Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Georg Vollnhals -- Wednesday 14 June 2006 11:57:
>> Melchior FRANZ schrieb:
>>> * Georg Vollnhals -- Wednesday 14 June 2006 03:02:
Take the BO105 and goo for a straight and level flight with 100-120
knts. Then push the collective down. [...] ^^^
Unless you get REALLY small the accuracy should be the same as full
scale.
But close to the ground the ground effect makes a big difference. It
happens when aplane flies at an altitude less than half its wingspan.
Basically the air underneath "can't get out" and creates tremendous
additional l
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:57:39 +0200, Georg wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Melchior FRANZ schrieb:
> > * Georg Vollnhals -- Wednesday 14 June 2006 03:02:
> >> Take the BO105 and goo for a straight and level flight with 100-120
> > > knts. Then push the collective down. [...]
> >> Try it wi
Ahh, ok. I stand corrected.
* Georg Vollnhals -- Wednesday 14 June 2006 12:37:
> Simply because it is established at low speed and will not *change*
> anymore at high speed.
Well, that's not true. It can.
I'm not really a helicopter engineer/physicist. I can only read about
things like these.
Melchior FRANZ schrieb:
> * Georg Vollnhals -- Wednesday 14 June 2006 11:57:
>> Melchior FRANZ schrieb:
>>> * Georg Vollnhals -- Wednesday 14 June 2006 03:02:
Take the BO105 and goo for a straight and level flight with 100-120
knts. Then push the collective down. [...] ^
The discussion seems to be getting hot..Regarding the heli model: Could it represent an R/C helicopter model fine enough to synthonize an autopilot to be ported afterwards to real (R/C UAV) life?Would it work for slow velocities and near to ground flights?
Would it work for higher (not much) altitu
* Georg Vollnhals -- Wednesday 14 June 2006 11:57:
> Melchior FRANZ schrieb:
> > * Georg Vollnhals -- Wednesday 14 June 2006 03:02:
> >> Take the BO105 and goo for a straight and level flight with 100-120
> >> knts. Then push the collective down. [...] ^^^
> > That's "transla
Melchior FRANZ schrieb:
> * Georg Vollnhals -- Wednesday 14 June 2006 03:02:
>> Take the BO105 and goo for a straight and level flight with 100-120
>> knts. Then push the collective down. [...]
>> Try it with the BO105 - see what happens?
>> You are not only able to hold height with pulling the st
* Georg Vollnhals -- Wednesday 14 June 2006 03:02:
> Take the BO105 and goo for a straight and level flight with 100-120
> knts. Then push the collective down. [...]
> Try it with the BO105 - see what happens?
> You are not only able to hold height with pulling the stick back but to
> climb with
Martin Spott schrieb:
>
> I don't claim the helicopter FDM in FlightGear is perfect, but turning
> it down just because a few details are missing, whereas most of the
> actual in-flight behaviour is pretty well done, is unjustified,
>
..
..
> Usually it _is_ my intention to stay within
Martin Spott wrote:
> I want to see a simulation of what is supposed to happen during a
> flight and I'm quite satisfied for now. Apparently you want to see a
> simulation of what is _not_ supposed to happen during a flight, so your
> expecations and your valuation of what's already there differs
Josh Babcock wrote:
> Martin Spott wrote:
>> This is what nowadays is done even on many model helicopters: They
>> spool up the whole thing, activate the governor, which typically part
>> of a FADEC in large helicopters, and have the rotor running at fixed
>> speed for the whole trip.
> Assuming
Martin Spott wrote:
> Josh Babcock wrote:
>
>> For instance: translational lift, ground effect, retreating blade stall,
>> and VRS. I don't think that there is any kind of realism regarding the
>> energy model for the blades. (AFAIK, all they do is spool up to the
>> specified rpm when the engines
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
instance: translational lift, [...]
>
> Translational lift is implelemented. According to Maik it's just not
> realistic yet.
>
>
> http://baron.flightgear.org/pipermail/flightgear-devel/2003-October/021940.html
>
> I also think that the helicopter FDM *parts* aren't ba
* Josh Babcock -- Tuesday 13 June 2006 04:33:
> I also feel, however, that there are some important things
> missing from the FDM.
>
> For instance: translational lift, [...]
Translational lift is implelemented. According to Maik it's just not
realistic yet.
http://baron.flightgear.org/piperm
Josh Babcock wrote:
> For instance: translational lift, ground effect, retreating blade stall,
> and VRS. I don't think that there is any kind of realism regarding the
> energy model for the blades. (AFAIK, all they do is spool up to the
> specified rpm when the engines are turned on and then back
Martin Spott wrote:
> "Correu PelDavid" wrote:
>
>> Isn't the FDM much good?
>> I thought it would be. What fidelity lacks?
>
> I find the helicopter FDM quite reasonable. I've been flying a model
> helicopter about the time when I finished school but this is
> already 20 years ago, so my m
"Correu PelDavid" wrote:
> Isn't the FDM much good?
> I thought it would be. What fidelity lacks?
I find the helicopter FDM quite reasonable. I've been flying a model
helicopter about the time when I finished school but this is
already 20 years ago, so my memory might play tricks with me. S
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 07:51:46 +1200, dene wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I agree and that's why I still fly helicopters even though I
> can't even follow Rule #5. That's the nice thing about a Sim...
> crashes don't hurt :-)
...the bad habits might, mightily too. ;o)
--
..med ve
> Question #4: Has anybody tried the Matlab-FlightGear connection without
> perishing on the try? If so, is there any documentation?
>
I don't know if there is any documentation. I kind of remember that
Jon had asked someone to come up with a paper or something... but
there is ofcourse the pro
Isn't the FDM much good? I thought it would be. What fidelity lacks?Does anybody pilot R/C helicopters to compare?What is the best FDM in FG for helis?And about the 5th rule... We ought to share a multiplayer sessions someday and take a look at the hover capabilities of the helis users.
David2006/6
>"dene maxwell" wrote:
>
> > Rule #5 Until you can hover indefinitely over the same point on the
>ground
> > and and climb and descend without moving from that point, don't try
>anything
> > fancier...ie practice hovering.
> > Rule #6 When you can hover, practice pulling up from level flight to a
"dene maxwell" wrote:
> Rule #5 Until you can hover indefinitely over the same point on the ground
> and and climb and descend without moving from that point, don't try anything
> fancier...ie practice hovering.
> Rule #6 When you can hover, practice pulling up from level flight to a
> stationa
Correu PelDavid wrote:
> Hello,
>
> After lots of exams, and almost infinite tasks at university, and before
> some more to come, I'd like to ask for a few things I'd like to do in
> the quiet sunny summer days.
>
> I'd like to mix FlightGear with Matlab through the aerospace toolbox.
> Weeks ago
Hi
>Hello,
>
>After lots of exams, and almost infinite tasks at university, and before
>some more to come, I'd like to ask for a few things I'd like to do in the
>quiet sunny summer days.
>
>I'd like to mix FlightGear with Matlab through the aerospace toolbox.
>Weeks ago I asked for the 0.9.8a ver
Hello,After lots of exams, and almost infinite tasks at university, and before some more to come, I'd like to ask for a few things I'd like to do in the quiet sunny summer days.I'd like to mix FlightGear with Matlab through the aerospace toolbox.
Weeks ago I asked for the 0.9.8a versions, which wa
26 matches
Mail list logo
