Andy Ross wrote:
> Sent: 12 August 2004 19:58
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire - new release
>
>
> OK, Melchior helped to debug this via chat while I was
> working on cell phone UI bugs at work. :)
>
> It turns
OK, Melchior helped to debug this via chat while I was working on cell
phone UI bugs at work. :)
It turns out to have been a pair of typos in fuel.nas that were
causing all the problems. What I *read* wasn't what the code was
actually doing, which explains all the confusion.
This one, though, is
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> This is, I believe, due to a bug at line 67 of the script
> ~/data/nasal/fuel.nas which improperly sets the tank property
> "kill-when-empty".
Haven't we already been here and thrown out this explanation? Here is
line 67:
if(t.getBoolValue("kill-when-empty")) { outOfFuel
Eric has kindly uploaded the most recent release of the Spitfire model to
cvs. If you haven't already noticed, this release adds a fuel system with
Upper and Lower tanks (which are interconnected), priming pump, fuel cocks,
and a fuel gauge.
Unfortunately, there are three problems with this relea
Vivian Meazza wrote:
plib.ssgAux has a particle system that can simulate smoke.
Attach one
to an animation object and there you have it. Any takers?
Someone (David Megginson?) mentioned the particle system when the subject of
smoke was brought up some time ago.
It may have been me but nothin
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Bernie Bright
> Sent: 27 July 2004 05:41
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
>
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
>
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Ampere K. Hardraade wrote
Sent: 26 July 2004 03:13
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
To create smoke, we will need two things: smoke emitter and smoke object.
[snip]
Good analysis. How much of this already exists, either in the
Ampere K. Hardraade wrote
> Sent: 26 July 2004 03:13
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
>
> To create smoke, we will need two things: smoke emitter and smoke object.
>
> The smoke emitter will allow the user to set the
I hope so too, but the fact is: I'm not a programmer.
Regards,
Ampere
On July 25, 2004 10:53 pm, Jon Berndt wrote:
> I really hope you can do this. Smoke and fire are important for the X-15,
> too.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ht
> To create smoke, we will need two things: smoke emitter and smoke object.
I really hope you can do this. Smoke and fire are important for the X-15, too.
:-)
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/
To create smoke, we will need two things: smoke emitter and smoke object.
The smoke emitter will allow the user to set the following properties:
- X, Y, Z coordinate relative to the aircraft. This is the location at which
the smoke objects will be created.
- vector at which the smoke is emitted.
Hi Vivian
"Vivian Meazza" writes
I've implemented a Coffman cartridge starter, and it would be nice to have
a
cloud of black smoke come out of the exhaust and drift downwind at wind
speed before dispersing. I can do the first bit, but not the rest. I have
my
eye on Fred's bump-mapped 3D clouds.
I wrote
> Sent: 16 July 2004 09:41
> To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
> Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
>
>
>
> Erik Hofman wrote
>
> > Sent: 16 July 2004 08:44
> > To: FlightGear developers discussions
> > Subject: Re: [Fl
Erik Hofman wrote
> Sent: 16 July 2004 08:44
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
>
> > Back up with an upgraded machine - 2.8 Mhz P4, 512 Ram, Gforce 5200.
> I've
> > rebuilt Cyw
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Back up with an upgraded machine - 2.8 Mhz P4, 512 Ram, Gforce 5200. I've
rebuilt Cywin, and FGFS-CVS. I've just copied the latest version of the
Spitfire from FGFS-0.9.4, where it was working, after a fashion, to
FGFS-CVS. All the files. Now it won't fly, as David pointed out.
I wrote
> Sent: 15 July 2004 22:16
> To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
> Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
>
>
> I wrote
>
> > Sent: 09 July 2004 09:53
> > To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
> > Subject: RE
I wrote
> Sent: 09 July 2004 09:53
> To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
> Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
>
> David Megginson wrote
>
> > Sent: 09 July 2004 00:24
> > To: FlightGear developers discussions
> > Subject: Re: [Flight
David Megginson wrote
> Sent: 09 July 2004 00:24
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
>
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
>
> > There should also be a version with the legacy code, and
> that does fly
> > (or rather, do
Hi Guys
Of course you could do what I did with the
P51 I could not fly just make a quick FDM
in JSBSIM with aeromatic.
