On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 14:42:40 -0000, Jim Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Probably I've got this wrong, but isn't the c-172 our most refined/realistic > flightmodel? My impression of yasim, from using it for the p51d, but not as > an aero engineer, is that getting an aircraft working is about 2 parts theory > and 1 part voodoo (the part that the basic formulas don't cover). Actually, I'd say that the two are roughly equal in realism: JSBSim can use real, measured flight coefficients when they exist (most of the time we have to make them up right now), but it is stuck at a high level of abstraction because it can apply its calculations only to the aircraft as a whole; YASim cannot use real coefficients, but since it handles each lifting surface separately, it works at a lower level of abstraction can handle various asymmetric situations much more believably (for example, JSBSim can model a stalled plane, but YASim can model a stalled *wing* with the other wing not stalled). After working a lot on and flown a lot with both models, I find the handling of the YASim pa28-161 more realistic than the handling of the c172p, though they're both good. All the best, David -- http://www.megginson.com/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
