Magnetic Heading

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi,

is it possible to add "Magnetic Heading Navigation" in APM 
It will be very useful for different type of navigation.
The ability to hold a magnetic heading is fundamental in aviation yet !

Thank you,
Evgeni Trenev

Original issue reported on code.google.com by etre...@gmail.com on 6 Sep 2011 at 1:12

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Just curious, as APM just allows creation of waypoints and draws lines between 
them, do you mean you want to be able to draw lines at magnetic headings, and 
imply waypoint creation at the ends of those lines?

For example: you want to input a mission that, from a point, flies X meters at 
a "magnetic heading" of Y, then another point is created, and so on? That would 
not be a specific feature to do just with magnetic headings, more like a 
feature requesting a different way of planning a mission track.

Original comment by justinbe...@gmail.com on 6 Sep 2011 at 1:30

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Issue 408 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by dewei...@gmail.com on 7 Sep 2011 at 6:57

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I think that will be interesting to add a heading like number from 0 to 359 to 
set a flying direction. In the aviation this is a normal type of navigation. 
You can use this in case of GPS signal lose or GPS failure.  

Original comment by etre...@gmail.com on 8 Sep 2011 at 6:39

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I agree that it would be very usefull to implement a headinglock for FBW, but 
for navigating i think it is not woth the work.

Original comment by DerFuc...@googlemail.com on 8 Sep 2011 at 11:23

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Actually the implantation of magnetic heading for navigation could be useful.  
One issue with flying UAS within the national airspace is the inability of many 
UA's to accept vectors based on aircraft headings.  Since most UA's are purely 
GPS based for navigation they will fly a precise ground track whereas other 
manned aircraft will fly a heading that ATC issued.  The manned aircraft does 
not account for wind, instead ATC does. Realistically people using this 
autopilot are not operating IFR and integrating within national airspace but it 
would be a great proof of concept. 

Original comment by cctaylor...@gmail.com on 23 Sep 2011 at 6:32

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What is the need?  

If it is simply proof of concept, that is not something that needs to be in the 
main code base.  Users are free to modify the code for their own purposes, and 
such a proof of concept can be made in that fashion without adding unnecessary 
code to the main code base.  We do have limited space. 

Original comment by dewei...@gmail.com on 25 Sep 2011 at 10:22

[GoogleCodeExporter]

That is a great point and I completely agree with you, it is not needed in the 
main code base.  

Original comment by cctaylor...@gmail.com on 27 Sep 2011 at 7:31

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by amilcar....@gmail.com on 11 Oct 2011 at 9:44

• Added labels: Type-Enhancement

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by dewei...@gmail.com on 31 Oct 2011 at 4:49

• Changed state: WontFix

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Actually I see this as a useful feature that would pave the way for a possible 
hardware panel implementation, with rotary encoders with which we could change 
desired heading, altitude and speed (much like some of the navigation modes in 
full-size aircraft). This would entail the creation of more navigation modes 
(HDG, ALT, SPD, LVL CHG) that could change the piloting style from pointing & 
clicking on a notebook to turning knobs on the panel, much more aviation-style. 
Many flight-simmers do this already. OTOH I do see that this is a niche feature 
that would not benefit the majority of users. Too bad.

Original comment by bruno.b....@gmail.com on 24 Oct 2012 at 10:43