I know thats not the fix but hey it flys
Cheers
Innis
From: David Megginson writes
Andy Ross wrote:
I know Vivian has had trouble getting it working with the gear ratio
stuff on
"Ampere K. Hardraade" wrote:
> Mwhaha... http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/ohmygodSpitfire
> pass.wmv
Does anyone have a copy of it ?
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
Ampere K. Hardraade wrote:
Mwhaha... http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/ohmygodSpitfirepass.wmv
Yes, I've seen that clip -- it's pretty funny (scary, actually).
Fortunately, the one based at CYOW tends to stick to the runway.
All the best,
David
_
I think this problem occurs with the F16 in 0.9.4 as well when the fuel tanks
are full.
Regards,
Ampere
On July 8, 2004 04:36 pm, David Megginson wrote:
> Can anyone actually fly the Spitfire model in CVS?
>
>fgfs --aircraft=spitfireIIa
>
> The elevators seem to have no effect at all. On th
Mwhaha... http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/ohmygodSpitfire
pass.wmv
Regards,
Ampere
On July 8, 2004 07:23 pm, David Megginson wrote:
> I love watching it take off when it's at our end of the airport.
> If only the plane had an extra seat ...
>
>
> All the best,
>
>
> David
>
> _
Vivian Meazza wrote:
There should also be a version with the legacy code, and that does fly (or
rather, does for me), although the performance is a bit down. I don't think
that there is an error in the code, but I'll double check with the legacy
version
Thanks. It's a beautiful model, by the way.
Andy Ross wrote:
>
> > I know Vivian has had trouble getting it working with the
> gear ratio
> > stuff on the engine. This (along with tuning the p51d) has
> been on my
> > list for ages, but I've been swamped with work and
> homeowner concerns
> > recently. I'm still alive, I promise.
Andy Ross wrote:
I know Vivian has had trouble getting it working with the gear ratio
stuff on the engine. This (along with tuning the p51d) has been on my
list for ages, but I've been swamped with work and homeowner concerns
recently. I'm still alive, I promise. :)
I don't think it's an engine p
David Megginson wrote:
>Can anyone actually fly the Spitfire model in CVS? I wonder if there's something
>wrong in the YASim
>config file.
>
>
>
I know Vivian has had trouble getting it working with the gear ratio
stuff on the engine. This (along with tuning the p51d) has been on my
list fo
On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 16:36:56 -0400
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Can anyone actually fly the Spitfire model in CVS?
>
>fgfs --aircraft=spitfireIIa
>
> The elevators seem to have no effect at all. On the ground, the plane
> starts nosing down as soon as it gets to around 30
On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 16:36:56 -0400
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Can anyone actually fly the Spitfire model in CVS?
>
>fgfs --aircraft=spitfireIIa
>
> The elevators seem to have no effect at all. On the ground, the plane
> starts nosing down as soon as it gets to around 30
Can anyone actually fly the Spitfire model in CVS?
fgfs --aircraft=spitfireIIa
The elevators seem to have no effect at all. On the ground, the plane
starts nosing down as soon as it gets to around 30 kt, and after an in-air
start, it just dives. I wonder if there's something wrong in the YASi
Hi,
I've forwarded the current state-of-play Spitfire model to Curt for release
in CVS. The model is also available here:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/vmeazza/FlightGear/spitfire.tar.gz
There are 2 versions: spitfireIIa with legacy YASim propeller/engine code,
and spitfireIIa-mod1 with the curr
I'm off to Italy tomorrow for a couple of weeks.
I've put the spitfire files here:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/vmeazza/FlightGear/spitfire.tar.gz
- they might work! There are 2 versions: spitfireIIa with legacy
propeller/engine code, and spitfireIIa-mod1 propeller/engine code. Only
spitfireIIa fl
Rick aked himself:
>(Or do I remember seeing film with the canopy open during the approach?)
Yes. It makes landing easier to open the canopy and look around the
big engine in front :).
>:) Nice job Vivian :)
Yes, indeed!
>Rick
Bye bye,
Wolfram.
