Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D Cockpit
Marcio Shimoda writes: OK, but that 3D stuff in the 3D cockpit are another AC file or hard-coded? Right now, it's in the same 3D model, with an XML wrapper defining animations, etc. The instruments and most of the controls, however, still come from the 2D panel, so it's a bit of a kludge. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Aircraft modelling questions
I'm going to have a go at modelling a Cessna Caravan from scratch. I have gMax (which is probably no use at all!), blender and PPE available to help me and I have a good idea about what to do thanks to David's Modelling document. I'm wondering how to produce a 3D cockpit. Does this need to be a seperate model to be placed in the aircraft's directory or should it be one large model? (I'm assuming it should be seperate...). In an ideal world I'd like to make one model that would , with a minimum of kludging, work in FGFS and FS2002 since I regularly use both. I appreciate that this might upset the purists! Take care, Matt. --- talk21 your FREE portable and private address on the net at http://www.talk21.com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Aircraft modelling questions
I'm going to have a go at modelling a Cessna Caravan from scratch. I have gMax (which is probably no use at all!), blender and PPE available to help me and I have a good idea about what to do thanks to David's Modelling document. I'm wondering how to produce a 3D cockpit. Does this need to be a seperate model to be placed in the aircraft's directory or should it be one large model? (I'm assuming it should be seperate...). In an ideal world I'd like to make one model that would , with a minimum of kludging, work in FGFS and FS2002 since I regularly use both. I appreciate that this might upset the purists! Take care, Matt. --- talk21 your FREE portable and private address on the net at http://www.talk21.com ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] MSVC Still not Building
To avoid this problem in future, maybe we should define a macro in
simgear/compiler.h. Something like:
#ifdef SG_NO_INCLASS_MEMBER_INITIALIZATION
# define SG_STATIC_CONSTANT(type, assignment) enum { assignment }
#else
# define SG_STATIC_CONSTANT(type, assignment) static const type
assignment
#endif
Usage then becomes:
class Foo {
SG_STATIC_CONSTANT(int, FG_MAX_ENGINES = 4);
...
}
which expands to either
static const int FG_MAX_ENGINES = 4;
or
enum { FG_MAX_ENGINES = 4; };
I think the problem with Norman's solution is that you can't use the
value later in the class declaration, as an array size for example.
Cheers,
Bernie
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft modelling questions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm wondering how to produce a 3D cockpit. Does this need to be a seperate model to be placed in the aircraft's directory or should it be one large model? (I'm assuming it should be seperate...). In the end, things will be set up so that you can model it either way. For now, I've been keeping the 3D cockpit in the same model as the external. Note that you'll also need to make an aero model for the Caravan. If you have good data, you can do it with JSBSim; otherwise, you can fake a fairly reasonable aero model in YASim using only geometry and published performance numbers. I appreciate that this might upset the purists! You won't be able to do that with the aero model, but you should be able to manage with the 3D model. I doubt many purists will be upset; after all, FlightGear itself runs under Microsoft Windows, and initially, we used 3D models that were created by third-parties for MSFS. The idea of Open Source is that it can be used anywhere, modified, and even sold for large amounts of money, as long as it stays free-as-in-speech. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] size of symbol
Sorry I mistyped thatit should have been extern not export :-/ Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: David Megginson wrote: Alex Perry writes: Do we care about this error ? /usr/bin/ld: Warning: size of symbol `current_model' changed from 4 to 8 in ../../src/Model/libModel.a(acmodel.o) Yes, I'm getting this as well and I don't understand it. It's a symbol collision. There's another current_model defined in LaRCsim/ls_model.c. Renaming one of them fixes the issue. Why the linker doesn't detect this as a vanilla multiple-definitions collision, instead of that weird size mismatch, though, is beyond me. Andy It's even weirder than that. Try taking out the extern declaration and see what it gives you for an error. The duplicate I got reported was on a source line that doesn't exist, supposedly from a simgear header file! Something is throwing the linker out of whack. Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Aircraft modelling questions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: In an ideal world I'd like to make one model that would , with a minimum of kludging, work in FGFS and FS2002 since I regularly use both. I appreciate that this might upset the purists! To the contrary, it's kind of iteresting having a fgfs model converted for use in msfs. After so long the other way :-) Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] size of symbol
Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: David Megginson wrote: Alex Perry writes: Do we care about this error ? /usr/bin/ld: Warning: size of symbol `current_model' changed from 4 to 8 in ../../src/Model/libModel.a(acmodel.o) Yes, I'm getting this as well and I don't understand it. It's a symbol collision. There's another current_model defined in LaRCsim/ls_model.c. Renaming one of them fixes the issue. Why the linker doesn't detect this as a vanilla multiple-definitions collision, instead of that weird size mismatch, though, is beyond me. Andy It's even weirder than that. Try taking out the export and see what it gives you for an error. The duplicate I got reported was on a source line that doesn't exist, supposedly from a simgear header file! Something is throwing the linker out of whack. Best, JIm ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Aircraft Checklists
Here's an excellent source for unofficial aircraft checklists: http://www.dauntless-soft.com/PRODUCTS/Freebies/HandlingNotes/ All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] FrameRate !!
