On Tue, 2002-02-26 at 11:58, David Megginson wrote: > Tony Peden writes: > > > What form would you need the surface positions in? Actual angles are > > the easiest thing for JSBSim to output (would those be useful for 3D > > models?), but I can see where normalized positions (-1..1) might be > > easier to deal with. > > I use angles (degrees) in the 3D models as well. Currently, I'm > converting from the normalized positions, but actual angles would be > great. Note that angles will have to be reported separated for each > aileron, since the amount of travel up and down often differs.
OK, JSBSim now reports control surface positions. I set up the following properties: /surface-positions/elevator-pos-deg /surface-positions/left-aileron-pos-deg /surface-positions/right-aileron-pos-deg /surface-positions/rudder-pos-deg /surface-positions/flap-pos-deg I believe the sign conventions are the same as those used by FGControls, but holler if they need to be different. > > > > If the elevator angle is always reported relative to the incidence > > > angle of the horizontal stabilizer, we should be OK. > > > > I think that in most cases this will not be true, elevator will usually > > be reported relative to a body reference line. > > That's fine -- I can design markup to deal with that situation when > the need arises. > > > All the best, > > > David > > -- > David Megginson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel > -- Tony Peden [EMAIL PROTECTED] We all know Linux is great ... it does infinite loops in 5 seconds. -- attributed to Linus Torvalds _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
