Georg Vollnhals wrote:
>As I would say, most developers and active users of FlightGear are more
>interested in smaller aircraft or helicopters than in airliners, at
>least if we count the new developed aircrafts. At least for Germany,
>this might be vice versa. If I check the interests of known
>flightsimmers (fellows, friends and neighbours) most of them like
>sim-flying airliners - only a few very seriously online.
>So we should be very careful what to present to new users. And although
>i really dislike the 2D panel of the 737 (HHS is developing a 3D panel,
>but this is an option for the next release) *the very nice 787 has one
>problem here which makes it UNUSABLE:
>*Activating the autopilot ie. with altitude hold it runs into very
>serious oscillations around the pitch axis - you really get sea-sick. I
>am not sure where I read that another user had the same problems
>(Forum? list?). It seems to be a problem of faster running PCs.
>It would be a good idea if as many people as possible would test the 787
>before choosing it. If it is only a local problem here, ok then we
>should take the 787. A pity, as the 737 does not show the capabilities
>of the actual FlightGear version, but then the 737 is the only airline
>we could choose :-(
>
>Georg EDDW
I have run into the same problem with pitch oscillations, when my airspeed is
excessive. I suggest keeping below 250 knots indicated airspeed when below
10,000 feet msl. http://www.risingup.com/fars/info/part91-117-FAR.shtml
Josh
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
