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 out to have been a pair of typos
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 = 1;
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,
-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:
Ampere K. Hardraade wrote
Sent: 26 July
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
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 following properties:
- X, Y, Z
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
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
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]
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]
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: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Back up
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: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
David Megginson wrote
Sent: 09 July 2004 00
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
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 Cywin, and FGFS-CVS. I've just copied the latest version
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: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire
Vivian Meazza wrote
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 !
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
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, does for me), although the performance is a bit
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 kt, and
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 kt, and
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 for
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
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
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.
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
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 the
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
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
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) with
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.
___
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!
Very nice indeed!
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: FlightGear developers
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
horrid bodge in YASim. Very unrealistic performance
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
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 Meazza wrote:
As you can see, it flies
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
___
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
Great progress...very nice!
-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 May 2004 09:30:37 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL
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
snip
I don't recall a jettison function:
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
all coming
together nicely. Just finishing
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:
Thanks, Eric, that link was already a primary source. It's
all coming
-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: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: RE
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 years back
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
___
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
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? IIRC
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 propeller would be supersonic and therefore
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 where I got
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:
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 all information about the spitfire:
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 :-)
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/Rolls-
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 in the
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]
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
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 reduction
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
was fitted
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
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 and
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 boost and
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 force
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]
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 going to end up with
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 sense in combination.
The
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 atmospheric
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; it
-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
On 4/19/04 at 9:24 AM Vivian Meazza wrote:
Finally
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 power.
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 (the
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 desired in
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 emergency
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
that it
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 the same.
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
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
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.
Setting the
Vivian Meazza wrote:
YASim crashes, or perhaps, fails to converge, just by
attempting to run with takeoff-power=1100
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
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
run with takeoff-power=1100 takeoff-rpm=1360
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 crashes, or perhaps, fails to converge, just by attempting
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 is a maximum power
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 attributes
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 valve. It
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. However, it is an
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. However, it is an
Jonathan Richards
On Wednesday 31 Mar 2004 11:09 am, Vivian Meazza wrote:
snip
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
On Wednesday 31 Mar 2004 11:09 am, Vivian Meazza wrote:
snip
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
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 documentation has got
a bit
Erik Hofman
Sent: 13 March 2004 15:12
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Hurricane manuals
Erik Hofman wrote:
http://home.clara.net/wolverine/BOB/misc/Spit_Hurri_Manuals.zip
To get back to the original subject, this site has an aweful
On Wednesday 31 March 2004 11:09, Vivian Meazza wrote:
Erik Hofman
Sent: 13 March 2004 15:12
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Hurricane manuals
Erik Hofman wrote:
http://home.clara.net/wolverine/BOB/misc/Spit_Hurri_Manuals.zip
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 attributes define the range of the blue
Andy Ross replied
Sent: 31 March 2004 20:43
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Spitfire Hurricane manuals
Vivian Meazza wrote:
How do we set the reduction gearing ratio?
Set the gear-ratio attribute of the propeller tag. This is
the reduction
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* like a
supercharger than a real turbo.
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?
Actually, the
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*
like a
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 attribute when used
Erik Hofman wrote:
http://home.clara.net/wolverine/BOB/misc/Spit_Hurri_Manuals.zip
To get back to the original subject, this site has an aweful lot of
information on WWII warbirds, including performance charts:
http://www.rdrop.com/users/hoofj/
Erik
Sorry I've not had the opportunity to reply to this earlier (holiday away on
business).
I was responsible for the spitfire model. Unfortunately the commitments of
work and trying to have a social life didn't agree with continuing it.
I hope to at some stage get some very detailed pictures
On Mon, 08 Mar 2004 21:52:04 -0500, David Megginson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And psychological warfare. From what I've read, the German flight crews
were much more frightened of the Spitfires (and British RADAR guidance
for interceptions made it look like there were many more planes than the
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
