Curt,
Yes, there's a way to implement *anything* using the JSBSim control system
components (that's by design). What is the spec for autobrakes?
In any case, JSBSim needs the ability to read the raw control inputs
directly, if it is desired to process those within JSBSim itself (again,
-Original Message-
From: leee [mailto:l...@spatial.plus.com]
Did you try scheduling your autoplilot´s height-error to pitch
demand gain with 1/V (speed inverse) ?
Alan
Re-read the end of the paragraph after the one you quoted above ;-)
LeeE
Red Face (me that is)
I
On Wednesday 14 Oct 2009, Alan Teeder wrote:
-Original Message-
From: leee [mailto:l...@spatial.plus.com]
Did you try scheduling your autoplilot´s height-error to
pitch demand gain with 1/V (speed inverse) ?
Alan
Re-read the end of the paragraph after the one you
leee wrote:
On Saturday 10 Oct 2009, Pete Morgan wrote:
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Saturday 10 October 2009 22:33:01 Curtis Olson wrote:
Really, this is all in how the autopilot is tuned and
configured.
FlightGear doesn't model realistic control surface deflection
rates
On Monday 12 Oct 2009, Alan Teeder wrote:
-Original Message-
For the faster and more
maneuverable military jets though, I found that I really needed
guaranteed higher rates to both ensure a crisp response and
avoid instabilities. For example, I could tune an
altitude-hold
On Sunday 11 Oct 2009, Alan Teeder wrote:
-Original Message-
From: leee [mailto:l...@spatial.plus.com]
ie if u stick in a new value to the FDM then it will react..
That sucks in my oioiion.. I how have to create my own craqo
to make the model. that sucks to me..
pete
-Original Message-
For the faster and more
maneuverable military jets though, I found that I really needed
guaranteed higher rates to both ensure a crisp response and avoid
instabilities. For example, I could tune an altitude-hold cascade
that would work fine at speeds up to 400kt
On Saturday 10 Oct 2009, Pete Morgan wrote:
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Saturday 10 October 2009 22:33:01 Curtis Olson wrote:
Really, this is all in how the autopilot is tuned and
configured.
FlightGear doesn't model realistic control surface deflection
rates so it's possible to
-Original Message-
From: leee [mailto:l...@spatial.plus.com]
ie if u stick in a new value to the FDM then it will react.. That
sucks in my oioiion.. I how have to create my own craqo to make
the model. that sucks to me..
pete
You really need to chill a bit. Just moaning
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Alan Teeder wrote:
First, thanks for the quick into to Flightgear´s autopilot.
I think that your premise that autopilots need to run at very high frame
rates is not realistic.
When I first got into autopilots and simulation, back in the 60´s, all of
our
On Sunday 11 Oct 2009 4:30:08 pm Curtis Olson wrote:
I think that your premise that autopilots need to run at very high frame
rates is not realistic.
When I first got into autopilots and simulation, back in the 60´s, all of
our models had as the final element a 0.1 second low pass filter
I'm working on my motion sim for xmas. Its powered by a vacum cleaner atmo..
One BIG BIG problem - am basicng the cockpit on Bravo and 787
The autopilot heading bug is very violent and JERKS to direction..
How can we solve that problem please because on my motion platform, I
cant keep up with
I haven't looked at these autopilot configurations (at least not for a long
time) but off the top of my head, I think this can all be fixed by tuning
the autopilot.
For instance, lowering the max aileron deflection from (-1 ... 1) down to
maybe (-0.1 ... 0.1) might be an interesting thing to
Actually my motion platform is at the momnet I am taking it one step at
a time.. ie so far its banking left to right by around 10 degree's which
kinda exagarrated the sim and is useful..
Anyone as a pilot at the moment can tip the aircfaft to lbank.. However
this jerk needs solving.. SO what
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Autopilot and violent roll
Actually my motion platform is at the momnet I am taking it one step at
a time.. ie so far its banking left to right by around 10 degree's which
kinda exagarrated the sim and is useful..
Anyone
We need to define the autopilot properly and define its behaviour.
At it's most basic I expect the autpoilot to fullfil the following
functions.
