Rob,
See the airport train at KSFO which has just been uploaded to cvs. Use
--ai-scenario=KSFO_AirTrain to see it. Of course - this isn't an answer to
your query.
Vivian
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Shearman, Jr. [mailto:rmsj...@yahoo.com]
Sent: 05 December 2009 22:11
To: FlightGear Developers
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Not really a bug, sort of, I think?
Hi, developers...
In attempting to design some more "animated scenery" in the vein of my
rocking boats at KMTN, I attempted to make some moving Metrorail trains at
the approach end of runway 15 at KCGS, and in doing so, exposed what I shall
call a "limitation" rather than a "bug", since I suppose the code is just
not meant to do what I am attempting to do with it. And while I understand
that a new AI ground vehicle system will be able to do what I want, I figure
I will mention this anyway, in case it becomes relevant later for some
currently unseen reason.
Anyway, what I was attempting to do was to create a Metro train in a given
position, which I shall refer to as "its origin", on a model of a raised
track just off of the approach to KCGS 15. I then used a time-based formula
with a sine wave to calculate an "offset", which ranged from + to -
something like three thousand meters, to have the train essentially
oscillate back and forth over a 3-mile section. Doing so in realistic time
intervals (five minutes or so) would create a reasonable illusion of
multiple trains passing back and forth past the airport on a more-or-less
normal schedule.
The limitation I discovered was this: if the user's view is not pointed at
the train's "origin" point, the trains disappear from view, regardless of
their "current" (i.e. offset) position.
While I understand that I was bending the code to attempt to do something it
wasn't originally intended for, my question is this: does it make sense to
suggest that the code be patched (and, mind you, I do not know how to do
this) so that the model's OFFSET position is taken into account, instead of
its "listed" ("origin") position? I understand that the AI vehicle system
will soon (or even now?) do what I wanted this hack to do, but perhaps there
are some other (more legitimate) reasons that this issue should be examined
and corrected -- or perhaps it should be fixed in case of future, unforeseen
applications of large offset values.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
-R. (MD-Terp)
Robert M. Shearman, Jr.
Transit Operations Supervisor,
University of Maryland Department of Transportation
also known as rm...@umd.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience,
a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing.
Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
