Thanks again .It will also reduce the amount of auto-coordination
checks required by the autopilot .
Cheers
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> Hi Syd,
>
> This is now in git:
> The auto-coordination and auto-coordination-factor properties now live
> in /controls/flight. A ba
Hi Syd,
This is now in git:
The auto-coordination and auto-coordination-factor properties now live
in /controls/flight. A backward compatibility check in aircraft.nas
checks if "somebody" created /sim/auto-coordination and if so, spits out
a warning messages and makes this property an alias poi
haven't had your morning coffee yet ? ;)
--
Try before you buy = See our experts in action!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 23:51:16 -0700, syd wrote in message
:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Curtis Olson
> wrote:
> > Hi Syd,
> >
> > That was a hack from the very early days of the project, so if it
> > went away, it wouldn't bother me. Fred might have a check box in
> > the window launcher,
Also, the real pa22 Tri-Pacer has a spring rudder interlock with the
ailerons so it can be overridden by the pilot when he wants to have
cross control as in a cross wind.
Dave P.
On 03/09/2012 02:45 PM, Adam Dershowitz, Ph.D., P.E. wrote:
Few, but at least one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Sounds good to me.Thanks for dealing with this.
Syd
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 2:45 AM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> This is in fact my preferred solution.
> - it does not break existing aircraft
> - it keeps existing --enable-auto-coordination behavior
> - it is configurable, even at runtime
> - minimal
This is in fact my preferred solution.
- it does not break existing aircraft
- it keeps existing --enable-auto-coordination behavior
- it is configurable, even at runtime
- minimal code change
I have the patch ready and I'm about to commit it. While at it, I'd like
to move the involved properties
Hi Curt
Well actually there are quite some RL aircraft having a so-called
rudder-aileron interconnect. Of course in these aircraft it acts both
ways: A spring (so not hard linked 1:1) pulls the rudder at aileron
deflection and vice versa. The reason is however a very different one
namely a la
In response to the auto-coordination question, it does need to be
there for users that do not have pedals or a twist stick joystick.
Ideally, the autopilot should either disable auto-coordination and
then restore state afterwards, if enabled by user or fly despite it.
I personally think that stat
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 5:58 PM, syd adams wrote:
>> On the subject of novices, would it be a good idea to have an idiot-startup
>> button or menu, which makes everything all systems go and ready to take off?
>>
>> Alan
>
>
> Mine already have such a button , in the menu called "autostart'.
I do
> On the subject of novices, would it be a good idea to have an idiot-startup
> button or menu, which makes everything all systems go and ready to take off?
>
> Alan
Mine already have such a button , in the menu called "autostart'.
?
Alan
From: Curtis Olson
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2012 8:05 PM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] auto-coordination
The counter argument here is that the existing "auto coordination" system is
nothing more than one line of code that forces s
Few, but at least one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ERCO_Ercoupe
--Adam
On Mar 9, 2012, at 12:05 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> The counter argument here is that the existing "auto coordination" system is
> nothing more than one line of code that forces some rudder deflection in
> proportion to
ah overlooked that , thanks
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:07 PM, ThorstenB wrote:
> Am 09.03.2012 21:46, schrieb syd adams:
>> Hmmm another thought . Wouldn't setting that value to 0.0 still force
>> the rudder to center , still overriding other systems ?
>
> No, since Torsten's suggested patch contai
Am 09.03.2012 21:46, schrieb syd adams:
> Hmmm another thought . Wouldn't setting that value to 0.0 still force
> the rudder to center , still overriding other systems ?
No, since Torsten's suggested patch contained a condition
&& auto_coordination_factor->getDoubleValue() > 0.0 ) {
so noth
Hmmm another thought . Wouldn't setting that value to 0.0 still force
the rudder to center , still overriding other systems ?
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Anders Gidenstam
wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Mar 2012, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
>
>> Currently the rudder is set to 0.5 * aileron if autocoordination i
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
>> Curt wrote:
>> I am sure there are very few (if any?) real life aircraft rigged in such a
>> way.
>
> There are also very vew (if any?) real life aircraft flown by mouse :-)
or flown looking through a monitor , using a keyboard :P
>
> Altoug
Now that sounds like an even better idea.Less chance of breaking
anything , but still adjustable.Thanks Torsten.
