Re: [Flightgear-devel] Warrior changes
Am Freitag, den 12.10.2007, 07:53 -0400 schrieb David Megginson: > On 11/10/2007, Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > This isn't the only plane that starts in cold configuration. I think > > it would be best to be consistent - either leave it up to the plane > > designer in every case (I believe in this case at least it was a > > conscious decision on the part of the designer), or decide on a policy > > that every aircraft should start hot and try to make that consistent > > throughout. > > I was the aircraft designer, though others have done a lot of > excellent work on the Warrior since. > > One problem with starting in cold configuration by default is that > in-air starts won't work. For example, if you use FlightGear to > practice IFR approaches (like I do), you want to start in the air > about 10 miles from the runway, not in the tie-down area. There was no > way to do that using command-line options with the previous version of > the config files. > That is not necessarily so. The default bf109 starts cold too, but you can set a property (either on the commandline or -set.xml) to have the engine running at startup. For Newbies I've provided a menu entry to "magically" start the engine. > I recommend that we start all aircraft running and ready to roll, but > provide an easy way for advanced users to start cold if they want to. > I know that aircraft designers work hard on the switches and systems > and want to show them off, but forcing people to use them every time > might not be the best choice, especially for new users (and when the > default start is on a runway threshold, where the engine should be > running). > > All the best, > > > David > > - > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel Greetings -- Detlef Faber http://www.sol2500.net/flightgear - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Warrior changes
David Megginson wrote: > As I mentioned earlier, the Warrior model is looking great. Hi David, Welcome back. I am the one that made all the changes to the Warrior. Starting directions and keyboard switch equivalents are under the help menu-Aircraft help, just like with the pa24-250. It was after you had commented on how you liked what I had done on the pa24 that you sent me your pictures and asked if I wanted to continue developing the Warrior, so I used the pa24 nasal work as a starting point for implementing the Warrior electrical system and switches. > However, > because it was starting with the engine and fuel off and the brakes > on, it took a while to get started (and wasn't realistic sitting on > the threshold with the engine off), and I don't think it was possible > to do an in-air start, e.g. > > fgfs --aircraft=pa28-161 --altitude=5000 --vc=100 > > There were some places that the Nasal scripts were overriding startup > preferences. I started cleaning those up and made a few more changes, > so that the Warrior now starts up just like the Cessna 172 or J3 Cub, > ready to take off. Please let me know if you find any problems. > I have not yet updated the warrior to your changes but I just used the command line above to do a mid air start. All it takes to have whatever power you have set from you throttle setting is to hit "f " and then "s". Then you need to switch on whatever else you want on such as pannel lights, strobes, fuel pump, etc. It seems to me that anyone experienced enough to desire starting in the air to practice instrument approaches should be able to figure out which keys are needed to get the engine on in 2 seconds especially since those keys are in the help menu. I still consider the Warrior your aircraft and had communicated to you off list in mid August that I had made updates and changes. I asked for feedback in that note. I assume that you did not disable or bypass the nasal implemented switches with the above change. I will update the Warrior from cvs this evening and then give feedback. I am clearly one that prefers to start with the brakes set and all switches off as that is the way every real flight starts. But I also see the advantage of having an easy option to start in the air with switches and fuel valve set for an approach. Perhaps with a little more effort, there is a way to accomplish both. Side comment. There are some AC in fgfs that start with the engine off, but no hot spots or help to point to how to get the AC started. This definitely is bad. AC designers need to include starting help. Really great to have you back! All the best, Dave Perry - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Warrior changes
On 11/10/2007, Hans Fugal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This isn't the only plane that starts in cold configuration. I think > it would be best to be consistent - either leave it up to the plane > designer in every case (I believe in this case at least it was a > conscious decision on the part of the designer), or decide on a policy > that every aircraft should start hot and try to make that consistent > throughout. I was the aircraft designer, though others have done a lot of excellent work on the Warrior since. One problem with starting in cold configuration by default is that in-air starts won't work. For example, if you use FlightGear to practice IFR approaches (like I do), you want to start in the air about 10 miles from the runway, not in the tie-down area. There was no way to do that using command-line options with the previous version of the config files. I recommend that we start all aircraft running and ready to roll, but provide an easy way for advanced users to start cold if they want to. I know that aircraft designers work hard on the switches and systems and want to show them off, but forcing people to use them every time might not be the best choice, especially for new users (and when the default start is on a runway threshold, where the engine should be running). All the best, David - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Warrior changes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I prefer starting with engine off (and not at threshold) so why not add support for starting somewhere else than end of runway? Starting at the gate for example (makes sense for 787 but not for the warrior) or in a hangar (if such exist at that airport). /AnMaster Hans Fugal wrote: > This isn't the only plane that starts in cold configuration. I think > it would be best to be consistent - either leave it up to the plane > designer in every case (I believe in this case at least it was a > conscious decision on the part of the designer), or decide on a policy > that every aircraft should start hot and try to make that consistent > throughout. > > On 10/11/07, David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> As I mentioned earlier, the Warrior model is looking great. However, >> because it was starting with the engine and fuel off and the brakes >> on, it took a while to get started (and wasn't realistic sitting on >> the threshold with the engine off), and I don't think it was possible >> to do an in-air start, e.g. >> >> fgfs --aircraft=pa28-161 --altitude=5000 --vc=100 >> >> There were some places that the Nasal scripts were overriding startup >> preferences. I started cleaning those up and made a few more changes, >> so that the Warrior now starts up just like the Cessna 172 or J3 Cub, >> ready to take off. Please let me know if you find any problems. >> >> >> All the best, >> >> >> David >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHDx1cWmK6ng/aMNkRCsVXAJ4rsHZ8m0XxGMsDOQwj6nVNcfSIvQCbB6TD l8Jk+rZ3V0wORXEIxqFl5Tk= =R0Gn -END PGP SIGNATURE- - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Warrior changes
This isn't the only plane that starts in cold configuration. I think it would be best to be consistent - either leave it up to the plane designer in every case (I believe in this case at least it was a conscious decision on the part of the designer), or decide on a policy that every aircraft should start hot and try to make that consistent throughout. On 10/11/07, David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As I mentioned earlier, the Warrior model is looking great. However, > because it was starting with the engine and fuel off and the brakes > on, it took a while to get started (and wasn't realistic sitting on > the threshold with the engine off), and I don't think it was possible > to do an in-air start, e.g. > > fgfs --aircraft=pa28-161 --altitude=5000 --vc=100 > > There were some places that the Nasal scripts were overriding startup > preferences. I started cleaning those up and made a few more changes, > so that the Warrior now starts up just like the Cessna 172 or J3 Cub, > ready to take off. Please let me know if you find any problems. > > > All the best, > > > David > > - > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel > -- Hans Fugal Fugal Computing - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