1) maintain a heading - ie go that way direction - this jerks
violently in the sim
2) Altitude hold - this works, and on the motion platform it works
and a mega fault.
pete
-Original Message-
From: Pete Morgan [mailto:ac...@daffodil.uk.com]
Sent: 10 October 2009 20:18
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Autopilot and violent roll
Actually my motion platform is at the momnet I am taking it one step
This is a problem across the whole system and a mega
fault.
If you mean this sudden banking when after reaching a new wayoint: yes. It is
known and is still on the bug-list on flightgear.org anywhere.
There were some aircraft authors who had a workaround with nasal- to my
knowledge the
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Heiko Schulz aeitsch...@yahoo.de wrote:
If you mean this sudden banking when after reaching a new wayoint: yes. It
is known and is still on the bug-list on flightgear.org anywhere.
There were some aircraft authors who had a workaround with nasal- to my
On Saturday 10 October 2009 22:33:01 Curtis Olson wrote:
Really, this is all in how the autopilot is tuned and configured.
FlightGear doesn't model realistic control surface deflection rates so it's
possible to command an instantaneous deflection of the control surfaces.
Control surface
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Saturday 10 October 2009 22:33:01 Curtis Olson wrote:
Really, this is all in how the autopilot is tuned and configured.
FlightGear doesn't model realistic control surface deflection rates so it's
possible to command an instantaneous deflection of the control
From: Roy Vegard Ovesen [mailto:roy.v.ove...@haugnett.no]
Control surface deflection rate can be limited by inserting a low-pass
filter
between the output of the final PID-controller and the control surface.
THis
is done in the autopilot config file.
For JSBSim aircraft, you also have
On 2 Oct 2009, at 01:14, Jacob Burbach wrote:
I must be losing my mind then, I had both Ki and Kd in pid-controller
without errors previously, and changing the values certainly had an
effect.
The values haven't had any affect, before or after my change. I
haven't checked the full history.
In recent cvs I get errors about having Ki or Kd in my pid
controllers config. This is unfortunate, as tuning of those values
stabilized my autopilot considerably. I wonder if someone can explain
what changes are going on in that area of code. Are Ki and Kd forever
gone, and what path should I
On 1 Oct 2009, at 17:54, Jacob Burbach wrote:
In recent cvs I get errors about having Ki or Kd in my pid
controllers config. This is unfortunate, as tuning of those values
stabilized my autopilot considerably. I wonder if someone can explain
what changes are going on in that area of code.
Will get error such as
malformed autopilot definition - unrecognized config node:Ki in section
Heading Bug Hold
Failed to load autopilot configuration: /path/to/autopilot.xml:XMLAuto:
unrecognized config node:Ki
Removing Ki, it will then complain about Kd. Can remove Ki and Kd and
it will
Jacob Burbach wrote:
In recent cvs I get errors about having Ki or Kd in my pid
controllers config. This is unfortunate, as tuning of those values
stabilized my autopilot considerably. I wonder if someone can explain
what changes are going on in that area of code. Are Ki and Kd forever
On 1 Oct 2009, at 22:41, Michael Smith wrote:
This is the error I get:
Failed to load autopilot configuration:
/home/michael/root/FGData/Aircraft/f-14b/f-14b-AFCS.xml:XMLAuto:
unrecognized config node:Ki
There seems to be some confusion here.
My changes do *not* change the functional
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Jacob Burbach jmburb...@gmail.com wrote:
In recent cvs I get errors about having Ki or Kd in my pid
controllers config. This is unfortunate, as tuning of those values
stabilized my autopilot considerably. I wonder if someone can explain
what changes are going
I must be losing my mind then, I had both Ki and Kd in pid-controller
without errors previously, and changing the values certainly had an
effect.
On another note, theres a bug in FGAutoBrake::postInit. It's using
_weightOnWheelsNode without checking if it is actually a valid
pointer. With atc
SydSandy wrote:
Hi guys , Had an idea with the autopilot menu , but before I dive in
, thought I'd better ask if this would even be desirable... I'd like
to add , in an aircraft set file some options like this:
autopilot config heading label n=0 type=stringHeading
Hold label action n=0
alexis bory wrote:
SydSandy wrote:
Hi guys , Had an idea with the autopilot menu , but before I dive in
, thought I'd better ask if this would even be desirable... I'd like
to add , in an aircraft set file some options like this:
autopilot config heading label n=0 type=stringHeading
Hi guys ,
Had an idea with the autopilot menu , but before I dive in , thought I'd
better ask if this would even be desirable...
