Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFD: FlightGear and the changing state of air navigation

[legoboyvdlp R <leg...@gm...>]

One thing that is very important moving into the future is the RF approach
(radius to fix). Please read this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performance-based_navigation#RNAV_and_RNP_specific_functions
One example of an RF-style approach is
https://bruceair.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/image.png; please also read
this:
https://bruceair.wordpress.com/tag/radius-to-fix/.

This style of RNAV approach is becoming more and more common, and
FlightGear cannot yet simuolate it.
Jonathan

On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:17 AM, John Denker via Flightgear-devel <
fli...@li...> wrote:

> Executive summary:  This is reeeeeeally important.
>
>
>
> On 07/02/2017 05:44 PM, David Megginson wrote:
>
> > The airspace system is in the process of changing drastically, and I'm
> > following it this summer by finally biting the bullet and installing an
> IFR
> > GPS (Garmin GTN 650 <https://buy.garmin.com/en-CA/CA/p/67884>) and ADS-B
> > transponder (Garmin GTX 345 <https://buy.garmin.com/en-CA/CA/p/140949>)
> in
> > my Piper Warrior II.
> >
> > What this means that for the first time in the 15 years since I started
> > flying in real life, I won't be able to use FlightGear to practice the
> IFR
> > approaches I'm flying in real life.[snip]
> > I don't have an easy solution — even with our amazing team of volunteer
> > developers, I doubt we have the capacity to pull this off — but then I
> > wonder whether that means that the usefulness of FlightGear will also
> > gradually taper off. Maybe we'll be able to connect to external
> simulators
> > for these units, and just accept not seeing them in the 3D cockpit.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> 1) A year and a half ago some efforts were made in this direction.  Then
>  the conversation suddenly stopped.  It might be worth checking up on:
>  On 01/26/2016 07:51 AM, Laurent wrote [..........]
>  Subject:  G1000 implementation based on HTML/Phi
>
>
> 2) As I tell my students in real life:  Don't get intimidated or hypnotized
>  by the huge number of features.  90% of the value comes from 10% of the
>  features.  Actually that's becoming more and more of an understatement.
>  With rare exceptions, you can ignore the features you're not using.
>
>  This is relevant to FG in the sense that it is not important to implement
>  all the features.  Most can be left out in the short term, and some can
>  be left out forever.
>
>
> 3) Somebody should approach Garmin and see if they want to cooperate.
>  They might want to.  They might even release an open-source version
>  of their simulator.  If they don't want to go that far, they might
>  release an opaque blob with a documented API that FG could call.
>
>
> This is reeeeeally important.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Fli...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
>