On Tue, 28 Jun 2011, xsaint wrote:
Hello Anders,
Yes you are right, after i moved the offset position, the plane do take
off without sinking into the ground.
But this give rise to another issue, as long as i am on external views
(eg chase, fly by views), it renders as if the CG is at the
Hello Anders,
Fantastic! That solves it all...
I owe you a coffee when you drop by at Singapore...
Thank you very much
cheers!
On Tuesday 28,June,2011 08:23 PM, Anders Gidenstam wrote:
view n=1
config
target-z-offset-m type=double 10.0/target-z-offset-m
/config
/view
On Sunday, June 26, 2011 17:27:06 xsaint wrote:
Hello All...
I am trying to better understand how YASIM calculates its contacts
points
Hi there, I'll try to answer, see below:
1) As from my experience, the SIM crashes when some part of the wings
comes in contact with a building or
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011, xsaint wrote:
Hello All...
I am trying to better understand how YASIM calculates its contacts
points
2) Eventhough CG looks like it is in correct place, in YASIM, the plane
do sink to the ground before take off. Insufficient lift maybe but
the back of the
Thank you Adrian,
You have much cleared my doubts in YASIM with regards to contact point
issues.
As for Gears sinking into the ground, even adding a fake gear was not
much of a help.
Later i got reply from Andres and he was mentioning the origin offset
could be the cause and he seems right on
Hello Anders,
Yes you are right, after i moved the offset position, the plane do take
off without sinking into the ground.
But this give rise to another issue, as long as i am on external views
(eg chase, fly by views), it renders as if the CG is at the tail. When i
pitch up/down, the origin
Hello All...
I am trying to better understand how YASIM calculates its contacts
points
1) As from my experience, the SIM crashes when some part of the wings
comes in contact with a building or ground and it does not crash if
other parts of the wings hit the ground of a building.The wing
On 18.04.2011 23:13, Maik Justus wrote:
By the way: I would prefer to use the old default values for the gear
solver. The spring constants of a gear should not be a function of the
approach fuel settings. Maybe some gears would need some tuning with the
patch otherwise. The
_approachWeight =
On Saturday, May 07, 2011 16:13:01 ThorstenB wrote:
On 18.04.2011 23:13, Maik Justus wrote:
By the way: I would prefer to use the old default values for the gear
solver. The spring constants of a gear should not be a function of the
approach fuel settings. Maybe some gears would need some
Hello,
So I tested the bo105 now with the HudsonBuild 262 win32-installer (before
YASim-patch) vs. the latest HudsonBuild 272 win32-installer. (after
YASim-patch)
I used the Bo105, KMTN, rwy15
METAR: 012345Z 15000kt 12SM 20/08 Q1013 NOSIG
I set Vy= 65, TOW 4531 lbs, Torque at 80% (end of
On Monday, April 18, 2011 01:09:56 Heiko Schulz wrote:
I had a fix locally but with the patch fixing the YASim issue I have now to
begin again. I see the problem in the airfoil, but a change to this means
that I have to change a lot of other parameters as well to keep the
behavior 100%
On 18.04.2011 14:51, Adrian Musceac wrote:
On Monday, April 18, 2011 01:09:56 Heiko Schulz wrote:
I had a fix locally but with the patch fixing the YASim issue I have now to
begin again. I see the problem in the airfoil, but a change to this means
that I have to change a lot of other
On Monday, April 18, 2011 20:51:17 ThorstenB wrote:
And you also checked that approach glide angle isn't used? Otherwise,
the new default cruise angle (0.0) might not match the original approach
angle setting...
No mention of approach glide angle either. I have no idea how this applies to
Hello Heiko,
does your local FDM still uses default approach fuel etc? But even if
not, there should be no difference in the flight behavior. The only
effect of the approach fuel level is (for a rotorcraft) within the gear
solver.
By the way: I would prefer to use the old default values for
Hi,
Hello Heiko,
does your local FDM still uses default approach fuel etc?
But even if
not, there should be no difference in the flight behavior.
The only
effect of the approach fuel level is (for a rotorcraft)
within the gear
solver.
Heiko, and anyone else: if you think there is
Hi,
Well, I'm glad it helps. The patch should not affect the
solution
too much in most cases, I've checked this myself.
I have tested it, and well, at least for helicopters there seems a difference.
No idea how long we have this bug now- but I guess a very long time.