I'd like to add , in an aircraft set file some options like this:
autopilot
config
heading
label n=0
Hi guys,
I posted a patch to enable bank limit controls with the autopilot ,
could someone with source write access please apply it , or if there is
a valid reason not to , let me know so I can find another method ? I do
realize everyone is busy with thier own projects , so it would be
--- Syd [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Hi guys,
I posted a patch to enable bank limit controls with
the autopilot ,
could someone with source write access please apply
it , or if there is
a valid reason not to , let me know so I can find
another method ? I do
realize everyone is busy
Heiko Schulz wrote:
sounds good- that's what I need- but where is the patch?
I guess he refers to his post from March 30.
Regards,
Tobias
begin:vcard
fn:Tobias Ramforth
n:Ramforth;Tobias
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard
signature.asc
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
sounds good- that's what I need- but where is the
patch?
I guess he refers to his post from March 30.
Regards,
Oh- thanks!
I just noticed, that I deleted it... Hopefully Sys can
upload it again
still in
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
schrieb:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
sounds good- that's what I need- but where is
the
patch?
I guess he refers to his post from March 30.
Regards,
Oh- thanks!
I just
--- LeeE [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 21:44, Heiko Schulz
wrote:
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
schrieb:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
schrieb:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
sounds good- that's what I need- but where
is
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 21:44, Heiko Schulz wrote:
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
schrieb:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
sounds good- that's what I need- but where is
the
patch?
I guess he refers to his
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 22:23, Heiko Schulz wrote:
--- LeeE [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 21:44, Heiko Schulz
wrote:
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
schrieb:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
schrieb:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
--- LeeE [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
On Wednesday 02 April 2008 21:44, Heiko Schulz
wrote:
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
schrieb:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
--- Tobias Ramforth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
schrieb:
Heiko
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 20:51:08 -0700
SydSandy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all ,
I've been trying to change the xmlautopilot to use prop and value
for the u_min and u_max properties , and currently have quite a mess on my
hands right now :)
The idea is to have a min and max property to
On Sunday 16 March 2008 03:51, SydSandy wrote:
Hi all ,
I've been trying to change the xmlautopilot to use prop and
value for the u_min and u_max properties , and currently have
quite a mess on my hands right now :) The idea is to have a min
and max property to control bank-limit /
On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:59:18 +
LeeE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday 16 March 2008 21:52, LeeE wrote:
On Sunday 16 March 2008 03:51, SydSandy wrote:
Hi all ,
I've been trying to change the xmlautopilot to use prop and
value for the u_min and u_max properties , and currently
Hi all ,
I've been trying to change the xmlautopilot to use prop and value
for the u_min and u_max properties , and currently have quite a mess on my
hands right now :)
The idea is to have a min and max property to control bank-limit / pitch with a
panel knob ...
setting the u_min and
On Sunday 13 January 2008 05:14, Ron Jensen wrote:
On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 21:22 +, LeeE wrote:
Oops - forgot to mention also that with '--log-level=info' the
'Processing registration HA-LHA with callsign MAH096/5'
type messages still seem to be continuously output. Is this
right?
On Sunday 13 January 2008 06:46, K. Hoercher wrote:
On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 09:22:15PM +, LeeE wrote:
On Saturday 12 January 2008 21:12, LeeE wrote:
On Saturday 12 January 2008 15:28, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Jan 11, 2008 7:09 PM, LeeE wrote:
From just a quick check, removing the
On Jan 11, 2008 7:09 PM, LeeE wrote:
Spoke too soon - I thought I'd update SG FG from cvs before trying
this and now FG won't get past the 'loading scenery objects' phase.
My understanding is that OSG 2.2.0 and earlier has some bugs that cause
problems with the new OSG random objects code.
On Saturday 12 January 2008 15:28, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Jan 11, 2008 7:09 PM, LeeE wrote:
Spoke too soon - I thought I'd update SG FG from cvs before
trying this and now FG won't get past the 'loading scenery
objects' phase.
