On 01/05/2007 04:06 AM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> Less dirty and more correct should be:
> relocate to the position of the fix, grab the magnetic variation and
> calculate
> the transporter coordinates using bearing and distance. Relocate again to
> these coordinates. You can safely call this pos
> A dirty hack might be to relocate to the new position using the true
> bearing, reading the magnetic-variation property for the new position
> thereafter and relocate again using the new variation.
Less dirty and more correct should be:
relocate to the position of the fix, grab the magnetic vari
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, John Denker wrote:
*) I spelled out "deg". I tried putting the ° symbol in the
xml file, but it complained of a parse error. Using °
didn't work, either. Any suggestions on how to encode symbols?
Not directly an answer to you question but here's a tip that may be us
> That's a good point. I consider it a bug in what I've written.
> The canonical behavior is to use the magnetic deviation at the
> /reference/ point. Can somebody give me a hint how to obtain
> the deviation at the location of arbitrary navaids and airports?
The magnetic variation is calculated
On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 15:36 -0500, John Denker wrote:
> First, some background information. Suppose we are up in the air,
> 10 nm west of KXYZ airfield (which is colocated with the XYZ vortac).
> 1) If we were inbound to the field, I would report our position
> as 10 nm west, inbound on the
I found a way to make it do what I want. Here's my version
http://www.av8n.com/fly/fgfs/location-in-air.xml
and the diff against the cvs version:
http://www.av8n.com/fly/fgfs/location-in-air.diff
On 01/03/2007 05:19 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> Only if you are relocating to a nearby position.
On 1/3/07, John Denker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm coming at this from the perspective of an instrument flying
lesson. Being able to reposition the aircraft a few miles from
the initial approach fix saves a lot of time.
And that is a perspective we fully want to support and promote .
Th
On 01/03/2007 04:00 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> we do want this to work intuitively so I would welcome
> any changes to improve the in-air reposition dialog box.
:-)
> I think it makes a lot
> more sense to focus on the gui dialog box.
Agreed.
I'm coming at this from the perspective of an instr
On 1/3/07, John Denker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First, some background information. Suppose we are up in the air,
10 nm west of KXYZ airfield (which is colocated with the XYZ vortac).
[snip]
To summarize: With rare exceptions, locations are specified using the
bearing /from/ the reference.
9 matches
Mail list logo
