How aircraft systems are implemented in flight simulators?

[Turbavykas]

Hello,

Do flight simulators(FS) use original systems and hardware like FMC, air data computers, autopilot and auto throttle computers and simulate all required inputs for them(like sensors) or FS uses completely different hardware and simulate everything using only software?
For example lets take Boeing FMC. It's know to have multiple bugs. So if FS simulates FMC from design specification everything works perfect in virtual flight but you have problems in real aircraft...
Are there any software for PC's available where original aircraft software for all modules could be loaded and run in emulation mode? I assume it should be really easy tack for modern PC.

[woodja51]

There is a mix of genuine aircraft parts and simulated ones dpending on the sim.
for example, on the CAE built KC30 (A330) sim the MCP is a genuine part, as are most other parts foward of the line around aft of the seats... This is for certification to level d. However the radio control panel is an actual part on the top however the internals have been removed and essentially it just operates sound cards etc in the PCs that do the audio work.

Other parts for example the stab trim or THS Wheel... Spins via an electric motor , chains etc under the simulator floor so is not a real system obviously.

As far as air data goes, and most other simulations, they are programmes of the flight modelling , hence the limitations on what you can achieve with simulators when outside the parameters modelled. For example I have looped the sim successfully on full motion, but it is not something you would probably get away with on the actual aircraft without damage of course.

Does that help ?

Mw:ok:

[code0]

In a bit of a different note, FAA and EASA have two different approaches for Flight Simulators. All licensed FSs according to both regulations should have certain basic common requirements such as the components related to "flying" ex. yoke, trims, flaps, etc And engine controls, radio communication, lights, engine start-up systems, landing and a few other requirements are mandatory.

With FAA, they allow some sort of a relief as a basic PC based desktop simulator can be used to log hours officially. but for this your hardware and software in the computer needs to be authorized by FAA.

But when it comes to EASA,they do not allow such desktop based products to log hours. According to EASA, they require an enclosed cockpit with feedback mechanism and quite a few other simulated requirements which FAA does not demand.

Software used in FAA approved desktop product can be even Microsoft Flight Simulator, Xplane, Lockheed's Prepar3d but with NO extra plugins such as weather, textures installed! and the frame rates are match and set by the manufacture. if you amend any of the defined criteria your licence is invalid. And some of the PC based FS manufacture also have their own software developed and any airport can be modeled on request.

But with EASA, the simulator manufacture have their own software or have a very selective customized software only for requested airport/countries/approaches or all the world! that you can specify. For example the A320 simulator from a popular European manufacture has their own software and their hardware - exact replication of the A320 cockpit.

Now when it comes to simulating mal-functions, failures (not sure about bugs though) almost all of the abnormal events are simulated in a professional commercial trainer. But you have a point, I do not know if a situation like the A320 nose gear landing with 90` angled could be simulated! and consequences could be judge from. But the point is when you train for any possible problem solving mechanism within the given time referring the FCOM or any other material and follow the steps or dealing with the situation with your own "airmanship" if nothing works come with the amount of training. when you encounter a failure in a system your training for other failures come into action and act like a background problem solving system to rectify the new problem!


Code0

[ZFT]

According to EASA, they require an enclosed cockpit with feedback mechanism and quite a few other simulated requirements which FAA does not demand.Not true. Enclosed cockpits only required for Level A,B,C & D. FTDs and FNPTs do not required it. (Ref CS-FSTD(A) pg 9 of 154).

[Landroger]

I once spent a couple of hours in a BA 747-200 simulator, many years ago and I asked the same question. Basically, all the 'dials' were ammeters or voltmeters connected to D to A converters and a computer interface. This was polled every few milliseconds and minute changes made to the output voltage or current. It was entirely up to the computer as to what was displayed and when.

With glass cockpits, its even easier, although my guess would be the screens are real, because nothing that good exists next to a PC. I remember seeing my first glass cockpit - a 757 on way to Arlanda - and being amazed at how black the 'raster' was, even in blinding sunlight.

Roger.

[STBYRUD]

If I am not mistaken to my knowledge especially a few years ago LRUs like the GPWS and DEUs or Symbol Generators were aircraft units that were fed faux information to behave as if they were in flight in the airplane, I could imagine that this has diminished somewhat if they can reasonably be simulated in software.

[GarageYears]

A lot of aircraft software is now "designed" to be rehosted (cross-compiled) to allow use directly on flight simulators. This software is included in the (horribly expensive) data package that the airframe manufacturer sells to support each simulator.

There is an ARINC standard (ARINC 610-1) that provides guidance on the incorporation of aircraft equipment into flight training devices: https://www.arinc.com/cf/store/catalog_detail.cfm?item_id=43

Cheers, GY :ok:

[ZFT]

To quantify "horribly expensive" An A320 Parts and Data Pack will set you back around €3M (€2M data and €1M aircraft parts) and Parts and Data for a B787 allegedly around $8M!!

[Flutter speed]

If the FMC software contains bugs, then those bugs will also be "available" in the simulator. FMCs are often hardware components with the real aircraft software loads (e.g. load 10.7, 10.8A for the 737NG.) or, indeed, re-hosted software (so the original aircraft software hosted on a different platform like an industrial pc).

[bungeeng]

What about things like IRUs, how are they simulated?

Real boxes fed by simulated acceleration / rotation rate from the flight model simulation?
Or all done in software?

[Ka8 Flyer]

I was wondering about this myself.

[RYR-738-JOCKEY]

I'd like to add a notion. When it comes to simulating motion I think most of us would agree that it's far from realistic. I always become slightly dizzy during the start of a session due to the artificial yaw, which is simply a tilting of the sim. When you get an engine failure it becomes quite pronounced. When I did suffer an actual engine failure I found the aircraft rediculously easy to fly. You're at the pointy edge of a metal tube and when it happens the sideway motion makes you react in quite a natural way. And landing it...it's dead easy compared to the sim...

[Flutter speed]

IRS, Flight Control Computers and such components in simulation are often software emulations. There are very detailed specs from the manufacturer available in the data packages, which allow you to design such models (think Matlab/Simulink compiled to code).

The simulators I work with (737NG) have the EGPWS, the FMC and the DU software either re-hosted or real aircraft boxes. All the rest is simulated. Well, other components like yokes, pedestal and other panels also can be aircraft parts (refurbished). But as far as we are speaking about avionics....