Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
2011/12/23 Jon S. Berndt jonsber...@comcast.net: Also, I guess we should have some discussion on where the official version of some JSBSim aircraft should reside. I think I'll be culling some models from the JSBSim distribution - models that have been untouched for a long time. I'd like to issue a new release - a formal v1.0 release - on the JSBSim site soon, since I've been getting some polite pressure to do so. :-) It's important to maintain some good flight models in the JSBSim distribution, but I can understand the problems that dual-hosting can lead to. I don't have any suggestions in mind... Jon Also it should be noted that there are previous experiences where some JSBSim models have been maintained in FlightGear and that resulted in a loss of compatibility with JSBSim stand-alone (see bug SF #3433548 for instance where the p51d model can no longer be run in JSBSim stand-alone). Test cases are definitely needed to maintain JSBSim code and most of them are based on an aircraft that has a counterpart in FlightGear. If the maintenance of these aircrafts are transferred to FlightGear, they will sooner or later end up with a FlightGear-only AP and/or stuffed with Nasal. The result will be that they will no longer be able to run in JSBSim stand-alone. While FDMs maintained in JSBSim can be used readily in FlightGear where they do not need any conversion to be run. The C172 is the aircraft on which many JSBSim test cases are based. Therefore, for the reasons mentioned above, I would not consider as a wise decision to let it being transferred to FlightGear. My 2 cents. Bertrand. -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
we believe it is intentional. the final increase in slipstream velocity (over the free stream velocity) is 2* the increase in velocity at the actuator disk. Which is consistent with the c172p FDM -Stuart Yes, its added twice to avoid the multiplication. Ron Ah, yes, found it in McCormick's Chapter six. Should we add some comment in c172p.xml as a reference for future generations? The computation is not very intuitive at first sight (at least for me). diff --git a/Aircraft/c172p/c172p.xml b/Aircraft/c172p/c172p.xml index b28511e..933ea11 100644 --- a/Aircraft/c172p/c172p.xml +++ b/Aircraft/c172p/c172p.xml @@ -451,6 +451,9 @@ /product /function +!-- the final increase in slipstream velocity (over the free stream velocity) + is 2 times the increase in velocity at the actuator disk. + McCormick, Aerodynamics, Aeronautics, and Flight Mechanics (6.9) -- function name=aero/function/velocity-induced-fps description velocity including the propulsion induced velocity./description Torsten -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Ah, yes, found it in McCormick's Chapter six. Should we add some comment in c172p.xml as a reference for future generations? The computation is not very intuitive at first sight (at least for me). Torsten I think that's a very good idea. Also, I guess we should have some discussion on where the official version of some JSBSim aircraft should reside. I think I'll be culling some models from the JSBSim distribution - models that have been untouched for a long time. I'd like to issue a new release - a formal v1.0 release - on the JSBSim site soon, since I've been getting some polite pressure to do so. :-) It's important to maintain some good flight models in the JSBSim distribution, but I can understand the problems that dual-hosting can lead to. I don't have any suggestions in mind... Jon -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Martin Spott wrote: Ron Jensen wrote: I just noticed the c172p.xml (FDM) in FGData doesn't match the one in JSBSim. What's your conclusion ? Conclusion is that the FG c172p FDM is out of date and doesn't include the latest changes that Ron made to Add propellor induced velocity factor to Cmde and Cndr. Enhances ground operations.. I _think_ means additional prop-wash to increase rudder effectiveness and wing airflow at low airspeeds. I've not committed these changes to the FG c172p FDM. -Stuart -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Stuart Buchanan wrote: I've not committed these changes to the FG c172p FDM. Sorry, that should be I've _now_ committed these changes to the FG c172p FDM -Stuart -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Stuart Buchanan wrote: On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Martin Spott wrote: Ron Jensen wrote: I just noticed the c172p.xml (FDM) in FGData doesn't match the one in JSBSim. What's your conclusion ? Conclusion is that the FG c172p FDM is out of date and doesn't include the latest changes that Ron made [...] I just wonder if it's really the most clever idea to have FG's default aircraft FDM maintained outside FG without an established procedure to merge updates into FG this sounds rather obscure, to put it mildly. Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Martin Spott wrote: Stuart Buchanan wrote: On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Martin Spott wrote: Ron Jensen wrote: I just noticed the c172p.xml (FDM) in FGData doesn't match the one in JSBSim. What's your conclusion ? Conclusion is that the FG c172p FDM is out of date and doesn't include the latest changes that Ron made [...] I just wonder if it's really the most clever idea to have FG's default aircraft FDM maintained outside FG without an established procedure to merge updates into FG this sounds rather obscure, to put it mildly. There IS a script that copies FDMs from JSBSim over to FG to keep them up to date. However, I don't know if it's working. I'm happy with manually updating the FG c172p FDM when appropriate - though probably more regularly than once per release, and ideally not immediately after feature freeze! I prefer manually syncing and checking that the changes are valid, rather than blindly over-riding what we've already got. -Stuart -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Wed, 2011-12-21 at 10:36 +, Stuart Buchanan wrote: There IS a script that copies FDMs from JSBSim over to FG to keep them up to date. However, I don't know if it's working. It should work properly but is getting increasingly difficult to use since some models are maintained in JSBSim CVS and others in the flightgear base package. It is often a matter of cherry picking by hand eventually. Erik -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
