Jon Berndt

> Do 3D models use a "normalized" range to model aerosurface rotation, or
> actual degree
> magnitude? I've been looking at the JSBSim flight control code and the
> addition of the
> code that "normalizes" aerosurface (elevator, aileron, etc.) rotation
> positions confuses
> the code, and appears to only be relevant to 3D modeling.

A quick search revealed that most, if not all, the 3d models in the current
inventory use normalized values for animating the control surfaces.  

> It was my opinion that rotations are done using actual degree measurement
> - that is, you
> can't specify an angular rotation in a range of 0 to 1 and have it mean
> anything at all. A
> rotation needs to be done over an angular range that is known, such as
> degrees or radians.
> I'd like to remove the code that normalizes angular measurement, but I am
> told that
> FlightGear requires normalized angular measurement, which seems, on teh
> surface,
> ridiculous. At the very least, I'd like to move the normalization code out
> of our flight
> controls code and into the flightgear interface code, since it appears to
> be a requirement
> of FlightGear only.

To avoid a sizeable conversion task, all we need is a property containing
the normalized value, so this seems like a sensible suggestion to me.



Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to