David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

> 
> There are obviously some aerodynamic changes in the 172R as well as
> the more obvious powerplant and panel changes.  Our JSBSim model uses
> mostly the standard 172/182 coefficients that Roskam provides, but
> these are probably wrong for the 172R.
> 
> A while ago, Alex suggested that we would be better modelling the
> 172M/N/P (I think), since those are more common.  In retrospect, I
> agree, for a slightly different reason -- I don't think that we have
> access to the right numbers for a 172R.
> 
> What does everyone else think?  Would you all be happy to see the tach
> calibrated to 2700 rather than 2400, and lose 100RPM when you switch
> on carb heat?
> 

Makes sense to me.  Especially if you do most of your hours in the
c172p...makes for easy checking of those tweaks!  Think someone posted a photo
from this page to the list once before, but here's an interesting review (with
a few screen shots) of a photo textured model someone did of the c172p for FS2000:

http://www.avsim.com/pages/1000/dreamfleet/df172.shtml

Maybe you should start taking your camera with you?

Best,

Jim


_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to