On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 10:12:26 -0800 Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That convention only works for tricycle gear airplanes with three wheels, though. The problem is that the current input mappings map the following properties to those values:
/controls/wheel/gear[0]/brake -- "left" /controls/wheel/gear[1]/brake -- "right" /controls/wheel/gear[2]/brake -- "center/nose"
If you have a model with a non-standard undercarriage (the YASim Harrier and 747 have this problem, for example), then it breaks. The notion that there are separate control inputs for each wheel is wrong; in a standard cockpit (i.e. as mapped by the default input bindings), there is a left brake pedal and a right brake pedal. The decision as to which wheels these effect, and how, is the job of the FDM, not the input bindings.
Ah. I see. I think. How would brakes work in a Harrier? Would left pedal brake the left outrigger wheel? Would both pedals brake all brakeable gear? In our case, we sort of have a left|center|right brake membership now, that I *think* is versatile enough to handle something like the Harrier, but I'm not sure: how does the "center" brake get set - I mean, what physical control device is used? Is it an average of both pedal inputs?
The standard bindings should reflect the controls in a standard cockpit. Right now, for gear, they don't. This complicates life for people writing models for non-standard wheel configurations.
Currently, the convention is obviously that there are only three "wheels" for the gear model. My suggestion was to canonize that and call them "left" and "right", instead of numbering them like the gear objects to which they don't (!) correspond.
In JSBSim, for a 747, we would associate both left main gear with the left brake input, etc.
Jon
_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