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> Am 09.03.2012 20:44, schrieb syd adams:
>> Ok I haven't entirely given up on the idea of removing the
>> auto-coordination from
On Fri, 9 Mar 2012, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> Currently the rudder is set to 0.5 * aileron if autocoordination is
> enabled. The value of 0.5 is hardcoded.
Perhaps this could be implemented with a property rule in preferences.xml
instead of in C++ code - couldn't such a rule easily be replaced by
Am 09.03.2012 20:44, schrieb syd adams:
> Ok I haven't entirely given up on the idea of removing the
> auto-coordination from the code.Wouldn't it be more appropriate to add
> that rudder control to controls.nas?
> Then it can be replaced if need be on a per aircraft basis , but not
> break anythin
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Renk Thorsten wrote:
>> Ok I haven't entirely given up on the idea of removing the
>> auto-coordination from the code.
>
> Why?
>
because its hard-coded...
>> Wouldn't it be more appropriate to add
>> that rudder control to controls.nas?
>
> Nasal runs per graphic
> Curt wrote:
> I am sure there are very few (if any?) real life aircraft rigged in such a
> way.
There are also very vew (if any?) real life aircraft flown by mouse :-)
Altough I tend to control rudder seperately (also when flying with a mouse!), I
do
agree that auto-coordination should
Am 09.03.2012 20:57, schrieb Renk Thorsten:
>> Ok I haven't entirely given up on the idea of removing the
>> auto-coordination from the code.
>
> Why?
>
>> Wouldn't it be more appropriate to add
>> that rudder control to controls.nas?
>
> Nasal runs per graphical frame, FDMs may need to run faster
The counter argument here is that the existing "auto coordination" system
is nothing more than one line of code that forces some rudder deflection in
proportion to aileron deflection -- basically implementing some sort of
hard linked manual system. I am sure there are very few (if any?) real
life
> Ok I haven't entirely given up on the idea of removing the
> auto-coordination from the code.
Why?
> Wouldn't it be more appropriate to add
> that rudder control to controls.nas?
Nasal runs per graphical frame, FDMs may need to run faster at low framerates.
Nasal AP systems tend to become uns
Ok I haven't entirely given up on the idea of removing the
auto-coordination from the code.Wouldn't it be more appropriate to add
that rudder control to controls.nas?
Then it can be replaced if need be on a per aircraft basis , but not
break anything
otherwise.And maybe it could be slip/skid-ball d
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Martin Spott wrote:
> syd adams wrote:
>
>> Actually I'd prefer the auto-coordination property to remain , and the
>> options to enable it too , just that it be handled in an autopilot
>> file rather than hard-coded.
>
> I'm not sure if I understood what you had in
OK ,I was just gathering opinions , and it appears it should stay.Now
I know how to proceed.
Thanks guys.
Syd
--
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but c
syd adams wrote:
> Actually I'd prefer the auto-coordination property to remain , and the
> options to enable it too , just that it be handled in an autopilot
> file rather than hard-coded.
I'm not sure if I understood what you had in mind, therefore, beware, I
might miss you point. Anyhow from
Some of us don't have a joystick and fl with a mouse and autopilot..
auto-coordination has to stay.. however.. just realised it DOES mess up the
autopilot...
pete
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 6:51 AM, syd adams wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> > Hi Syd,
> >
> > That
Am 09.03.2012 07:51, schrieb syd adams:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
>> Hi Syd,
>>
>> That was a hack from the very early days of the project, so if it went away,
>> it wouldn't bother me. Fred might have a check box in the window launcher,
>> and there may be a command
> I could add a check every time autopilot is engaged to disable it
> while autopilot is active , but my real question is ,
> can it be removed from the code ? It consists of three lines in
> flightgear/src/Aircraft/controls.cxx , but it seems
> that this should be handled by the autopilot system.
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> Hi Syd,
>
> That was a hack from the very early days of the project, so if it went away,
> it wouldn't bother me. Fred might have a check box in the window launcher,
> and there may be a command line option or property value to hunt down and
Hi Syd,
That was a hack from the very early days of the project, so if it went
away, it wouldn't bother me. Fred might have a check box in the window
launcher, and there may be a command line option or property value to hunt
down and remove.
