On Sunday 04 June 2006 08:40, Georg Vollnhals wrote:
> Josh Babcock schrieb:
> > AJ MacLeod wrote:
> >> My only request at this stage is an easy one - that the
> >> aircraft starts off with the parking brake engaged. There
> >> are few things more irritating than having the fg screen
> >> fade in
* dene maxwell -- Monday 05 June 2006 22:32:
> I hace always liked this idea, I know that "Start-Up" positions can be
> specified in TaxiDraw and [...]
> It would be an added touch of realisism IMHO
I use ac_state.nas[1], which puts the aircraft where you left it last
time. This is even more real
t;Reply-To: FlightGear developers discussions
>
>To: FlightGear developers discussions
>
>Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Harrier checkin
>Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 20:25:03 +0200
>
>Am Montag, den 05.06.2006, 14:56 +0100 schrieb AJ MacLeod:
> > On Monday 05 June 2006 13:43, Jos
Georg Vollnhals wrote:
>
> Hi Josh,
> although I can't understand why someone would like to start a flightsim
> session with programmed trouble (=aircraft not in a stable position) I
> accept the argument that the status of the aircraft should be set up
> separately, ie in the preferences file
True...point taken
:-D ene
From: Josh Babcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: FlightGear developers discussions
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Harrier checkin
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 08:51:00 -0400
dene maxwell wrote:
> My penny's worth..
AJ MacLeod wrote:
> I'm not claiming having the parking brake set at this point is the height of
> realism, just that it's slightly less bad than the alternative. I've still
> not heard a convincing reason why FG starting up with out of control runaway
> aircraft is a good idea...
I don't hav
Am Montag, den 05.06.2006, 14:56 +0100 schrieb AJ MacLeod:
> On Monday 05 June 2006 13:43, Josh Babcock wrote:
> > How many pilots still have their parking brakes set at the runway
> > threshold?
>
> These same pilots will (hopefully :-) have been in control of the plane for a
> good while leadin
Josh Babcock schrieb:
> dene maxwell wrote:
>> My penny's worth...I agree... no experience IRL ...it's one of the first
>> things I do in FG is engage the P-brake while I set up the radio/AP ...I'm
>> working through my hanger to set this as default for all AC.
>> :-D ene
>>
>
> My point though,
On Monday 05 June 2006 13:43, Josh Babcock wrote:
> How many pilots still have their parking brakes set at the runway
> threshold?
These same pilots will (hopefully :-) have been in control of the plane for a
good while leading up to this point.
In FG, we're suddenly dumped there, with the plane
dene maxwell wrote:
> My penny's worth...I agree... no experience IRL ...it's one of the first
> things I do in FG is engage the P-brake while I set up the radio/AP ...I'm
> working through my hanger to set this as default for all AC.
> :-D ene
>
My point though, is that you only have to change
AJ MacLeod wrote:
> On Sunday 04 June 2006 04:24, Josh Babcock wrote:
>
>>Hmm, rather than force everyone to start with the P-brake engaged, why
>>don't you just set it in your preferences.xml file? This is the sort of
>>thing that really has nothing to to with the aircraft, and everything to
>>do
On Monday 05 June 2006 10:31, Martin Spott wrote:
> location using chocks. As you are very much by yourself because
> FlightGear doesn't provide a ground crew that could remove the chocks
> for you I think the parking brake is a pretty good choice for a
> work-alike.
Oh good, someone else agrees w
;Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],FlightGear developers discussions
>
>To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Harrier checkin
>Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 09:31:16 + (UTC)
>
>AJ MacLeod wrote:
>
> > I completely fail to see how anyone benefits from
AJ MacLeod wrote:
> I completely fail to see how anyone benefits from a mad scramble for control
> of the aircraft on FG startup... particularly since on the carrier it's often
> over the side by then. This aircraft has a parking brake IRL unless I'm very
> much mistaken - surely it's sensible
On Sunday 04 June 2006 04:24, Josh Babcock wrote:
> Hmm, rather than force everyone to start with the P-brake engaged, why
> don't you just set it in your preferences.xml file? This is the sort of
> thing that really has nothing to to with the aircraft, and everything to
> do with the procedures th
Georg Vollnhals wrote:
> The newer versions of the Harrier have an artificial stability system
> which makes it a lot more easier to fly the aircraft in low speed
> procedures - may be the force is with us and we'll see something like
> that in FG some day :-)
Hmm, Nasal IIRC only runs once pe
Josh Babcock schrieb:
> AJ MacLeod wrote:
>
>> My only request at this stage is an easy one - that the aircraft starts off
>> with the parking brake engaged. There are few things more irritating than
>> having the fg screen fade in only to find yourself pitching off the carrier
>> deck or into
AJ MacLeod wrote:
> My only request at this stage is an easy one - that the aircraft starts off
> with the parking brake engaged. There are few things more irritating than
> having the fg screen fade in only to find yourself pitching off the carrier
> deck or into the nearest windsock!
Hmm,
> On Thursday 25 May 2006 12:59, AJ MacLeod wrote:
>
> I think the gear needs a good bit more damping - I've used damp=4 on all
> the gear which is very much better, although possibly a wee bit much?
> Perhaps the spring rates of the u/c need upped a tiny bit too, I've not
> played with that yet.
On Thursday 25 May 2006 12:59, AJ MacLeod wrote:
> My only request at this stage is an easy one - that the aircraft starts off
> with the parking brake engaged. There are few things more irritating than
> having the fg screen fade in only to find yourself pitching off the carrier
> deck or into th
On Thursday 25 May 2006 12:30, Georg Vollnhals wrote:
>
"To cater for jet-borne flight, where the aerodynamic forces on the
conventional surfaces are reduced or eliminated, a system of air jet reaction
control valves are utilised. These are placed in the extreme nose, tail and
at the wingtips
Georg Vollnhals schrieb:
Hi Steve Havlir,
..
So, with this actual flight model you have to think a lot more "in
advance" compared to a helicopter (where you also have to think in
advance) due to the big! delay to power-setting and steering commands.
Actually, I do not have any detailled in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Still a lot to do, but I figure people would at least like to have a 3d model
to go with the flight model that already exists (I didn't touch the flight
model).
Hi Steve Havlir,
I never would have tried the Harrier without any reference points to the
horizont
shavlir
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of @uiuc.edu
> Sent: 25 May 2006 04:31
> To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Flightgear-devel] harrier checkin
>
> Since those of you who h
Since those of you who have checkin access never seem to be around when i am
online, I guess the devel list will have to do.
I am at a good checkpoint with the harrier model. Since there are a million
variants of the harrier, I picked the version to do a 3d model that was very
similar to what
25 matches
Mail list logo
