FYI
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Robert Osfield
> Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:50 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [osg-user]Handling whole earth databases
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> As I write this, my other machine is churning aw
I am planning a real flight to Des Moines, Iowa from Longmont, CO and
have tried to use fgfs to "prefly" the route. In fgfs, flying the
return trip (departing from KIKV) I pick up V172 to Omaha VOR 116.3.
All is well until I am very near to this VOR and fgfs aborts.
I am using the current S
On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:22:49 +0100, "Vivian Meazza"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Not only the clever radiator, but also the ejector exhausts ... They have
>both been exercising my mind recently. I think both could be modelled within
>the existing Yasim framework. They are both a source of additio
On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:41:02 +0100, "Vivian Meazza"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The Spitfire also had a drag-reducing radiator. I think the key _was_ the
>wing section. The Spitfire was eventually fitted with a Mustang-like laminar
>flow wing, which enabled the aircraft to reach 450+ mph. it was
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004 18:52:03 -0600, "Jon Berndt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> BTW I never said 'whole aircraft drag' - always just the drag
>> due to the cooling system. In this article we have some better
>> numbers: 350lb of additional thrust on an aeroplane generating
>> c. 1000lb of thrust via
Rick Ansell wrote:
> I think that the article was referring to net thrust from the
> propellor-powerplant combination. 2000lb of engine ;power' doesn't
> necessarily make for 2000lb of thrust from the prop.
Actually, 2000 pounds of thrust doesn't sound that far off. To start
with an intuitive arg
On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 00:39:34 -, "Jim Wilson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Is it fair to say that the 400lbs of drag returns at approach speeds though?
>That number isn't apparent there. BTW YASim is reporting that the p51d is
>putting out about 2000 lb.+ maximum, which seems like a lot.
I th
Gunnstein Lye wrote
>
> On Friday 02 April 2004 13:33, Jon Berndt wrote:
> [...]
> > drag coefficient of the aircraft. The P-51 was also the
> first aircraft
> > to utilize the NACA laminar-flow airfoil sections,
> discussed earlier.
> > Although it is doubtful that any significant laminar f
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Jim Wilson wrote:
> In either case the aircraft is a little too high off the pavement on restart
> and crashes. I'll take a look later today or tomorrow unless someone else
> gets to it first.
I've had problems like this just *starting* the sim with the fokker 50 &
100. They
* Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 02 April 2004 20:18:
> As soon as I get the sun in my view, fog disappears.
Fixed in CVS now. :-)
m.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> The new code works (almost) well for me. Doesn't even slow my fps
> down considerably. But: As soon as I get the sun in my view, fog
> disappears. It comes back when the sun is out of view again. So
> I can only have sun *or* fog.
>
> Erik thinks that this is an nVidia bug
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
The new code works (almost) well for me. Doesn't even slow my fps
down considerably. But: As soon as I get the sun in my view, fog
disappears. It comes back when the sun is out of view again. So
I can only have sun *or* fog.
Erik thinks that this is an nVidia bug. Makes the mu
The new code works (almost) well for me. Doesn't even slow my fps
down considerably. But: As soon as I get the sun in my view, fog
disappears. It comes back when the sun is out of view again. So
I can only have sun *or* fog.
Erik thinks that this is an nVidia bug. Makes the multi-pass-clouds
more
On Friday 02 Apr 2004 2:23 pm, David Culp wrote:
> > Earlier we had a report of a reset issue on the list. It appears that
> > the problem only affects a couple JSBSim aircraft...the c172 (all of
> > them) and the 737. Everything else seems to trim fine.
>
> I don't use the reset feature, but I j
On Wednesday 31 Mar 2004 11:09 am, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> I now have the Spitfire IIa model well underway. I have all the drawings
> and data I need (far too much probably). I've rather lost the bubble on the
> recent changes to the piston engine simulation in YASim:
Vivian
The pictures here http
* Luca Masera -- Friday 02 April 2004 16:47:
> I'm working wirh 3dsMAX and exporting all in the ASE format that it's
> supported by FlightGear. [...] I reused some files of the bo105 and I
> changed the names in the model to match the one's used in animations
> but the lights doesn't appear. I re
On Friday 02 April 2004 13:33, Jon Berndt wrote:
[...]
> drag coefficient of the aircraft. The P-51 was also the first aircraft to
> utilize the NACA laminar-flow airfoil sections, discussed earlier. Although
> it is doubtful that any significant laminar flow was achieved on production
> versions o
Luca Masera wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm created the model of mb339PAN and now I'm trying to add the lights to it. I'm working wirh 3dsMAX and exporting all in the ASE format that it's supported by FlightGear.
I've found that the lights, in the ASE format, are created thorought changing the vertex co
Hi everyone,
I'm created the model of mb339PAN and now I'm trying to add the lights to it. I'm
working wirh 3dsMAX and exporting all in the ASE format that it's supported by
FlightGear.
I've found that the lights, in the ASE format, are created thorought changing the
vertex colors. In this way
I just ran across the following and thought it might look interesting to
someone since FG has a nice cub ...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3185540829&category=34056
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson Intelligent Vehicles Lab FlightGear Project
Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Earlier we had a report of a reset issue on the list. It appears that the
> problem only affects a couple JSBSim aircraft...the c172 (all of them) and
> the 737. Everything else seems to trim fine.
I don't use the reset feature, but I just tried a few runs with the 737 and
T38 using the menu
Mathias Fröhlich said:
> On Freitag, 2. April 2004 05:47, Jim Wilson wrote:
> > Earlier we had a report of a reset issue on the list. It appears that the
> > problem only affects a couple JSBSim aircraft...the c172 (all of them) and
> > the 737. Everything else seems to trim fine.
> Others don't
> The Mustang was one of the first aircraft to use an airfoil designed for
> longer runs of laminar flow. The Spit and FW190 did not - at least in the
> early versions. The upper surface of the wing should have been able to
> support a laminar flow with transition occurring as far back as half the
> On Friday 02 April 2004 09:41, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > The Spitfire also had a drag-reducing radiator. I think the key
> _was_ the
> > wing section. The Spitfire was eventually fitted with a Mustang-like
> > laminar flow wing, which enabled the aircraft to reach 450+ mph.
>
> Pardon my lack of a
On Freitag, 2. April 2004 05:47, Jim Wilson wrote:
> Earlier we had a report of a reset issue on the list. It appears that the
> problem only affects a couple JSBSim aircraft...the c172 (all of them) and
> the 737. Everything else seems to trim fine.
Others don't work too. The A320 for example en
On Friday 02 April 2004 09:41, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> The Spitfire also had a drag-reducing radiator. I think the key _was_ the
> wing section. The Spitfire was eventually fitted with a Mustang-like
> laminar flow wing, which enabled the aircraft to reach 450+ mph.
Pardon my lack of aero-engineeri
On Friday 02 Apr 2004 5:19 am, Jim Wilson wrote:
> Jon Berndt said:
> > > Earlier we had a report of a reset issue on the list. It appears that
> > > the problem only affects a couple JSBSim aircraft...the c172 (all of
> > > them) and the 737. Everything else seems to trim fine.
> >
> > I wonder
27 matches
Mail list logo
