Joacim Persson wrote:
> #1 (below) is a call to localWind for the thruster calculations, only the
> thruster
> altitude is NAN.
>
> "_global_ground" are all NAN:s too. But I think by then, my insane turns had
> become insane loopings. (Hard to tell with the view flipping around like
> that.)
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Lee Elliott wrote:
> I think there's now a patch in for the engine problem - don't
> know if it fixes everything though.
Well it changed the behaviour somewhat. No more negative FF et al values.
It still accelerates like mad in extreme turns but now we get a SIGSEGV
clue. I go
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 12:08, Joacim Persson wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Lee Elliott wrote:
> > Thanks for posting this observation - this is clearly a bit
> > wacky (not that accelerating w/o +energy wasn't) - can you
> > reproduce it?
>
> Now that I tested it again, I saw however that the FF
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Lee Elliott wrote:
Thanks for posting this observation - this is clearly a bit wacky
(not that accelerating w/o +energy wasn't) - can you reproduce
it?
Now that I tested it again, I saw however that the FF number didn't fall
over from a high number to a negative, but decrea
On Monday 07 August 2006 18:36, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Lee Elliott -- Monday 07 August 2006 02:16:
> > Can you reproduce it while under control of the A/P? That
> > should help me reproduce it here.
>
> Didn't try. It's really easy to reproduce when you follow the
> instructions. I don't think
On Monday 07 August 2006 11:50, Joacim Persson wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> > Based on my understanding of YASim, this has to be some sort
> > of bug in the core yasim code since it's getting energy from
> > nowhere. Might be some sort of numerical/roundoff issue,
> > perh
* Lee Elliott -- Monday 07 August 2006 02:16:
> Can you reproduce it while under control of the A/P? That should
> help me reproduce it here.
Didn't try. It's really easy to reproduce when you follow the
instructions. I don't think the AP is involved in any way.
m.
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> Based on my understanding of YASim, this has to be some sort of bug in
> the core yasim code since it's getting energy from nowhere. Might be
> some sort of numerical/roundoff issue, perhaps some of the code in YAsim
> makes assumptions/simplifications
On Friday 04 August 2006 15:26, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Curtis L. Olson -- Friday 04 August 2006 15:34:
> > I will point out that while it's possible to force the YF-23
> > into this extreme state, if you fly it in a more normal
> > range, it behaves pretty normally.
>
> Not for me. I actually no
Hi Jon,
I think it makes sense to clamp the integrated value in any PID
regulator. Due to the fact, that for a PID-regulator the output is
clamped, the integrator should be clamped to a value, which is
sufficient for reaching the maximum allowed output (even if the D-part
is working against the
> > One way to reproduce:
> >
> > - start fgfs with --aircraft=f16-3d
> > - apply parking brakes
> > - wait 10 minutes
> > - fly and die (elevator pulls *strongly* up)
> >
> > m.
I think I see at least one problem. The pitch channel integrates load factor
error. Sitting on the runway, I see that
* Jon S. Berndt -- Saturday 05 August 2006 13:21:
> Now, if I can get OpenGL to work with my new video card, I can
> help debug this one... :-(
You can use the new stopwatch dialog under the Debug menu. My personal
record for surviving an F16 flight after 10 minute parking is around
25 seconds. Th
> One way to reproduce:
>
> - start fgfs with --aircraft=f16-3d
> - apply parking brakes
> - wait 10 minutes
> - fly and die (elevator pulls *strongly* up)
>
> m.
Thank you. Now, if I can get OpenGL to work with my new video card, I can
help debug this one... :-(
--
* Melchior FRANZ -- Saturday 05 August 2006 08:00:
> (I and others can *always* reliably reproduce.)
One way to reproduce:
- start fgfs with --aircraft=f16-3d
- apply parking brakes
- wait 10 minutes
- fly and die (elevator pulls *strongly* up)
m.
--
* Jon S. Berndt -- Saturday 05 August 2006 01:31:
> By saying "the F-16 is pathetic", that tells me nothing about what
> problems you are having.
Sorry, but this wasn't meant as a bug report. I've told Erik twice
about the problem already. He said he couldn't easily reproduce it.
(I and others can
> Unfortunately, we don't have a single halfway modern fighter
> in fgfs, that is not totally broken. The F16 is pathetic and unusable
> since JSBSim 2.0. The hunter/seahawk work nicely, but aren't exactly
> modern.
I tested several aircraft with FlightGear and JSBSim 0.9.11 with the v2.0
configur
* Curtis L. Olson -- Friday 04 August 2006 16:58:
> For what it's worth, the NTPS is using their own flight dynamics model
> and are looking out the window sans-3d cockpit, so they are just seeing
> the outside world + hud.
Ahh, good. In that case it's anything but urgent.
m.
