Jon Berndt wrote:
I give up. Sort of.
No need to IMHO. I think we now have an excellent solution.
Could someone file a patent request for this?
There are some gotcha's involved which could mean some other
points/locations should be exposed also in the future, but that's about it.
Erik
Mathias Fröhlich wwrites:
On Sonntag, 15. Februar 2004 10:49, Erik Hofman wrote:
Jon Berndt wrote:
I give up. Sort of.
I hope you don't!
No need to IMHO. I think we now have an excellent solution.
Could someone file a patent request for this?
There are some gotcha's involved which
On Sonntag, 15. Februar 2004 16:08, Norman Vine wrote:
i.e. the aircraft appears to be rotating about the nose
No, it does not rotate around the nose since the reported position is
corrected by just that amount that is required to rotate around the correct
axis.
This is just a thing of proper
JSBSim calls that the 'reference frame' since this seems to be
structural frame, actually.
This stuff needs to be compiled into a comprehensible FAQ or document on
Coordinate Systems Used, etc.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
On Sonntag, 15. Februar 2004 17:47, Jon Berndt wrote:
JSBSim calls that the 'reference frame' since this seems to be
structural frame, actually.
Sorry, not the first time I called it reference frame. It seems to be burned
in my head with the wrong name...
Sure, it is called structural frame!
You have already a document about these frames. Can you
incorporate?
That's right. I forgot. I should.
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Mathias Fröhlich writes:
Norman Vine wrote:
Also I can not find in the code the mechanism that will rotate the AirCraft
about any point other then the point returned by
Object.getBSphere()-getCenter() as adjusted by the translation WRT the VRP
which appears to be set at Model load time
Jon Berndt writes:
Could this be solved if the camera viewpoint looked at the CG instead of
the VRP? What is being done, now?
The camera viewpoint need not necessarily be either or any fixed point
i.e. the camera should be free to look around :-)
What is required is that the 'center of
On Sonntag, 15. Februar 2004 18:39, Norman Vine wrote:
Simply stated the problem is that inorder to rotate an object about an
arbritrary point you *must* do the equivalaent of the following
1) translate object so that it's 'rotation point' is at the 'point of
rotation' 2) rotate the object
Jon Berndt writes:
Could this be solved if the camera viewpoint looked at the CG
instead of the VRP? What is being done, now?
The camera viewpoint need not necessarily be either or any fixed point
i.e. the camera should be free to look around :-)
What is required is that the 'center
Mathias Fröhlich writes:
What you need to report to flightgear is the orientation and position of the
visual reference frame relative to the earth fixed frame (lat/lon/h +
angles).
Agreed
And all required 'corrections' that the model does not rotate around the nose
but around the dynamic
Norman Vine wrote:
Mathias Fröhlich writes:
Norman Vine wrote:
Also I can not find in the code the mechanism that will rotate the AirCraft
about any point other then the point returned by
Object.getBSphere()-getCenter() as adjusted by the translation WRT the VRP
which appears to be set
Norman Vine wrote:
Mathias Fröhlich wwrites:
On Sonntag, 15. Februar 2004 10:49, Erik Hofman wrote:
Jon Berndt wrote:
I give up. Sort of.
I hope you don't!
No need to IMHO. I think we now have an excellent solution.
Could someone file a patent request for this?
Russell Suter writes:
The IG shouldn't be used to position the 3D model. If it being used,
that's wrong.
By IG I am assuming you mean Image Generator, and you have to
understand how the things are drawn or else you are bound to get
surprised at least occassionally :-)
Cheers
Norman
Jim Wilson writes:
Norman Vine said:
Here is where I get confused and ... I am probably missing the obvious but
See 3. Ummm...think about how rotation in 3D space really works for a minute.
Easier to just wait for all this to get coded up and then see it live on the monitor
:-)
On Sonntag, 15. Februar 2004 19:26, Norman Vine wrote:
And all required 'corrections' that the model does not rotate around the
nose but around the dynamic center of gravity are automatically included.
Please reread my earlier post on necessary steps for rotating an object
about an
Norman Vine wrote:
Jon Berndt writes:
Could this be solved if the camera viewpoint looked at the CG instead of
the VRP? What is being done, now?
The camera viewpoint need not necessarily be either or any fixed point
i.e. the camera should be free to look around :-)
What is required is
Russell Suter writes:
Norman Vine wrote:
Simply stated the problem is that inorder to rotate an object about an arbritrary
point you *must* do the equivalaent of the following
1) translate object so that it's 'rotation point' is at the 'point of rotation'
2) rotate the object
3)
I give up. Sort of.
I just want things to work out properly between the FDM and the 3D model.
JSBSim now can provide the lat/lon/alt of a fixed point on the aircraft.
This includes the possibility of providing an offset from the initial CG to
the current CG. We can provide whatever is desired.
Personally, I think the nose VRP makes a lot of sense. I think people
are trying to make this a lot more complicated than it is. It's just a
simple solution to a small problem. I vote Yea.
Josh
Jon Berndt wrote:
I give up. Sort of.
I just want things to work out properly between the FDM
20 matches
Mail list logo
