"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Jim Wilson wrote: > > That sounds like it might be the right way to do it. Is it better to use a > > general flag like that or to have one that is specific to indicated heading as > > in the old autopilot code? > > > > Does this work for the designers (Curt et al), using configuration properties > > to manipulate the behavior of the helper? > > I'd be more inclined to simply add a new helper calculation. As time goes > forward, given all the variety of sensors and autopilot hardware and > vintages of sensors and autopilots, this could get extremely messy and > confusing. I'd prefer to simply add a new calculation to the helper > function section.
Yes, that leaves the options open. May I suggest this then? (I'm trying to get the 747 a/p together :-)) patch: http://www.spiderbark.com/fgfs/xmlauto-jw.patch patchedfile: http://www.spiderbark.com/fgfs/xmlauto.cxx Best, Jim _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