moved to the devel list for general info WOW ! This appears to be a bug in the latest NVIDIA drivers Reverting to any of several of their earlier ones and the problem goes away. I'll have to investigate this some more at some point but for now I will just be happy that I know how to get around it :-)) FYI This 'bug' appears on Win2k using the NVIDIA 28.32 reference driver with a geForce2 GTS Bummer -- This driver has lots of neat new features OpenGL 2.0 that I wanted to experiment with :-( Hopefully this won't be a problem in the next release ! Norman -Original Message- From: Norman Vine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 10:32 AM To: 'David Megginson' Cc: 'Curtis Olson' Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] FrameRate !! Curt David Something changed recently so that when the HUD is displayed the framerate drops dramatically when the Menu is hidden ~25% This is most easily seen when in the minimal HUD by toggling the Menu. I have looked for the cause but nothing obvious has popped out at me Any Ideas ?? Other then this it appears as if the FrameRate is back up to 'close' to what it was a month ago :-) Cheers Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] FYI: Re BOOST
This month's issue (MAY 2002) of C/C++ User's Journal contains the article: The Boost.Threads Library. The issue focuses on multithreading. Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] RGB Texture Editing Tools
Windoze developers - What tool(s) are you guys using to edit .rgb files? Thanks, Paul Paul R. Deppe Veridian Engineering (formerly Calspan) Flight Aerospace Research Group 150 North Airport Drive Buffalo, NY 14225 (716) 631-6898 (716) 631-6990 FAX [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RGB Texture Editing Tools
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002 12:45:47 -0400 Paul Deppe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Windoze developers - What tool(s) are you guys using to edit .rgb files? IIRC, won't Gimp for Win32 handle those? Seems to me I've opened those before. Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] FrameRate !!
Norman Vine writes: This appears to be a bug in the latest NVIDIA drivers Reverting to any of several of their earlier ones and the problem goes away. Just for the benefit of everyone else, Norm means the latest NVIDIA *windows* drivers. I'm not aware of any similar problem with the Linux drivers, but I have not tested them hard. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RGB Texture Editing Tools
Paul Deppe wrote: Windoze developers - What tool(s) are you guys using to edit .rgb files? I don't, but you can use JASC PaintShop Pro in the newest version. CU, Christian -- The idea is to die young as late as possible.-- Ashley Montague Whoever that is/was; (c) by Douglas Adams would have been better... ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] FrameRate !!
David Megginson writes: Norman Vine writes: This appears to be a bug in the latest NVIDIA drivers Reverting to any of several of their earlier ones and the problem goes away. Just for the benefit of everyone else, Norm means the latest NVIDIA *windows* drivers. I'm not aware of any similar problem with the Linux drivers, but I have not tested them hard. As I said in the original post This 'bug' appears on Win2k using the NVIDIA 28.32 reference driver with a geForce2 GTS But if anyone else sees the framerate when displaying the HUD much slower i.e. anything less then ~95% of the framerate of not displaying the HUD then I would suspect your driver if you have a NVIDIA card and I would REALLY APPRECIATE hearing about it. what's-wasting-a-couple-of-days'ly yrs Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FrameRate !!
This driver has lots of neat new features OpenGL 2.0 Do they really implement the upcoming OpenGL-2.0 features in hardware or do they tend to rely on fallbacks ? It's somewhat astonishing that they already provide a driver for a still not really existent OpenGL standard. Do they create their own upcoming 'standard' ? Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] FrameRate !!
