> Perhaps engine simulation should be separated from the flight dynamic > calculations altogether? (the propellers must stay though) People may > introduce all sorts of weird engines in aircrafts: stirling or wankel > engines, rubber bands, electric motors and batteries, pigeons of burden... > ...coal fired steam engines? (ok, maybe not). And you end up supporting a > plethora of engine principles, when all you need to know is mass, shaft > power for the propeller and torque/gyroscopic effects from the engine. > (anything else?)
The engine stuff can't (at least for now) be removed from JSBSim, in theory or in principle. JSBSim is a drop-in dynamic library for flight dynamics, which includes all normally available subsystems that provide forces and/or moments on the aircraft. It can be run on its own without flightgear, or in other simulations/frameworks. Even if we wanted to remove the propulsion subsystem (which we don't), it would break other peoples' applications. The philosophy behind our propulsion system is to provide a decent perception of propulsive forces applied to the aircraft - not an engineering simulation of an engine. With that said, improvements to the engine model are always something we are interested in. I do recall having a discussion about propeller torque and the underpowered starter at one point. This is one of those areas that is expected to be made more generalized. I think we have a fix floating around somewhere. I'm searching, now. Jon ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
