On Mon, Sep 15, 2003 at 11:33:44PM -0400, Nick wrote: > Good evening, > Just as a matter of professional technique, the pilot's opinion is the last place to > go for verification. Do every possible thing you can to check your results > objectively. Then tell the pilot you've done every possible objective test. THEN > get the pilot's opinion.
I agree partially. Often, esp. w/ M$FS, people claim their planes are 'as real as it gets'. They are especially proud if some professional pilot flies them and attests that the simulation flies as the real thing. I'm not a pilot. But I think there's a still a huge difference between sitting in a real cockpit and having 'full motion feedback' and sitting in front of a monitor. Sure, if a model flies 'by the numbers' is a good start, but there are other properties that need to be simulated well for a good model, esp. outside of cruise (cruise is probably the simplest part). While researching numbers for the 717, i looked at some M$FS aircraft.cfg files. Often, even basic values like wing area were off by 100% !!! Not to speak of some other numbers. And this was just comparing a couple of 717s from the M$FS world against each other. Enough M$ bashing for now..... > For objective data on the 717 engine see Jane's "All the Worlds' Aircraft". Idle > thrust may be listed, or you may be able to calculate it from numbers given there. > For zero-lift drag of the 717 configuration I believe you should have a number > somewhere around Cd = .02. As a reference point most airliners have an LD of 20 > clean at cruise. Could someone with that or a similar book please help out. If you can help with better numbers for the 717-200 flightmodel that would be highly appreciated. CD0 is set to 0.02 in my 717 jsbsim config. > I have some experience in this. I hope it helps. _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
