That's actually a counter-example: this is all information that
FlightGear will have to have by default, but FDMs like JSBSim will not
(necessarily) -- since FlightGear owns the panel and the UI, it is the
component that tracks the position of every switch, stick, and so on.
JSBSim will need
Jon S. Berndt wrote:
Alex wrote:
For starters, can the JSB filters (etc) stuff be used without
JSBSim?
The base class of all JSBSim classes - including the FCS classes - is
FGJSBBase. So, technically, no.
This would be a good feature to look at breaking out of the FDM. At
its most
I don't see why moving the FCS out of JSBSim precludes your ability to
run the thing standalone. You could maintain your own tree
independant of FlightGear as you do right now (or just keep it in the
JSB tree next to the FDM). Alternatively, you could place it in
SimGear, which is designed
On Wed, 2002-01-16 at 10:13, Andy Ross wrote:
Jon S. Berndt wrote:
Alex wrote:
For starters, can the JSB filters (etc) stuff be used without
JSBSim?
The base class of all JSBSim classes - including the FCS classes - is
FGJSBBase. So, technically, no.
This would be a good
On Tue, 2002-01-15 at 18:52, Alex Perry wrote:
On Tue, 2002-01-15 at 07:19, Christian Mayer wrote:
What we really need here is for our resident flight control systems
expert to whip us up a program for generating the control law gains
based on the config file ...
It's probably easier
From: Andy Ross
In fact, this is a good example: a real F-16A (Dunno about the C)
flight control computer takes its input from a set of gyros and from
the position of the stick, and that's it
The F-16 DFCS (beginning with Block 40) - and I suspect to some degree also
the F-16A model - also
Martin.
P.S.: I _really_ believe it would be wise to separate FDM and FCS using a
clean interface - but this is different from the above ;-)
In JSBSim it already is. There appears to be a misconception that the FDM
and FCS are inappropriately linked together. In JSBSim the atmosphere,
Jim Wilson writes:
Speaking of lawn darting there seems to be a problem with
autopilot altitude hold with the c310 under jsbsim.
You'll see the same problem with any higher-power plane in the JSBSim,
YASim, or UIUC models. The current autopilot is closely tuned to the
C172 (which,
David Megginson wrote:
Jim Wilson writes:
Speaking of lawn darting there seems to be a problem with
autopilot altitude hold with the c310 under jsbsim.
You'll see the same problem with any higher-power plane in the JSBSim,
YASim, or UIUC models. The current autopilot is closely
On Tue, 2002-01-15 at 07:19, Christian Mayer wrote:
What we really need here is for our resident flight control systems
expert to whip us up a program for generating the control law gains
based on the config file ...
It's probably easier to adapt the autoconfiguration algorithms for PID
Well, JSBSim theoretically has the building blocks for an autopilot, same as
for an FCS. I have mentioned before that this is one thing I'd like to add
in. The caveat of course is not to break anything that currently exists,
piss anyone off, or preclude some other FDM from working correctly.
Speaking of lawn darting there seems to be a problem with autopilot
altitude
hold with the c310 under jsbsim. Or at least that's what I'm getting...an
instant lawn dart (stalls and drops). Tried 2000 and 4000ft. Jsb/c172
still
works fine. The problem seemed to appear around when the
12 matches
Mail list logo