I was working on
-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] YASim issues
Hi,
Well, I'm glad it helps. The patch should not affect the
solution
too much in most cases, I've checked this myself.
I have tested it, and well, at least for helicopters there seems a
difference. No idea
Actually, I find it rather odd that it should have all this trouble to
climb in an hover at sea level. I love the Bo105, it's my plane of choice,
but making a neat vertical take off is very hard.
Alessandro
I had a fix locally but with the patch fixing the YASim issue I have now to
begin
On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:07:42 +0300, Emilian wrote in message
201104151807.42441.emili...@gmail.com:
On Friday 15 April 2011 17:36:12 syd adams wrote:
Syd, about the fuselage contact points: they are internally
represented as a gear object, only without the compression stuff
and with
On Saturday 16 April 2011 15:29:52 Arnt Karlsen wrote:
..more ways to skin this cat: IRL, flying or stalling like this
into the grass, should bend metal or break wood propeller blades,
but the engine should turn another 2/3 to 2 or 3 more revolutions
plowing into the field. At high speed, the
On Thursday, April 14, 2011 21:40:10 Gary Neely wrote:
Adrian,
Great catch on the fuel and glideslope issues. You're right--
despite
parsing the fuel attributes and supplying defaults if necessary,
it
has the defaults hard-coded right in the Airplane::compile block.
It
seems to consider
Syd, about the fuselage contact points: they are internally
represented as a gear object, only without the compression stuff
and with hardcoded values for static and dynamic friction. I think
using fake gears directly would give a little better tweaking
precision, wouldn't it?
Cheers,
Hi Syd,
As Oliver Thurau (ot-666) found out, many fuselage sections will decrease
framerates.
That's why it is better to have fuselage section only when necessary.
Heiko
Von: syd adams adams@gmail.com
Betreff: Re: [Flightgear-devel] YASim issues
An: FlightGear developers discussions
Possibly , I think you've probably looked deeper into the code than i
have there . Thought I'd bring up the idea in case it hadn't been
tried .
I,ve also tried to trigger that gear up crash but haven't been able
too , (with my aerostar) , it does a belly landing and the crash
property
On Friday 15 April 2011 17:36:12 syd adams wrote:
Syd, about the fuselage contact points: they are internally
represented as a gear object, only without the compression stuff
and with hardcoded values for static and dynamic friction. I think
using fake gears directly would give a little
) found out, many fuselage sections will decrease
framerates.
That's why it is better to have fuselage section only when necessary.
Heiko
Von: syd adams adams@gmail.com
Betreff: Re: [Flightgear-devel] YASim issues
An: FlightGear developers discussions
flightgear-devel
Still trying to take off ;) .Very nicely done model ...but a bit too
much detail for my laptop ...I get 10 fps where I'm used to getting
30-40 .
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Adrian Musceac kanto...@gmail.com wrote:
Possibly , I think you've probably looked deeper into the code than i
have
On Friday 15 April 2011 21:07:12 syd adams wrote:
Still trying to take off ;) .Very nicely done model ...but a bit too
much detail for my laptop ...I get 10 fps where I'm used to getting
30-40 .
No need to take off :), just raise the gear with the engine running (otherways
it doesn't raise
On Friday, April 15, 2011 20:43:45 syd adams wrote:
One small ,narrow fuselage piece inside and at the bottom of the main
fuselage doesnt make a difference here, you don't need a lot . And
they don't seem to trigger a crash like gear does.
The gear only triggers a crash when its absolute
Ok success. It does rest slightly off the ground at the nose ... i
removed the fake gear and all the mstab objects (clever use of mstab ,
by the way :)) , and still the same results... I have to admit I've
never noticed this behavior before.
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Adrian Musceac
Hello,
I have found a couple of YASim issues, more details here:
https://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=302
https://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=303
Would anyone still maintaining YASim please have a look and provide
some feedback?
Cheers,
Adrian
Just a note about the belly landing ... you can use fuselage objects
instead of fake gear each end of a 'fuselage' is a contact point
, and like the doc says you can have as many and in any orientation
you like ... though most people seem to be under the impression that
you can only model the
Adrian,
Great catch on the fuel and glideslope issues. You're right-- despite
parsing the fuel attributes and supplying defaults if necessary, it
has the defaults hard-coded right in the Airplane::compile block. It
seems to consider the user-supplied values for aircraft mass, but not
elsewhere.
33 matches
Mail list logo
