Erik Hofman writes: > > Note also that making this the default means switching from the > > c172r.xml JSBSim file, which Tony maintains, to the c172p.xml JSBSim > > file, which I maintain. It's not really that big a jump, since mine > > is plagerized 99.8% from Tony's, and Tony is welcome to take over > > c172p.xml as well. > > Is there that much difference in cockpit layout?
Mainly in the panel. It's still a standard T configuration, so the main 6 are where you'd expect them, but some of the other stuff like the tachometer and engine gauges move around. Many 172P's don't have an EGT gauge, and many (most?) have older radios. The 172R ships with newer gyros with red flags that drop automatically on a gyro failure; most 172P's have no such thing. If you move back to the 172M, you might have an ASI calibrated in MPH rather than KT and even a funkier panel; if you move back to a 1960s 172, you can no longer even count on a standard T configuration, so the HI might be right to the left of the AI (where you'd expect the ASI), etc. Most importantly, the 172R is fuel-injected, so it has a fuel pump, no carb heat, and a very different start-up procedure (it's easy to flood); the 172P is carburated, so it has a carb-heat knob (now modelled in the 3D cockpit) and a manual primer, but no fuel pump. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