__
Andy Ross wrote
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > Now the bad news - the new propeller/engine code does not
> seem to > work for me. These are the input data:
>
> Nothing looks wrong from reading it. Can you post the whole
> file so I can test? Thanks.
>
This is the whole file. It worked(ish
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> Now the bad news - the new propeller/engine code does not seem to
> work for me. These are the input data:
Nothing looks wrong from reading it. Can you post the whole file so I
can test? Thanks.
Andy
___
Flightgear-devel mailing l
Andy Ross wrote:
> Sent: 13 May 2004 23:38
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Performance Testing
>
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > As you can see, it "flies". The engine/propeller combination is a
> >
On Friday 14 May 2004 23:44, Rick Ansell wrote:
> On Fri, 14 May 2004 22:48:19 +0100
>
> "Vivian Meazza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> > > Rick Ansell
> > > Sent: 14 May 2004 21:30
> > > To: F
On Friday 14 May 2004 08:30, Erik Hofman wrote:
> Jim Wilson wrote:
> > Vivian Meazza said:
> >>Nearly there:
> >>
> >>http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/vmeazza/FlightGear/spitfireIIa-1.jpg
> >>
> >>http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/vmeazza/FlightGear/spitfireIIa-2.jpg
> >
> > Great progress...very nice!
>
> Ver
On Fri, 14 May 2004 22:48:19 +0100
"Vivian Meazza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> > Rick Ansell
> > Sent: 14 May 2004 21:30
> > To: FlightGear developers discussions
> I don't recall a jettison
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Rick Ansell
> Sent: 14 May 2004 21:30
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Performance Testing
>
>
> On Fri, 14
On Fri, 14 May 2004 09:30:37 +0200
Erik Hofman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Wilson wrote:
> > Vivian Meazza said:
>
> >>Nearly there:
> >>
> >>http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/vmeazza/FlightGear/spitfireIIa-1.jpg
> >>
> >>http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/vmeazza/FlightGear/spitfireIIa-2.jpg
> >
> > Grea
Jim Wilson wrote:
Vivian Meazza said:
Nearly there:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/vmeazza/FlightGear/spitfireIIa-1.jpg
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/vmeazza/FlightGear/spitfireIIa-2.jpg
Great progress...very nice!
Very nice indeed!
Erik
___
Flightgear-deve
Andy wrote
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Andy Ross
> Sent: 13 May 2004 23:38
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Performance Testing
>
>
> Vivian Me
Vivian Meazza said:
>
>
> Erik Hofman wrote (some time ago)
> > Sent: 01 May 2004 08:42
> > To: FlightGear developers discussions
> > Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Performance Testing
> >
> >
> > Vivian Meazza wrote:
> >
> &g
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> As you can see, it "flies". The engine/propeller combination is
> a horrid bodge in YASim. Very unrealistic performance. Looking
> forward to resolving that issue.
I actually thought it was resolved. Did the recent changes not
work for you? I can only fix bugs that are rep
Erik Hofman wrote (some time ago)
> Sent: 01 May 2004 08:42
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Performance Testing
>
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
>
> > Thanks, Eric, that link was already a primary source. It's
&
> -Original Message-
> From: Vivian Meazza
> Sent: 04 May 2004 7:38 pm
> To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
> Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Propeller vs. YASim
>
> Richard Bytheway wrote
>
> > Sent: 04 May 2004 10:42
> > To:
Richard Bytheway wrote
> Sent: 04 May 2004 10:42
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Propeller vs. YASim
>
>
> > I had already shown by some pretty simple math that at 2850
> > rmp the tips of
> > a 1.65m radius
Richard Bytheway said:
> > I had already shown by some pretty simple math that at 2850
> > rmp the tips of
> > a 1.65m radius propeller would be supersonic and therefore highly
> > improbable, but we now know that the data of hp, gear ratio,
> > rpm etc all tie
> > together.
At higher altitudes
Richard Bytheway wrote:
I have a memory from years back of being told that the reason the
Spitfire had such a distinctive sound was that the propellor tips _were_
supersonic. Maybe it was just heresay.
