Hi,
> > I took the opportunity to check the PoH against the > simulator experience. While I didn't go as far as getting > the OAT exactly right, the errors I came across were fairly > signficant (using a HUD to get accurate altitude/TAS etc.) > > As I think you've noted before, the climb rate is too high > - I consistently see 1000ft/min up to 8000ft ASL, instead of > approx 800ft/min at sea level, and 400ft/m at 8000ft ASL. > > In contrast, the cruise speed is a bit too low - I don't > recall what I saw at sea-level, but at 8000ft ASL, I saw 107 > KTAS rather than 120 KTAS (though as that was very close to > the IAS, it may be that the environment was not quite > right). > > I'm not sure what to make of this. Perhaps the drag and > power should be reduced, or possibly the alpha drag needs to > increase? > > I suspect I need to use JSBSim directly to tune these > parameters better. > > -Stuart > I wonder if it makes really sense to compare our C172P-model with a real C172N. Both types has different engines and therefore different perfomances. That's why I suggested to have one real aircraft with everything, which our sim-model is modelled after it. The manual should only help to get an idea of some stuff, like panel, handling. But Perfomance is difficult, as it is not the c172P. Kind Regards HHS __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen Massenmails. http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
