Re: [Flightgear-devel] c172p pitch at cruise question

[Martin S. <Mar...@mg...>]

John Denker wrote:
> On 12/06/2008 03:25 PM, Martin Spott wrote:

> > This is the sole point I'm talking about: Apparently, even though 'we'
> > have "original" drawings of the entire airframe, still none of us has
> > authoritative information at his hands how it is supposed to be
> > properly positioned 'at level'. This is the issue which I'd was trying
> > to sort out.
> 
> As a step toward sorting it out, it would be nice to
> have a clearer idea what "at level" means.

I'm sorry if things are a little bit more complicated at your end.
In a case like this one I prefer the 'pragmatic' approach of reading a
manual (if available), determining what its authors consider as being
"at level" (if they do in some way) and finally to evaluate if we're
able to make use of it.
It doesn't serve anyone if you define your own fancy idea of the term
"at level" if you don't get any reference for it,

	Martin.
-- 
 Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------