Andy Ross wrote:
Sent: 27 July 2004 20:03
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Tried the Spitfire
Vivian Meazza wrote:
I have run several traces on fuel.nas, and I can see the
/consumables/fuel/tank[0]/kill-when-empty being set, despite not
David Megginson wrote:
I've been frustrated with the tendency of the DC-3 (--aircraft=dc3) to
noseover during the takeoff and landing rolls, and of the J3 Cub
(--aircraft=j3cub) to nose over during wheel landings. I've fiddled
with the YASim files a lot in the past but have never found a good
Jim Wilson wrote:
You are right, that doesn't sound right. At least if a positive value did
point down, it would be in conflict with the AOA parameter. That said, are
you sure the DC-3 is supposed to have a negative incidence? I just looked up
the p51 and the diagram clearly shows a positive
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:09:24 +0100, Matthew wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think my Vans RV-9 will have a diesel engine :-)
..you have a kit started? Which diesel?
Arnt,
I'm sending a reply off-list to prevent me getting seriously off-topic :-)
All the best,
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:09:24 +0100, Matthew wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think my Vans RV-9 will have a diesel engine :-)
..you have a kit started? Which diesel?
Arnt,
I'm sending a reply off-list to prevent me getting seriously off-topic :-)
All the best,
David Megginson said:
Jim Wilson wrote:
You are right, that doesn't sound right. At least if a positive value did
point down, it would be in conflict with the AOA parameter. That said, are
you sure the DC-3 is supposed to have a negative incidence? I just looked up
the p51 and the
Chris Metzler said:
Hi. It appears that in initialization, if an airport and heading are
specified on the command line, a runway is immediately chosen based
upon the heading, and latitude/longitude is set to that runway's
threshhold. This is sensible if the user is starting *at* the
Jim Wilson wrote:
Excellent, thanks for the clarification. Just looking at the cub you can see
down-wash is a major design feature. The DC-3 has a high tail, but I can see
the incidence in the main wing is pretty high. I wonder what happens when you
increase the wing incidence and set the
Matthew Law wrote:
It seems much, much better to me. However, I can sit at minimum power
with the brakes on in nil wind and rock from one main wheel to the other
using the ailerons. I can also lift the tail off the ground at minimum
power. I'm not sure if that is a side effect of what you've
Jim Wilson wrote:
There is a modified sound config in cvs that at least partially addresses the
problems. I hope Erik doesn't mind. BTW if anyone wants to mess with any of
the aircraft sound configs that I've commited in the past, have at it. It
isn't as easy (or fun) as it first appears :-).
David M. wrote:
I'm getting seriously out of my depth here, since I didn't even take high
school physics, but as far as I understand the most important part of lift
is the suction created by the partial vacuum *above* the wings -- that means
that wings are pulling air down more than pushing
-Original Message-
From: Jon Berndt
Sent: 28 July 2004 3:47 pm
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Taildragger takeoff and landing
snip
I've heard it described several ways (lift); I think you're
pretty close. I don't know if
I'd say partial
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:54:28 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris Metzler wrote:
Hi. It appears that in initialization, if an airport and heading are
specified on the command line, a runway is immediately chosen based
upon the heading, and latitude/longitude is set to that
Richard Bytheway said:
-Original Message-
From: Jon Berndt
Sent: 28 July 2004 3:47 pm
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] Taildragger takeoff and landing
snip
I've heard it described several ways (lift); I think you're
pretty close.
David Megginson wrote:
I'm getting seriously out of my depth here, since I didn't even take high
school physics...
Just a lurker at present until I can find a way to contribute more
usefully but try this...
http://www.av8n.com/how/
HTH
-|steve|-
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 17:25:31 -
Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Richard Bytheway said:
Well as a physicist (but with no formal aeronautical education), I
always
think of it as the wing is pushing air down, which causes an equal
and
opposite force (to quote Newton) of the air pushing the
For those of you who've worked on 3d modelling/texturing, please please
please tell me I'm missing something here.
I've an object I've created in Blender. Using the UV Face Editor, I
load one texture file and map some of the faces to it (or actually,
to a region much much larger than it,
We have now done 3 pre-releases and hopefully we have most of the major
issues dealt with for this release. Have we missed any patch
submissions? Are there any remaining issues that can be *quickly* dealt
with?
If I sat a chicken at a computer and made it look at even 1/2 the email
I
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 19:20:17 +0100
SGMINFO [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Megginson wrote:
I'm getting seriously out of my depth here, since I didn't even
take high
school physics...
