On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 16:17:29 -0500,
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Arnt Karlsen writes:
>
> > ..another point you guys may be aware of, is that some jets
> > (military only?) tank _cold_ (40-50 Centigrades below zero)
> > fuel, this allows burni
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 08:33:03 -0500,
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Andy Ross writes:
>
> > The effect is happening because the aircraft isn't consuming fuel.
> > If you take off at full tanks, you never get any lighter. A real
> > aircraft woul
Jim Wilson wrote:
> Yes agreed. And probably with a 747-400 it is only those longer
> flights like London-Vancouver that get filled to the brim with fuel.
>
> Andy, is the aircraft otherwise considered filled to capacity
> (passenger/cargo) in the fdm?
Um... I'm not sure. :)
The configure
David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Andy Ross writes:
>
> > The effect is happening because the aircraft isn't consuming fuel. If
> > you take off at full tanks, you never get any lighter. A real
> > aircraft would have burned off a big chunk of its fuel store in the
> > climb, and
Andy Ross writes:
> The effect is happening because the aircraft isn't consuming fuel. If
> you take off at full tanks, you never get any lighter. A real
> aircraft would have burned off a big chunk of its fuel store in the
> climb, and would have an easier time of it. As a workaround, try
Jim Wilson wrote:
> IIRC the 747-400 comes down pretty fast anyway. I think you're
> looking at 195 KIAS range for final dropping down to 175 KIAS (with
> full flaps) at the outer marker. But note again, this is from
> memory. Still, there is no way that pig flies at 150.
>
> The biggest
Hi,
> IIRC the 747-400 comes down pretty fast anyway. I think you're looking at
195
> KIAS range for final dropping down to 175 KIAS (with full flaps) at the
outer
> marker. But note again, this is from memory. Still, there is no way that
pig
> flies at 150.
>
> The biggest problem I saw with
John Wojnaroski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >
> > Certainly not, when it's gross weight is 800k lbs. :)
> >
> > The weight you quote is close to the zero-fuel weight, which is
> > typical for landing. By default, YASim will top your tanks off at
> > startup. The plane in this condition will
>
> Certainly not, when it's gross weight is 800k lbs. :)
>
> The weight you quote is close to the zero-fuel weight, which is
> typical for landing. By default, YASim will top your tanks off at
> startup. The plane in this condition will indeed have a very high
> approach speed. Try setting t
> Andy Ross writes:
> > Undeniably. Unfortunately, the only way to get it closer is to have
> > people work on and provide feedback for the models. I'll freely admit
> > that I don't spend much time in the 747 model, because big jets don't
> > push my buttons.
>
> Jim Brennan, could probably ra
On Saturday 23 February 2002 10:24 pm, you wrote:
> Andy Ross writes:
> > Undeniably. Unfortunately, the only way to get it closer is to have
> > people work on and provide feedback for the models. I'll freely admit
> > that I don't spend much time in the 747 model, because big jets don't
> > pu
Andy Ross writes:
> Undeniably. Unfortunately, the only way to get it closer is to have
> people work on and provide feedback for the models. I'll freely admit
> that I don't spend much time in the 747 model, because big jets don't
> push my buttons.
Jim Brennan, could probably rattle off 747 p
John Wojnaroski wrote:
> On the 747 YASim model, have not been able to slow to a resonable
> approach speed < 150kts and maintain altitude, run out of elevator
> authority around 184 kts and flap settings seem to have no effect. The
> numbers I have in my 747 flight manual don't match up with
>
> I tried downloading OpenGC stuff, but
>
> http://opengc.sf.net/
>
> seems to be dead (might be temporarily, though). Is the FG related stuff
> under that same address (I recall it was integrated, right?) or somewhere
> else?
>
>
Try http://www.opengc.org.
If the problem persists, I can uploa
Erik,
> It looks like the .sf.net domain sometimes doesn't work.
> Try uding opengc.sourceforge.net instead.
...which does not work either :-( But thanks for the hint, anyway. I'll try
again later; it should return sometime.
Regards, Michael
--
Michael Basler, Jena, Germany
Michael Basler wrote:
> John Wojnaroski wrote:
>
>
>>A question was asked last week on running FG and OpenGC
>>on the same machine. Well, the one way is to
>>
>
> John, that might have been me ;-) The picture in the Gallery is just
> fascinating.
>
> I tried downloading OpenGC stuff, but
>
>
John Wojnaroski wrote:
> A question was asked last week on running FG and OpenGC
> on the same machine. Well, the one way is to
John, that might have been me ;-) The picture in the Gallery is just
fascinating.
I tried downloading OpenGC stuff, but
http://opengc.sf.net/
seems to be dead (might
Hi,
A question was asked last week on running FG and
OpenGC on the same machine. Well, the one way is to
run each app in it's own window and use the
loopback address of 127.0.0.1 to communicate via sockets.
fgfs ..
--opengc=socket,out,24,127.0.0.1,5800,udp ...
Depen
18 matches
Mail list logo