Martin Spott writes: This driver has lots of neat new features OpenGL 2.0 Do they really implement the upcoming OpenGL-2.0 features in hardware or do they tend to rely on fallbacks ? It's somewhat astonishing that they already provide a driver for a still not really existent OpenGL standard. Do they create their own upcoming 'standard' ? Well I lied a little :-) but 2.0 is in part a 'rconciliation' of the various 'propriatary' extensions and the inclusion of things that almost all of the manufacturers have done to support M$oft DX#. And this driver has more of these upcoming features then any of the previous ones. Specifically it has hardware friendly 'render to texture' which IMHO will be way Cool i.e. Dynamic texture ala Vertex Shaders Since these are NVIDIA unified drivers if your card doesn't support something in hardware it has a software fallback but at least you can get to play :-) Cheers Noman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] 3d graphics hardware support
Has anyone tried using the 3d i-glasses with flightgear? We have a NVIDIA GeForce2 Pro graphics card which allows a 3d stereo buffer to be enabled through the driver. Whenever I enable the stereo buffer, flightgear locks up. We are running under Windows 2000. Thanks Dawn Dawn Ellis School of Engineering Computer Science UT Chattanooga ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3d graphics hardware support
Dawn Ellis wrote: Has anyone tried using the 3d i-glasses with flightgear? We have a NVIDIA GeForce2 Pro graphics card which allows a 3d stereo buffer to be enabled through the driver. Whenever I enable the stereo buffer, flightgear locks up. Well, I haven't (don't have the necessary hardware...). serious/realism mode Apart from the upcomming 3d panel there's not much that flightgear gains by a stereo view. The ground is usually too far away as that it matters. And it's more important to have high framerates than nearly non-existant depth cues. /serious mode On the other hand a friend of mine told me how awesome the 3d effect is when you are using stereo mode. And for a arcade mode it might well be a feature that attracts lots of people. CU, Christian -- The idea is to die young as late as possible.-- Ashley Montague Whoever that is/was; (c) by Douglas Adams would have been better... ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] 3d graphics hardware support
Jon Berndt wrote: I think it's more than that, though. Dawn, correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding was that with the glasses they can look anywhere and see the virtual cockpit, too. We have to use the mouse to look around. Dawn: is this the capability y'all have or are working towards? The version we are running is 7.8. We are using an head tracker to look around in flightgear. It works the same as the mouse, though. Is this what you are asking, Jon? The problem with the glasses seems to lie when we enable the stereo buffer on our graphics card to render the scene in 3d. We can view FG in the glasses without enabling the buffer, but the view just 2d -- it treats the glasses like another monitor. The 3d buffer on the graphics card is suppose to be a no code way to enable software to look 3d within the glasses. When we enable the buffer, it locks up FG and basically crashes the machine. I hope this explains my problem better. Dawn Dawn Ellis School of Engineering Computer Science UT Chattanooga ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3d graphics hardware support
We are using an head tracker to look around in flightgear. It works the same as the mouse, though. Is this what you are asking, Jon? The problem with the glasses seems to lie when we enable the stereo buffer on our graphics card to render the scene in 3d. We can view FG in the glasses without enabling the buffer, but the view just 2d -- it treats the glasses like another monitor. The 3d buffer on the graphics card is suppose to be a no code way to enable software to look 3d within the glasses. When we enable the buffer, it locks up FG and basically crashes the machine. I hope this explains my problem better. Perhaps a little more on the setup for those unfamiliar with the interface into FG. Commercial off the shelf or unique single point design? Here's a thought.. Are the head tracker and glasses independent systems? Or a packaged deal? Does the output from the head tracker change for the 2D versus 3D mode. FG handles view changes via the mouse by moving the eyepoint (single point). Is the tracker reporting two points in stereo for each eye? Regards John W. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3d graphics hardware support
Cameron Moore wrote: Can you run any other OpenGL apps besides FG? -- Yes, we wrote an OpenGL test application that displays the infamous 3d cube and it worked just fine. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FYI: Re BOOST
