Andy Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 05/17/2005 09:25 AM MST Please respond to FlightGear developers discussions |
To |
FlightGear developers discussions <flightgear-devel@flightgear.org> |
cc |
||
bcc |
||
Subject |
Re: [Flightgear-devel] c172r-yasim solution error | |
But again: it is unlikely that this model will be maintained in the
future. The standard FlightGear 172 is a JSBSim model, and it works
quite well. If there is something specific you need from the Skyhawk
model, you might best be served by modifying the JSBSim one. And if
you want a YASim lightplane, definitely check out the pa28-161. This
is very well tuned (by David Megginson, who actually owns such a
Cherokee) and works great.
Andy
At your suggestion, I spent this AM looking at the Warrior and agree it's as realistic as needed. My problem arises in the radio/nav stack where the VOR's cannot be set independently like in the c172. I'm looking into an instructor's aide for IFR approaches and would like to define an approach path intersection with the second vor-radial. To add to the confusion, I'm using the energy markers in the HUD to define inputs to the student and the Yasim FDM seems to support more HUD components than the JBS FDM... although I haven't spent too much time in the hud_ladr.cxx to find the links...
Mike
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
