On Montag, 5. Juli 2004 22:47, David Culp wrote:
> > ... but it didn't move or have effects
> > for relative wind, deck motion or the burble around tail and
> > superstructure.
>
> Some more info on the AI carrier. I'm not too familiar with the hitlist,
> but I believe this is where objects get their solidity. A moving object
> would have to interact with the hitlist on every frame, which might be too
> expensive. Again, I'm not really sure.
>
> As far as the wind/turbulence effects go, these are possible. As an
> example see the FGAIThermal class which models a thermal. It modifies the
> value of wind-from-down when the "user" aircraft is within the thermal's
> radius, creating a "rising column" of air.
>
> Similar things can be done to the AI tanker, causing downwash behind it. A
> burble of air behind the ship can also be done like this.
>
> Causing a ship to bob up and down can be modeled by adding a periodic
> altitude adjustment to the ship's location. That's the easy part.
For the FDM part I have often thought about this.
What will be needed is a method where we can query for the position of a
surface element (triangle/whatever) and its speeds (longitudinal/rotational)
dependent on a given position (usually the contact patch position).
Also for the cat and the wires we will need to query for those objects and
their exact locations and speeds in an area of the aircraft.
To implement that efficient, I think that a FGInterface or some class in that
area should cache this information and should provide an interface that could
easily used to query some properties of the ground in the area of the
aircraft.
I wanted to start with code which can better follow the ground level in the
area of the aircraft. Also I think it is interresting to distinguish
different load capacities of solid ground. Or/and different ground types like
asphalt, grass or water.
... this way you will need to hit the runway with your 747
... also rolling jesus like on the water surface will not work
:)
Having that, the carrier stuff is an extension which is not too hard to do.
The most notable difference would be that such surface triangles will have
velocities. And I think that it is save to assume that these triangles will
not accelerate within one timestep or even within one frame. They will just
get an other velocitiy in the next step.
Greetings
Mathias
--
Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
