> 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 aircraft, I don't see any benefit in using our FDM since we would be accepting a data feed from the aircraft in --fdm=external. Given that scenario, the remaining GIS and GUI components are only providing a way to interpret the data feed and, in themselves, cannot affect the acft. Providing the FGFS GUI is advisory and not a primary instrument, most of the requirements go away and we're in the same situation as all those moving map displays that are essentially a tiny Windows NT computer with LCD screen. > An alternative would be to consider an effort to certify FlightGear > as a Flight Training Device under > AC 120-45A What do you seek to gain from that ? FTDs are required to have a physical instrument panel and cockpit and a separate instructor console. The visual display, which we're so proud of, is optional and the FDM can be minimal. _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
