Sounds interesting, which photo scenery do you work on?
(I haven't read the postings for a while)
thanks
georg
-Original Message-
From: Colin Rose [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Dienstag, 28. Mai 2002 02:52
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Report on my
Andy Ross writes:
I'm pretty sure that under the current YASim configurations, a
positive /controls/rudder input from the joystick will produce a
/surface-positions/rudder-norm of the same sign. That seems
rational to me, so I hereby hand the bug off to the JSB folks to
fix or further
I agree -- JSBSim is reporting a positive normalized position for a
negative input (and vice-versa). Obviously, we've made allowances for
that in the model animations, but it's inconsistent with the behaviour
elsewhere. I'll look into fixing it.
Before making changes, can you elaborate on
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I agree -- JSBSim is reporting a positive normalized position for a
negative input (and vice-versa). Obviously, we've made allowances for
that in the model animations, but it's inconsistent with the behaviour
elsewhere. I'll look into fixing it.
No elaboration needed. Thanks David.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jon Berndt
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 6:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Rudder inverted again in yasim
I agree -- JSBSim is
Jon Berndt writes:
I agree -- JSBSim is reporting a positive normalized position for
a negative input (and vice-versa). Obviously, we've made
allowances for that in the model animations, but it's
inconsistent with the behaviour elsewhere. I'll look into fixing
it.
Before
OK. But I am not sure I agree with FlightGear's convention. The rudder Z
axis is downward. A positive deflection (by the right hand rule) rotates
(should rotate) the trailing edge left. The elevator deflection follows
the same convention, right hand rule about the Y axis hinge line. Aileron
is
Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
In other news, I think I've got a 2.95.2 build that fails the same way
yours does. I'm still at the yup, it don't work stage, though. No
analysis yet.
Interesting. Also a few months ago we discussed a power problem at altitude
with the 747. Around 25000
Andy:
One thing to consider is whether the autopilot is optimizing for
the correct solution to the equations. There are always two solutions,
one slower with higher drag and the other faster with lower drag.
Depending on altitude and power, one of these can be below stall speed.
Near the
On Sat, 27 Apr 2002 01:57:09 -0500 Jonathan Polleywrote
When you state your concerns about the FAA,
I assume that you are talking about avionics software, probably DO-178B
level C or higher.The vast majority of modern (1987+) avionics
software that I have seen is in Ada, largely due to
On Sat, 27 Apr 2002 01:57:09 -0500 Jonathan Polley wrote
When you state your concerns about the FAA, I assume that you are talking
about avionics software, probably DO-178B level C or higher.
FlightGear is a combination of an aircraft FDM, a GIS database and a 3D GUI.
When placed into an
Alex Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Andy:
One thing to consider is whether the autopilot is optimizing for
the correct solution to the equations.
Basically the autopilot just targets the max climb/descent rate until desired
altitude is reached. It needs work. The current autopilot
Jim Wilson wrote:
The pitch angle seems to be way too high when at altitude (not
climbing) [...] But now I'm thinking that the real issue has to do
with the lift calculation. [...] The altitude starts to decrease
smoothly as IAS passes below 300knots...not in a stall fashion.
This is
Just got that Virus. Look at the From: and it's text...
CU,
Christian
Message-ID: md5:85B9914316D8E05B3319FC316B764F4E
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from dartagnan.telusquebec.com ([142.169.1.123]) by
On Tue, 28 May 2002 10:04:12 -0700
Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hopefully I got the conventions right. The point being not that
YASim's coordinate system is inherently better**, but that making the
joystick inputs match the coordinate sense is possible with a right
handed coordinate
Jim Wilson writes:
The pitch angle seems to be way too high when at altitude (not
climbing), which of course would cause a decrease of airspeed and
power. The altitude starts to decrease smoothly as IAS passes
below 300knots...not in a stall fashion. This is running with
the default
[Curt: this deserves a link on the FlightGear site.]
[Jon: ditto for the JSBSim site.]
I think that this could be a treasure trove of aero data from the
European Organization for the Safety of Air Navigation. Here's the
abstract from the BADA manual for version 2.6:
The Base of Aircraft
On Tue, 2002-05-28 at 09:21, Jim Wilson wrote:
Alex Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Andy:
One thing to consider is whether the autopilot is optimizing for
the correct solution to the equations.
Basically the autopilot just targets the max climb/descent rate until desired
altitude
On Dienstag, 28. Mai 2002 19:22 Christian Mayer wrote:
Just got that Virus. Look at the From: and it's text...
It's the good ole klez worm. Gode save Linux ;)
Martin
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.martinhenne.de
___
Flightgear-devel mailing
On Tue, 28 May 2002 09:06:35 -0700 (PDT),
Alex Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sat, 27 Apr 2002 01:57:09 -0500 Jonathan Polley wrote
When you state your concerns about the FAA, I assume that you are
talking about avionics software, probably DO-178B level
* Curtis L. Olson -- Tuesday 28 May 2002 23:35:
Melchior FRANZ writes:
* Curtis L. Olson -- Tuesday 28 May 2002 23:22:
Melchior FRANZ writes:
$ w3m http://localhost:5500/
fgfs --jpg-httpd=5501
I don't believe a default is specified or defined, you can use which
ever ports
I'm currently working on a web-based TreeViewer for the Property-Tree which
loads nodes and values dynamically.
Hope that anybody (except me) has use for it ...
georg
-Original Message-
From: Melchior FRANZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Dienstag, 28. Mai 2002 23:42
To: [EMAIL
On Monday, May 27, 2002, at 04:43 PM, joe mangan wrote:
Standards for application to general aviation aircraft have been revised as to reduce the burden for
certification of specific classes of avionics equipment.
AC 29-1309
An alternative would be to consider an effort to certify
Tony Peden [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Just something to file away ... big jets should have a climb mode in
which the power is regulated to max climb by the autothrottles and speed
is held with the pitch control.
Filed it away. But not sure of the purpose of this mode. It'd seem that
pitch
Just something to file away ... big jets should have a climb mode in
which the power is regulated to max climb by the autothrottles and speed
is held with the pitch control.
Filed it away. But not sure of the purpose of this mode.
It's more efficient as follows ...
The autothrottle
On Tue, 2002-05-28 at 19:30, Jim Wilson wrote:
Tony Peden [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Just something to file away ... big jets should have a climb mode in
which the power is regulated to max climb by the autothrottles and speed
is held with the pitch control.
Filed it away. But not sure
I finally had some time to play around with FG the other day (first time
in a few weeks), so let me preface all of this with the fact that I'm
not running the latest CVS. Mine is from May 18th. I don't have time
to update and rebuild everything right now, so sorry. Now, on with the
bugs...
27 matches
Mail list logo
