On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:57:48 -0600 Curtis L. Olson wrote: > > 737 - large commercial jet. Reasonably well done. Flies pretty well. > Nice 2d panel with some simple glass elements.
I like the 737 -- I've probably spent as much time with it as I have
with the c172. I'm sure it's giving me bad habits; but it's fun. It
has a couple of issues I think need to be resolved before it should go
in the base package, IMHO.
The most important is that when you run it from the command line, you
get the huge "Beta" warning message telling you that it may not fly as
expected and should be used for development purposes only. If that's
not its status in FlightGear, the message should go; if that *is* its
status, then it shouldn't be included. A casual user would find that
message unsettling, IMHO.
The second -- it's had a contrail submodel added to it, and I don't
think the project is done. The contrails don't start until 7k feet,
and they look OK at altitude. But they continue on as you descend
through 7k feet and all the way to landing. When they're created
at the engines, they have forward momentum, and their deceleration is
less than what the aircraft experiences while braking on the runway.
The result is that when you land, as you brake, your contrails go
shooting forward past you and pile up on the runway ahead of you.
This continues until you stop decelerating.
The third -- I don't know when this happened, I can't find it from
browsing the CVS logs, but right now the localizer arrow is hardwired
to NAV1 and the DME is hardwired to NAV2, meaning anyone coming in
on a localizer/DME has to have both radios set to the localizer and
can't use a second navaid. This doesn't seem right to me, and I'm
pretty sure it wasn't like this at one time. I haven't submitted
a patch because I'm not sure about this and wanted others' input.
So, I guess this is a request for that input.
> c172, c172-le, c172p, c172r, c172x - I don't have the energy to sort
> out the dependencies so throw it all in.
I hope someone who does understand the dependencies and can sort it
all out will. This has confused me in the past, so I guarantee there
will be users who get confused.
> p51d - A classic WWII fighter ... also well done. Full 3d cockpit.
Just out of curiosity, what remains to be done with the Spitfire? If
it's in production, are there any reasons to favor it over the P-51,
or vice versa?
-c
--
Chris Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(remove "snip-me." to email)
"As a child I understood how to give; I have forgotten this grace since I
have become civilized." - Chief Luther Standing Bear
pgpSArqOZwMUd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
