David Megginson writes:
> Right, but the system will also need input from a directional gyro (possibly 
> slaved) to know which way to make the needle point.  My point was that it's 
> not like the ADF which (more or less) points towards the transmitter; it's 
> more a guess at where the transmitter might be based on the difference 
> between the inverse of the current radial and the indicated heading.  If the 
>   VOR radials are 4 degrees off magnetic (which happens fairly often), and 
> the VOR indicator is another 4 degrees off, you would could end up with the 
> needle pointing 8 degrees off the actual bearing to the VOR transmitter.
> 
> I don't disagree that the HSI and RMI are good instruments to model, but I 
> don't think that Curt's idea of giving the actual bearing to the VOR station 
> is the right way to do it.  We should be able to model the RMI VOR pointer 
> using only the (indicated) heading and the current VOR radial, just like the 
> real instrument does.

I don't think it hurts to expose this additional info via the property
system, it might not be useful for any real instruments though ...

Curt.
-- 
Curtis Olson   HumanFIRST Program               FlightGear Project
Twin Cities    curt 'at' me.umn.edu             curt 'at' flightgear.org
Minnesota      http://www.flightgear.org/~curt  http://www.flightgear.org

_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to