Curtis L. Olson writes: > I'm looking at doing some fault modeling ... things like failing > various instruments, CDI, GS, to/from flag failing, and quite a few > other things with avionics, electrical, fuel, flaps, engines, etc. > > What makes the most sense to me is to create a section for faults in > the property tree /sim/faults/ > > Once this subtree is populated, the the various instruments could use > these in condition statements to decided what to draw (or not draw) in > the case of a failure. Since the failures are flagged in the property > tree, it would be easy to build an instructor gui to set/unset them. > > Does this sound reasonable?
This partly duplicates what's happening under the /instrumentation/ and /systems/ trees. For example, right now if you set /instrumentation/airspeed-indicator/serviceable = false the altimeter needle will stop working; if you set /systems/static/serviceable = false the whole static system will stop working, with appropriate results in the instruments that depend on it. It would make the most sense to keep on following this path, putting the avionics under /instrumentation and the systems (like the fuel system) under /systems, and using subtrees for parts of systems or instrumentation, as in /instrumentation/vor-gauge/serviceable /instrumentation/vor-gauge/cdi/serviceable /instrumentation/vor-gauge/gs/serviceable and you can also add thing like /instrumentation/vor-gauge/cdi/error-deg All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
