Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tango]

I'd rather not see two distinct methods of doing flight models in outerra as it very rapidly polarises the community and that's a very bad thing.

It wouldn't be two distinct methods...it would be numerous methods, because it would depend upon the developer as to how they chose to do it.

If you want to use JSBSim, then do that! There is no point limiting the sim to "only" JSBSim, or any other method, because of a perceived "split" that might arise.

It makes no sense to limit what is possible based upon someone's biases towards a particular method. It should be open so anyone can use any method they like (within certain technical constraints). If you're not careful, you get into the trap that numerous simulators of the past have faced - that they force the developer to using one method, and as a direct consequence limit what developers are able to do.

That visualisation tool could be used for JSBsim and would make flight modelling easier, producing more accurate flight models

Yes, and not only JSBSim, but other techniques as well. As SE explained elsewhere, the visualizer only uses JSBSim for integration methods (essentially, to emulate the missing half of the simulator) so the flight model code can run complete for analysis; it doesn't have constraints as to how the flight model is computed - it doesn't know or care if you use XYZ method or JSBSim for the calculations.

[SilentEagle]

Agree to disagree then.  That flight model visualizer is just the tip of the iceberg of what I'm planning.  This series of tools I'm working on should allow people to define their aircraft however they wish and be able to write all the data to a standardized file format for the sim to read.

[Steve.Wilson]

SilentEagle....fly on.  Sounds interesting.  The JSBSim and Outerra combination is no doubt terrific, as I have seen, but it pales in comparison to the ease with which one can create an aircraft in X-Plane.  I like the sound of your endeavors.  Really, it's all about the tools.

[bomber]

Well said Steve..... The point of this thread.

Do we want to make flight modelling easier and how do we go about it ?

[Jon S. Berndt]

Great thread. It's true that it can be tedious to create a detailed JSBSim flight model. If you have the data, it's a bit easier to make simple models. Getting the data (or creating it) for specific aircraft can be hard - but that's true for any flight sim. I've wanted for a long time to create a very capable editor for building models, but that's a very serious effort. There is one open source effort that was begun years ago, but that has not been updated for a while. Someone could pick that up and turn it into a nice application, with some work. You can find it here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/jsbsimcommander/ and here: http://jsbsimcommander.sourceforge.net/. There is also a product called DATCOM+ that can help build up an aerodynamic mode: http://www.holycows.net/datcom/

[Revolver]

Have small question because of JSBSim and what he is able to do.
So, I have Flight dynamism in wind tunnel(Wiederstandsdaten-Cw...) as well as polar of airplane X (original),
how would be exact ones I able to do with JSBSim FM for airplane X programming? In other words, is one
able to do with JSBSim exact FM to create... faithful?

[bomber]

Faithfully?

Jsbsim can do anything you want.....set the bar as high as you want.

Simon

[Revolver]

Faithfully?

Jsbsim can do anything you want.....set the bar as high as you want.

Simon

Hehe... Simon, this was only one question, because I do not know 100% what is able to do JSBSim. Hence, no panic on the Titanik!.... and Thanks!  

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

Gruß,
Stefan