Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
On Wednesday 10 November 2004 11:08, Antonio Pennino wrote: please verify the brakes and the dimension and visual definition of the cockpit at the 800x600 resolution. Wheel brakes are working as expected. The BRAKES indicator on the panel is not working. I think you should remove the ADF radio panel, since there is no instrument to display the adf bearing. Alternatively add an adf bearing indicator. Also (if you are using the latest CVS version) I think you should consider to add a second airspeed indicator and turn indicator module. I see that those two instruments are visible from the copilot's panel. Now, I'm guessing that the the airspeed indicator on both sides are tied to the same property, so both fail at the same time. If you add a second airspeed indicator module, you can make the two airspeed indicators independent of eachother. This also applies to the turn indicator. -- Roy Vegard Ovesen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
From: Antonio Pennino [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Nocera Informatica To: FlightGear developers discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date sent: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:01:35 +0100 Subject:Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99 Priority: normal Send reply to: FlightGear developers discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] i have also use the 'b' key. Nothing. solved! It is need press the key and NOT release it!! Antonio Pennino Nocera Informatica s.r.l. telefono: 035/4219033 telefax : 035/4219050 e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
On Wednesday 10 November 2004 13:01, Antonio Pennino wrote: I think you should remove the ADF radio panel, since there is no instrument to display the adf bearing. Alternatively add an adf bearing indicator. I use the 0.9.6 win32 binary. How i make it? This question forces me to rethink my previous assumption that you were the maintainer of the Beach 99. If you know nothing about panels, a good place to start would be README.xmlpanel in the Docs directory. It is also very helpful to look at existing panel configurations. -- Roy Vegard Ovesen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
Funny you guys should be talking about turboprop models. I have been playing around today trying to get a allison t56 working using jsbsim's aeromatic.But for what ever reason the RPM just seems to keep climbing from the time you start even though I had the max prop rpm set at 1450.The prop did not respond to throttle movement.Actually managed to take off with the throttles set at idle. cheers Innis David Megginson writes Andy Ross wrote: The Beech 99 is a turboprop, which means that YASim is going to need new code to support it. I'd be happy to write it if someone decides they want to go that way. Doing so would open the way to a whole bunch of other interesting turboprops, including the Beech KingAir (from which the Beech 99 evolved, I think), the DeHavilland Twin Otter and Dash-8, the Lockheed C-130 Hercules, and even the single-engine Piper Meridian. Aren't nearly all helicopters turbine-driven as well? All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel _ What's your house worth? Click here to find out: http://www.ninemsn.realestate.com.au ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
Funny you guys should be talking about turboprop models. I have been playing around today trying to get a allison t56 working using jsbsim's aeromatic.But for what ever reason the RPM just seems to keep climbing from the time you start even though I had the max prop rpm set at 1450.The prop did not respond to throttle movement.Actually managed to take off with the throttles set at idle. If you're connecting a prop to a turbine, that won't work. The present turbine model can't be used as a turboprop. As a result, the best way to model a turboprop is to use a turbine with a direct thruster, and adjust the thrust table to simulate a propeller (see the OV-10). Dave -- David Culp davidculp2[at]comcast.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
If you're connecting a prop to a turbine, that won't work. The present turbine model can't be used as a turboprop. As a result, the best way to model a turboprop is to use a turbine with a direct thruster, and adjust the thrust table to simulate a propeller (see the OV-10). The issue is that we do energy different between the turbine and piston engine, right? Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
If you're connecting a prop to a turbine, that won't work. The present turbine model can't be used as a turboprop. As a result, the best way to model a turboprop is to use a turbine with a direct thruster, and adjust the thrust table to simulate a propeller (see the OV-10). The issue is that we do energy different between the turbine and piston engine, right? Right. The relevant code from FGPropulsion is: PowerAvailable = Engines[i]-Calculate(Thrusters[i]-GetPowerRequired()); Thrusters[i]-Calculate(PowerAvailable); vForces += Thrusters[i]-GetBodyForces(); // sum body frame forces vMoments += Thrusters[i]-GetMoments(); // sum body frame moments Presently, the turbine model ignores PowerRequired and returns pounds-force. The Piston and Electric models use PowerRequired and return horsepower. Dave -- David Culp davidculp2[at]comcast.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