My understanding is that OSG 2.2.0 and earlier has some bugs
On Saturday 12 January 2008 21:12, LeeE wrote:
On Saturday 12 January 2008 15:28, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Jan 11, 2008 7:09 PM, LeeE wrote:
Spoke too soon - I thought I'd update SG FG from cvs before
trying this and now FG won't get past the 'loading scenery
objects' phase.
My
On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 21:22 +, LeeE wrote:
Oops - forgot to mention also that with '--log-level=info' the
'Processing registration HA-LHA with callsign MAH096/5'
type messages still seem to be continuously output. Is this right?
It makes the output from --log-level=info pretty
On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 09:22:15PM +, LeeE wrote:
On Saturday 12 January 2008 21:12, LeeE wrote:
On Saturday 12 January 2008 15:28, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Jan 11, 2008 7:09 PM, LeeE wrote:
From just a quick check, removing the explicit call to build()
after
init() in reinit()
Hi all,
I've been experiencing some more weird behaviour from pid
controllers and filters.
I had a pid controller that was working ok (but had some room for
further fine-tuning) but after amending the config and re-loading
the autopilot it seemed to be working randomly. I reverted back to
On Jan 11, 2008 3:14 PM, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Friday 11 January 2008, LeeE wrote:
I've had a look at the relevant code but as I'm not up on c++ I'm
not sure about what I'm looking at but at lines 798-802 there's:
void FGXMLAutopilot::reinit() {
components.clear();
On Friday 11 January 2008, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Jan 11, 2008 3:14 PM, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Try commenting out the call to build() from the code that you quoted
above.
build() is called inside init(), so there should be no need to call it
again
after init().
I suspect the build()
On Friday 11 January 2008 21:50, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Jan 11, 2008 3:14 PM, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Friday 11 January 2008, LeeE wrote:
I've had a look at the relevant code but as I'm not up on c++
I'm not sure about what I'm looking at but at lines 798-802
there's:
void
On Friday 11 January 2008 23:49, LeeE wrote:
On Friday 11 January 2008 21:50, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Jan 11, 2008 3:14 PM, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Friday 11 January 2008, LeeE wrote:
I've had a look at the relevant code but as I'm not up on
c++ I'm not sure about what I'm looking
On Wednesday 19 December 2007 16:38, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
LeeE wrote:
On Wednesday 19 December 2007 12:56, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
LeeE wrote:
On Tuesday 18 December 2007 22:52, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
LeeE wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed recently that after re-loading an autopilot
the filters
On Tuesday 18 December 2007, LeeE wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed recently that after re-loading an autopilot the filters
that are being used seem to be getting a bit 'confused'. I spotted
it when I was comparing the unfiltered input with the filtered
output and saw that the input was stable to
On Thursday 20 December 2007 10:53, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Tuesday 18 December 2007, LeeE wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed recently that after re-loading an autopilot the
filters that are being used seem to be getting a bit
'confused'. I spotted it when I was comparing the unfiltered
On Thursday 20 December 2007 11:21, LeeE wrote:
On Thursday 20 December 2007 10:53, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Tuesday 18 December 2007, LeeE wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed recently that after re-loading an autopilot the
filters that are being used seem to be getting a bit
LeeE wrote:
On Tuesday 18 December 2007 22:52, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
LeeE wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed recently that after re-loading an autopilot the
filters that are being used seem to be getting a bit
'confused'. I spotted it when I was comparing the unfiltered
input with the filtered
On Wednesday 19 December 2007 12:56, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
LeeE wrote:
On Tuesday 18 December 2007 22:52, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
LeeE wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed recently that after re-loading an autopilot the
filters that are being used seem to be getting a bit
'confused'. I spotted it
LeeE wrote:
On Wednesday 19 December 2007 12:56, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
LeeE wrote:
On Tuesday 18 December 2007 22:52, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
LeeE wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed recently that after re-loading an autopilot the
filters that are being used seem to be getting a bit
'confused'. I
Hi all,
I've noticed recently that after re-loading an autopilot the filters
that are being used seem to be getting a bit 'confused'. I spotted
it when I was comparing the unfiltered input with the filtered
output and saw that the input was stable to 2 decimal places but
the filtered output
LeeE wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed recently that after re-loading an autopilot the filters
that are being used seem to be getting a bit 'confused'. I spotted
it when I was comparing the unfiltered input with the filtered
output and saw that the input was stable to 2 decimal places but
On Tuesday 18 December 2007 22:52, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
LeeE wrote:
Hi all,
I've noticed recently that after re-loading an autopilot the
filters that are being used seem to be getting a bit
'confused'. I spotted it when I was comparing the unfiltered
input with the filtered output and
Hi,
There was an uninitiliazied member so the autopilot was never doing his
job (at least in a windoze debug build).
