> Really we just need the FDMs to agree on something. Or maybe > not...maybe the > idea of sharing 3DModel configs between FDMs (c310-jsbsim, > c310-yasim pointing > to the same model.xml) is impratical or too complex? Certainly if one FDM > models gear compression and the other doesn't, that is an issue > when it comes > to configuring the 3d model.
It's neither impractical nor complex. FWIW, there really is a standard already out there, and we use it. That is, the structural frame, as I have outlined before. The only problem I see is that the FDM and the 3D model rendering code need to have a static common point of reference - that's why I mentioned the farthest point forward, such as the nose or prop hub. Using the wing leading edge is unsatisfactory: think of the F-16, or the space shuttle. What do you use in those cases? In the case of the X-15, do you use the point where the wing meets the fuselage as the "leading edge" or the point where the leading edge would intersect the centerline? The nose tip or prop hub is unmistakable. We would report this position to FlightGear and you would then have intimate knowledge of what to rotate about.
smime.p7s
Description: application/pkcs7-signature
