On Tuesday 15 June 2004 01:00, Andy Ross wrote:
> Ampere K. Hardraade wrote:
> > Shame... they are perfect for landing gear animations.
>
> Honestly, no, they're not.  Typically, you use bones to provide a
> framework for mesh deformation of an articulated object like an elbow
> or knee.  Landing gear parts are rigid, they don't deform smoothly and
> thus don't need this kind of thing.  You can model the real world
> motion with a simple rotation and/or translation matrix.
>
> And of course, we already have FDMs which provide their own
> buzzword-enhanced "Double Inverse Kinematics (tm)" algorithm to
> compute gear compression. :)
>
> Is there something specific you are trying to accomplish?
>
> Andy

IK would simplify animating linkages due to the non-linear rotations that 
occur but I'm not sure if the overhead would be worth it.  It's usually 
possible to 'fake' it with the existing anim functions, using interpolation 
if really necessary,  and the degree to which the different parts separate 
can be made too small to notice.

For Ampere:  Something that can help while trying to sort out U/C animations 
is to temporarily bind the appropriate control axis to the one of the flight 
surface controls e.g. the elevator, so that you can cycle the gear animation 
or check the compression animation using the joystick.

Re the above, it would help if all the scenery could be made invisible because 
while rotating the view around the model to get the right angle to observe a 
particular animation I often find that the ground gets in the way and obscure 
the view.

LeeE

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

Reply via email to