[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 > Is it safe to assume that if one wanted to add support for winds
 > aloft reports, they would only need to add code to acquire the data
 > and then parse it into some kind of data structure defined by your
 > system?

That's to be determined.

 > How much support will there be for data beyond that which is included
 > in the METAR's?  Winds aloft reports are one example of additional
 > data sources that exist outside FG, but not all weather data would
 > exist outside the application.

That's also to be determined.  As I mentioned, I'm working from front
to back.  FGEnvironment contains a set of environment information for
a single place and time.  Once we get that working better, I'll add
FGEnvironmentManager to get the environment information for places
(and times?) beyond the aircraft's current locus; at first, it will
return the same information for everywhere, but later it will start
differentiating in different ways.  The rest of FlightGear won't have
to know about that -- all it has to know is how to get an environment
object:

  const FGEnvironment * env = globals.get_env_mgr()->getEnv(lat, lon, alt);

As the quality of the information improves, the other FlightGear
subsystems should be able to use it automatically; for example, the
FDM might get FGEnvironment objects for the centre point of each
lifting surface as well as for the CG; in the future, if we add
microbursts (etc.), the FDMs will see them automatically.

 > It could be possible to have weather
 > data generated from inside FG itself in the form of thermals or "ridge
 > lift". (I use that term very loosely.)  Would FGEnvironment be able to
 > accept and manage data from these various sources?

In time.  It depends on how the manager develops.  For now, I just
want to be able to have the basics: temperature, winds, clouds,
visibility, magnetic variation, etc.

 > Will there be anything beyond basic interpolation?

It depends on what people contribute.  Right now, I'm trying to get
the basic interface nailed down so that future work won't require too
much extra integration in the rest of FlightGear.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Reply via email to