Posts by jcomm
-
-
The default A320 / 737 although they are set by default with some mid-high load, require a lot of throttle to get rolling, and to keep taxiing while, for those same GW values they should be able to taxi at ground idle.
Where in the tmd files should I look into in order to try to fine tune net thrust curves on ground and inflight ?
-
Great!
Will give that a try.
Thx Jeroen!
-
But can I simply install just Switzerland - no Western USA and even less the High Res textures for it ?
-
You're right Jeroen, but I would like to be able to have only the Swiss and additional European regions released in teh future, instead of filling my disk with USA regions which are pretty much useless for me...
-
I would like to be able to install AEFS2 being able to select exactly what areas I want to have installed.
By default it installs Western USA and it's high res textures, and if I tick Switerrland, of course that is installed as well, but i would like to install Switzerland only, and then maybe latter the Wertern USA, and NY when i get a bigger disk. Also I prefer to use the Swiss Alps scenery for my flights than the USA regions available right now.
-
Wow!!!!!!!!
Knowing this made my weekend! and my consideration again for AEFS2!
-
Display More
Thanks for the clear answer, it confirms my assumption that the InertiaLength is sufficient to describe the inertial property of the RigidBody.
BUT! There's something that doesn't seem right. You said:
I interpret that in the meaning that in the RigidBody class, the inertial lengths (let's call them Lx, Ly, Lz) give the RigidBody the same moments of inertia that would have a solid homogeneous box with the same mass and with the sides of length Lx, Ly, Lz.
But usually, the radii of gyrations are used in a different way, i.e. each of the three lengths, squared and multiplied for the body mass, give the moment of inertia _around_ that axis.
So, which of the two interpretations is correct?
An example to better understand: let's say I increase the value of Lx (the first element in the InertiaLength vector, corresponding to the roll axis if the tensor is not rotated).
According to how I interpret what you wrote, that should correspond to a homogeneous box with a longer X side, and hence it should yield a bigger moment of inertia around Y (pitch) and Z (yaw) axes, but the same moment of inertia around the X (roll) axis.
According to my interpretation instead (the conventional one), increasing Lx should correspond to just increasing Ixx (the moment of inertia around X (roll) axis), while Iyy and Izz (the moments of inertia around the Y (pitch) and Z (roll) axes) do not change.
What is the correct interpretation?
Think you meant ( Z) yaw axis Murmur.
Anyway, the tensor matrix should allow to infer the cross-moments, unless they're not being considered in the present aircraft modelled in AEFS2 ?
-
Murmur,
I guess the tensor should be there for the calculation of acceleration/ force due to cross-moments and angular momentum balance.
-
Antoine,
Happy and Healthy 2017 for you to Antoine!
I don't have the DR-400 installed, but I used it in AEFS1 and noticed very few prop effects on yaw. I remember how much the ball must be kicked in the real thing, on glider tug operations, at full power climbs.... just like in the Socata Rallye... and found this very tame in AEFS... How does it feel in AEFS2 ?
-
Well,
right now I am re-installing AEFS2 in a PC with a very fast internet access, and am willing to transfer the install to my home desktop.
I would like to use the above suggested process, but, was it confirmed that it works that way ?
Thank you
-
Thanks, I was afraid I was going to be assimilated at any moment!
Hiflyer, great shots!
You almost tempted me to re-install AEFS2...
but I think I will wait for the Q-400, maybe the first helicopter and some news on the weather modelling side, like rain / snow, an more cloud types... -
San Francisco and NY in AEFS 2
The Lear can be used, but also the Airbus or the 744 !
-
Just out of curiosity there's a screenshot of the new F-15 flying at FL900... and the author asking if that's supposed to be possible IRL...
Well, here's the answer:
"Between Jan. 16 and Feb. 1, 1975, the Streak Eagle broke eight time-to-climb world records. It reached an altitude of 98,425 feet just 3 minutes, 27.8 seconds from brake release at takeoff and coasted to nearly 103,000 feet before descending."
-
It would be great if other developers decided to follow the example of ORBX.
PMDG has World coverage, which is one of their basic requirements, A2A would have a superb flight dynamics engine to build on, Active Sky the chance to add great and detailed weather to the scene, ....
-
I mean on what Orbx John Venema refers to as "Project A" in here?
http://www.avsim.com/topic/499655-s…p/#entry3527374
"Top Secret Projects
*
Now to the juicy stuff! Next year we have a number of top-secret projects being started. All of these are big budget, big investment, risky, adventurous and a little bit scary for us. I know I am going to sound deliberately vague, but understand we are investing deep into six figures for these initiatives so it's important to keep things within the company for now. Don't worry, I think you know how much we as a team love showing you new stuff, so things will be revealed soon enough.
*
Project A - Massive. A huge investment in new tech, new tools, new apps and new staff. It will surprise many of you, and delight you all. It will focus on both Europe and North America. It will perform like nothing you have experience in your simming life. It will support VR. It will be a VFR flyer's wet dream.*It will be sold on OrbxDirect. Oh, and it will be 64-bit." -
I'm with you regarding the enthusiasm and true hope that AFS2 can become something really worth the use.
Presently it is not even installed on my rig - too big an install, too few features to keep it as my only sim right now, but I see the potential, I like the flight dynamics, above all, I want to see if my initial expectations are founded...
Regarding opening scenery development to the user community, IPACS once wrote that it would be very complex since the tools they use and the process and data required are difficult to make widely available.
Meanwhile, opening the aircraft configuration files reveals nice details, sometimes reminding me of the approach once followed by Flight Unlimited, but also shows lot's of room for improvement in various areas.
Let's see how it goes, let's wait for the upcoming aircraft, including Q-400, and maybe the first helicopter
-
And !!!!! Last but certainly not least - those trully REMARKABLE flight dynamics that provide us with a feel of flight we cant find in many other sims ....
We have to be patient! I am !
-
Thx!
I believe in the past I did post something about the turn coordinator not correctly marking the std rate turns...
-
