A new Flight Simulator

[bomber]

Israel, I've no problem with the philosophy of this approach....

I expect others will want however to use real wind tunnel data and as such this approach would need to be either allowable or a method that takes this wind tunnel data and shows that the planes as configured conforms with tolerance to this tunnel data.

I need to be able to damage flight model characteristics based on which part of an 8 segment wing has less lift \ drag..... I do that now. I also move weights such as the undercarriage dynamically and I see no reason why using your philosophy wouldn't allow for this.

Frankly I don't care if I use an xml file to configure my plane or a n other type... All I'd want is for it to be logical AND flexible to go past the generic.

[bomber]

Josh..... Sorry but jsbsim doesn't have to be a single set method...

[Source : I've done many many jsbsim flight models that are a lot better than anything else in FG]

[IAHM-COL]

Israel, you do realize, and I can't believe I have to state this again, but:
* No 2 airplane are alike!
* Every minor changes to an airframe needs aerodynamics changes in JSB, or it stops being realistic

What I don't realize is where what I said left you to believe that I dont already acknowledged these two points?

[IAHM-COL]

Israel, I've no problem with the philosophy of this approach....

I expect others will want however to use real wind tunnel data

I dont' know how wind data looks like or how it would specifically alter FDM tables, but the namespace could have subroutines managing the dirty work as in:

example

Code: Select all

import  FDM.lightGlider

myGlider=FDM.ligthGlider() #load up a modded lightGlider FDM

myGlider.windTunnelMatching(windTunneldata) #modify it for matching the windTunnel parameters
                              #which are held in lets say windTunneldata matrix
                              #I presume this may need extra information onto
                              #which FDM axis, or parameters the data entered
                              #represents.
                              #something like scipy can maybe hande table
                              #interpolations for softening?

myGlider.render() #done render and good for testing.


If such subroutine could be logically drafted to modify the FDM classes required

[bomber]

The difference is best explained like this.....

Wind tunnel data represents the whole plane.... So, wing, fuselage, h and v stabs , nacels and general squirely aerodynamic effects.

Now building a flight model from left wing, right wing, fuselage etc parameters (which is how i do it) requires a bit of additional work as the wind tunnel data is more than the sum of these parts.

So you could create a plane from its known parts and yet when tested within a virtual wind tunnel ( I do this) the resulting values don't match the wind tunnel data..... This isn't a problem as long as it's not left like that but adjusted to cover for, or simulate the missing effects

[Octal450]

Bomber,
Please read my post, where I specifically state: Jsbsim is a very customizable method and is a blanks slate to the developer. Since you were talking about Yasim (an FG only) I assumed you meant from FlightGear..., therefoer I refer to the method used in FGFS... I never stated it had to be this way, I stated what I think the easiest way is, and in this case, I think FlightGear got it right (XML based integration,which is highly modular, and customizable. Splitting this into separate modules just makes it more confusing in my opinion.).

You are both missing my point entirely, and I have better things to do than argue all day. No more comments from me on this silly topic I barely care about.

Kind Regards,
Josh

[bomber]

In JSB (As I'm sure you know), the way aerodynamics and flight behavior is calculated is up to the developer of the FDE.

Sorry Josh but you seem to be telling us here HOW jsbsim works...

[Octal450]

I'm exhausted, in pain, and don't have as good language skills as most. You're a smart guy who's built JSBsim flight models before -- you should know what I mean based on what I said. It's not rocket science (unless you are modelling a rocket, in which case, it might be). As I said, I won't bother explaining it further, especially since you seem to be finding every excuse possible to point me as wrong, instead of trying to understand my point.

[bomber]

I'm doing nothing of the sort...

[bomber]

Something also to consider when creating a system for the development of jsbsim flight models is to do so such that these flight models can be used straight out of the box within other jsbsim application such as FG and Outerra.

Now at first glance this might seem counterintuitive as these flight models could be used on competitors Sims, but in the long run the greater the number of modeller the higher the quality and greater the number of planes each sim has access too.

The realities is that a sim isn't judged on the flight models but instead on its fps speed, graphics, effects etc ....all the sexy stuff.

Get the best out of a unified flight modelling community and fight the battle of what makes one sim better than another over something else.