Just a lurker at present until I can find a way to contribute more
usefully but try this...
Chris Metzler wrote:
For those of you who've worked on 3d modelling/texturing, please please
please tell me I'm missing something here.
I've an object I've created in Blender. Using the UV Face Editor, I
load one texture file and map some of the faces to it (or actually,
to a region much much
Jim Wilson writes:
Well as a physicist (but with no formal aeronautical education), I always
think of it as the wing is pushing air down, which causes an equal and
opposite force (to quote Newton) of the air pushing the wing up. Hence
acrobatic aircraft with symmettrical wings can
On Wednesday 28 July 2004 18:53, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
We have now done 3 pre-releases and hopefully we have most of the major
issues dealt with for this release. Have we missed any patch
submissions? Are there any remaining issues that can be *quickly* dealt
with?
If I sat a chicken at a
Josh Babcock said:
AC3D does not support multiple textures per object, AFAIK.
Josh
This is correct.
http://www.ac3d.org/ac3d/man/ac3dfileformat.html
It is possible to group multiple objects under a single name.
Best,
Jim
___
Flightgear-devel
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:15:04 -0400
Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a 100 year old argument :-)
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/fluids/airfoil.html
If you really want to know read everything you can wriiten by
Koukowskii and Prandtl
Is light a wave or a particle?
:-)
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:59:37 -0400
Josh Babcock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris Metzler wrote:
For those of you who've worked on 3d modelling/texturing, please
please please tell me I'm missing something here.
I've an object I've created in Blender. Using the UV Face Editor, I
load one
Al West wrote:
Well done Curt - however I think you might be interested in how google use
birds in their processing system.
http://www.google.com/technology/pigeonrank.html
I heard rumors [maybe on slashdot?] that they plan to double their
pigeon capacity without needing to add space by
Jim Wilson wrote:
This suggests that both bernoulli and the pushing (gravity) are at play,
depending on the airfoil. My (uneducated) guess is the pushing is almost all
of it and that the bernoulli effect only augments:
http://observe.arc.nasa.gov/nasa/exhibits/planes/planes_1c.html
There's a
Chris Metzler wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:59:37 -0400
Josh Babcock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris Metzler wrote:
For those of you who've worked on 3d modelling/texturing, please
please please tell me I'm missing something here.
I've an object I've created in Blender. Using the UV Face
Jon S Berndt wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 19:20:17 +0100
SGMINFO [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Megginson wrote:
I'm getting seriously out of my depth here, since I didn't even
take high
school physics...
Just a lurker at present until I can find a way to contribute more
usefully but try
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:52:24 -0400
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The important thing to note is that the airflow *above* the wing also
curves down, not just the airflow below it. That is why, even with
the same incidence angle, the hstab sees a different angle of attack
in the
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:48:03 -0500
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris Metzler wrote:
Oh, that sucks. That truly, truly sucks. Having finished several
objects, I now have to go back and break each of them up into
multiple smaller objects. Using one unified texture, and UVmapping
Curt,
I'd say almost. My stuff has been checked in and seems to work fine now. My
only concern is that I just downloaded pre3 about two hours ago and haven't
even had a chance to compile it. Therefore, I'd prefer to wait just a little
longer. Probably just a day or so to see if anything
Durk Talsma wrote:
Curt,
I'd say almost. My stuff has been checked in and seems to work fine now. My
only concern is that I just downloaded pre3 about two hours ago and haven't
even had a chance to compile it. Therefore, I'd prefer to wait just a little
longer. Probably just a day or so to see
On Wednesday 28 July 2004 13:45, Matthew Law wrote:
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:09:24 +0100, Matthew wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think my Vans RV-9 will have a diesel engine :-)
..you have a kit started? Which diesel?
Arnt,
I'm sending a reply off-list to
On Wednesday 28 July 2004 19:35, Jon S Berndt wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:15:04 -0400
Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a 100 year old argument :-)
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/fluids/airfoil.html
If you really want to know read everything you can wriiten by
Just one quick note:
There are still a number of traffic files missing from the fgfs-base-pre3,
even though they are in CVS now.
