Re: [Flightgear-devel] Minor logic bug re: starting location initialization?

2004-07-28 Thread Jim Wilson
Chris Metzler said:


 Hi.  It appears that in initialization, if an airport and heading are
 specified on the command line, a runway is immediately chosen based
 upon the heading, and latitude/longitude is set to that runway's
 threshhold.  This is sensible if the user is starting *at* the airport;
 but if the user is starting somewhere else, and using the airport
 as a reference point via --offset-azimuth and --offset-distance,
 the result is that starting position can jump by a large amount
 simply by changing the starting heading.  Changing the heading
 changes the runway fg_init thinks is relevant, and the offset is
 taken from the position that's been set to an irrelevant runway
 threshold location.
 
 I ran into this tonight while trying to contrive some aliases for
 quickly starting FlightGear with the ufo at a specific vantage
 point near a structure I'm modelling.  I decided I wanted to be on
 the other side of the structure, so I added a couple of degrees to
 my --offset-azimuth value, and changed my heading by 90 degrees.
 Upon restart, I didn't see the structure.  I spent quite a while
 trying to determine why it wasn't loading before I realized that
 it *was* loading, and that the reason I didn't see it was because
 I was a kilometer and a half away from where I thought.
 
 Not very important at all -- it probably takes a fairly contrived
 situation (like mine) to get bit by this -- but figured I'd
 mention it.
 

True, but it is actually it is a fairly contrived feature.  And I could see a
user wanting to start on a downwind leg or something like that.  I'd call it a
bug as well.  At the very least we ought to be able to change the behavior
during air starts,  but then how would we choose a location to offset from?

What happens if you specify a runway?

Best,

Jim


___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d


Re: [Flightgear-devel] Minor logic bug re: starting location initialization?

2004-07-28 Thread Chris Metzler
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:54:28 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Chris Metzler wrote:
 Hi.  It appears that in initialization, if an airport and heading are
 specified on the command line, a runway is immediately chosen based
 upon the heading, and latitude/longitude is set to that runway's
 threshhold.  This is sensible if the user is starting *at* the
 airport; but if the user is starting somewhere else, and using the
 airport as a reference point via --offset-azimuth and
 --offset-distance, the result is that starting position can jump by a
 large amount simply by changing the starting heading.  Changing the
 heading changes the runway fg_init thinks is relevant, and the offset
 is taken from the position that's been set to an irrelevant runway
 threshold location.
 
 Not very important at all -- it probably takes a fairly contrived
 situation (like mine) to get bit by this -- but figured I'd
 mention it.
 
 I think the options you mention are explicitly to align to the airport. 
 A better approach would probably be to specify --lat and --lon instead.

I agree completely that specifying latlong is a much better option
for what I was trying to do.  I ended up doing it that way because
I had initially forgotten specifying position was possible, and had
been flying to the scenery from the nearest airport to the scenery
in the ufo each time before remembering there were simpler options;
so the first thing that occurred to me was to do it relative to
the airport.  But you're right:  specifying latlong makes more sense.

But it's not announced in the command line option list, or the getstart
files, that --heading is really for use only at an airport; and there
are circumstances where one would want to use the heading parameter
without it assuming a runway.  For instance, I've been using it in
landing practice, where I start out with a position relative to the
airport plus a starting heading that's not necessarily correlated with
the runway I want to use (so I have to get myself around and onto the
correct pattern/course).  Because I suck, I start myself far enough out
that the jumps in position when I change heading aren't a big deal
(apparently, since I never noticed this before now!).  Like I said,
it's absolutely not a big deal.  But I can imagine it catching someone.

-c

-- 
Chris Metzler   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(remove snip-me. to email)

As a child I understood how to give; I have forgotten this grace since I
have become civilized. - Chief Luther Standing Bear


pgpvkPAWaoyGy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d