On Friday 23 April 2010 08:33:49 am Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> Best things in life are free - so is FlightGear!
Thanks for all the suggestions so-far. I think that should contain some
interesting information for a nice column.
Cheers,
Durk
-
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 9:42 AM, David Megginson
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 3:11 AM, syd adams wrote:
>
> > This is news to me. Which instrument models the drift ? I thought none
> did ,
> > so I created a nasal gyro
> > that drifts at 3 degrees/15 minutes for my own use. Apparently I haven
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 3:11 AM, syd adams wrote:
> This is news to me. Which instrument models the drift ? I thought none did ,
> so I created a nasal gyro
> that drifts at 3 degrees/15 minutes for my own use. Apparently I haven't
> looked close enough at the instrument code .
After I got my PP
2010/4/23 Arnt Karlsen :
>
> ..earlier on, I believe Microsoft used a cylinder model to
> model planet Earth, did they switch before FSX?
>
Apparently they did: http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtopic=224048
/JanM
-
Don't forget to mention that one of the best features of FlightGear is that
it is open source. Complete source code is available to all and we have an
open community of developers that anyone can plug into and ask questions.
This is less concern perhaps to end users, but still is one of our most
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 20:27:54 -0700 (PDT), cas...@mminternet.com wrote
in message
:
> Just to be pendantic.. ;-)
>
> wgs-84 is an oblate spheroid and an equipotential gravity model which
> is what I think we all meant by "round". I would image FSX also uses
> it, if not then this a definite plus
Thanks Torsten , I'll give that a try .
And yes , there are still things about FlightGear I probably dont know about
;)
Cheers
--
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightge
> This is news to me. Which instrument models the drift ? I thought none did
> , so I created a nasal gyro
> that drifts at 3 degrees/15 minutes for my own use. Apparently I haven't
> looked close enough at the instrument code .
>From heading_indicator.cxx:
// Next, calculate time-based preces
What makes FG outstanding is, that it models not only the regular
> behaviour of systems but also the system errors. That is gyro drift,
> compass
> errors and side lobes on ILS signals to name just a few.
>
This is news to me. Which instrument models the drift ? I thought none did ,
so I create
> Although I have a fair idea what those unique features might be, this might
> be an excellent opportunity to incorporate some input from real-life
> pilots. Any suggestions are welcome though.
Best things in life are free - so is FlightGear!
As an instrument rated pilot, I use FlightGear regula
Just to be pendantic.. ;-)
wgs-84 is an oblate spheroid and an equipotential gravity model which is
what I think we all meant by "round". I would image FSX also uses it, if
not then this a definite plus
for you math types, it can be modeled using 2nd order Bessel functions for
orbital mechanics/
I think FSX uses a round earth model and non-flat runways as well.
David
On Apr 22, 2010 9:29 PM, "Curtis Olson" wrote:
Here are a couple things off the top of my head ...
- FlightGear is currently powering several FAA certified pilot training
devices (www.atcflightsim.com)
- Flightgear uses
Here are a couple things off the top of my head ...
- FlightGear is currently powering several FAA certified pilot training
devices (www.atcflightsim.com)
- Flightgear uses a wgs-84 round earth model so you can fly from your real
aviation charts and hit all the intersections and radials and headi
Don't forget fgrun :-)
And you can check
http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php/Category:FlightGear_Newsletter
for new features
and http://www.flightgear.org/Gallery-v2.0/
At least the cloud is the best in all of flight simulator :-D
--Buganini
-
On 23/04/10 08:44, David Megginson wrote:
> Easy to set up for the command line, so you can launch straight into a
> practice approach without clicking through a bunch of screens (and can
> randomize things like wind).
>
Unfortunately, lets be honest, many (most) of our fellow pilots wouldn't
k
We actually try to emulate the aircraft's systems (vacuum, pitot,
static, electrical, etc.), so failure modes are much more realistic.
Instruments update more realistically, with suitable lags and other errors.
MSFS X has improved its flight models, but in general, I still find
that both JSBSim a
16 matches
Mail list logo
