[Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
* Gerard ROBIN -- Tuesday 08 November 2005 16:28: http://ghours.club.fr/Flanker.jpg Wow! I just saw my next favorite. :-) m. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Le mardi 08 novembre 2005 à 16:52 +0100, Melchior FRANZ a écrit : * Gerard ROBIN -- Tuesday 08 November 2005 16:28: http://ghours.club.fr/Flanker.jpg Wow! I just saw my next favorite. :-) m. May be later on. It will need many time to do it. Beautiful and difficult. That one is not free (built from several spare part model coming from mdl, three model + home detail and animation add on). The Su27 FDM will be a real problem, so i do use the Erik f15 FDM (good for F15 bad for Su27) Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
* Gerard ROBIN -- Tuesday 08 November 2005 17:28: * Gerard ROBIN -- Tuesday 08 November 2005 16:28: http://ghours.club.fr/Flanker.jpg That one is not free (built from several spare part model coming from mdl, three model + home detail and animation add on). Oh, what a pity. (The Nimitz and the Concorde were also not made for FlightGear, but I found the authors and asked them if we could distribute them with fgfs under the GPL. They agreed. The Nimitz author also granted us to use *all* of his models. :-) m. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Le mardi 08 novembre 2005 à 18:12 +0100, Melchior FRANZ a écrit : * Gerard ROBIN -- Tuesday 08 November 2005 17:28: * Gerard ROBIN -- Tuesday 08 November 2005 16:28: http://ghours.club.fr/Flanker.jpg That one is not free (built from several spare part model coming from mdl, three model + home detail and animation add on). Oh, what a pity. (The Nimitz and the Concorde were also not made for FlightGear, but I found the authors and asked them if we could distribute them with fgfs under the GPL. They agreed. The Nimitz author also granted us to use *all* of his models. :-) m. Sometime it is possible. With Su27 it is difficult because the authors don't authorize to modify the original MSFS package (mainly msfs2004 models) only texture can be modified (i have many beautiful a/c with that prohibition). -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Hi Guys, Just a quick comment. There's been a few people chatting about how good/bad certain aircraft are with respect to FDM's near the edge of the normal flight envelope. I think its very difficult for a simulator to get everything right all of the time. I fly a number of different simulators (FlightGear, MSFS and X-Plane). Even MSFS obviously gets it *very* wrong from time to time. Now, I have never taken the controls of a helicopter (although I have been a passenger in one), but I'm fairly sure that with the engine off it shouldn't cavort around in the air for ages without loosing altitude, which is just what the MS Jetranger does :-) I think, what I'm trying to say is, its all very well to encourage people to strive for perfection in the flight models, 3D cockpits, etc, but when they don't quite reach it, don't beat them up about it, because even the proprietary sims don't get it right all the time :-) TTFN, Paul ~ __ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
On Sunday 06 November 2005 20:18, Paul Duncan wrote: Even MSFS obviously gets it *very* wrong from time to time. Now, I have never taken the controls of a helicopter (although I have been a passenger in one), but I'm fairly sure that with the engine off it shouldn't cavort around in the air for ages without loosing altitude, which is just what the MS Jetranger does :-) I think, what I'm trying to say is, its all very well to encourage people to strive for perfection in the flight models, 3D cockpits, etc, but when they don't quite reach it, don't beat them up about it, because even the proprietary sims don't get it right all the time :-) MSFS is a simulator?!! I thought it was just a game and therefore excused all the funnies. Sort of like a hard core, no frills version of Crimson Skies. Regards Paul P.S. I own a copy of FS2004 ;-) ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Hi Guys, Just a quick comment. There's been a few people chatting about how good/bad certain aircraft are with respect to FDM's near the edge of the normal flight envelope. I think its very difficult for a simulator to get everything right all of the time. I fly a number of different simulators (FlightGear, MSFS and X-Plane). Even MSFS obviously gets it *very* wrong from time to time. Now, I have never taken the I program sims for a living. Even the really serious engineering sims don't get it all right. The ones I help develop and use get the important stuff done quite good almost all of the time. But, landing gear, for instance, is not modeled at rest. All the sim runs end prior to V=0. Jon ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Le dimanche 06 novembre 2005 à 20:54 +0200, Paul Surgeon a écrit : MSFS is a simulator?!! I thought it was just a game and therefore excused all the funnies. Sort of like a hard core, no frills version of Crimson Skies. Regards Paul P.S. I own a copy of FS2004 ;-) you are right it is a game -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Le dimanche 06 novembre 2005 à 22:49 +0200, Charalampos Alexopoulos a écrit : Hi I am very thanksfull to people who implement FGFS and the aircraft's. What , in my undrstanding, is the use of this topic is to have some info of wich aircraft did what in order to not confuse ourselfs trying to do with an airplane thinks that not implemented. regards Charalampos Alexopoulos Hi Charalampos, I am not sure it is any question, about what an a/c can do or not, every function which are within FG are available for every a/c. The diff is mainly : First/ the visual aspect detail 3D and animation. Second/the panel detailed or not within mouse interface or not. Third/the FDM paramaters more or less close to the real A/C (in any case flyable) The authors are able to answer to specific questions from any users about their baby. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly? (George Patterson)
