David Megginson wrote: > Jim Wilson wrote: > > Also have made a tiny bit of progress on a 3D panel model...but > > it's at the point where it could be either a c310 or c172 > > That's a hard call -- there's a good case for each as the starting > aircraft. The C172 has a much simpler powerplant, but the user will > have to deal with p-factor on takeoff;
The "tradition" with civilian consumer flight simulators has always been to default to the trainer aircraft. That would argue for the 172, I suppose. And as far as 3D panels go, it'd be nice to be able to get the virtual cockpit effect without the full-on modelling work. To me, the biggest advantage of a 3D cockpit is the ability to point the view in any arbitrary direction and still look at the gauges. I don't care so much about seeing the throttle quadrant. I mean, even mapping the panel to a plane (or planes) in front of the user and letting them scroll around would be a huge leap forward. > the C310 has counter-rotating engines (therefore no p-factor) It does? Oops. I gotta get that fixed. The YASim model has identical engines; I thought that most of the "simple" twins had co-rotating engines, because of the difficulty of getting the engine manufacturers to tool up for mirrored engine parts. Andy -- Andrew J. Ross NextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com "Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one." - Sting (misquoted) _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
