> The chance of reaching 100,000 ft is not the only issue. > > Things pilots care about include: > -- RPM as a function of altitude, prop control, throttle, etc. > -- MAP as a function of .. .. > -- Rate of climb as a function of .. .. > -- Level-flight speed as a function of .. .. > -- Mixture requirements as a function of .. .. > -- EGT as a function of mixture and .. .. > -- fuel-consumption rates as a function of .. .. > > > > IMHO the FGPiston model is ok and you should close the bug report. > > Evidently "ok" means different things to different people. > > *) Some FG users don't care much about the aforementioned items or > about handling or flight dynamics in general. Some of them may > actually prefer a model that doesn't consume any fuel. > > *) Some of them do care.
John: I agree with your above statements. This may constitute a different bug report, but after investigating the one mentioned, I decided it was not likely to be a problem as reported. I tried contacting you earlier this week via email. If you have specific, reproducible, problems with the engine, I'd like to see a bug report specifically about that. I've heard anecdotal evidence of some of the items you mention, and with or without a formal bug report, those items are in the queue. Jon ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