Hi All, I did not copy any part of a preceding email because there is so much under this subject. So here goes. I gladly donate my category system for aircraft. I peeked at the Wiki and it has a lot there already. I have two major questions. First, can we and do we need to define aircraft status? (See next long discussion Second shouldn't comments and status be subdivided based on what it effects within an aircraft "model"? (Long discussion below) I think a "complete" aircraft and development of the same can be divided in too some key area's, needing different talents, and potentially interesting to different individuals. i.e. perfect for GPL development if the WIKI can be used has a needs list and the standard CVS methodology for updatingthe aircraft. The key is who defines status and how are the aircraft verified, etc. Assuming that the final goal of an aircraft is to be completely finished and included in the standard release package or GPL-hanger. Through probable lack of knowledge I see the aircraft model as having a basic structure like this. Aircraft 3 D Model Basic Model (how it appears in flight) Textures Accuracy Fit and Finish Animations (there are examples of these on some aircraft and others have some or none implemented) Landing Gear Flaps Rudder Propeller Sounds Engines Propellers FDM (this has multiple choices and some modelshave be implemented in more than one) YASIM (appears to be the easiest to create based on documentation and questions I asked previously) JSBSIM (has a tool to build a basic model based on size and specific operating characteristics) Cockpit 2D - Instruments 3D - Instruments HUD Radar Systems Electrical Auto Pilot Other Vacuum Hydraulic Static Pitot Sub-models ( I have seen or read about the following examples) Contrails Weapons (of course) So a minimally aircraft needs a 3D model, the generic cockpit, generic systemsand an FDM in order to "fly" under flightgear. Status PRELIM If you add actual Engine(prop) and a specific FDM for the aircraft would that be status TEST. To achieve an ALPHA status the aircraft would need at least some animation and an accepted specific FDM. (who tests/accepts) For a BETA status add a specific Cockpit and Sounds. For a RELEASE status what is minimal requirements? What Status for a plane that has, photo realistic model,everything defined specifically for it and accurate. 100% GOLD (like in classic cars) ;-) Ray Mc ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly? (George Patterson)
Le samedi 05 novembre 2005 à 09:56 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : Snip I have two major questions. First, can we and do we need to define aircraft status? (See next long discussion Second shouldn't comments and status be subdivided based on what it effects within an aircraft model? (Long discussion below) I think a complete aircraft and development of the same can be divided in too some key area's, needing different talents, and potentially interesting to different individuals. i.e. perfect for GPL development if the WIKI can be used has a needs list and the standard CVS methodology for updating the aircraft. The key is who defines status and how are the aircraft verified, etc. Assuming that the final goal of an aircraft is to be completely finished and included in the standard release package or GPL-hanger. Through probable lack of knowledge I see the aircraft model as having a basic structure like this. Aircraft 3 D Model Basic Model (how it appears in flight) Textures Accuracy Fit and Finish Animations (there are examples of these on some aircraft and others have some or none implemented) Landing Gear Flaps Rudder Propeller Sounds Engines Propellers FDM (this has multiple choices and some models have be implemented in more than one) YASIM (appears to be the easiest to create based on documentation and questions I asked previously) JSBSIM (has a tool to build a basic model based on size and specific operating characteristics) Cockpit 2D - Instruments 3D - Instruments HUD Radar Systems Electrical Auto Pilot Other Vacuum Hydraulic Static Pitot Sub-models ( I have seen or read about the following examples) Contrails Weapons (of course) So a minimally aircraft needs a 3D model, the generic cockpit, generic systems and an FDM in order to fly under flightgear. Status PRELIM If you add actual Engine(prop) and a specific FDM for the aircraft would that be status TEST. To achieve an ALPHA status the aircraft would need at least some animation and an accepted specific FDM. (who tests/accepts) For a BETA status add a specific Cockpit and Sounds. For a RELEASE status what is minimal requirements? What Status for a plane that has, photo realistic model, everything defined specifically for it and accurate. 