Jon S Berndt wrote: This month's issue (MAY 2002) of C/C++ User's Journal contains the article: The Boost.Threads Library. The issue focuses on multithreading. Matt Austern and Herb Sutter regularly mention Boost in their articles and at the C++ experts forum at http://www.cuj.com/experts/. Both have contributed code and/or criticisms. Bernie ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] EAA Wright Flyer
Microsoft To Join The Centennial Of Flight Celebration As Part Of EAA's Countdown To Kitty Hawk Presented By Ford Motor Company http://www.countdowntokittyhawk.com/news/microsoft.html Go read it for the full details, but it basically says that Micros~1 will be creating a highly detailed flight model for the 1903 Wright Flyer to be used in a big simulator. Here's the interesting part: quote To create the most accurate simulation of the 1903 Wright Flyer, the Microsoft Flight Simulator team plans to work with EAA to research the details of the aircraft, the site where the Flyer flew and historical accounts of Dec. 17, 1903. The team also will observe wind tunnel tests of EAA's 1903 Wright Flyer reproduction - the only Flyer to fly at the First Flight Centennial Celebration. Those experiences and the data will help ensure that the 3-D visuals and the flight model of the aircraft in Microsoft Flight Simulator are as detailed and accurate as possible. /quote I wonder if the EAA would be willing to share their research data with the rest of us? Any EAA members here? -- Cameron Moore :wq ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] YASim piston engine
If you look carefully, you'll actually see the RPM drop very slightly before it starts increasing. The physical reason for this is that the blades are unstalling. As the flow attaches to them, they experience a sharp increase in induced drag. I was pretty pleased to notice this little tidbit; it kinda validates the model in an obtuse way. That being said, I have *no* idea if this effect is noticeable in a real aircraft. Alex? I've never noticed it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. For most throttle transients, the combination of prop momentum, throttle pump and induction system effects will hide the blade stall transition. Especially true if you have a controllable prop. Have you checked whether the blade profile implies that the whole blade stalls and unstalls at the same time ? It may be gradual. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] EAA Wright Flyer
I wonder if the EAA would be willing to share their research data with the rest of us? Any EAA members here? IIRC it's not the EAA that's sponsoring the research. I think the model was tested extensively in the wind tunel at Langley. http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/aero/wright/tunnels/ I am thinking that the data may be available via FOIA or online. Jon smime.p7s Description: application/pkcs7-signature
Re: [Flightgear-devel] EAA Wright Flyer
On Wednesday 10 April 2002 10:02 pm, you wrote: Microsoft To Join The Centennial Of Flight Celebration As Part Of EAA's Countdown To Kitty Hawk Presented By Ford Motor Company http://www.countdowntokittyhawk.com/news/microsoft.html Go read it for the full details, but it basically says that Micros~1 will be creating a highly detailed flight model for the 1903 Wright Flyer to be used in a big simulator. Here's the interesting part: quote To create the most accurate simulation of the 1903 Wright Flyer, the Microsoft Flight Simulator team plans to work with EAA to research the details of the aircraft, the site where the Flyer flew and historical accounts of Dec. 17, 1903. The team also will observe wind tunnel tests of EAA's 1903 Wright Flyer reproduction - the only Flyer to fly at the First Flight Centennial Celebration. Those experiences and the data will help ensure that the 3-D visuals and the flight model of the aircraft in Microsoft Flight Simulator are as detailed and accurate as possible. /quote I wonder if the EAA would be willing to share their research data with the rest of us? Any EAA members here? I dunno, but M Selig from UIUC has been working on a flyer model for fgfs for a while ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] FTD
Looks like X-Plane beat us to the punch, but I'm still impressed. http://www.x-plane.com/FTD.html -- Cameron Moore :wq ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] EAA Wright Flyer
Last year I did an in-flight simulation of the Wright Flyer in our Variable-Stability Lear 24 for the USAF Test Pilot School. It was part of the AIAA Wright Flyer Project - I wonder how this is this related to the EAA project? See: http://www.wrightflyer.org/Future/have_wright.html The linear model was provided by Dr. Fred Culick of CalTech. They were considering adding pitch and roll SAS (which we also tried in flight) to augment the statically unstable pitch and roll axes, although I'm not sure what has been done since last year. If Dr. Culick's model was accurate, Wilbur and Orville really had their hands full. Regards, Paul Paul R. Deppe Veridian Engineering (formerly Calspan) Flight Aerospace Research Group 150 North Airport Drive Buffalo, NY 14225 (716) 631-6898 (716) 631-6990 FAX [EMAIL PROTECTED] attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Flightgear-devel] EAA Wright Flyer
