On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 18:11:22 -0500, David wrote in message
> On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 17:14:44 +0100, Arnt Karlsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ..eh, in RL, you often _can't_ see the ground at night, just lights.
> I'll confirm that. The runway and taxiway lights are aimed up and do
> not illuminate the pavement at all (not even a tiny area around each
> light). That's why you need landing (and often taxi) lights. Even
> with a landing/taxi light, taxiing on a cloudy or moonless night is
> enormously difficult -- you can hardly see the yellow line or the
> turnoffs, and most of the time you're just rolling through a sea of
> If anything, the ground in FlightGear is too bright at night. It's
> appropriate for a well-lit urban area or a full moon on a clear night,
> but the runway is far too bright for a cloudy night.
> > For example, do we properly model the impact on night vision
> > from hypoxia?
> That's a surprisingly sneaky thing in real life. At night, descending
> from (say) 6,000 ft enroute altitude to the airport, I have a couple
> of times had a *lot* of trouble finding the airport at night. I don't
> feel like I'm having trouble seeing; it's just that the lights don't
> stand out. That's never a problem if I'm lined up with the runway on
> an approach, because those lights are so bright and directional, but
> even then judging the flare is a big challenge.
..this is with or without oxygen?
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.
Flightgear-devel mailing list