Hi,
I have been busy updating the F-16 flight computer lately which turned
out the have quite some problems. After extensive (and many, many hours
of) work I'm pleased to announce it is finished now. I know others have
been using this FDM to model other aircraft, so I've added a bit of
On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:52:38 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have been busy updating the F-16 flight computer lately which
turned
out the have quite some problems. After extensive (and many, many
hours
of) work I'm pleased to announce it is finished now. I know others
On jeu 14 août 2008, gerard robin wrote:
SNIP
With Noratlas, the last piston update, has made some change, now i get less
power, i must update the Engine spec
However i can take off with it (slowly, and carefully)
Cheers
No i was wrong, N2501 is right with the most recent JSBSim update ,
On Friday 15 August 2008 09:52:38 Erik Hofman wrote:
I have been busy updating the F-16 flight computer lately which turned
out the have quite some problems. After extensive (and many, many hours
of) work I'm pleased to announce it is finished now. I know others have
been using this FDM to
On jeu 14 août 2008, Erik Hofman wrote:
Hi,
Ever since I switched to the CVS version of FlightGear I wondered
whether the black-out behavior really is that realistic . Although I
never experienced it I couldn't imagine this would happen in real life,
at least not with an anti-g suit.
In an
On ven 15 août 2008, gerard robin wrote:
I have not the answer :( ,
so, having access to an external parameter/property ( evaluated and
given by the Model Aircraft developer) which modify the conditions/values
of black-out would be the best.
Now when using any modern fighter with G-Suit
Erik Hofman wrote:
Hi,
Ever since I switched to the CVS version of FlightGear I wondered
whether the black-out behavior really is that realistic . Although I
never experienced it I couldn't imagine this would happen in real
life, at least not with an anti-g suit. In an excerpt from a
I encountered the following code, in the middle of
FGNavList::findNavFromList:
==
// LOC, ILS, GS, and DME antenna's could potentially be
// installed at the opposite end of the runway. So it's not
// enough to
James,
I was perusing the cvs logs online for this source file and this code goes
back quite a ways ...
http://cvs.flightgear.org/viewvc/source/src/Navaids/navlist.cxx?view=log
Revision *1.7* -
(viewhttp://cvs.flightgear.org/viewvc/source/src/Navaids/navlist.cxx?revision=1.7view=markup)
On 08/15/2008 01:30 PM, James Turner wrote:
I encountered the following code, in the middle of
FGNavList::findNavFromList:
[snip]
Now, there's two bad things here: (I think)
- in the DME case (type == 12 or 13), hdg is left 0.0
- hdg, having been computed, isn't then used: I assume it
On 15 Aug 2008, at 23:07, John Denker wrote:
Possibly constructive suggestions:
1) In the case of paired transmitters, turn on the one that serves
the
runway _favored by the wind_. Do this regardless of the location of
the aircraft.
Remark: This works even in multiplayer
I'm planning to do a slightly intensive re-factoring - creating a base
class where one didn't exist before. The (draft) base class is
attached - it will become a base for the following:
FGAirport
FGRunway
FGFix
FGNavRecord
ATCData
The members are
12 matches
Mail list logo