-
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> Sorry, no offense to Lee -- it's still very well done 3D model wise,
> but I find it a bit embarrassing to show off in the NTPS. I'm not
> even sure if this is an old bug or if it's caused by later YASim
> changes. I don't remember ever having seen such unrealistic behavior,
* Melchior FRANZ -- Friday 04 August 2006 16:26:
> Unfortunately, we don't have a single halfway modern fighter
> in fgfs, that is not totally broken.
No, wait. There's the harrier, and maybe the f15 is good, too
(though without model).
m. :-)
---
* Curtis L. Olson -- Friday 04 August 2006 15:34:
> I will point out that while it's possible to force the YF-23 into this
> extreme state, if you fly it in a more normal range, it behaves pretty
> normally.
Not for me. I actually noticed the problems during "normal" flight.
I chased the KA6 and
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Lee Elliott -- Friday 04 August 2006 01:05:
>
>> Just a thought - what sort of speed are we talking here? AFAIK
>> YASim doesn't 'do' trans/supersonic - might this be a factor?
>>
>
> We are talking about accelerating from 300 kts to 2000 kts with
> zero throttle
* Lee Elliott -- Friday 04 August 2006 01:05:
> Just a thought - what sort of speed are we talking here? AFAIK
> YASim doesn't 'do' trans/supersonic - might this be a factor?
We are talking about accelerating from 300 kts to 2000 kts with
zero throttle. I doubt that this has anything to do with
On Tuesday 01 August 2006 22:50, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Lee Elliott -- Tuesday 01 August 2006 23:40:
> > Again, IIRC, the real (Y)F-23 could (was intended) get to
> >
> > >65000ft so with the YASim YF-23 under weight and too
> > > powerful
> >
> > it's able to climb just a bit too high:)
>
> Tha
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 00:03, Josh Babcock wrote:
> Lee Elliott wrote:
> > dearth of good info on the YF-23 when I originally did it.
> > I
>
> Should you find a moment, I feel that I should point this out:
> http://www.flight-manuals-on-cd.com/YFN.html
>
> Josh
Ta for that - I might have a
Lee Elliott wrote:
> dearth of good info on the YF-23 when I originally did it. I
Should you find a moment, I feel that I should point this out:
http://www.flight-manuals-on-cd.com/YFN.html
Josh
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash.
On Tuesday 01 August 2006 22:50, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Lee Elliott -- Tuesday 01 August 2006 23:40:
> > Again, IIRC, the real (Y)F-23 could (was intended) get to
> >
> > >65000ft so with the YASim YF-23 under weight and too
> > > powerful
> >
> > it's able to climb just a bit too high:)
>
> Tha
* Lee Elliott -- Tuesday 01 August 2006 23:40:
> Again, IIRC, the real (Y)F-23 could (was intended) get to
> >65000ft so with the YASim YF-23 under weight and too powerful
> it's able to climb just a bit too high:)
That's a minor problem. The bigger problem is that it *accelerates*
in very narro
I think this is resulting from a combination of factors.
The YASim YF-23, as currently defined, probably doesn't weigh
enough and the engines are a bit too powerful, both due to a
dearth of good info on the YF-23 when I originally did it. I
suspect that this means that it can get to > 74000ft
Is this some sort of bug in the model? It strikes me as something that
would either be a tightly held performance spec on the part of the US
Gov't, or a glaring flaw somewhere...
Stefan Seifert wrote:
> Melchior FRANZ wrote:
>
>> $ fgfs --aircraft=YF-23 --airport=knuq --disable-real-weather-f
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> $ fgfs --aircraft=YF-23 --airport=knuq --disable-real-weather-fetch
>
> - full throttle
> - climb to 8000 ft
> - 90 degree bank
> - pull stick fully back
> amazingly: you don't bleed off speed, but *accelerate*
> - at ~1630 kt (after that the speed decreases) 0 degree bank
* Jeff McBride -- Friday 28 July 2006 15:46:
> Actually, sometimes if you get it right (well, I did it once), you can
> go a lot faster than that.
Yes, you are right. I suggested 8000 ft only as sufficiently high to
not rush into the ground immediately, at that high speed. But trying
at 1000 ft o
> $ fgfs --aircraft=YF-23 --airport=knuq --disable-real-weather-fetch
>
> - full throttle
> - climb to 8000 ft
> - 90 degree bank
> - pull stick fully back
> amazingly: you don't bleed off speed, but *accelerate*
> - at ~1630 kt (after that the speed decreases) 0 degree bank and
> 90 degree pit
Actually, sometimes if you get it right (well, I did it once), you can
go a lot faster than that. I managed to get the speed to diverge
rapidly up to 5 or 6 digits once and then FG crashed. I wasn't able
to do it consistently though.
-Jeff
On 7/28/06, Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
$ fgfs --aircraft=YF-23 --airport=knuq --disable-real-weather-fetch
- full throttle
- climb to 8000 ft
- 90 degree bank
- pull stick fully back
amazingly: you don't bleed off speed, but *accelerate*
- at ~1630 kt (after that the speed decreases) 0 degree bank and
90 degree pitch up
- climb to
34 matches
Mail list logo