HJ.
Index: xmlauto.cxx
===
RCS file: /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/source/src/Autopilot/xmlauto.cxx,v
retrieving
Hi All,
I'm looking for some autopilot code to stick inside a UAV I'm
desiging. I will have some roll, pitch, location and altitude
information available, plus a goal (i.e. fly here, do this etc). I
need algs to control roll, pitch, yaw. I'd like to know if the
flightgear autopilot can be
Hi all,
I've added a passive mode toggle to the autopilot menu (basically an
Autopilot on/off switch ).
If it's unacceptable , breaks anything , just not wanted , let me know ,
I'll remove it .
Thanks,
Syd
-
Take
On Sunday 11 February 2007 09:02, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Sunday 11 February 2007 02:14, leee wrote:
I thought I'd give it another go, with debug on the pitch-hold controller
and waddya know - this time the pitch hold worked and the alt hold
failed.
Ok - so I set debugging on all
On Sunday 11 February 2007 02:14, leee wrote:
I thought I'd give it another go, with debug on the pitch-hold controller
and waddya know - this time the pitch hold worked and the alt hold failed.
Ok - so I set debugging on all three of the pitch related controllers and
on the next test it was
On Friday 09 February 2007 21:36, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Friday 09 February 2007 21:13, leee wrote:
Just tried another quick test.
Opened five property browsers - autopilot/locks, autopilot/settings,
autopilot/internal, autopilot/FCS/locks autopilot/FCS/controls - all
seemed ok
On Sunday 11 February 2007 00:37, leee wrote:
On Friday 09 February 2007 21:36, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Friday 09 February 2007 21:13, leee wrote:
Just tried another quick test.
Opened five property browsers - autopilot/locks, autopilot/settings,
autopilot/internal,
On Friday 09 February 2007 21:13, leee wrote:
Just tried another quick test.
Opened five property browsers - autopilot/locks, autopilot/settings,
autopilot/internal, autopilot/FCS/locks autopilot/FCS/controls - all
seemed ok but then I pre-set most of the nodes during aircraft
On Wed 24 January 2007 07:14, Dave Perry wrote:
On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 18:48 +0100, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Just updated from CVS (HEAD (OSG)), and it seems to me that the
autopilots are
working. I tried the KAP140, and the generic in the pa28-161. Both
worked
fine in heading mode, and
On Tue 23 January 2007 03:27, Dave Perry wrote:
I updated both SimGear, fgfs source, and data for the osg branch
yesterday. After the compiles and installs with no errors, none of the
autopilots are working. This includes the default autopilot from the
gui as well as the kap140 (I am testing
On Tuesday 23 January 2007 16:00, gh.robin wrote:
On Tue 23 January 2007 03:27, Dave Perry wrote:
I updated both SimGear, fgfs source, and data for the osg branch
yesterday. After the compiles and installs with no errors, none of the
autopilots are working. This includes the default
On Tue 23 January 2007 18:48, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
On Tuesday 23 January 2007 16:00, gh.robin wrote:
On Tue 23 January 2007 03:27, Dave Perry wrote:
I updated both SimGear, fgfs source, and data for the osg branch
yesterday. After the compiles and installs with no errors, none of the
On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 18:48 +0100, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Just updated from CVS (HEAD (OSG)), and it seems to me that the
autopilots are
working. I tried the KAP140, and the generic in the pa28-161. Both
worked
fine in heading mode, and the followed the bug on the HSI.
I just did a cvs
I updated both SimGear, fgfs source, and data for the osg branch
yesterday. After the compiles and installs with no errors, none of the
autopilots are working. This includes the default autopilot from the
gui as well as the kap140 (I am testing the new version from Roy Vegard
Oveson). All were
On Sunday 07 January 2007 13:12, gh.robin wrote:
Hello,
Between the 13 December 2006 and last night 07 January , the autopilot
has vanished
With my previous built of Flightgear osg branch 13-12-2006 dated i was
still able to run autopilot the heading and altitude where nicely taken ,
and
Hi all , I have another silly question how does one enable autopilot
passive mode ?
