20,741
edits
Startup Profiles: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 111: | Line 111: | ||
James proposed, but didn’t yet have time to implement, a more formal ‘startup profile’ system for all aircraft, likely implemented as XML overlays on the basic -set.xml files. | James proposed, but didn’t yet have time to implement, a more formal ‘startup profile’ system for all aircraft, likely implemented as XML overlays on the basic -set.xml files. | ||
Currently the entire -set.xml is overlaid on the property tree. I would extend this with additional overlays based on some ‘phase of flight value’, where the values are - cold-and-dark - pre-takeoff - cruise - approach It’s interesting to note the difference between ‘cold-and-dark’ and ‘pre-takeoff’ is essentially the same as what the existing auto-start functionality does in most aircraft. But this would simply be a set of property values. For anything which requires Nasal, I guess the aircraft scripts would have to check the value of /sim/presets/phase-of-flight and adjust things accordingly. (And there’s presumably lots of complexity there) I need input from aircraft authors on how feasible this is, of course. But the usability pay-off is potentially huge; standardised auto-start, nice in-air starts, easier setup of training configs. | |||
<ref>{{cite web | |||
| url = http://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/mailman/message/34642417/ | |||
| title = <nowiki>Re: [Flightgear-devel] Launcher changes for 3.8</nowiki> | |||
| author = <nowiki>James Turner</nowiki> | |||
| date = Nov 23rd, 2015 | |||
}} | |||
</ref> | |||
This would also solve the in-air start issues, to a degree. As was noted back in the original discussion, this raises some questions about initialising Nasal state and other dynamic systems (the FDMs already support in-air trimming, to various degrees), but James doesn't believe there issues are insurmountable, and the benefit in user experience would be very large - for novice users, for in-air starts, and more. | This would also solve the in-air start issues, to a degree. As was noted back in the original discussion, this raises some questions about initialising Nasal state and other dynamic systems (the FDMs already support in-air trimming, to various degrees), but James doesn't believe there issues are insurmountable, and the benefit in user experience would be very large - for novice users, for in-air starts, and more. | ||
| Line 305: | Line 314: | ||
{{cquote|It is trivial to add other checklist sequences. For example, on the 1049h, although I initially created an “autostart” sequence, I now have "ground-start” and “in-air-start” sequences. The ground start fires up the aircraft ready to take off and the in-air start runs the checklists necessary to get it into a flying state (gear up, flaps up, etc.).|Richard Senior}} | {{cquote|It is trivial to add other checklist sequences. For example, on the 1049h, although I initially created an “autostart” sequence, I now have "ground-start” and “in-air-start” sequences. The ground start fires up the aircraft ready to take off and the in-air start runs the checklists necessary to get it into a flying state (gear up, flaps up, etc.).|Richard Senior}} | ||
{{FGCquote | {{FGCquote | ||