Re: [Flightgear-devel] Which navradio code is considered standard?
Am 22.11.2012 20:44, schrieb ThorstenB: > On 22.11.2012 10:08, Adrian Musceac wrote: >> I've gone ahead and used the new radio code for navaids, but I have a >> question: which navradio code is considered standard? newnavradio or >> navradio? > > navradio is the current/old standard, newnavradio is the new module. > Most aircraft use "navradio", few "newnavradio". I'm not sure if there > is a plan to switch/replace the old radio at some point, and whether the > new module was compatible with the old etc. But for now, both are there. > TorstenD is the expert here. The plan was to replace navradio by newnavradio. Due to an "unhandled exception in my real-life's main loop", I have never been able to finish the transition and I will most likely not be able to soon. So please consider navradio as standard. Please, don't add too much code to the old navradio.?xx files but try to encapsulate new functionality within own classes and files and make them as reusable as possible. Torsten -- LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim Piston Engine Idle
I'd be grateful for an update of the Dragonfly and the ogeL. The Dragonfly's configuration was a wild guess, and only very vaguely based on real numbers. ogeL's engine is by definition just fantasy ;-) Thanks, Torsten Am 08.12.2012 20:12, schrieb Ron Jensen: > I took a quick look through the FGData Aircraft directory today and came up > with a list of some 27 JSBSim piston engines that still seem to be using > either the old aeromatic default values for idle manifold pressure (minmp) > or suspiciously low values. > > As time permits this week I intend to take a deeper look at this list and > adjust the minmp value as seems appropriate, if there are no objections. > I know a couple of engines have different versions in other repositories > (JSBSim or personal hangers) that are updated and just need to be copied > into FGData. > > Ron > > > Probably won't idle: > > Aerocar/Engines/Lycoming_O-290.xml: 6.0 > an2/Engine/ASH-62IR.xml:5.0 > Boeing314/Engines/WrightGR-2600.xml:6.0 > c150/Engines/eng_O-200.xml: 6.0 > c172r/Engines/engIO360C.xml:6.5 > c182/Engines/engIO540AB1A5.xml: 6.5 > c182rg/Engines/engIO540AB1A5.xml: 6.5 > c310/Engines/engIO470D.xml: 6.5 > c310u3a/Engines/engIO470D.xml: 6.5 > dc2/Engines/R-1820-R52.xml: 6.0 > dc6/Engines/CB17.xml: 6.0 > dc6/Engines/eng_R-2800.xml: 6.5 > Dragonfly/Engines/Rotax582.xml: 2.1 > Dromader/Engine/engine_Asz-62IRM18.xml: 5.0 > fkdr1/Engines/Oberursel-UrII.xml: 6.0 > flash2a/Engines/503.xml:2.0 > Lockheed1049/Engines/WrightCyclone-975C18CB1.xml: 6.0 > > Lockheed1049h/Engines/WrightCyclone-972TC18DA3.xml: 6.0 > > Lockheed1049h/Engines/WrightCyclone-975C18CB1.xml:6.0 > > Noratlas/Engines/Bristol-739.xml: 6.0 > ogel/Engines/200hp-jsbsim-2.0.xml: 6.0 > P-38-Lightning/Engines/Allison.xml: 6.0 > p51d/Engines/Packard-V-1650-7.xml: 4.0 > PBY-Catalina/Engines/PBY-6_engine-new.xml: 6.0 > Skyranger/Engines/rotax.xml:6.0 > Storch/Engines/Argus_As_10.xml: 6.0 > > > Maybe: > > G-164/Engines/R-1340-AN1.xml: 7.0 > > Good: > > A6M2/Engines/Sakae-Type12.xml: 10.5 > b29/Engines/eng_R3350.xml: 12.0 > c172p/Engines/eng_io320.xml:8.3 > C684/Engines/6Pfi.xml: > Cap10B/Engine/LycomingIO360B2F.xml:12.0 > Cessna337/Engines/engine_IO360C.xml: 15.0 > ercoupe/Engines/c-75-12.xml: 10.0 > Nordstern/Engines/eng_Maybach_Mb_IVa.xml: 9.0 > SenecaII/Engines/tsio360eb.xml:10.0 > Short_Empire/Engines/eng_PegasusXc.xml:10.0 > Submarine_Scout/Engines/eng_RRhawk.xml:10.0 > ZivkoEdge/Engines/io540.xml: 10.0 > ZLT-NT/Engines/engIO360C.xml: 10.0 > > -- > LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial > Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support > Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services > Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers > http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel > > -- LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Real-Time Radio Propagation, Was: Sqlite location
Hi, let me chime in here with a personal note, hoping it's not offending anybody. Although I like having accurate and detailed computation of our real-world simulation, I'm not really a friend of the radio propagation code with the level of detail given. Please let me explain why that is the case: The radio stations used for aviation purpose certainly follow the same physical laws as any other radio station does. However, their performance have to adhere to some specific rules, mostly set up by the ICAO. Service volumes is on of these rules, a straight ILS final track is another etc. If real life's environment disturbes the performance of the radio stations, the operator has to work hard to override these environmental impacts. As we usually do not have any detailed information about how the radio station is set up (and I doubt, we will ever get those), it's close to impossible to correctly model radio probagation of a specific station. Adding envirionmental factors besides terrain and terrain cover and the factors of aircraft installations will result in a wide range of uncertainty, spoiling all the detailed computation of the radio signal propagation. As a pilot, I am usually just interested in the factor, if I am within the service volume of a radio station. If so, I'd expect a clear and correct indication, probably with the well-known system errors applied. If I am outside the service volume, the systems may show "something", but I do not really care about what exactly an ILS indicator (as an example) is showing. From real life experience, I can say that barely two stations behave the same if you are outside their published range. Sidelobes of a localizer may appear at on site and may not at another site. False glideslopes appear here but do not show up somewhere else. It depends heavily on the local setup of the base equipment (and to some degree on aircraft installations). However, I have seen the shoreline effect of ADF stations deflection my ADF needle heavily and I have seen effects of nearby thunderstorms and lightning on the instruments. I'd love to see these effects modeled. That said, I think doing realtime radio signal propagations is much more that we need and much more than we want. At least unless we are multi-threading and have a spare CPU for those computations. This is certainly just my personal point of view. Greetings, Torsten -- LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Framerate improve with latest Git + effects problem.
Hello, Indeed, I updated my system on the weekend, and I was surprised!! Especially with Lightfield-Shader enabled and Advanced Weather, Framerates are a dream! If we manage to get the Reflection-Lightmap-bmpmap-shader to work with, I would be in heaven! I did some advertisement in a swiss aviatic-forum: http://www.flugsimulation.ch/forum/showpost.php?p=833259&postcount=4958 http://www.flugsimulation.ch/forum/showpost.php?p=833260&postcount=4959 Compared with those MSFS-screenies above we are looking really good! Cheers HHS -- LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
