<snip a lot of good reasons for using an fdm/autopilot combination for AI
traffic from David Megginson and Alex Perry>

(Following an OS re-install I can reply now!)

OK, I can see the point of wanting a proper simulation when within
reasonably close visual distance of the target.  My concern was that if
there were a lot of traffic being simulated, a lot of it known to the pilot
only through the radio communication, then using an fdm thats updating at
120Hz and simulating right down to the exhaust gas temperature is overkill,
and that using a greately simplified model with basically a look-up table
of typical speeds and climb/descent rates would allow the additional
traffic to be updated in a queue with, say, only one plane updated per
timestep if far enough away from the viewer.  My concern was that updating
a number of fdms per timestep could possibly introduce a noticable delay.
I can accept the fact that when reasonably close the realistic behaviour of
other aircraft provides useful piloting cues - I hadn't recognised the full
significance of that.  I personally think that a switch from a full
autopilot/fdm combination to a greatly simplified where-to-fly/how-to-fly
logic when beyond a certain distance/direction from the user is probably
eventually justified (IMHO).

Still, regardless of how much get ripped out and rewritten eventually, its
still progress for now...

Cheers - Dave

Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to