Jabberwocky wrote in Sat Jan 17, 2015 6:02 pm:Hooray, I looked for example in tanker.nas. If you would look into it, you would find, it depends on a waypoint concept ... which was the issue already some posts ago. So please, no new iterration of the same posts again ...
look, I completely remember what you posted, and I also remember what I responded.
Now, maybe just consider that I might be correct about this, or that I might be a little more familiar with the code or Nasal in general.
Thus, would you please consider that your understanding is currently incomplete and that I happen to be right ?
Otherwise, the whole exercise kinda moot - you're asking others to provide help/advice/pointers and code snippets.
I have provided exactly what you asked for - yet, you are obviously in a position not to recognize that.
Which is why I made additional references. So this is not about me being right or wrong: it is about you being able to apply the advice you're given.
So either you're able to apply that information or not - but based on what I've seen so far, you haven't even tried it yet, even if that would have just meant to read what's been posted, or to click a few links given to you.
Without doubt, there are at least a handful of other contributors around here who could have responded to your questions, or -equally- who would have come here to post "Hooray, you're wrong, Jabberwocky is right, your postings are not helpful". So far this hasn't happened - which either means that nobody else understands your questions, or that nobody disagrees with my responses so far.
It is your call.
Thorsten, relative coordinates would be fine if they would be calculabe with sufficient precision. That's one way I tried, but there is aboviously a factor involved that is nowhere documented, so using relative coordinates atm gives me a shift of about 2 meters with every iteration of the update_loop. I haven't figured out why.
this, also, is documented in the missile.nas code
All those missile examples are great ... alas, I have no missile to deal with.
which is fine, the missile is just a scripted AI object - it could be anything, including an aircraft, boat or a truck.
So, this is an entirely different kind of beast I am dealing here with.
nope, you are still mistaken - and please don't get this wrong: you're repeating the same mistake you've made in other instances: getting lost in irrelevant implementation details long before understanding the whole problem first, while arguing with contributors who are trying to fill in any gaps for you. Remember how the whole "Canvas menubar" thing worked out for you ? You spent days arguing about irrelevant details, even though people much more familiar with Nasal and Canvas told you that those woud be a no-brainer. That is exactly what is currently happening here.
I have to behave. Even if I don't get real answers only iterations and polemics. Therefore, I do it as usual, figure it out on myself at some point, it will take longer though, and consider this thread as unsolved-closed as far as I am concerned. Sorry, that I asked.
look, you've been given exceptionally detailed advice here, it is you who fails to recognize that and who fails to apply the information given here.
Honestly, FlightGear doesn't know at all whether an AI object is a missile, a truck, an aircraft or a vessel - the underlying technique is the same. Equally, computing relative offsets among independent objects is pretty much identical. It is your choice to process all the feedback you've been given here - but please don''t complain that our advice wouldn't be applicable, everybody who understands the technologies involved, knows much better obviously.
PS: the whole "relative offsets" issue has been solved in a number of places already, including even just those jetways (Nasal, too)