On Thursday 16 December 2004 04:06, Jon Berndt wrote:
> True, I've seen both. JSBSim has used both, and we accept both, but
> "normalized" units are anything but normal - you have to provide a range
> for it to mean anything, and as far as I can tell, there is no standard
> here. It's defined on a per-aircraft basis. And, as I have pointed out
> above, for aerosurfaces it requires an intermediate conversion twice.
A rotation whether in degrees or radians only makes sense if the axis
of rotation is specified. This would have to be on a per aircraft basis. Also 
I'm sure that many if not most control surfaces do not simply rotate about
a single axis but involve sliding motion and rotation of multiple parts
and often, rotation while sliding.
I think a normalized value makes good sense. For complicated cases, on the FDM 
side, it can be converted into an index into a table of effective force while 
on the GUI side, it could index into a table of drawing routines.

Just my 2 cents.

Richard Harke

_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

Reply via email to