I don't know about the Spitfire, but I understand that's the case with many
floatplanes -- you c
Richard Bytheway wrote:
I have a memory from years back of being told that the reason the Spitfire had such a distinctive sound was that the propellor tips _were_ supersonic. Maybe it was just heresay.
That probably was for the Harvard.
Erik
___
Flight
> I had already shown by some pretty simple math that at 2850
> rmp the tips of
> a 1.65m radius propeller would be supersonic and therefore highly
> improbable, but we now know that the data of hp, gear ratio,
> rpm etc all tie
> together.
>
> Thanks
>
> Vivian Meazza
>
I have a memory from
Wolfram Kuss
>
> >Spitfire Mk IIA
>
> Ah - surprising!
>
> Here is an email Rick "Fuelcock" sent me a short while ago. I
> hope it helps. Sorry for the poor formating.
> --- snip -
> Rather than send you the GBE code , I will direct you to the
> site whe
>Spitfire Mk IIA
Ah - surprising!
Here is an email Rick "Fuelcock" sent me a short while ago. I
hope it helps. Sorry for the poor formating.
--- snip -
Rather than send you the GBE code , I will direct you to the site
where I got
it:
http://www.aeromech.usyd
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Thanks, Eric, that link was already a primary source. It's all coming
together nicely. Just finishing texturing, a little more animation to do,
and about half the 3d instruments.
You'll be glad to know that the model is under 5000 vertices so far.
I have bodged the engine,
Erik Hofman wrote
> Sent: 30 April 2004 22:37
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Performance Testing
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> It just occurred to me I had this link in my bookmarks, just when you
> think you've seen
Hi,
It just occurred to me I had this link in my bookmarks, just when you
think you've seen all information about the spitfire:
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mai
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:26:42 +0100, David wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> On 4/19/04 at 11:12 PM Vivian Meazza wrote:
> >All you ever wanted to know about a Merlin with 2 speed, 2 stage
> >supercharging is here:
> >
> >http://www.unlimitedexcitement.com/Pride%20of%20Pay%20n%20Pak/Ro
On 4/19/04 at 11:12 PM Vivian Meazza wrote:
>All you ever wanted to know about a Merlin with 2 speed, 2 stage
>supercharging is here:
>
>http://www.unlimitedexcitement.com/Pride%20of%20Pay%20n%20Pak/Rolls-Royce%2
0
>Merlin%20V-1650%20Engine.htm
>
>Except exactly how the boost contol valve worked
Andy Ross said:
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > Here are some calculations on propeller rpm.
> > [...]
> > We can see that 2850 is unlikely to be the rpm of a 10.75 diameter
> > propeller
>
> Yeah, you're right. This is a real bug. I was playing with it this
> morning, and we're hitting an edge case
Wolfram Kuss asked
> I did not see the original thread. What Spitfire version are
> you speaking about?
>
Spitfire Mk IIA
Regards
Vivian
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgea
I did not see the original thread. What Spitfire version are you
speaking about?
Bye bye,
Wolfram.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> Here are some calculations on propeller rpm.
> [...]
> We can see that 2850 is unlikely to be the rpm of a 10.75 diameter
> propeller
Yeah, you're right. This is a real bug. I was playing with it this
morning, and we're hitting an edge case in the propeller solver.
The pr
Vivian Meazza wrote
>
> Andy Ross
>
> > [Starting a new thread. The reply nesting level in my
> > mozilla window was getting freaky.]
> >
> > Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > > The engine I'm trying to specify developed 1140 HP at engine
> > > revolutions of 2850 rpm at a boost pressure of 9 psi. It
Andy Ross
> [Starting a new thread. The reply nesting level in my
> mozilla window was getting freaky.]
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > The engine I'm trying to specify developed 1140 HP at engine
> > revolutions of 2850 rpm at a boost pressure of 9 psi. It was fitted
> > with 1:0.477 reducti
[Starting a new thread. The reply nesting level in my mozilla window
was getting freaky.]
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> The engine I'm trying to specify developed 1140 HP at engine
> revolutions of 2850 rpm at a boost pressure of 9 psi. It was fitted
> with 1:0.477 reduction gearing, which I think mean
Andy Ross tried again!
