--- gerard robin wrote:
> Nobody (but me) has talked about the Concorde which is highly elaborated
> why ?
Probably because few people on the -dev list take the time to fully get to grips
with it.
As you say - it is a very complicated aircraft. Unfortunately that makes it
difficult to get to grips with, and quite specialized.
Another reason to suggest that it shouldn't be included is that it is quite
large
(IIRC 18MB?).
> Yes the bf109 is difficult to take off , but because FG is not a game the
> author was right to do it.
> Our best choice should be to show that FG is a simulator (not a game), and
> some real aircraft which were difficult to fly, are difficult to fly in FG.
>From looking at the FG Forums, a lot of new users to FG don't have joysticks
>and
pedals, which really are required if you're going to successfully fly the bf109
and the other big taildraggers.
> Or, for the future, the authors will develop every aircraft with a FDM c172
> like.
Why does everyone always gang up on the poor c172 ? :(
-Stuart
___________________________________________________________
Support the World Aids Awareness campaign this month with Yahoo! For Good
http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
