On Mon 18 June 2007 10:06, Stefan Seifert wrote:
> John Denker wrote:
> > If you want to know exactly why FGFS poops out at approximately
> > 62,000 feet, look at line 88 of Environment/environment.cxx
> >
> >    You can contrast that with the ISA table that goes up to 278,000
> >    feet as found e.g. at the top of
> >      http://www.av8n.com/physics/altimetry.htm
>
> Just for my understanding: this table is only used for instrumentation,
> isn't it?
> Both JSBSim and YASim have their own atmosphere models including such
> tables where JSBSim goes up to 259186ft and YASim to 18900m (62008ft).
>
> Reminds me that I should test again, if it's still possible to reach
> Earth orbit and do interstellar travel with an F-16 ;) Maybe this got
> better in newer JSBSim versions. But it's pretty strange, since JSBSim
> should be the FDM to do this right with the table up to 260Kft...
>
> Nine
>
>
Hello everybody, 

Tell me if i am wrong,

When i opened that topic , it was to know if we could hope any FG update to 
get an altitude instrument  which can be able to indicate more than 61000 ft.

We have had a lot of discussion on it , but nothing which could give the right 
answer.
Do we have to stay with  that limitation => 61000 ft ?
Do we have to conclude that FG altitude instruments is unable to give the 
right value?
Or is it only a bug which could be solved ?

Thanks for the answer

-- 
Gérard


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to