AJ MacLeod wrote

> On Tuesday 14 Jun 2005 22:57, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > Is this in roll only? The ailerons are much more powerful, but also
> damped.
> > There shouldn't be any rapid movement in the ailerons, but the stick
> > reflects the input. Look at the ailerons in an external view - are they
> > jumping around too?
> Yes to both - it's in roll only (although once the plane is bucking around
> like that, pitch starts to become involved as well!)  I was wondering if
> the
> wind moving ailerons, e.g. at rest on the ground (is that even modelled?)

No - not modelled - the stick follows input, and the ailerons follow the
surface positions after processing.

> moved the stick but obviously if the stick represents what my joystick
> input
> is, then that's the problem.
> > There is the gyro effect of the prop, and the tail is offset to
> compensate,
> > but it shouldn't be too difficult. Try the rudder trim.
> Yes, I was assuming that those effects should be controllable fairly
> easily;
> although I've certainly not flown a Hurricane or Spit (or anything other
> than
> a Bocian, for that matter!) the amplitude of this effect feels entirely
> out
> of proportion with "reality" even as modelled in the rest of the sim.

The Spitfire may have a bit too much gyro effect as currently modelled -
I'll revisit that idc. However, by repute it needed full rudder to hold it
straight on take-off. I think the Hurricane is more or less right.

> > What joystick are you using? I have to say that I suspect a hardware
> > problem by your description.
> So do I, which is why I was tentatively checking that I'm not just a
> completely useless pilot (although that's probably still true :-)
> It's a cheap (and fairly nasty) analogue stick made by InterAct.  And it's
> almost nine years old.  Looks like it's time to spend a few quid then!  I
> normally fly the Hunter though and it doesn't show any misbehaviour unless
> I've forgotten to calibrate the stick first, which is why I've not
> investigated further before.

If you decide on a Logitech the extra money to extend the guarantee could be
a good investment - I've replaced 3 under mine!

> > Sea Hurricane next, when I've done with this one. Then back to re-work
> the
> > Spitfire and Hunter. Probably a year's work!
> Still not tempted by a Bucc? ;-)  Oh well, one mustn't be greedy!  

Yes - I went as far as to look at a cockpit section at the Manston Museum
last year. Daunting! I was also put off by the arrangements of BLC, blown
flaps etc. I haven't abandoned the idea yet, but lack of technical data is
holding me back. I'm researching the Sea Vixen right now. 14 (yes 14!) fuel
tanks, and a tail which is linked to the flaps (as was the Buccaneer's). All
very complex. So far I've only modelled aircraft for which I've had access
to the pilot's notes, and, in the case of the Seahawk and Hunter, a pilot.

> I'm
> currently attempting a Lightning, using AC3D rather than Blender this
> time,
> with tips from the (pretty good) series of tutorials posted here a short
> time
> ago.  So far I've got a fuselage, tail and 80% of the wing done and
> looking
> almost reasonable, which is a whole lot more than I've managed before...
> whether or not it turns out to be remotely near releasable quality remains
> to
> be seen!  Are most you (or most people here) using AC3D or something else?

I use AC3D - I dislike Blender with a passion - too complex and
non-intuitive. I gave up in frustration. The latest AC3D has some nice
features. Others can do great things with Blender - Melchior can make it sit
up and beg.

Have you seen the recent Aeroplane magazine? It has comprehensive series of
articles on the Lightning: excellent source data.

Keep at it - it just takes time - you can hijack most of the Hunter
instruments for the interior. 

> > Did you try the yasim.diff yet (posted to the list earlier) - if you
> > haven't I would be grateful for any feedback - it shouldn't break
> anything,
> > and enables several other features such as the boost gauge and the Boost
> > Control Cutout. The modified supercharger output should make landing
> much
> > easier too.
> I must confess I didn't, but if I get a chance tomorrow, I'll give it a
> go.



Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to