Yeah, I have been reviewing this, and I think I understand how the definition works. I'm getting pretty much the same numbers based on the 2900 and .35 which I got out of the POH and several internet sources on the cyclone engines. I have a more appropriate yasim file now, but I still can't get it to solve, so I wonder if there is another problem somewhere else? Maybe I have screwed up the aero data and it is producing way too much drag.
Here's the latest: http://home.comcast.net/~jrbabcock/superfort/b29-yasim.2.xml
Everyone, thanks for all the help so far, it is very appreciated, Josh
Not sure if I started with the latest or not, but this one solves: http://www.spiderbark.com/fgfs/b29-yasim.xml
This is what I changed:
1) Added fuselage length.
2) Increased wing length to something closer to correct length. 3) Probably adjusted a couple other less significant numbers that seemed wrong (wing sweep angle maybe?).
4) Fixed rpm/power numbers under the prop tags. They need to be scaled back according to the gear ratio. Someone with a better understanding of mech engineering might be able to explain why the BHP on the prop shaft is reduced by a factor of 0.35 when that's the gear ratio, or maybe that is wrong and there is something going on in the YASim calcs. It seems that is what you have to do to get a solution that works. In any case YASim should at least do some sanity checking here to avoid the endless loop thing.
Solution results: Iterations: 1220 Drag Coefficient: 3.398360 Lift Ratio: 417.065216 Cruise AoA: 1.252508 Tail Incidence: 3.132050 Approach Elevator: 0.268476 CG: -10.439, 0.000, -0.137
This solution isn't quite right. I had to knock down your cruise speed and altitude, but at least you've got something to go back to while tweaking. BTW I don't know much about the B-29, but did you do that airspeed in KIAS? 365 @ 25000 sounds a bit high.
Best regards,
Jim Wilson
_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Many thanks, I will make these changes (I already caught the fuse snafu, I put that in by accident recently)
As for the figures, they are the same ones that I keep seeing everywhere. Actually, the max altitude is more like 32000. Part of the reason that we beat Japan so badly once we got in range is that they simply didn't have anything that could catch and/or reach the superfort.
Josh
_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
