X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 23:11:30 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mailgate-internal4.sri.com ([128.18.84.114] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.7) with SMTP id 3110961 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:25:57 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=128.18.84.114; envelope-from=thomas.low@sri.com Received: from mars.esd.sri.com (128.18.26.200) by mailgate-internal4.sri.com with SMTP; 2 Sep 2008 16:25:22 -0000 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_9V8/epULNhUVshPdZwx5Cg)" Received: from tlowpc ([128.18.14.156]) by mars.esd.sri.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-3.01 (built Jul 12 2007; 32bit)) with ESMTPA id <0K6K0061BTM7QL30@mars.esd.sri.com> for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:25:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Low X-Original-To: 'Ted Noel' , lml@lancaironline.net References: Subject: RE: [LML] Simulators, Training and "Slow flight" X-Original-Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:25:22 -0700 X-Original-Message-id: <013001c90d18$7f7092b0$9c0e1280@esd.sri.com> X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-reply-to: Thread-index: AckNFMjFI1w7ZqHGQAOU/9cYwGD5aAAADFvA X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_9V8/epULNhUVshPdZwx5Cg) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Before 'dissing X-plane and Microsoft, I should have said that X-plane's approach to aerodynamic modeling is fundamentally sound, and is actually similar in many ways to the approach used in my code. Austin Myers, is a Columbia (Cessna) pilot, and is justifiably proud of his software. My comments are based on my own "flight tests" of the stock aircraft provided with the simulator in which I have personal flight experience. Yaw damping and response to rudder, ground handling and many other similar second order characteristics seemed unrealistic to me. This is a subjective impression only. When I was developing the aerodynamic and systems models of the Beechcraft B-58 for FAA and JAA certification, a huge effort was required to model specific idiosyncratic characteristics of the aircraft and to insure that the overall model nailed all the numbers and at the same "felt" correct to experienced B-58 pilots. I have yet to see any general purpose simulator that can, from aircraft geometry and some looked-up values of aerodynamic coefficients, reproduce the nuanced feel of the actual aircraft. With enough tweaking and access to source to model some special characteristic, perhaps these commercial codes like X-plane can be used. There is no substitute however to having a detailed understanding of the aerodynamics, tons of fight experience in type, and first-hand familiarity with every line of modeling code. FAA certification of FTD's and Sims has several different fidelity levels, and I am not surprised that an X-plane - based simulator could be certified, but I suspect it is to a level below what our community would need to practice to proficiency in our aircraft. I'd like to hear from the list community which Lancair model would be most valuable to simulate? I've often considered using our actual airframes as our simulator cockpits, with detachable control surface loaders and avionics stimulators to provide 100% fidelity of the cockpit environment of our individual aircraft. Thoughts? Tom Low _____ From: Ted Noel [mailto:tednoel@cfl.rr.com] Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 4:16 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] Simulators, Training and "Slow flight" MS Flight Sim and X-Plane, while fun and educational, are not up to the challenge of providing the kind of fidelity needed for type familiarity, let alone upset recovery training. That's curious. The designers of X-Plane are quite proud of their flight dynamics, and my local FBO uses X-Plane to drive an FAA-certified Motus motion sim. That being said, if a group was serious about creating a high-fidelity simulator, I would be please to contribute to the effort with the development of a high fidelity aerodynamic model. The variations between our individual aircraft remain a challenge, but from mostly from a systems level. The aero models could be readily adapted model the range of variations between our aircraft. Tom Low I think all of us would be grateful for your help. Perhaps we could pass the hat to reimburse for the time and effort. If others are willing, I'll put some $$ in. Ted Noel N540TF No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.10/1638 - Release Date: 8/27/2008 7:06 PM --Boundary_(ID_9V8/epULNhUVshPdZwx5Cg) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

Before ‘dissing X-plane and Microsoft, I should have said that X-plane’s approach to aerodynamic modeling is fundamentally sound, and is actually similar in many ways to the approach used in my code.  Austin Myers, is a Columbia (Cessna) pilot, and is justifiably proud of his software.  My comments are based on my own “flight tests” of the stock aircraft provided with the simulator in which I have personal flight experience.  Yaw damping and response to rudder, ground handling and many other similar second order characteristics seemed unrealistic to me.  This is a subjective impression only. 

When I was developing the aerodynamic and systems models of the Beechcraft B-58 for FAA and JAA certification, a huge effort was required to model specific idiosyncratic characteristics of the aircraft and to insure that the overall model nailed all the numbers and at the same “felt” correct to experienced B-58 pilots.  I have yet to see any general purpose simulator that can, from aircraft geometry and some looked-up values of aerodynamic coefficients,   reproduce the nuanced feel of the actual aircraft.  With enough tweaking and access to source to model some special characteristic, perhaps these commercial codes like X-plane can be used.  There is no substitute however to having a detailed understanding of the aerodynamics, tons of fight experience in type, and first-hand familiarity with every line of modeling code.

FAA certification of FTD’s and Sims has several different fidelity levels, and I am not surprised that an X-plane – based simulator could be certified, but I suspect it is to a level below what our community would need to practice to proficiency in our aircraft.   

I’d like to hear from the list community which Lancair model would be most valuable to simulate?  I’ve often considered using our actual airframes as our simulator cockpits, with detachable control surface loaders and avionics stimulators to provide 100% fidelity of the cockpit environment of our individual aircraft.  Thoughts?

 

Tom Low   

 

 

From: Ted Noel [mailto:tednoel@cfl.rr.com]
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 4:16 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: Re: [LML] Simulators, Training and "Slow flight"

 

 

 MS Flight Sim and X-Plane, while fun and educational, are not up to the challenge of providing the kind of fidelity needed for type familiarity, let alone upset recovery training. 

 

 

That's curious. The designers of X-Plane are quite proud of their flight dynamics, and my local FBO uses X-Plane to drive an FAA-certified Motus motion sim.

 

 

 

That being said, if a group was serious about creating a high-fidelity simulator, I would be please to contribute to the effort with the development of a high fidelity aerodynamic model.   The variations between our individual aircraft remain a challenge, but from mostly from a systems level.  The aero models could be readily adapted model the range of variations between our aircraft.  

 

Tom Low

 

I think all of us would be grateful for your help. Perhaps we could pass the hat to reimburse for the time and effort. If others are willing, I'll put some $$ in.

 

Ted Noel

N540TF

 

 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.10/1638 - Release Date: 8/27/2008 7:06 PM
--Boundary_(ID_9V8/epULNhUVshPdZwx5Cg)--