Does anyone understand how VIEW_xxx_EYE= statements work?

[Guest Stan V]

I am mystified. The Panel SDK says only that such statements are used to change the eyepoint for the view that is specified and that's all it says. I know there are three parameters for each statement that correspond to an x, y, and z distance along three orthogonal axes. But which axes relative to the aircraft axes are these and are they different depending on which EYE statement is being provided? The SDK doesn't say - or at least I couldn't find any sort of a helpful discription. I also tried some trial and error modifications myself to see if I could figure the answer out for myself but got totally lost. Nothing seemed to work as I expected, and small eyepoint axis changes had huge effects in the sim. If you, for example, want to lower the eyepoint slightly for views out of the left window only such that in the 2D panel mode you would see less top window frame and more window space, I would expect, first of all, that you would need to specify a VIEW_LEFT_EYE statement. Then, logic tells me that all I need to do is provide the same x and y parameters as the aircraft eyepoint (from the aircraft.cfg file) and replace the aircraft's z eyepoint value with a slightly smaller value. However, this is obviously not correct. The view out of the left window is completely changed when you do that. I then thought maybe the specified parameter values were incremental changes from those specified at the aircraft level and only the axis to be modified should have a value specified - but that didn't work either. If anyone knows the answer or can point me to a source of information better than the SDK, please do.Stan V.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

From my practice, the view commands in the panel.cfg seem relative to the eyepoint specified in the aircfaft.cfg, and the eyepoint in the aircraft.cfg is relative to the model's origin as defined in GMAX or FSDS.But, the view commands seem to offset the eyepoint in meters vs. feet. IOTW each unit in the view parameters offsets the eyepoint by one meter.Hope this helps.-John

[mgh 89]

The FSEdit SDK implies the following axis arrangement:x - positive forwardy - postive right (starboard)z - positive up

[Guest Slacktide]

>From my practice, the view commands in the panel.cfg seem>relative to the eyepoint specified in the aircfaft.cfg, and>the eyepoint in the aircraft.cfg is relative to the model's>origin as defined in GMAX or FSDS.Almost.. the eyepoint is relative to the reference_datum_position point in the aircraft.cfg. The reference_datum_position is relative to the 0,0,0 point in Gmax or FSDS.

[n4gix 4,947]

>>From my practice, the view commands in the panel.cfg seem>>relative to the eyepoint specified in the aircfaft.cfg, and>>the eyepoint in the aircraft.cfg is relative to the model's>>origin as defined in GMAX or FSDS.>>Almost.. the eyepoint is relative to the>reference_datum_position point in the aircraft.cfg. The>reference_datum_position is relative to the 0,0,0 point in>Gmax or FSDS.Which in most cases (because the designer doesn't know any better) both the ref_dat_pos and empty_weight_COG are congruent, making the issue moot. ;)

[Guest Slacktide]

>>>From my practice, the view commands in the panel.cfg seem>>>relative to the eyepoint specified in the aircfaft.cfg, and>>>the eyepoint in the aircraft.cfg is relative to the model's>>>origin as defined in GMAX or FSDS.>>>>Almost.. the eyepoint is relative to the>>reference_datum_position point in the aircraft.cfg. The>>reference_datum_position is relative to the 0,0,0 point in>>Gmax or FSDS.>>Which in most cases (because the designer doesn't know any>better) both the ref_dat_pos and empty_weight_COG are>congruent, making the issue moot. ;)Man, I hate that. It makes doing a weight and balance calc all but impossible.Dan

[n4gix 4,947]

>>>Almost.. the eyepoint is relative to the>>>reference_datum_position point in the aircraft.cfg. The>>>reference_datum_position is relative to the 0,0,0 point in>>>Gmax or FSDS.>>>>Which in most cases (because the designer doesn't know any>>better) both the ref_dat_pos and empty_weight_COG are>>congruent, making the issue moot. ;)>>Man, I hate that. It makes doing a weight and balance calc>all but impossible.No kidding! Worse, a few modelers don't set the origin in the CAD program properly, making contact points and such a real headache as well... ;(