Re: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim C-172 Performance

2004-05-21 Thread Erik Hofman
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

[Flightgear-devel] JSBSim C-172 Performance

2004-05-20 Thread Jon S Berndt
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim C-172 Performance

2004-05-20 Thread David Megginson
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim C-172 Performance

2004-05-20 Thread Jon S Berndt
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim C-172 Performance

2004-05-20 Thread Curtis L. Olson
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim C-172 Performance

2004-05-20 Thread David Megginson
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

RE: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim C-172 Performance

2004-05-20 Thread Jon Berndt
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

RE: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim C-172 Performance

2004-05-20 Thread Jon Berndt
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