Dave C. wrote: Right. The relevant code from FGPropulsion is: PowerAvailable = Engines[i]-Calculate(Thrusters[i]-GetPowerRequired()); Thrusters[i]-Calculate(PowerAvailable); vForces += Thrusters[i]-GetBodyForces(); // sum body frame forces vMoments += Thrusters[i]-GetMoments(); // sum body frame moments Presently, the turbine model ignores PowerRequired and returns pounds-force. The Piston and Electric models use PowerRequired and return horsepower. I think this is fixable - are you working on it? If not, I might take a quick try at it. Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
On 4/30/04 at 7:02 AM Jon Berndt wrote: Funny you guys should be talking about turboprop models. I have been playing around today trying to get a allison t56 working using jsbsim's aeromatic.But for what ever reason the RPM just seems to keep climbing from the time you start even though I had the max prop rpm set at 1450.The prop did not respond to throttle movement.Actually managed to take off with the throttles set at idle. If you care to, send me your configs and I can try and figure out the problem. I am momentarily going to commit to JSBSim CVS Dave Luff's turbo/supercharged piston engine model. That might help. I suspect your problem might be a too low IXX for the prop/engine. The turbocharged piston engine is a completely different beast from a turboprop though, I would imagine the latter has more in common with the turbine model. OTOH, the Piper Navajo is a GA twin that uses turbocharged piston engines, that might be a nice one to model. Cheers - Dave This message has been scanned but we cannot guarantee that it and any attachments are free from viruses or other damaging content: you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
Presently, the turbine model ignores PowerRequired and returns pounds-force. The Piston and Electric models use PowerRequired and return horsepower. I think this is fixable - are you working on it? If not, I might take a quick try at it. Sure. I was going to first implement the multiple-thrusters-per-engine change, so that the turbine's output could be sent partly to the propeller and partly to a nozzle. But it would be a few days before I could get to it. Dave -- David Culp davidculp2[at]comcast.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
David Luff wrote: The turbocharged piston engine is a completely different beast from a turboprop though, I would imagine the latter has more in common with the turbine model. OTOH, the Piper Navajo is a GA twin that uses turbocharged piston engines, that might be a nice one to model. Lots of GA planes have an option turbocharged (or turbonormalized -- I'm not technie enough to remember the distinction) engines, even relatively low-end ones like the Piper Arrow or the Cessna 182. There are two benefits: 1. it's actually possible to fly on a summer afternoon in the mountains; and 2. you can climb into the middle altitudes (up to 18,000 ft or even into the flight levels) to get above weather or turbulence or find more favourable winds. I've never flown a turboprop, but from what I have picked up secondhand, Dave is right -- it has a lot in common with a turbojet. Note, for example, that most piston engines burn 100LL fuel, while turboprops and turbojets both burn Jet-A (some newer European piston engines also burn diesel or Jet-A). 100LL is nearly odorless (it smells a bit like model airplane glue close up); Jet-A smells like diesel when it burns, and is what creates the distinctive odor on the ramp of passenger airports. All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 13:57:03 +0100 David Luff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The turbocharged piston engine is a completely different beast from a turboprop though, I would imagine the latter has more in common with the turbine model. OTOH, the Piper Navajo is a GA twin that uses turbocharged piston engines, that might be a nice one to model. Cheers - Dave Oops. I knew that. What was I thinking!? Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
David Megginson wrote: Lots of GA planes have an option turbocharged (or turbonormalized -- I'm not technie enough to remember the distinction) I think it's certification. A turbonormalized engine has a wastegate setting of normal atmospheric pressure. It never develops more power than the normally aspirated engine would see, so presumably the certification process is less involved. But it's still turbocharged at altitude, which is where you care about it. Andy ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
Curtis L. Olson wrote: Anyone want to take a crack at a new FDM model for the Beech 99 as well? You could probably start with the data for the UIUC model and go from there. The Beech 99 is a turboprop, which means that YASim is going to need new code to support it. I'd be happy to write it if someone decides they want to go that way. Andy ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Beech 99
Andy Ross wrote: The Beech 99 is a turboprop, which means that YASim is going to need new code to support it. I'd be happy to write it if someone decides they want to go that way. Doing so would open the way to a whole bunch of other interesting turboprops, including the Beech KingAir (from which the Beech 99 evolved, I think), the DeHavilland Twin Otter and Dash-8, the Lockheed C-130 Hercules, and even the single-engine Piper Meridian. Aren't nearly all helicopters turbine-driven as well? All the best, David ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
