gerard robin schreef: > With an aircraft which has gears retractable , the "landing" on sea can be > done smoothly on the belly. > TableData "drag" (and "lift") can be given with the best values according > to the water reaction. > The values regarding landing on ground remains right. > We have, only, to select the right TableData according to terrain type, > which is easy to do. > The possibility of belly landing an aircraft depends on the aircraft type -- an A/C with underwing mounted engines and a low wing is impossible to make a graceful belly-ditch (like the 737) since the engines would scoop up all the water and cause a huge amount of drag (and pitch the nose forward). IMO, the aircraft's fuselage, engines, and wings could also be considered contact points, albeit higher situated than an extended landing gear. For example, when you land a 737 or 747 over its recommended landing weight, you run the risk of either breaking the gear struts or causing enough gear compression to impact the engines on the runway. And of course, belly-landing an A/C on tarmac or grass is just as possible as ditching on water, but those methods could only be considered in an extreme emergency (like a jammed landing gear). Even MSFS can be fooled into doing it: I once bellied a Learjet 45 on the runway at Malaga in FS2004, only noticing that I made a fuselage landing when I tried to taxi off the runway and the aircraft didn't move (and I switched to external camera, realizing I forgot to lower the gear before landing. Next time: THREE GREENS! :))
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
