On Wed, 29 Jun 2011 23:28:42 +0100 "Vivian Meazza" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Further research indicates that the F1A, modeled here was NOT capable of > M2.0 at 36000ft. M1.9 seem more likely. Moreover, due to structural and > stability problems the F1A was operationally limited to M1.7 or > approximately 700KIAS. We have pushed a small change in Mach drag to model > this better. Ron will look at the Mach stability issue a bit later. Thanks Vivian (and Ron)... It's been so long since I did the model that I've forgotten all the relevant figures; I know it matched all the descriptions of flight behaviour I could get hold of at the time fairly well, but I've not really flown the model since then. There's probably more performance data available for the later marks which is possible confusing people. Cheers, AJ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
