On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 10:34 +0000, Thorben wrote: > On Wednesday 09 November 2005 19:31, Curtis L. Olson wrote: > > > The current list is: > > > > data/Aircraft/737 \ > > data/Aircraft/A-10 \ > > data/Aircraft/bo105 \ > > data/Aircraft/c172 \ > > data/Aircraft/c172p \ > > data/Aircraft/c310 \ > > data/Aircraft/c310u3a \ > > data/Aircraft/Citation \ > > data/Aircraft/f16 \ > > data/Aircraft/j3cub \ > > data/Aircraft/Hunter \ > > data/Aircraft/p51d \ > > data/Aircraft/pa28-161 \ > > data/Aircraft/ufo \ > > data/Aircraft/wrightFlyer1903 \ > > > > Just glancing through the list very quickly, potential candidates for > > inclusion might be the b1900d, Citation Bravo, Concorde, dhc2, F-8E, > > Hurricane, Marchetti, MiG-15, seahawk, Spitfire, tu154 ... (?) > > b1900d is my favourite plane, as it flies very well, has decent sound and a > really good cockpit. And even the propeller blade pitch is animated > > i would ditch either the wright flyer, c310, ufo, c172 or Hunter in favor of > b1900d. but i don't expect you to agree with me in all respects. > > thorben >
I second adding the b1900d for the above reasons. Drop the ufo as fun as it is for testing purposes it has no cockpit, and can't be verified as to the realism of the flight model. Just my opinion. The Wright Flyer could also be dropped as it's not really flyable (IMO). George Patterson _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [email protected] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