At 4/9/02, you wrote: On Wednesday 10 April 2002 10:02 pm, you wrote: Microsoft To Join The Centennial Of Flight Celebration As Part Of EAA's Countdown To Kitty Hawk Presented By Ford Motor Company http://www.countdowntokittyhawk.com/news/microsoft.html Go read it for the full details, but it basically says that Micros~1 will be creating a highly detailed flight model for the 1903 Wright Flyer to be used in a big simulator. Here's the interesting part: quote To create the most accurate simulation of the 1903 Wright Flyer, the Microsoft Flight Simulator team plans to work with EAA to research the details of the aircraft, the site where the Flyer flew and historical accounts of Dec. 17, 1903. The team also will observe wind tunnel tests of EAA's 1903 Wright Flyer reproduction - the only Flyer to fly at the First Flight Centennial Celebration. Those experiences and the data will help ensure that the 3-D visuals and the flight model of the aircraft in Microsoft Flight Simulator are as detailed and accurate as possible. /quote I wonder if the EAA would be willing to share their research data with the rest of us? Any EAA members here? I dunno, but M Selig from UIUC has been working on a flyer model for fgfs for a while John is right, I did put together a model of the 1903 Wright Flyer. I used data from the NASA Ames test (AIAA Paper 2000-0512) and the reference is here: Jex, H, Grimm, R., Latz, J.P., and Hange, C., Full-Scale 1903 Wright Flyer Wind Tunnel Test Results from the NASA Ames Research Center AIAA 38th Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper No. 2000-0512, 2000. http://www.wrightflyer.org/Papers/papers.html Another key person is Prof Culick at Caltech. Together with several others, he's analyzed the Flyer inside and out, and he's published a number of papers on it. His interests do not stop there: he's planning on flying a Wright Flyer look-alike in 2003 ... and because the original design was unstable, he asked us here to design a new airfoil for his Wright Flyer (the Los Angeles AIAA Section/Caltech group). This new airfoil + a change in cg + some other subtle changes will make the aircraft (the look-alike) more stable, which is the only sane thing to do! The sim model requires CONSTANT attention to maintain pitch attitude and avoid stall. Looking away for 1/3 sec is enough to find yourself looking at the ground or blue sky without much of a chance to recover. Stall is very interesting. The aircraft will pitch up, and the canard will stall but it still generates enough lift to keep pitching up the nose. Then the main wing will stall and create an even higher angle of attack on the canard as the cg heaves down due to lost of lift. At this point the canard goes into a deep stall, the diving moment of the wing takes over and pitches the aircraft down rapidly. The canard control power is VERY marginal, and the pullout is rather dramatic (slow). 50-75 ft can be lost very easily ... and that was 50 ft of clawing to altitude. One illusion in the sim is that when the main wing stalls, the canard seems to pitch up too fast. What's really happening is that the cg of the aircraft is dropping down. The view from the controls is one of seeing the canard rise up. But in side-view the drop of the main wing can be seen fairly well. The model is here: http://amber.aae.uiuc.edu/~m-selig/apasim/Aircraft-uiuc.html The data from the full-scale tests, which I used, is a gold mine to someone like me wanting to model the Flyer in a sim. One important thing is lacking, however. Stall data was not taken because of, presumably, instrumentation concerns. Nevertheless, my model is a nonlinear aero model (i.e. has stall) with data going from -35 to +35 deg alfa. It required some effort to estimate the stall data and independent effects of the canard and wing. I have recently added in apparent mass effects (version 2), but that model and associated code is not yet in the CVS. If anyone wants to try it (version 1), a good 3D model is the 03Flyer.zip (www.flightsim.com): FS2002 - 1903 Wright Flyer Model by Paul Beardsley ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ** Prof. Michael S. Selig Dept. of Aero/Astro Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 306 Talbot Laboratory 104 South Wright Street Urbana, IL 61801-2935 (217) 244-5757 (o), (509) 691-1373 (fax) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/m-selig http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/m-selig/faq.html (FAQ) ** ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
