Jon S Berndt wrote:
3) This one just occurred to me: I wonder if the control inputs from
stick and rudder are linear? Or, are they perhaps graduated? In our FCS
model, we take the joystick input and map it linearly to the range of
values that the control surfaces can see - essentially. It might
Well, I got a note back from Cessna and (as I pretty much expected)
they were tight-lipped about supplying any aero/mass props data,
saying instead that the owner's manual was about all I could get.
After thinking about this some more, there are three possibilities I
can see for any perceived
Jon S Berndt wrote:
3) This one just occurred to me: I wonder if the control inputs from
stick and rudder are linear? Or, are they perhaps graduated?
The controller devices can be all over the place, but as I mentioned, I'm
trying to factor that out -- for example, I'm looking at how the
On Thu, 20 May 2004 18:48:13 -0400
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think you might have been onto something with the moments of inertia: our
current IXX, IYY, and IZZ apply to a Cessna 182, which is a heavier plane
than a 172, though with the same wing area and wingspan. Here are
Jon S Berndt wrote:
Well, I got a note back from Cessna and (as I pretty much expected)
they were tight-lipped about supplying any aero/mass props data,
saying instead that the owner's manual was about all I could get.
You could always send up a volunteer to do some flight testing. :-)
Don't
Jon S Berndt wrote:
I'm not sure I see how the 182 figures into this. Higher values for MoI
will make the aircraft slower to react to control inputs, and slower to
react to damping. From your discussion yesterday I got the feeling that
you were stating that the 172 was too wild - i.e. it was
2) The MoIs are too low. This is possible - I have not yet checked
these out, but again I believe we will find these numbers to be pretty
good.
I have access to a commercial C172 model that has been FAA certified for
a level 3 FTD. I wish I could share more of it, but I will say that
Relevant technical reports (I think the C-172 is included in this report):
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/DTRS/1966/Bib/H-451.html
Abstract: A review of existing criteria indicated that the criteria have not kept pace
with aircraft development in the areas of dutch roll, adverse yaw, effective
