Elaborate.
Local angle version? Unless I'm misunderstanding you that IS what it outputs.
I think a "local" angle version of the direction vector output on the beacon sensor would be a very convenient feature. Anyone agree?
Elaborate.
Local angle version? Unless I'm misunderstanding you that IS what it outputs.
The "direction vector" is relative to the world position and ignores the beacon sensor's rotation.Elaborate.
Local angle version? Unless I'm misunderstanding you that IS what it outputs.[/b]
For example, I have the locater 10,0,0 with the beacon sensor 0, 0, 0 angle. However, when I change the angle to 0, 90, 0 the distance vector remains 10,0,0 rather than 0,10,0 if it took into account the beacon sensor's angle. That is true regardless of the sensor's angle, no matter how I change the angle, it stays the same. I didn't see a option to make the angle local, only to normalize. (I think the normalized vector angle would be much better than the current elevation/bearing, due to the whole -90 90 thing on elevation.)
Actually, yesterday I tested a design for an RPG-dodging hoverplatform using expression gate vector functions. I found that the X,Y,Z outputs of the beacon sensor were in local coordinate space, but the target velocity X, Y, Z were in global coordinate space. (I wanted it to try to dodge only if the RPG was angled towards the platform, with +/- 45 degrees).
x* x+ 17 = 0
When keeping it real goes wrong.
I really think its about time you wire-guys made it so you could use a -180 to 180 pitch/elevation (as an additional option).
You could actually find the local angle vector by having a gyroscope in the same direction of the beacon-sensor.
Haven't tried it yet though, like so many other codes I think about fast.Code:@SH Local Vector Angle I@Pitch Yaw Roll Xold Yold Zold O@X Y Z Vold=vector(Xold,Yold,Zold) NewPitch=(abs(Roll)>90?angnorm(180-Pitch):Pitch) Vnew=vecrotate(Vold,-NewPitch,-Yaw,-Roll) X=vecx(Vnew) Y=vecy(Vnew) Z=vecz(Vnew)
Everything can be improved upon. Nothing is Perfect.
The only way to move forward, is to surpass what has already been done.
Creator of many things.
I'll try it again, but I am pretty sure it wasn't relative to the sensor's angle.Actually, yesterday I tested a design for an RPG-dodging hoverplatform using expression gate vector functions. I found that the X,Y,Z outputs of the beacon sensor were in local coordinate space, but the target velocity X, Y, Z were in global coordinate space. (I wanted it to try to dodge only if the RPG was angled towards the platform, with +/- 45 degrees).[/b]
As I thought, the angle made no difference on the vector.
The slight change was purely from my imperfect rotation. Besides, a 90 degree rotation would pretty much cause the x and y values to nearly swap if it was relative to the sensor's angle.
Ahh, you used the DirectionVector output.
Actually, there are three output types, like in this picture:
I used "split x,y,z," which is in local coordinate space.
x* x+ 17 = 0
When keeping it real goes wrong.
Yay, now I think I can get something working right.Ahh, you used the DirectionVector output.
Actually, there are three output types, like in this picture:
I used "split x,y,z," which is in local coordinate space.[/b]
one prob i hav on idea how to use vectors even though i play alot of flight sims(look in the off topic forum)I think a "local" angle version of the direction vector output on the beacon sensor would be a very convenient feature. Anyone agree?[/b]
ive got 2 tickets to paradise..in my pants.You put the plug in the socket.
Bookmarks