Michael,These are eigenvectors. Eigenvalues are scalar quantities (numbers). I guessed it is sort of German-English standard terminology. The autothrottle speed/mach, level change and vertical speed modes are solved as boundary value problems with the solution obtained as an eigenvalue. I am having fun now. Not when I was cursing at the screen, the compiler and FS in general for a what seemed a long, long time :)Andre,Regrettably MSFS has not contacted my office yet and I dont expect them to...CheersVangelis======================================= E. M. Vaos Presicion Manuals Development Group www.precisionmanuals.com=======================================

As I learned we used a system of eigenvectors to attain the eigenvalues bound to the 'headdirections'(so we would put the eigenvalue back in the eigenvectors solve the system and result in 1 "figurative point"(form (x,y,0) as it is a direction) per system) of the ellipse, hyperbool and parabool enabling us to determine f.e. the axes, the asymptotic directions in the case of the parabool and in those calculations the eigenvalue was simply a parameter subjected to the collection |R, perhaps it was even subjected in the collection of complex numbers so i guess if you say they are scalar quantities, we're talking about the same thing. It's sure nice to know more than one function of these theorems and their applications... my math teacher would be proud I mentionned this... LOL , then again no need to brag but I did get a straight A for my oral examination about analytical math(with applied Linear Algebra of course) :-DAnd to be honest, what i said in the earlier message about me not liking math.. just a joke ;-)When it comes down to the real application I find math to be a very pleasent occupation. Now, let's cease this mathematical talk and get back to the plane...'s math ;)I really had no idea about what logics were used in the MCP's so if you are ever interested in shooting me just a little bit of explanation, especially about the 'bounderary problem' as I didn't see that in my course or i'm mistaking it for something else...: [email protected] - always interested (fyi i'm not talking college stuff here, plain and simple my 2 years worth of 8hr math a week in 'high school', so of course yours truly has only a limited knowledge...)

here's an interesting fact: although we've been flying for a century we still can't describe the physics of flight analytically. in other words we still don't know exactly why planes fly. that's why we still rely heavily on wind tunnel tests.Andre

Let's see if I understood. You actually made stability tests for the system and calculated the controller?I'm impressed, first time I heard of something like that in FS.you have a new clientJos

Hey Vangelis,very impressive. the accuracy and smoothness must be incredible. i'm intrigued by your mention of usability and adaptation how have you implimented this into the code and interface? i've never used Kash-Carp RK, how does it compare? compiling and running some of my programs does often require a long coffee break, but then again i'm not exactly at the head of the race. i look forward to enjoying your work. =)Andre

Actually, we know exactly how they fly. It can be as simple as the basic four forces in flight. You can define flight possibility in any aircraft by defining each characteristic; especially those of the wing(s). This applies to rotor wing as well as the rotors are, well, wings. :-)Wind tunnels are great tools that do a multitude of things. They can save countless dollars on the testing of new designs of airframes or simply determining elementary limitations on the aircraft to establish the POH and its published operational limitations prior to test flights. Not to mention the life saving functionality to the test pilots about to enter a newly designed or radically modified aircraft.Either this or the FAA has had me teaching wrong in excess of 7 years! :-waveEnjoy!...Good Day.http://www.clearedasfiled.com/images/simpics/cirrus.jpgwww.flightfactory-simulations.comwww.clearedasfiled.com

true, flight can be defined by the forces involved, i'm talking about defining the forces. defining lift. we still can't scientifically define lift. our understanding of the physics isn't complete. currently aerodynamics is a combination of theory with experimental results (wind-tunnel). once completed the theory will make it possible to build far more efficient and faster planes, as well as make it possible to create a completely physics based flight simulator.=) fs2020 perhaps.Andre

>as well as make it possible>to create a completely physics based flight simulator.=) >fs2020 perhaps.I'm not sure that will ever happen since you're modeling a chaotic system (esp. related to the atomspheric conditions) and from what I've read on the subject, it really isn't possible to model that kind of thing exactly - only an approximation.Ryan

that's why the weather forcast is always wrong.

geekhttp://saltydogfly2.avsim.net/images/avsim_sig.jpg