;) so for the time being the the change I proposed will only effect the spoilers. As Andy R. pointed out, you can assign several control inputs to a surface and I've done just that with the BAC-TSR2 and YF-23, where the aileron and rudder control inputs, respectively, are bound to the elevator surfaces, so you could have the ailerons controlling the spoiler surfaces, except for the 0 to +1 range restriction. To get the effect you want with the slats I think you would need to use non-linear interpolation on the flaps control input to the slats and think you could do this in YASim using src dst tags. I've only used them for scaling control inputs i.e. src0=-1 src1=1 dst0=-0.1 dst=0.1 to scale the control input by a tenth but I just quickly tried adding a third pair e.g. src0, src1, src2 dst0, dst1, dst2, and it seemed to work, so you might be able to get the interpolation you need that way. Of course, I might have just made a mistake when I tried to operate the flaps differentially:) LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Tears along lines delineating bucket widths
On the 25th of May, I discovered that FlightGear has tears along the 22nd, 62nd, 76th, 83rd, 86th and 88th latitudes north or south out at sea, and everything between the 89th latitude north or south and the adjacent pole is completely missing (i.e. no sea or ground). These are that latitudes in sg_bucket_span() in simgear/bucket/newbucket.hxx in SimGear. I haven't looked deep enough to locate the source of this problem. I suspect that another problem - every tile with its north edge on the 22nd latitude south having its north-west corner missing - is related to this. This last problem is also showing up in the tiles made by Map from the Atlas package. Here's a diagram: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 . . . . . . . . . 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 0 0 2 5 7 0 2 5 7 0 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 s21.750 +---+ |###| s21.875 |###| |###| s22.000 +-+#+-+#+-+#+-+#+ |/##|/##|/##|/##| s22.125 +###+###+###+###+ |###| s22.250 +---+ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] SID, STAR, and airway data
On Wednesday 26 May 2004 23:21, David Megginson wrote: I agree. Unfortunately, you will find that many SIDs consist of something along the lines of - fly runway heading - maintain 3,000 ft unless otherwise advised by ATC - expect vectors on course Similarily, many STARs simply provide an altitude and a starting point, and then state that the pilot should expect vectors to the runway. Neither will be too useful for AI work, I'm afraid. I hadn't really thought about that so much. However, while these SIDs and STARs wouldn't be very useful for AI traffic, they probably wouldn't be too problematic either. As long as there is an initial and a final waypoint, the expect vectors would then simply be the most direct route between these two. I'm currently again leaning more toward a straight-in straight-out take on AI traffic as the first step, because that would simplify automatic flight plan/waypoint generation by quite a bit. Then next, if we have the data available on approach and departure procedures, these could be used instead. Cheers, Durk ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spoiler control
Hi Lee Lee Elliott writes As I understand it, the spoilers are primarily to dump lift, although they'll usually increase drag as well, producing a braking effect, so on a/c that only have spoiler surfaces and no specific speed-brake surfaces the spoilers may be used to give a braking effect. The primary purpose of speed-brakes, on the other hand, is to dump speed but not necessarily lift. As most commercial aircraft don't have separate speedbrakes(yes I know aircraft like the Bae-146 have fuse mounted speedbrakes) the one surface does both.In fact on landing at touch down the the spoilers/speedbrakes are fully extended in this case they are acting as both lift destroyers and speedbrake at the same time. Have you checked with regard to the B52, if you say they have no ailerons, if the spoilers are not infact also used as a speedbrakes. The problem with using spoilers for roll control in YASim is that because the spoiler range is clamped to 0 to +1, when you 'split' the input for differential control it only works on one side of the a/c - through the 0 to +1 range - to get it to work on the other side it needs a -1 to 0 range but it can't do it, or at least it couldn't when I last tried. That was on the YF-23, and I was trying to use the flaps differentially, instead of the spoilers, but I think the same thing applies (the YF-23 used the ailerons and flaps in opposition for speed-braking and could deploy them on one side only for manuevering). I dont know the yasim system but couldn't both left and right wing spoilers have +1-0 or vice versa and be activated off the aileron property so as when the aileron property is plus the spoilers on onw wing extend and whe the aileron property is minus the spoiler on the other wing are extended. Just a thought but as I say I dont know the system. LeE cheers Innis _ Open an Online Savings Account today collect a bonus $30*! http://clk.atdmt.com/1DG/go/hsb005000991dg/direct/01/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