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > As does this (2):
> > cruise-speed="308" cruise-rpm="2850"
> >
> > This does not (3):
> > cruise-speed="308" cruise-rpm="1360"
>
> Again, these are *wildly* different propoellers you are
> specifying. The second one is g
Vivian,
Are you aware of this data I once sent to the list:
http://baron.flightgear.org/pipermail/flightgear-flightmodel/2003-March/002130.html
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightge
Vivia Meazza wrote:
> As does this (2):
> cruise-speed="308" cruise-rpm="2850"
>
> This does not (3):
> cruise-speed="308" cruise-rpm="1360"
Again, these are *wildly* different propoellers you are
specifying. The second one is going to end up with four (!)
times the fo
Andy Ross
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > However, eng-power should be the un-supercharged max power, so I
> > reduced eng-power value,
>
> No no, I was wrong. Use the superchared value, the eng-power
> gets corrected before solving to assume "max" sea level
> manifold density (i.e. with boos
Andy wrote
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > However, eng-power should be the un-supercharged max power, so I
> > reduced eng-power value,
>
> No no, I was wrong. Use the superchared value, the eng-power
> gets corrected before solving to assume "max" sea level
> manifold density (i.e. with boost
On Tuesday 20 April 2004 01:58, Andy Ross wrote:
> Lee Elliott wrote:
> > While I remember, if a YASim a/c only has one tank, the second tank -
> > tank[1] - seems to be set with a 'nan' level. Doesn't stop the a/c
> > engine from starting or running but it screws up the tot fuel figure.
> > Setti
Lee Elliott wrote:
> While I remember, if a YASim a/c only has one tank, the second tank -
> tank[1] - seems to be set with a 'nan' level. Doesn't stop the a/c
> engine from starting or running but it screws up the tot fuel figure.
> Setting the level for tank[1] to zero via the property browser s
On Monday 19 April 2004 23:15, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> Andy Ross wrote
>
> > Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > > The "takeoff" values. Are these the power absorbed by the
> >
> > propeller at
> >
> > > propeller rpm, or the engine output at engine rpm, super- or
> > > un-supercharged?
> >
> > Un-supercharged
While I remember, if a YASim a/c only has one tank, the second tank - tank[1]
- seems to be set with a 'nan' level. Doesn't stop the a/c engine from
starting or running but it screws up the tot fuel figure. Setting the level
for tank[1] to zero via the property browser sorts it ok.
LeeE
Andy Ross wrote
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > The "takeoff" values. Are these the power absorbed by the
> propeller at
> > propeller rpm, or the engine output at engine rpm, super- or
> > un-supercharged?
>
> Un-supercharged. And the equations are solved such that both
> power values are th
David Luff said
> "Jim Wilson" writes:
>
> > David Luff said:
> >
> > > Can anyone clarify the function of the "Boost cut-out EMERGENCY
> > > control" mentioned in the manual. The name implies that
> it cuts the
> > > boost completely in an engine emergency. However, the
> text implies
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> However, eng-power should be the un-supercharged max power, so I reduced
> eng-power value,
No no, I was wrong. Use the superchared value, the eng-power gets
corrected before solving to assume "max" sea level manifold density
(i.e. with boost and wastegate applied).
> Is i
"Jim Wilson" writes:
> David Luff said:
>
> > Can anyone clarify the function of the "Boost cut-out EMERGENCY control"
> > mentioned in the manual. The name implies that it cuts the boost
> > completely in an engine emergency. However, the text implies that it
> > overrides the BCV for extra em
David Luff said:
> Can anyone clarify the function of the "Boost cut-out EMERGENCY control"
> mentioned in the manual. The name implies that it cuts the boost
> completely in an engine emergency. However, the text implies that it
> overrides the BCV for extra emergency boost:
>
> "If it is desi
Andy Ross said:
>
> These settings don't make much sense in combination.
>
> The "eng" setting is a maximum power (at standard sea level) for the
> engine without supercharging. In this case, the normally aspirated
> engine develops 1140 HP at max RPM.
>
That needs to be clarified in the docs
I wrote (incorrectly):
> The "eng" setting is a maximum power (at standard sea level) for the
> engine without supercharging.