Unfortunately, these file are required, even when the traffic manager is
disabled. Fixing this is on my todo list, but I likely won't be able to fix
this before
Jon S Berndt wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 14:15:04 -0400
Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a 100 year old argument :-)
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/fluids/airfoil.html
If you really want to know read everything you can wriiten by
Koukowskii and Prandtl
Is light a wave or a
David Megginson wrote:
The important thing to note is that the airflow *above* the wing also
curves down, not just the airflow below it. That is why, even with the
same incidence angle, the hstab sees a different angle of attack in the
wings' downwash even if it is level with or slightly above
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:56:59 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is exactly the reason why pressure is build up underneath the
wing (pushing the airfoil up on air molecules == force).
No, not really. See:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/airfoils.html#sec-consistent
Excerpt:
Of course,
Jon S Berndt wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:56:59 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is exactly the reason why pressure is build up underneath the
wing (pushing the airfoil up on air molecules == force).
No, not really. See:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/airfoils.html#sec-consistent
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 23:28:55 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon S Berndt wrote:
No, not really. See:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/airfoils.html#sec-consistent
Try this for a start:
An airflow over the wing is causing the downwash at the end of the
airfoil. The airflow below the wing
Lee Elliott writes:
My 2p on the 'does lift suck or blow',
On more refined aerofoils most of the lift comes from the leading edge region,
where the acceleration is highest, although some of the more recent
'super-critical' aerofoils produce lift further back.
There again, while I'm
Erik Hofman wrote:
Try this for a start:
An airflow over the wing is causing the downwash at the end of the
airfoil. The airflow below the wing is now kind of captured between the
airfoil and the layer(s) of air underneath itself.
In this situation it can go in just two directions, up or down,
Jon S Berndt wrote:
Which is why he never flew. See the argument about bullets in the link
provided, above.
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20031201/leonardo.html
In the case of the airflow below the wing, it's not really trapped. It
gets out of the way, below.
But it will encounter a force
On Wednesday 28 July 2004 22:47, Jon S Berndt wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 23:28:55 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon S Berndt wrote:
No, not really. See:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/airfoils.html#sec-consistent
Try this for a start:
An airflow over the wing is causing the
Lee Elliott wrote:
Hello Matthew,
I don't know if it's just me but you seem to be posting everything twice.
That is, I seem to be getting two copies of everything you post. That doesn't
mean that you're necessarily posting everything twice, but it's a bit odd.
LeeE
Hi Lee,
I use thunderbird
On Wednesday 28 July 2004 23:22, Matthew Law wrote:
Lee Elliott wrote:
Hello Matthew,
I don't know if it's just me but you seem to be posting everything twice.
That is, I seem to be getting two copies of everything you post. That
doesn't mean that you're necessarily posting everything
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 23:55:09 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon S Berndt wrote:
That's because it's _mostly_ (or entirely) the sucking action above
the wing that contributes the most to lift.
No, that is the *result* of lift, not the *cause*.
Erik
No, you're mixing up cause and
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 23:16:05 +0100
Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Although it might not be accurate in my model, the B-52 wing is set
at six deg
incidence, and while it does fly a little nose-down in some
circumstances,
six deg worth would be worrying;) Heh - not that I haven't seen
Getting back on topic, I think everyone agrees that the horizontal
stabilizer on a typical plane (excluding t-tails) should be seeing downwash
-- in other words, its relative wind will not be the same as the relative
wind seen by the wings. For JSBSim, we don't have to worry about this,
David Megginson wrote:
That shouldn't be from my change -- can you do it with other YASim
planes?
I see the same issue with elevator on the c172-3d-yasim but not
aileron. Again with the pa28-161 -looks to be about 5-10 deg judging by
the attitude from inside the cockpit...
All the best,
I see the same issue with elevator on the c172-3d-yasim but not
aileron. Again with the pa28-161 -looks to be about 5-10 deg judging by
the attitude from inside the cockpit...
Also, try side slipping any of the cessnas or the pa28. It seems that
in this flight regime the rudder seems to
Getting back on topic, I think everyone agrees that the horizontal
stabilizer on a typical plane (excluding t-tails) should be seeing downwash
Yes. _When_ there is positive lift being generated by the wing.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon S Berndt wrote:
That's because it's _mostly_ (or entirely) the sucking action above
the wing that contributes the most to lift.
No, that is the *result* of lift, not the *cause*.
Erik
No, you're mixing up cause and effect.
One more thing:
Matthew Law wrote:
David Megginson wrote:
Matthew Law wrote:
It seems much, much better to me. However, I can sit at minimum
power with the brakes on in nil wind and rock from one main wheel to
the other using the ailerons. I can also lift the tail off the
ground at minimum power.
