On 12/22/2009 02:35 AM, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > I think all that is required is that we make clear that auto-coordination is > designed to help people without any rudder control axis, and that a proper > rudder axis (or even a twist axis on a joystick) is preferable.
On 12/21/2009 08:59 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: >> Yup, it's never been intended to be more than a simple work around for >> people without rudder pedals or a twist grip on their joystick. A "game >> feature" is a good description I think. In order to document it as a "game feature" we need some basic information. What do gamers actually use the "auto-coordination" feature for? -- what game? -- what model aircraft? -- what benefit are they getting from this feature? Out of the 358 aircraft available in my copy of FG, I can think of only a handful that I would expect to have better coordination with auto-coordination enabled. No, the Ercoupe is not one of them; it has an aileron/rudder interconnect even without this feature, and does not benefit from the feature. Even the Sopwith Camel, which in the Real World was notorious for its unharmonious controls, in the Sim World benefits only slightly from the "auto-coordination" feature. I doubt most gamers would notice. Most modern aircraft come from the factory with reasonably harmonious controls. That is, under cruise conditions, they fly just fine with "feet on the floor" (as opposed to "feet on the pedals"). Such aircraft handle distinctly worse with "auto-coordination" turned on. As for the default c172p, "auto-coordination" might not make it much worse ... but that's only because the model's basic aerodynamics is so messed up. It has an order of magnitude too much adverse yaw at cruise. Rather than messing with "auto-coordination" and all the attendant limitations and bad side-effects, it would be muuuuch easier to use a saner set of aero coefficients ... especially when you consider that some users have rudder pedals, and use them, and want to use them with more realism. A patch to improve the c172p is available. If we are going to document the "auto-coordination" feature, we must document the restrictions. The user must a) have no rudder-axis input devices, or b) unplug all rudder-axis devices, or c) make sure any rudder-axis devices have zero "noise", or d) edit the .xml driver to discard rudder events, or e) never use the "auto-coordination" feature Chez moi the preferred option is (e). The only other option would be (d), since my joystick has an integrated rudder axis that cannot be unplugged. Its noise level is just low enough that when sporadic events come in, they are surprising. I suspect that most gamers would be pretty unhappy with options (c) and (d). I suspect that most people on this list stick with option (e). Also the user must: x) make sure the aileron input device has zero noise, or y) rely on CWS (control wheel steering) to the exclusion of other steering features (e.g. keyboard insert/enter), or z) never use the "auto-coordination" feature. All in all, it's hard to come up with plausible use-case scenarios for this feature. We've heard how this feature was intended to be used. If anybody knows how it is actually used, please let us know. As I asked before, how hard would it be to implement a feature that actually improved coordination, perhaps something that works more like a yaw damper? Or is it better to forget about the whole topic, and let rudderless gamers rely on the natural feet-on-the-floor behavior of the aircraft? ============= I won't bother to ask why some people consider a discussion of auto-coordination to be "hijacking" an auto-coordination thread. I reckon we all know the answer to that one. ============================ On 12/22/2009 03:04 AM, Alan Teeder wrote in part: > Yaw dampers, stick pushers and other stability augmentation demands are > added to the pilots´s joystick/rudder input, they would not normally > override it. Quite so. Also, the aileron/rudder interconnect on aircraft such as the Beech Bonanza is springy such that you can overpower it using the obvious technique, by pushing the yoke one way and pushing the pedals the other way. This allows you to slip the aircraft e.g. for a crosswind landing. The "auto-coordination" feature does not provide a good model of this. Evidently it was never intended to do so. The pilot is out of luck if he needs to make a crosswind landing. This makes a certain amount of sense from the developers' viewpoint, but from the users' viewpoint it is all quite mysterious and unhelpful. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