Never mind the last part. The code *does* correctly handle the boost
setting, and assumes that it is at maximum (in most cases, the
wastegate setting) at the specified pow
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> David Luff
> Sent: 19 April 2004 09:52
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire & Hurricane manuals
>
>
>
>
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> The "takeoff" values. Are these the power absorbed by the propeller
> at propeller rpm, or the engine output at engine rpm, super- or
> un-supercharged?
Un-supercharged. And the equations are solved such that both power
values are the same. Basically, don't sweat this one;
On 4/19/04 at 9:24 AM Vivian Meazza wrote:
>
>Finally, I've had some difficulty understanding the concept of using
>absolute pressure for the Boost Control Valve (BCV). In the real world a
>BCV
>comprises, in principle, a plate exposed to manifold pressure on one side
>and to the local atmospheri
Andy Ross wrote
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > With these values
> >
> > eng-power="1140" eng-rpm="2850"
> > cruise-power="2850" cruise-rpm="1359"
> > takeoff-power="1100" takeoff-rpm="1359"
> >
> > YASim appears go into a loop and provides no output.
>
> These settings don't make much
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> With these values
>
> eng-power="1140" eng-rpm="2850"
> cruise-power="2850" cruise-rpm="1359"
> takeoff-power="1100" takeoff-rpm="1359"
>
> YASim appears go into a loop and provides no output.
These settings don't make much sense in combination.
The "eng" setting
On Sunday 18 April 2004 22:46, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> Andy Ross wrote:
> > Sent: 18 April 2004 19:04
> > To: FlightGear developers discussions
> > Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire & Hurricane manuals
> >
> > Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > > YASim c
Andy Ross wrote:
> Sent: 18 April 2004 19:04
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire & Hurricane manuals
>
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > YASim crashes, or perhaps, fails to converge, just by attempting to
> > ru
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> YASim crashes, or perhaps, fails to converge, just by
> attempting to run with takeoff-rpm="1360">
Crashing and solution failure ought to be easily
distinguished. :) Maybe the recent logging changes have hidden
the failure message, I'll take a look.
Try running the command
Andy Ross wrote
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > wastegate-mp="18.32"
> > [...]
> > mp-osi = 26.050 - does the "wastegate" work? - is this psi?
>
> The units are absolute pressure in inches of mercury (I
> honestly don't know what the "-osi" suffix means). The
> wastegate should indeed work. How
> Andy Ross replied
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > wastegate-mp="18.32"
> > [...]
> > mp-osi = 26.050 - does the "wastegate" work? - is this psi?
>
> The units are absolute pressure in inches of mercury (I
> honestly don't know what the "-osi" suffix means). The
> wastegate should indeed work.
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> wastegate-mp="18.32"
> [...]
> mp-osi = 26.050 - does the "wastegate" work? - is this psi?
The units are absolute pressure in inches of mercury (I honestly don't
know what the "-osi" suffix means). The wastegate should indeed work.
However, it is an overpressure release val
Andy Ross wrote
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > How do we set the reduction gearing ratio?
>
> Set the "gear-ratio" attribute of the propeller tag. This is the
> reduction ratio, so typical values will be less than 1.0.
>
> > Can we do a constant speed propeller?
>
> The min-rpm and max-rpm attr
Jonathan Richards
>
> 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
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
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004 08:47:15 +0100, Vivian wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>
> Arnt Karlsen wrote
>
> >
> > On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 13:32:39 -0800, Andy wrote in message
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > > Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > > > Thanks for all that: all looks good - the document
Arnt Karlsen wrote
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 13:32:39 -0800, Andy wrote in message
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > > Thanks for all that: all looks good - the documentation has got a
> > > bit astern of station. Could you explain a bit more about the
> > > "turbo" attr
Andy Ross wrote
>
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > Thanks for all that: all looks good - the documentation has
> got a bit
> > astern of station. Could you explain a bit more about the "turbo"
> > attribute when used for a supercharger?
>
> Actually, the existing turbo-mul implementation is *more*
On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 13:32:39 -0800, Andy wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > Thanks for all that: all looks good - the documentation has got a
> > bit astern of station. Could you explain a bit more about the
> > "turbo" attribute when used for a supercharger?
>
> Ac
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
