Willi,
It is Cylinder Head Temperature.
- Mish
- Original Message -
From: "WillyB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 27 July, 2003 10:56 AM
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Instrument help
Hi...
I'm starting to get the instruments onto the Cassutt Racer and came accross
one t
Hi...
I'm starting to get the instruments onto the Cassutt Racer and came accross
one that is called CH or C HT or something like that... and I don't have any
idea what it is...
I've thought about it but my brain can't come up with the answer so thought
I'd ask here as most of you probably kn
You might want to just wrap everything (below the includes) in namespace uiuc {}.
Best,
Jim
Michael Selig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> At 7/27/03, you wrote:
> >Looks like you're getting into a mess with these defines (particularly
> >this one):
> >
> >#define ch aircraft_->ch
>
> If I renam
At 7/27/03, you wrote:
Looks like you're getting into a mess with these defines (particularly
this one):
#define ch aircraft_->ch
If I renamed "ch", would that solve the problem? I could use "chord_h" for
horizontal tail chord.
Regards,
Michael
as it conflicts with a variable in my sstream
Looks like you're getting into a mess with these defines (particularly this one):
#define ch aircraft_->ch
as it conflicts with a variable in my sstream by the same name.
See output:
depmode=gcc3 /bin/sh ../../../depcomp \
g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../../src/Include -I../../.. -I../../
Michael Selig wrote:
At 7/26/03, Jim Wilson wrote:
Is there a reason this can't be moved out of the main loop yet? It's
been a
while since it was last discussed, but I thought something was going
to be
done with it.
The patch was one I submitted to Erik.
How about this solution for now: Sim
Alex Perry writes:
> However, the OAT instrument is often not mounted in the panel and is
> instead located in one of the overhead air vents. Unless you're using
> the 3D cockpit, that region is not normally in a FGFS display window.
> This leaves the obvious question of where we should show
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 21:00:33 +0200,
"Frederic Bouvier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> BTW, if you can provide a translation of the error messages, helping
> you would be easier.
..would piping these error messages thru a translation filter, help?
--
..med vennli
At 7/26/03, Jim Wilson wrote:
Is there a reason this can't be moved out of the main loop yet? It's been a
while since it was last discussed, but I thought something was going to be
done with it.
The patch was one I submitted to Erik.
How about this solution for now: Simply delete or comment out
Bodo von Thadden wrote:
> Hello
> I try to build Flightgear again. The last time, it was several months ago.
I
> still use MSVC6 as Compiler.
> The compiler stucks in the file: ssgEntityArray.cxx on line 67.
>
> Kompilierung läuft...
> ssgEntityArray.cxx
> f:\source\src\objects\ssgentityarray.cxx(6
Just an update on this.
I can re-arrange the default keboard (and presumably js - haven't tried yet)
bindings from the default settings in preferences by entries in the a/c
set.xml file.
This means I can change the brake set-up from one gear and three wheels, with
a brake on each wheel, to fou
> He felt that to fly near minimums
> you needed to be flying on a daily basis, even though you can maintain
> certification without doing anything like that.
I think he is oversimplifying. You can easily do minimums, at night and
in completely smooth air and stratus clouds, at your home airport
Hello
I try to build Flightgear again. The last time, it was several months ago. I
still use MSVC6 as Compiler.
The compiler stucks in the file: ssgEntityArray.cxx on line 67.
Kompilierung läuft...
ssgEntityArray.cxx
f:\source\src\objects\ssgentityarray.cxx(67) : error C2259: "ssgEntityArray"
: In
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 14:13:11 -, "Jim Wilson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> Just like the Spitfire -- the ME-109's fuel-injected engine was one of
>> the few advantages it had over the Spitfire's gravity-fed, carbureted
>> engine, if I recall correct
Jim Wilson writes:
> IIRC there was an oil issue with the Merlin's inverted as well.
A gravity-fed wet sump, perhaps?
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL P
Arnt Karlsen writes:
> > that -10 to +1 Celsius band that's especially scary, and that's when I
>
> ..say +4, or try drop into rain with a _cold_ plane. ;-)
Absolutely right. The problem is that the fuel in the wing tanks
takes a long time to warm up, so if you've been flying cold long
enou
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Just like the Spitfire -- the ME-109's fuel-injected engine was one of
> the few advantages it had over the Spitfire's gravity-fed, carbureted
> engine, if I recall correctly.
>
IIRC there was an oil issue with the Merlin's inverted as well.
Best,
Ji
Is there a reason this can't be moved out of the main loop yet? It's been a
while since it was last discussed, but I thought something was going to be
done with it.
Best,
Jim
Erik Hofman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> // Curt is this code used? I don't see any problems when I comment it out.
>
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 15:22:29 +0200, Arnt Karlsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 13:56:17 +0100,
>Rick Ansell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Mk I max TAS at 20,000 ft (where it was fastest): c. 350 mph
>
>..with the wood prop???
The website I fou
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 21:56:43 -0400,
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> that -10 to +1 Celsius band that's especially scary, and that's when I
..say +4, or try drop into rain with a _cold_ plane. ;-)
..there is one record of a Norwegian? hanglider pilot
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 13:56:17 +0100,
Rick Ansell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Mk I max TAS at 20,000 ft (where it was fastest): c. 350 mph
..with the wood prop???
--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 06:45:00 -0400, David Megginson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jon Stockill writes:
>
> > They are - I started out in them when I was 14, and didn't have any
> > problem handling it then. Also fully aerobatic, provided you remember
> > that there's no inverted fuel system on them
Jon Stockill writes:
> They are - I started out in them when I was 14, and didn't have any
> problem handling it then. Also fully aerobatic, provided you remember
> that there's no inverted fuel system on them, so leaving it upside down
> with no +ve G on results in a bit of a chugging noise
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, David Megginson wrote:
> Tell me more about how they handle -- I understand that they're light
> on the controls.
They are - I started out in them when I was 14, and didn't have any
problem handling it then. Also fully aerobatic, provided you remember
that there's no inverte
24 matches
Mail list logo