I prefer manually syncing and checking that the changes are valid, rather than blindly over-riding what we've already got. Hi Stuart, this -sin -propertyaero/alpha-rad/property -/sin +propertyaero/alpha-rad/property value-1.8000/value reintroduces a bug, IIRC that had something to do with tailwind behavior. I think we should keep the sin function. Torsten -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Torsten Dreyer wrote: I prefer manually syncing and checking that the changes are valid, rather than blindly over-riding what we've already got. Hi Stuart, this - sin - propertyaero/alpha-rad/property - /sin + propertyaero/alpha-rad/property value-1.8000/value reintroduces a bug, IIRC that had something to do with tailwind behavior. I think we should keep the sin function. Agreed - that's a mistake in my checkin. I will correct it. -Stuart -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Agreed - that's a mistake in my checkin. I will correct it. -Stuart OK - one more. function name=aero/function/velocity-induced-fps description velocity including the propulsion induced velocity./description sum propertyvelocities/u-aero-fps/property propertypropulsion/engine/prop-induced-velocity_fps/property propertypropulsion/engine/prop-induced-velocity_fps/property /sum /function Why is prop-induced-velocity_fps added twice? Is that by intention? Torsten -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote: Agreed - that's a mistake in my checkin. I will correct it. -Stuart OK - one more. function name=aero/function/velocity-induced-fps description velocity including the propulsion induced velocity./description sum propertyvelocities/u-aero-fps/property propertypropulsion/engine/prop-induced-velocity_fps/property propertypropulsion/engine/prop-induced-velocity_fps/property /sum /function Why is prop-induced-velocity_fps added twice? Is that by intention? From discussion with AndersG on IRC who checked his aerodynamics text, we believe it is intentional. the final increase in slipstream velocity (over the free stream velocity) is 2* the increase in velocity at the actuator disk. Which is consistent with the c172p FDM -Stuart -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Wednesday 21 December 2011 14:50:39 Stuart Buchanan wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote: Agreed - that's a mistake in my checkin. I will correct it. -Stuart OK - one more. function name=aero/function/velocity-induced-fps description velocity including the propulsion induced velocity./description sum propertyvelocities/u-aero-fps/property propertypropulsion/engine/prop-induced-velocity_fps/property propertypropulsion/engine/prop-induced-velocity_fps/property /sum /function Why is prop-induced-velocity_fps added twice? Is that by intention? From discussion with AndersG on IRC who checked his aerodynamics text, we believe it is intentional. the final increase in slipstream velocity (over the free stream velocity) is 2* the increase in velocity at the actuator disk. Which is consistent with the c172p FDM -Stuart Yes, its added twice to avoid the multiplication. Ron -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Wednesday 21 December 2011 04:09:35 Stuart Buchanan wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Torsten Dreyer wrote: I prefer manually syncing and checking that the changes are valid, rather than blindly over-riding what we've already got. Hi Stuart, this - sin - propertyaero/alpha-rad/property - /sin + propertyaero/alpha-rad/property value-1.8000/value reintroduces a bug, IIRC that had something to do with tailwind behavior. I think we should keep the sin function. Agreed - that's a mistake in my checkin. I will correct it. -Stuart I missed backporting this to the JSBSim side. I've also got an experimental FDM with many more of these wrapped in sine or cosine functions as appropriate. This will make the forces and moments trend in the correct directions, even if the magnitudes aren't quite right. Perhaps a improved stall system for JSBSim will be ready for 2.8 Ron -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On 14 December 2011 20:07, Gijs de Rooy gijsr...@hotmail.com wrote: A great source of dimensions is http://gallery.tigert.com/gallery/c172dim Note that this is a C172N (not P), but there doesn't seem to be much of a difference between the two models cockpitwise. Yeah. That's our club's OH-CTL (which reached 15000 flight hours this summer...) If you need more dimensions or maybe texture photos, I am more than happy to take them for you, even edit them to fit a certain texture rectangle, just let me know. I want to learn how to do modelling so this would be interesting if I can help this way first..? Nor does it have photorealistic texturing... This is easy to fix if desired :-) I could snap some pics on saturday and lets see if those would be useful..? //Tuomas -- Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Ron Jensen wrote: I just noticed the c172p.xml (FDM) in FGData doesn't match the one in JSBSim. What's your conclusion ? Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Learn Windows Azure Live! Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011 Microsoft is holding a special Learn Windows Azure training event for developers. It will provide a great way to learn Windows Azure and what it provides. You can attend the event by watching it streamed LIVE online. Learn more at http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-windowsazure ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 5:06 AM, Patrick Callahan wrote: What can be said about the flight dynamics of the C172P model? Is it accurate? If not, how could it be improved? It's currently got a 3 rating. It matches some of the PoH numbers (cruise speed, rate of climb) for an aircraft fitted with a cruise prop rather than a climb prop. IIRC the stall is too low and the slide-slip behaviour is incorrect. Certainly the FDM would benefit from some TLC, but it requires someone with a bit of JSBSim knowledge, or the time to learn, and ideally someone with some time in the 172 who can compare it to the real thing. The two people don't necessarily have to be the same person, though they'd probably have to work quite closely together. -Stuart -- Learn Windows Azure Live! Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011 Microsoft is holding a special Learn Windows Azure training event for developers. It will provide a great way to learn Windows Azure and what it provides. You can attend the event by watching it streamed LIVE online. Learn more at http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-windowsazure ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Patrick Callahan wrote: What can be said about the flight dynamics of the C172P model? Is it accurate? If not, how could it be improved? The response varies _much_ depending on whom you ask :-) Personally I'm quite confident with FlightGear's flight dynamics, but there's always room for improvement and if you know someone who's flying the real one (maybe you're evn doing yourself), take a stopwatch, pen and paper and record climb rates at certain weather conditions and power settings and the like. Note that there are many, many different variants of the real one, therefore claims like it climbs too fast might be rather moot the smaller the deviation gets, because it depends much on the weight (which might depend a lot on the installed equipment) and the condition of the aircraft. Just an idea - cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Learn Windows Azure Live! Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011 Microsoft is holding a special Learn Windows Azure training event for developers. It will provide a great way to learn Windows Azure and what it provides. You can attend the event by watching it streamed LIVE online. Learn more at http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-windowsazure ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Martin Spott wrote: Note that there are many, many different variants of the real one, therefore claims like it climbs too fast might be rather moot the smaller the deviation gets, because it depends much on the weight (which might depend a lot on the installed equipment) and the condition of the aircraft. assuming that you're always flying with the same amount of fuel and pilot/passenger weight ;-) Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Learn Windows Azure Live! Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011 Microsoft is holding a special Learn Windows Azure training event for developers. It will provide a great way to learn Windows Azure and what it provides. You can attend the event by watching it streamed LIVE online. Learn more at http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-windowsazure ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Am 18.12.2011 12:02, schrieb Martin Spott: Personally I'm quite confident with FlightGear's flight dynamics, but there's always room for improvement and if you know someone who's flying the real one (maybe you're evn doing yourself), take a stopwatch, pen and paper and record climb rates at certain weather conditions and power settings and the like. I used these a lot for tuning the Seneca's FDM: http://www.avweb.com/news/airman/182410-1.html http://www.avweb.com/news/airman/182418-1.html Torsten -- Learn Windows Azure Live! Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011 Microsoft is holding a special Learn Windows Azure training event for developers. It will provide a great way to learn Windows Azure and what it provides. You can attend the event by watching it streamed LIVE online. Learn more at http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-windowsazure ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Sunday 18 December 2011 04:02:01 Martin Spott wrote: Patrick Callahan wrote: What can be said about the flight dynamics of the C172P model? Is it accurate? If not, how could it be improved? The response varies _much_ depending on whom you ask :-) Personally I'm quite confident with FlightGear's flight dynamics, but there's always room for improvement and if you know someone who's flying the real one (maybe you're evn doing yourself), take a stopwatch, pen and paper and record climb rates at certain weather conditions and power settings and the like. Note that there are many, many different variants of the real one, therefore claims like it climbs too fast might be rather moot the smaller the deviation gets, because it depends much on the weight (which might depend a lot on the installed equipment) and the condition of the aircraft. Just an idea - cheers, Martin. I just noticed the c172p.xml (FDM) in FGData doesn't match the one in JSBSim. The one in JSBSim has propeller induced effects added in. Also, the FDM, by default, Has one 180 lb pilot, no other passengers and no luggage. It also only has 200 pounds of fuel and a capacity of 370 lbs. So, it is very lightly loaded. That could be why some observe that it climbs too well. Ron -- Learn Windows Azure Live! Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011 Microsoft is holding a special Learn Windows Azure training event for developers. It will provide a great way to learn Windows Azure and what it provides. You can attend the event by watching it streamed LIVE online. Learn more at http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-windowsazure ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Sorry to respond to myself, but wanted to add some detail: Mass Properties Report (English units: lbf, in, slug-ft^2) WeightCG-XCG-YCG-Z Base Vehicle 1500.041.0 0.036.5 0 Pilot 180.036.0 -14.024.0 1 Co-Pilot 0.036.014.024.0 2 Left Passenger 0.070.0 -14.024.0 3 Right Passenger 0.070.014.024.0 4 Baggage 0.095.0 0.024.0 0 Fuel 100 56-11259.4 1 Fuel 100 56 11259.4 Total:1880.042.1-1.337.7 The CG-X arms should match what's in the TCDS and POH. The propeller file also does not match between JSBSim and FlightGear. JSBSim has the same tables, but they were commented out and replaced with new tables. Using a script I wrote to simulate a softfield takeoff technique[1], I see the following: datafiles as they are in FGDATA: Flaps 0% Time Speed RPMHeightEvent (s)(knot) (ft agl) 0 0 1900 0 Brake Release 11 40 2332 0 Rotation 17 59 2430 0 Lift off 22 71 2525 8 32 83 262184 456 fpm Flaps 30% Time Speed RPMHeightEvent (s)(knot) (ft agl) 0 0 19000 Brake Release 11 40 23300 Rotation 17 58 24230 Lift off 23 67 2500 14 33 75 2565 90 492 fpm Using JSBSim's IO-320 and Propeller Flaps 0% Time Speed RPMHeightEvent (s)(knot) (ft agl) 0 0 1900 0 Brake Release 9 39 2500 0 Rotation 13 58 2600 0 Lift off 23 84 280050 Engine over red-line 33 98 2875 200 900 fpm Flaps 30% Time Speed RPMHeightEvent (s)(knot) (ft agl) 0 0 1900 0 Brake Release 9 39 2500 0 Rotation 12 53 2600 0 Lift off 18 70 268015 23 77 2800 130 Engine over red-line 33 87 2830 216 516 fpm [1] The aim of the script was to get off the ground asap then lower the nose to gain airspeed. It does not try to establish a best climb speed. -- Learn Windows Azure Live! Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011 Microsoft is holding a special Learn Windows Azure training event for developers. It will provide a great way to learn Windows Azure and what it provides. You can attend the event by watching it streamed LIVE online. Learn more at http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-windowsazure ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
What can be said about the flight dynamics of the C172P model? Is it accurate? If not, how could it be improved? snip -- Learn Windows Azure Live! Tuesday, Dec 13, 2011 Microsoft is holding a special Learn Windows Azure training event for developers. It will provide a great way to learn Windows Azure and what it provides. You can attend the event by watching it streamed LIVE online. Learn more at http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-windowsazure ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Hello Stephan, It looks nice so far! But someone has already improved it, you can find more info here: http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14t=10187 You don't need to upload it to GIT by yourself, you can pack it in a .zip and a FGData committer can upload it for you. If you run a more recent version of FG, much better! You can use the latest tools and options. But I recommend to switch to the development version (GIT). More info here http://wiki.flightgear.org/FlightGear_and_Git Cheers. 2011/12/14 Stephan Bourgeois stepha...@hotmail.com Hello everybody, I have been looking at improving the Cessna 172p cockpit. I have been mostly focusing on the instruments. I am creating new 256px textures, and modifying the geometry and xml files when required. All the work is based on pictures of Cessna cockpits and pictures of instruments posted by avionics resellers. So far I have been working from the latest c172p model from the website, and running Flightgear 1.9.1-1 on Ubuntu. You can see the work done so far on https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/l-C4kL0msqOhfYg3pW78trtBKth8brfvXTX_6GVpOLg ( The next picture shows a close-up. This album also contains older tests I made in 2010 ) Here are some questions: 1. Should I work from a c172p model more recent than on the website? If so, where can I find the Aircrafts in gitorious? 2. How do I contribute? Do I learn to use git and create a branch? Do I post the aircraft as a .zip file for someone to look at? 3. Should I run a more recent flightgear version? (e.g. compile 2.4.0 from source) Thank You. Please give feedback and comments on the changes. Yours, Stephan. -- Cloud Computing - Latest Buzzword or a Glimpse of the Future? This paper surveys cloud computing today: What are the benefits? Why are businesses embracing it? What are its payoffs and pitfalls? http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51425149/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Cloud Computing - Latest Buzzword or a Glimpse of the Future? This paper surveys cloud computing today: What are the benefits? Why are businesses embracing it? What are its payoffs and pitfalls? http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51425149/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Here are some questions: 1. Should I work from a c172p model more recent than on the website? If so, where can I find the Aircrafts in gitorious? 