On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 01:54:06AM +0200, Boris Koenig wrote:
> Of course, if there's running X11 on that other machine,
> FlightGear could still provide the graphics for such an
> externally displayed CDU via network without the need to
> explicitly be running on that machine :-)

x11 yes, but what if not OpenGL capable. That would exclude running
anthoer flightgear instance on that machine. (I'm thinking about old
cheap computers. Often those you can get for free)

> professional users who are building their own cockpits or
> simply those users that are using those expensive external
> standalone CDU units.

Or homebuilt cheap external CDUs :-)

> On the other hand I think one has to ponder about the pros & cons,
> and certainly it would be more of an advantage for the AVERAGE
> user to have a GENERAL xml-configurable mechanism to add support
> for FMCs/CDUs to FlightGear than having merely a way to code
> your own stuff by accessing the property tree via network.

Another idea I just had: Why not put all the general algorithms needed
in an average FMC into a library (possibly as part of SimGear). 
Things like performance calculations, (access to) route databases, input
validation (eg: airport code exists?, does this airport have a runway
xxR?),routing calculations,...

This library could then be used/linked to build an FMC, either withing fgfs our
as a standalone program.


Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to