On 01/11/2007 10:58 AM, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > John Denker has suggested that a C-182 RG would be a good addition.
I'm still interested in that. It would be tremendously useful as a procedures trainer. > However, this is very much on the drawing-board and would require > significant effort - we currently don't have an FDM I want this enough that I would be happy if the gear had *no* effect on the flight dynamics. The minimum would be to make something appropriately bad happen on a gear-up landing. The FDM for the flaps is markedly unrealistic, but people use flaps anyway..... Why should we hold the gear to a higher standard (in the short run)? > or model for such an effort. Can't the model for the gear-handle be "borrowed" from the C310? > I have enough work to do on the normal c182 without needing to worry about > retractable landing gear. That applies both as a pilot and a maintainer! I'm hoping for a low-workload solution. As for piloting, you can always just fly around with the gear extended, ignoring the gear handle. ========== Similar remarks apply to the cowl flaps. Remember, I'm coming at this from the /instructor/ point of view. Even if the gear lever and/or cowl-flaps lever don't have any effect on the model flight dynamics, *I* am still there, and I can give the student negative feedback if he doesn't use the levers properly. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