2. How do I contribute? Do I learn to use git and create a branch? Do I post the aircraft as a .zip file for someone to look at? 3. Should I run a more recent flightgear version? (e.g. compile 2.4.0 from source) Hi Stephan, Stuart currently is our maintainer for the c172p and it might be a good idea to coordinate your efforts with him to avoid duplicate work. It is usually best to develop against the latest state of development which you can find at http://gitorious.org/fg Our aircraft are still in the fgdata sub project with it's direct link http://gitorious.org/fg/fgdata I'd strongly recommend learning git. Creating merge requests is by far the best way for commiters to apply patches. And for the binary, it is best to run not only the latest version (2.4.0) but build from source from the current HEAD of the next branches to make sure your changes are compatible with the next version of FlightGear. I hope this helps getting you started. The learnig curve is a little steep in the beginning but if you get stuck, there are many documents about compiling from source at the wiki and many helping hands at the forum or here on the list. Torsten -- Cloud Computing - Latest Buzzword or a Glimpse of the Future? This paper surveys cloud computing today: What are the benefits? Why are businesses embracing it? What are its payoffs and pitfalls? http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51425149/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Fernando García Liñán wrote: Hello Stephan, It looks nice so far! But someone has already improved it, you can find more info here: http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14t=10187 The changes Fernando refers to were applied before the 2.4.0 release, so any changes that Stephan has made will be in addition. There's always room to improve the aircraft further! As Torsten says, working from git will ensure that your changes will be against the very latest version of the aircraft, and will avoid hitting incompatibility issues (as you may see from the referenced forum topic). I currently maintain the c172p. The only other changes I'm aware of are some significant updates that Gijs was working on prior to the 2.4.0 release. I don't know whether he's still working on them - Gijs? Finally, if you've got some very straightforward changes, such as a texture update, you can just email them to me, and I'll see if I can apply them. -Stuart -- Cloud Computing - Latest Buzzword or a Glimpse of the Future? This paper surveys cloud computing today: What are the benefits? Why are businesses embracing it? What are its payoffs and pitfalls? http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51425149/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Hi all, Stephan in particular, Stuart wrote: I currently maintain the c172p. The only other changes I'm aware of are some significant updates that Gijs was working on prior to the 2.4.0 release. I don't know whether he's still working on them - Gijs? Right, I had indeed quite some updates (almost the entire cockpit appeared to be wrong scale/size etc.). But apparently I deleted the merge request that we used to discuss the changes and I don't have it at hand on this computer... So we can consider it lost. It was too much of a rehaul anyway. I even ended up changing the doors because they were incorrect. :-) A great source of dimensions is http://gallery.tigert.com/gallery/c172dim Note that this is a C172N (not P), but there doesn't seem to be much of a difference between the two models cockpitwise. Stuart, now we're at it, could you please decrease the cockpit-status-rating of the C172P? It really is not complete and does not fit the five-stars category. For example, our current model even lacks something as a master switch! Nor does it have photo- realistic texturing... Cheers, Gijs -- Cloud Computing - Latest Buzzword or a Glimpse of the Future? This paper surveys cloud computing today: What are the benefits? Why are businesses embracing it? What are its payoffs and pitfalls? http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51425149/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Gijs de Rooy wrote: Stuart, now we're at it, could you please decrease the cockpit-status-rating of the C172P? It really is not complete and does not fit the five-stars category. For example, our current model even lacks something as a master switch! Nor does it have photo- realistic texturing... Given the fact that all of the past attempts to add photo-realistic texturing to the C172 cockpit ended up in a disputable look I'd rather count this as a bonus point ;-) Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Cloud Computing - Latest Buzzword or a Glimpse of the Future? This paper surveys cloud computing today: What are the benefits? Why are businesses embracing it? What are its payoffs and pitfalls? http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51425149/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Cessna 172p cockpit improvement
Stuart Buchanan wrote: I currently maintain the c172p. I still don't understand why Heiko was alienated from maintaining the C172 model Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Cloud Computing - Latest Buzzword or a Glimpse of the Future? This paper surveys cloud computing today: What are the benefits? Why are businesses embracing it? What are its payoffs and pitfalls? http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sdnl/114/51425149/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