Curt
On Thursday, March 8, 2012, syd adams wrote:
>
Hi folks,
Ran into a little problem just recently.
I was informed on IRC that auto-coordination broke autopilot behavior
and eventually it went out of control.
I admit I never thought about it before , I've never used it , even
with a mouse as my only controller .
I could add a check every time aut
On Wednesday 23 Dec 2009, Alan Teeder wrote:
> --
> From: "leee"
> Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 10:05 PM
> To: "FlightGear developers discussions"
>
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] auto-coordination bro
--
From: "leee"
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 10:05 PM
To: "FlightGear developers discussions"
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] auto-coordination broken
> On Tuesday 22 Dec 2009, Alan Teeder wrote:
> [snip...]
&g
On Tuesday 22 Dec 2009, Alan Teeder wrote:
[snip...]
> The Ercoupe and certain other aircraft (e.g. TSR2) may have an
> aileron-rudder interconnect, but this is very aircraft specific
> and should be part of the aircraft FCS model.
The YASim BAC-TSR2 doesn't/didn't/shouldn't have an aileron-rudde
On 22 Dec 2009, at 12:23, John Denker wrote:
> I won't bother to ask why some people consider a discussion
> of auto-coordination to be "hijacking" an auto-coordination
> thread.
I think that comment was because you replied to the 'autopilot broken' thread
to start the auto-coordination discuss
On 12/22/2009 02:35 AM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> I think all that is required is that we make clear that auto-coordination is
> designed to help people without any rudder control axis, and that a proper
> rudder axis (or even a twist axis on a joystick) is preferable.
On 12/21/2009 08:59 PM, Cur
iscussions"
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] auto-coordination broken
> Ron Jensen wrote:
>
>> > > Are you sure you don't have some noisy input
>> > > device like a joystick or pedals connected that might affect the
>> > > rudder axi
Ron Jensen wrote:
> > > Are you sure you don't have some noisy input
> > > device like a joystick or pedals connected that might affect the
> > > rudder axis?
> > > If two input axes are bound to the same control the last write wins.
> >
> > Thanks for the hint. That helps. It makes sense fro
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Ron Jensen wrote:
> In my view --enable-auto-coordination is a game feature, and usable for
> people without a rudder axis control. A group you seem to have
> completely overlooked.
Yup, it's never been intended to be more than a simple work around for
people wi
On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 17:45 -0700, John Denker wrote:
> On 12/21/2009 02:36 PM, Anders Gidenstam wrote:
>
> > It seems to work ok here.
>
> Interesting
Another thread hijacked.
> > Are you sure you don't have some noisy input
> > device like a joystick or pedals connected that might affec
On 12/21/2009 02:36 PM, Anders Gidenstam wrote:
> It seems to work ok here.
Interesting
> Are you sure you don't have some noisy input
> device like a joystick or pedals connected that might affect the
> rudder axis?
> If two input axes are bound to the same control the last write wins.
On Mon, 21 Dec 2009, John Denker wrote:
> In the default c172p, it appears to have no effect at all.
>
> In the SenecaII, the most observable effect is that it makes
> it impossible to steer when trying to taxi. In the air it
> does not noticeably improve the coordination. Sometimes I
> see an int
> Did you try to turn
> on/off jaw damper?
>
>
> Hah, I tried that on my wife and it didn't work
> ... :-)
> (jaw being a bone in the mouth, yaw being side
> to side motion.)
> Curt.
> --
Upss...Lol! :D
Maybe I used this word instead because thinking of my own jaw which still pains
a bit aft
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Heiko Schulz wrote:
> Did you try to turn on/off jaw damper?
>
Hah, I tried that on my wife and it didn't work ... :-)
(jaw being a bone in the mouth, yaw being side to side motion.)
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/
Hi,
> The –enable-auto-coordination
> feature never worked very well,
> but now it even more broken than it used to be. I observe
> different symptoms in different aircraft.
>
> In the default c172p, it appears to have no effect at all.
If so, then it must be something happened recently. With
The –enable-auto-coordination feature never worked very well,
but now it even more broken than it used to be. I observe
different symptoms in different aircraft.
In the default c172p, it appears to have no effect at all.
In the SenecaII, the most observable effect is that it makes
it impossibl
50 matches
Mail list logo