100% GOLD (like in classic cars) ;-) Ray Mc Hi Ray, Your check list cannot be more completed, we can find everything. Well but isn't it a third question: Because we stand in a binary system, the question is which criteria to decide if an a/c will be official ? I defend the idea that every good work, i mean productive work must be official, the a/c which are available are productive work. It was said: an author go on an other model, and the existing one which is still on the workbench is not completed, every a/c is never completed, only the author can say if the degree of completion is acceptable, only the author could say if it is Alpha, Beta, or anything else (he is alone to know which target). You put the finger on Animations (there are examples of these on some aircraft and others have some or none implemented): we accept it, these a/c have FDM, they fly and because they are official we know them and that could encouraged one to start in developing a new simple model). An other example of work which is a productive work, an FDM for Harrier A/C has been developed by Andy, no cockpit, no 3Dmodel: on my side with a non GPL 3Dmodel and for my personal use i could experiment and later on use that FDM. We can find a very good FDM f15 (thanks Erik) no cockpit, no 3Dmodel. And so on.. To conclude, i think we have had, many mail about a subject which could have been useful in a company which try to make profits, decide to increase the quality of the products, and trash the oldies (null default, low cost). It is not useful for us, only to remember that the main engine which make us working is the pleasure to do beautiful and FREELY Stop me if i am wrong , every developers who are here do use that engine. Cheers -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
After loading up everything available in CVS there are a lot of flyable things available to play with in many different states of completion. I would suggest rather than ditching any of the current models, regardless of state, that a better organization of the existing models would be more useful. I built my self a tree within the Aircraft folder. In the Aircraft folder I leave the models I'm currently interested in using. That way they show up in the Windows launcher and it is not cluttered with 100's of IMHO unneeded items. I defined the following categories of aircraft. Fantasy - Santa, UFO etc Experimental - X-15, YF-23 etc GA- Citation, C-182 etc Gliders Commercial - 737, DC-3, etc Pre WWII Wright Flyer, Sopwith Camel, etc WWII - P-51, Spitfire, etc Post WWI - B-52, F-16 etc Most of the -set XML files have a Status from the author although I don;t know if there is a "standard" definition of the status's. A standard definition would also be useful. As far as the Base package I think it has a relatively small number of reasonably complete aircraft doesn't it? Ray Mc ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
I have started a page for each aircraft on the wiki http://www.seedwiki.com/wiki/flight_gear/aircraft_wishlist.cfm where folks can leave comments on their favourite aircraft-models. I've phrased it thusly, though, being a wiki, please change it if you have better ideas :-) Aircraft-model titlethumbnail link to airliners.net Categories: Version: FDM: Status: Author/Maintainer: Features: To do: Help wanted? Yes please /No thanks==This bit is for the use of the author/maintainer only please. Please give your comments on this aircraft below. Please indicate if you think it is * just great - needs no further development * shows promise but needs further development - please be specific and say if you are willing to help * just needs a little tweaking - please be specific and say if you are willing to help * 'hanger queen' - stays in CVS but shouldn't be part of a release Im working through it now, starting to fill in the blanks, and weed out the aliases, though I think I'll be deleting the link to airliners.net and finding photos elsewhere. Is it OK to link the wiki to the thumbnails on the download page BTW? Please feel free to dive in and fill in info, links screenshots and comments. Hopefully after a week or so we'll get a feel for which aircraft are most popular and hopefully find more effort to finish some that are already started. Categories, I'm going to shamelessly steal from Ray Mc. Fantasy - Santa, UFO etc Experimental - X-15, YF-23 etc GA - Citation, C-182 etc Gliders Commercial - 737, DC-3, etc Pre WWII Wright Flyer, Sopwith Camel, etc WWII - P-51, Spitfire, etc Post WWI - B-52, F-16 etc Cheers Willie Fleming ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Ok thats good to know - how about stalls - how does it react? Shelton D'Cruz wrote: hi Ray The Citation, although very nice, is not really flyable - I stalled her the other day and could not come out of the spin. The Citation is actually one of my favorite airplanes to fly. It hits the published performance numbers pretty close in terms of climb rate, speeds, etc. Curt. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Shelton D'Cruz wrote: Ok thats good to know - how about stalls - how does it react? YAsim models some simple stalls. You definitely know when you've stalled. True life stall behavior is very difficult to model because it can be so different from aircraft to aircraft. There seems to be a small issue in YAsim with some strange behavior when your aoa goes a little past negative. I was looking at that last night and today, but quickly got in over my head. Hopefully Andy can figure this out without too much additional work. When you fly in the normal regimes you should almost never run into this problem. For whatever it's worth, some people like to hop into a sim and evaluate the flight dynamics model by taking it to the extreme edges of the flight regime before looking at anything else. If it feels right, the sim is great, if not the sim stinks. In this case, who here has stalled a Citation Jet? Who would know exactly how it reacts or doesn't react? How easy is it to recover in real life? If I told you it stalled exactly right would you be able to prove me wrong? If you told me it didn't stall right, could I prove you wrong? I'm not a full scale pilot, but I have flown a variety of R/C aircraft. They all have wildly different stall characteristics. So who knows... I think the YAsim Citation has a plausible stall but I have no way to say if it's anything close to realistic or not. Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Hi Willie Your WiKi is excellent! - I will add some comments to it. Regards Shelton. I have started a page for each aircraft on the wiki http://www.seedwiki.com/wiki/flight_gear/aircraft_wishlist.cfm where folks can leave comments on their favourite aircraft-models. I've phrased it thusly, though, being a wiki, please change it if you have better ideas :-) Aircraft-model titlethumbnail link to airliners.net Categories: Version: FDM: Status: Author/Maintainer: Features: To do: Help wanted? Yes please /No thanks==This bit is for the use of the author/maintainer only please. Please give your comments on this aircraft below. Please indicate if you think it is * just great - needs no further development * shows promise but needs further development - please be specific and say if you are willing to help * just needs a little tweaking - please be specific and say if you are willing to help * 'hanger queen' - stays in CVS but shouldn't be part of a release Im working through it now, starting to fill in the blanks, and weed out the aliases, though I think I'll be deleting the link to airliners.net and finding photos elsewhere. Is it OK to link the wiki to the thumbnails on the download page BTW? Please feel free to dive in and fill in info, links screenshots and comments. Hopefully after a week or so we'll get a feel for which aircraft are most popular and hopefully find more effort to finish some that are already started. Categories, I'm going to shamelessly steal from Ray Mc. Fantasy - Santa, UFO etc Experimental - X-15, YF-23 etc GA - Citation, C-182 etc Gliders Commercial - 737, DC-3, etc Pre WWII Wright Flyer, Sopwith Camel, etc WWII - P-51, Spitfire, etc Post WWI - B-52, F-16 etc Cheers Willie Fleming ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Hi Curt Yep good points - so besides the AOA issue, I think this jet is pretty much done. BTW - checked out your nice pics with you in the simulator - must have been a ball. Regards Shelton. Shelton D'Cruz wrote: Ok thats good to know - how about stalls - how does it react? YAsim models some simple stalls. You definitely know when you've stalled. True life stall behavior is very difficult to model because it can be so different from aircraft to aircraft. There seems to be a small issue in YAsim with some strange behavior when your aoa goes a little past negative. I was looking at that last night and today, but quickly got in over my head. Hopefully Andy can figure this out without too much additional work. When you fly in the normal regimes you should almost never run into this problem. For whatever it's worth, some people like to hop into a sim and evaluate the flight dynamics model by taking it to the extreme edges of the flight regime before looking at anything else. If it feels right, the sim is great, if not the sim stinks. In this case, who here has stalled a Citation Jet? Who would know exactly how it reacts or doesn't react? How easy is it to recover in real life? If I told you it stalled exactly right would you be able to prove me wrong? If you told me it didn't stall right, could I prove you wrong? I'm not a full scale pilot, but I have flown a variety of R/C aircraft. They all have wildly different stall characteristics. So who knows... I think the YAsim Citation has a plausible stall but I have no way to say if it's anything close to realistic or not. Curt. ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-users] Re: So what do you fly?
Shelton D'Cruz wrote: Hi Curt Yep good points - so besides the AOA issue, I think this jet is pretty much done. BTW - checked out your nice pics with you in the simulator - must have been a ball. Thanks, I was pretty lucky to get a chance to go in there. I was able to shoot two approaches in the full motion A320. It's really awsome, especially with a bit of turbulence. Even though you know you are in a sim and are trying hard to remember that fact, the immersiveness of the whole thing is really hard to ignore. Something to aim for with FlightGear... :-) Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-users mailing list Flightgear-users@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