David Megginson wrote:
This problem has little effect on normal flight, but it matters a lot for
the landing and takeoff rolls of taildraggers -- without it, they have an
unrealistic tendency to nose over.
I have been tied up with an upgrade to SuSe 9.1 and wanted to comment on
the tail
Andy Ross wrote:
Uh... YASim doesn't model wash effects, so there really isn't any
process by which a pure control input would generate force. Are you
sure you weren't just sitting in a stiff wind? Can anyone else
replicate this?
I cannot reproduce it on my system:
fgfs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
fgfs aborted with the dc3.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/FlightGear ./bin/fgfs --aircraft=dc3
Object TrimElevation not found
Initializing OpenAL sound manager
Oops AL error in sample set_volume()! -0.2 for
/usr/local/FlightGear/Aircraft/dc3/Sounds/engine_running.wav
Oops AL error in sample
Dave Perry wrote:
1. I updated CVS last night and the changes to the J3 Cub make it
impossible to do a full-stall 3 point landing.
I can fiddle a bit with the elevator effectiveness.
2. It is not true that a
wheel landing should end with applying full down elevator.
I'm not suggesting that it
I am attaching an edit of this file that should work with either Windows
or Linux. As of a few days ago, the CVS file did not work at all.
Would a Windows person with this joystick try it and then it could be
included in the release.
Dave P.
!--
Joystick binding definitions for Saitek Cyborg
I guess that's one of the reasons why some planes use canards. =P
Regards,
Ampere
On July 28, 2004 03:06 pm, Jon S Berndt wrote:
So, from the point of view of the horizontal stabilizor, that pesky
downwash happens because wings really suck. ;-)
___
On Wed, 2004-07-28 at 14:28, Erik Hofman wrote:
Jon S Berndt wrote:
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:56:59 +0200
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is exactly the reason why pressure is build up underneath the
wing (pushing the airfoil up on air molecules == force).
No, not
cc'ing this to make sure you see the reply . . .
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 17:07:55 +0200
Frederic Bouvier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lee Elliott replying to Josh Babcock:
I get the same ground poly problems that you seem to be getting with
your
new
ATI driver, except I've been getting them for
Dave Perry said:
fgfs aborted with the dc3.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/FlightGear ./bin/fgfs --aircraft=dc3
Object TrimElevation not found
Initializing OpenAL sound manager
Oops AL error in sample set_volume()! -0.2 for
/usr/local/FlightGear/Aircraft/dc3/Sounds/engine_running.wav
On July 28, 2004 02:40 pm, Chris Metzler wrote:
Oh, that sucks. That truly, truly sucks.
Don't feel bad. I don't think 3D Studio supports multiple textures per object
either.
On July 28, 2004 02:48 pm, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Be careful how many 2048x2048 textures you use. Just one of those
In the mean time, we just have to put up with the echos. =P
Regards,
Ampere
On July 28, 2004 06:30 pm, Lee Elliott wrote:
No problem, and no assumption either:) Software eh?
:)
LeeE
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chris Metzler wrote:
cc'ing this to make sure you see the reply . . .
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 17:07:55 +0200
Frederic Bouvier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lee Elliott replying to Josh Babcock:
I get the same ground poly problems that you seem to be getting with
your
new
ATI driver, except I've been
Tony wrote:
I hope you guys realize that this is an ages old debate that still goes
on in the relevant academic circles.
I've heard about the debate on whether it is circulation or the pressure difference
that
causes lift. I've never heard it argued that mechanical deflection is the cause for
Hi !
As a user on the FG user list requested a patch from base package
pre2-pre3 in order to reduce download size/time, I was looking for the
required pre2 package, it doesn't seem to be available on
ftp.flightgear.org anymore - so I decided to look what base package I am
currently using in order
Hi !
As a user on the FG user list requested a patch from base package
pre2-pre3 in order to reduce download size/time, I was looking for the
required pre2 package, it doesn't seem to be available on
ftp.flightgear.org anymore - so I decided to look what base package I am
currently using in
Jon Berndt wrote:
Hi !
As a user on the FG user list requested a patch from base package
pre2-pre3 in order to reduce download size/time, I was looking for the
required pre2 package, it doesn't seem to be available on
ftp.flightgear.org anymore - so I decided to look what base package I am
Boris Koenig said:
Hi !
As a user on the FG user list requested a patch from base package
pre2-pre3 in order to reduce download size/time, I was looking for the
required pre2 package, it doesn't seem to be available on
ftp.flightgear.org anymore - so I decided to look what base package I
72 matches
Mail list logo
