> > This would be the "easy" way to supply the data. However, I think it > > might be better if the power draw figure was part of the instrument > > definition itself. This would require 2 new tags added to the xml files > > that are used to define each instrument - I'm referring to the > > configurationd data found in data/Aircraft/Instruments. > > This sounds like a good idea, but I expect that the lack of good > information spoiled the idea. One might be able to get the power > consumption by a device, but often the peak power consumption is much > higher. And it's the peak power consumption that causes circuit breakers > to pop out. > > I could imagine that certain actions can cause circuit breakers to pop > most of the time on some aircraft, but defining the power consumption > based on specific actions might be a little to much to ask for aircraft > developers. >
Avionics power ratings are always available as nominal and max normal draw. Electrical systems are designed with a bit of extra capacity to deal with power on rush current, etc. The only time an aircraft author would have to give the the current draw any thought at all is if they're also building special avionics and even then, they only really need to specify the nominal draw. The only time the breakers will pop is either on command from an instructor station or via a random systems failure routine. g. _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
