I've done just enough programming using prop rules and autopilot I could probably figure something out, but I don't have the experience to know what is appropriate or best? I think my solution might be somewhat of a hack. Are Limited By The Collective Ability Of The People They Can Hire And Pay. I assume fdm rate would be preferred for this? The FlightGear Flight Simulator Project Is An Open-source, Multi-platform. So what is the most appropriate autopilot or prop rule function to use here? The pedals should return to a nearly centered position. While the collective is full up, the right pedal should be placed in the full right pedal position and the collective lowered. If the couple is functioning correctly, the pedals should move to a nearly centered position as the collective is raised. It involves pushing full left pedal, then raising the collective full up. There is a preflight check for it explained as such that I think provides the basic functionality needed. Collective movement is not affected by this coupling. This coupling provides automatic tail rotor torque compensation for collective changes. The actual aircrane controls that are involved as far as I have determined are.Ĭollective to Yaw Coupling provides input to the tail rotor to increase or decrease tail rotor pitch upon collective movement. The first "simple" function I want to create is a "collective to yaw coupling" for the basic fcs. So I am asking for some help and tutoring here in the forum. While I have a very basic understanding of some of autopilot and property rule functionality, I am far from having even an average understanding as to what all is available or when and how to use it. Swedish where IIRC '~', and'$' are at inconvenient locations.Hi all, I'm starting to program some missing pieces to the AirCrane (YASim) AFCS and basic FCS. Contrast this with the traditional approach of commercial software vendors, who are limited by the collective ability of the people they can hire and pay. Select engines ~ / / ! / # / $ (Note: These keys are problematic on some keyboard layouts, e.g.carburettor heat - some piston aircraft only.propeller - some piston aircraft only ⇧ Shift+ N / N.mixture - piston aircraft only Shit+ M / M.differential toe brakes left/right, /. elevator trim up/down 1 / 7, Home / End.landing gear raise/retract G / ⇧ Shift+ G.look forward/backwad ⇧ Shift+ 8 / ⇧ Shift+ 2.look left/right ⇧ Shift+ 4 / ⇧ Shift+ 6.Winch / Aerotow (begin winching, open hitch etc).throttle - for helicopters, should the same key control the collective? 3 / 9, Page up / Page down.Keyboard bindings.Īs a first step in the keyboard refactoring, we need to come up with a prioritized list of functions that (a) are general enough to apply to most (or at least many) aircraft, and (b) are important enough to justify a keyboard shortcut rather than just a menu/dialog or a model hotspot.įeel free to add to the list, but please don't delete anything - just move it to the bottom if you don't think it's important.Īs we'll probably not want to change too many existing key-bindings, The current CVS key-binding is also listed in brackets. This is basically a usability discussion, so everyone will have strong opinions :) What I'd like to see is the entire 'Ctrl' (Command on Mac) space reserved for GUI functions, like a normal application - Ctrl-Q for quit, Ctrl-M for map dialog, Ctrl-A for autopilot dialog, Ctrl-R for replay dialog (or radios dialog :) - then have a complete discussion about which key-bindings make sense on The other issue is the keybindings are effectively 'full' (we can't easily add more), because they've been added and added over the years, but rarely removed, so at this point every key 'does something', but often something quite obscure. So flaps, trim, CDI/HSI heading,įine, but things to change view distance or FoV seem unnecessary to me. My *personal* feeling is that unless it's something the > 50% of users use *each flight*, it shouldn't be a keybinding. My point of view is that the current keybindings file is a mess, with many historical bindings, and also it binds in the ASCII space, as opposed to the scan code space, so we can't distinguish keypad vs normal number keys, and various other combinations, even though osgViewer supports that.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |