Has anyone noticed this? http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526961.aspxI am very hopeful that this will enter into the next MSFS SDK. It turns out I have access to ESP, so I think I'll give this a "go" and get a head start (crossing fingers that it'll find its way into MSFS). I have been somewhat irritated for quite a while that flight modeling (in a FLIGHT simulator) has remained an obfuscated black art. I think, on this matter, X-plane has the right approach: make tools for flight modeling a first-class part of the SDK. I'll admit I know VERY little about how to do a flight model, but if the tools will not be upfront, I can begin to learn.Anybody know more about this?

Hope you can code in Assembler... }( Currently that section is the only difference between the ESP SDK and the FSX SDK.-Dai

Sort of related...This is a cool website collecting information on flight dynamics modeling (a Princeton prof's site): http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/MAE331.htmlMan, I am very hopeful about this Flight Model SDK.

Since there are good examples, "learning" ASM wouldn't be TOO different than what you described your C/C++ learning process was to get your EXCELLENT gauge programming tutorial together: you'll learn it if it is an obstacle to getting what you want. I might fail, but at least (I hope) the tools are there to try.I have "messed" with assembler in the past... very low level and concerned with moving things around in memory. If you study those examples carefully, it seems as though the extent of ASM knowledge required is to make variables and tables. I don't see any ASM "logic" required. In this sense, understanding the purpose of each variable is the challenge.

I think it's still going to be a black art. Creating the .Asm file doesn't appear to need any knowledge of assembler programming. It's simply a way to organise the data.However, I looked at the example code for for the simple piston engined aircraft and found that the Cl vs Angle of Attack table gives the Cl in the range from -180 to +180 degrees of angle of Attack. Anyone any ideas what the Cl should be at an angle of attack of, say, 135deg? Microsoft thinks it's -0.5 and that it's +0.5 at -135deg. I have difficuklt visualising these cases and doubt that there are any reliable data for them.

>I think it's still going to be a black art. >>Creating the .Asm file doesn't appear to need any knowledge of>assembler programming. It's simply a way to organise the>data.>>However, I looked at the example code for for the simple>piston engined aircraft and found that the Cl vs Angle of>Attack table gives the Cl in the range from -180 to +180>degrees of angle of Attack. Anyone any ideas what the Cl>should be at an angle of attack of, say, 135deg? Microsoft>thinks it's -0.5 and that it's +0.5 at -135deg. I have>difficuklt visualising these cases and doubt that there are>any reliable data for them.The ClvsAoA record has a single range that's utilized for the aircraft's lift performance... despite the fact the entries range from -180 to +180. It goes from Cl_min to Cl_max.

The Cl vs alpha table is:;CL vs. Alpha ;The first entry defines the number of data points (maximum 47 entries) TOKEN_BEGIN AIR_CL_ALPHA dd 13 ; Number of Entries REAL8 -3.142, 0.000 REAL8 -2.356, 0.500 REAL8 -1.571, 0.000 REAL8 -0.366, -1.528 REAL8 -0.078, 0.000 REAL8 0.017, 0.590 REAL8 0.262, 2.096 REAL8 0.288, 2.183 REAL8 0.314, 2.096 REAL8 0.340, 1.528 REAL8 1.571, 0.000 REAL8 2.356, -0.500 REAL8 3.142, 0.000 TOKEN_ENDI assume that the second column is the Angle of Attack running from -3.142 radians to +3.142 radians (-180 deg to +180 deg.) The graph in degrees is:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/194283.jpgThis shows that Cl is +0.5 at -135deg Angle of Attack and -0.5 at +135deg. I still ask what this means in reality? Think about the attitude of the aircraft.

Explain how a negative angle of attack is physically possible... then we'll continue the discussion. ;)

An aircraft pulling negative g - such as in steady inverted flight - will have a negative angle of attack.Continue!

>An aircraft pulling negative g - such as in steady inverted>flight - will have a negative angle of attack.>>Continue!Incorrect.Once the aircraft is inverted, the angle of attack is referenced to the bottom surface of the wing.

No it isn't. The Angle of Attack is the angle between a fixed datum line in the aircraft/wing and the relative airflow and can be negative. Consider an aircraft mounted in a wind tunnel at zro angle of attack. Rotating it nose up will give a positive angle of attack: rotating it nose down will give a negative angle of attack. Until you understrand that basic idea there is no point in discussion with you.

>No it isn't. The Angle of Attack is the angle between a fixed>datum line in the aircraft/wing and the relative airflow and>can be negative. Consider an aircraft mounted in a wind tunnel>at zro angle of attack. Rotating it nose up will give a>positive angle of attack: rotating it nose down will give a>negative angle of attack. Until you understrand that basic>idea there is no point in discussion with you.Incorrect statement. However, you're correct... no point in discussion with you.

AerodynamicsThe angle of attack of an aircraft is defined as the angle between the relative wind and the wing's chord line. Since drag is defined as the component of the resultant force parallel to the relative wind, angle of attack is also the angle between the drag and the chord line. In other words, since the relative wind is usually approximately horizontal, if the plane is climbing, the angle of attack is positive, and if it's in a dive, the angle of attack is negative.Angle of attack is often abbreviated as α or AOA. Forces and moments on a wing section generally1 vary as functions of angle of attack; airfoils are often identified by the way their coefficients of lift, drag, and moment vary according to angle of attack. All of NACA's voluminous airfoil data archives are presented as graphs in this form. The angle of attack when lift is zero is defined as the "zero-lift angle of attack" (duh), αL=0. αL=0 is different depending on the shape of the airfoil: for a cambered airfoil (eyebrow-shaped), it is negative, while for a perfectly symmetrical airfoil, αL=0 is identically zero. With the wing sitting at zero lift, a line can be drawn along the line of relative velocity, through the airfoil, and out its trailing edge. This is known as the "zero-lift line". As the airfoil then changes orientation relative to the wind, the angle between the zero-lift line and relative wind is known as absolute angle of attack, and is the sum of the zero-lift angle of attack and the geometric angle of attack.Angle of attack is often abbreviated as α or AOA. Forces and moments on a wing section generally1 vary as functions of angle of attack; airfoils are often identified by the way their coefficients of lift, drag, and moment vary according to angle of attack. All of NACA's voluminous airfoil data archives are presented as graphs in this form. The angle of attack when lift is zero is defined as the "zero-lift angle of attack" (duh), αL=0. αL=0 is different depending on the shape of the airfoil: for a cambered airfoil (eyebrow-shaped), it is negative, while for a perfectly symmetrical airfoil, αL=0 is identically zero. With the wing sitting at zero lift, a line can be drawn along the line of relative velocity, through the airfoil, and out its trailing edge. This is known as the "zero-lift line". As the airfoil then changes orientation relative to the wind, the angle between the zero-lift line and relative wind is known as absolute angle of attack, and is the sum of the zero-lift angle of attack and the geometric angle of attack: αa = α + αL=0.At some large value of α, the flow passing over the top of the airfoil will separate, and the sudden increase in drag will make the aircraft stall - i.e., don't try to fly straight up, 'cause it won't work.A twisted airfoil (see wing divergence, reversal) can cause the angle of attack to vary along the length of a wing.In practice, airfoils tend to shed vortices from the wingtip, which creates a downwash and deflects the local airflow in the vicinity of the wing downward by an angle of αi. This is the induced angle of attack. The airfoil section itself is then responding to an effective angle of attack equal to the geometric angle of attack minus the induced angle of attack: αeff = α - αi. This is related to finite wing theory.http://everything2.com/title/angle%2520of%2520attack

I suspect that you are used to seeing windtunnel Cl vs alpha graphs with the two axes meeting at the bottom LH corner and with alpha not going beyond 25

Bill... I asked him for an example of AoA going negative. He stated that inverted, level flight would result in a negative AoA. I stated he was incorrect, and thus ensued a translation of what defines AoA... I've never said AoA can't go negative... I've stated what he's saying is incorrect.However, since you brought up the correct answer.... I'll ask the next question... is it possible for an aircraft to exceed a climb or dive of 90 degrees?