Im rewriting my flightdirector routines because I thought that having
the autopilot in passive mode would give me readouts of target roll
and pitch properties without the autopilot controlling the plane
syd sandy wrote:
Hi all , I have another silly question how does one enable autopilot
passive mode ?
Im rewriting my flightdirector routines because I thought that having
the autopilot in passive mode would give me readouts of target roll
and pitch properties without the autopilot
Curt wrote
Vivian Meazza wrote:
There is one - nearly - as I said orientation/heading-magnetic-deg. But
it's
not derived from an instrument, and therefore has no supply, neither can
it
fail, not does it have any error. Further, use of such a property will
not
stop, AFAIKS, the
På 16.06.2006 10:19 CEST skrev Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip...
I also have a patch prepared which prevents xmlauto.cxx from generating
spurious instruments, and which uses whichever Heading Indicator that is
present. That's probably a 'fancy waistcoat', and I'm still pondering if
it's
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Sent: 16 June 2006 10:26
To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Autopilot Bug/Feature
På 16.06.2006 10:19 CEST skrev Vivian
Hi,
In the course of developing the KC135, I noticed that parts of the autopilot
function do not work in that model, copied from the B737 - the bits
described as vor/loc and app. Investigation showed that the cause was simple
- in JSBSim a jet ac does not have vacuum system. No vacuum - no
I think the simple solution here is to modify the autopilot config so
the input is not from a vacuum driven heading indicator since you don't
have one, but from a different property that you do have.
The autopilot is designed to be very configurable in this respect and
even though it can be
In the course of developing the KC135, I noticed that parts
of the autopilot function do not work in that model, copied
from the B737 - the bits described as vor/loc and app.
Investigation showed that the cause was simple
- in JSBSim a jet ac does not have vacuum system. No vacuum -
no
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Hi,
In the course of developing the KC135, I noticed that parts of the autopilot
function do not work in that model, copied from the B737 - the bits
described as vor/loc and app. Investigation showed that the cause was simple
- in JSBSim a jet ac does not have vacuum
On Wednesday 14 June 2006 21:51, Josh Babcock wrote:
Can't you just supply whatever property regarding the vacuum system that
the instrument is looking for?
He could (which ISTR I had to do for the Lightning) but I think it would be
nice to have the correct system available too. Some aircraft
Curt wrote
I think the simple solution here is to modify the autopilot config so
the input is not from a vacuum driven heading indicator since you don't
have one, but from a different property that you do have.
There is one - nearly - as I said orientation/heading-magnetic-deg. But it's
not
Jon
In the course of developing the KC135, I noticed that parts
of the autopilot function do not work in that model, copied
from the B737 - the bits described as vor/loc and app.
Investigation showed that the cause was simple
- in JSBSim a jet ac does not have vacuum system. No vacuum
AJ wrote
On Wednesday 14 June 2006 21:51, Josh Babcock wrote:
Can't you just supply whatever property regarding the vacuum system that
the instrument is looking for?
He could (which ISTR I had to do for the Lightning) but I think it would
be
nice to have the correct system available
Josh
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Hi,
In the course of developing the KC135, I noticed that parts of the
autopilot
function do not work in that model, copied from the B737 - the bits
described as vor/loc and app. Investigation showed that the cause was
simple
- in JSBSim a jet ac does
Thank you for your responses.
Stefan Seifert wrote:
FlightGear supports a few I/O protocols. Why not use them for
communication of FG and your standalone auto pilot?
Nine
Nine: I didn't think of using the I/O available from FG, I'll have to look into using them.
Jon Berndt wrote:
How did
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've looked at the documentation of flightgear and I've found of particular
interest for my work the section relative to the configuration of the
autopilot.I didn't enter on the details yet but just to have an idea I wanted
to ask if,in your opinion,would it be
Hi
I've looked at the documentation of flightgear and I've found of particular
interest for my work the section relative to the configuration of the
autopilot.I didn't enter on the details yet but just to have an idea I wanted
to ask if,in your opinion,would it be possible to create a my own
101 - 200 of 204 matches
Mail list logo
