Synethic Vision
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Synethic Vision
Hi there -
How long before the big brands bring Synethic Vision out (Garmin, Avidyne). Have no idea what is so complex given computer games managed it years ago (yes, I know certification but still).
I imagine it may well eliminate CFIT.
VT
How long before the big brands bring Synethic Vision out (Garmin, Avidyne). Have no idea what is so complex given computer games managed it years ago (yes, I know certification but still).
I imagine it may well eliminate CFIT.
VT
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I can't wait. The Chelton system is stunning. Highway in the sky. Fly through the boxes from take off to touchdown. Forget about getting psyched up for the approach . Just fly it down to the runway on the screen....Of course...It won't be cheap
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think that it will eliminate CFIT to any extent greater than existing modern GPS systems do. All modern kit has built in terrain awareness and you can't miss the warnings. That being said, I'm sure that people like Garmin are working on it and one wonders why it takes so long (probably because they don't currently need to move any faster).
The Chelton system is much better than the Garmin or Avidyne but I don't think synthetic vision is its biggest strength. There is an article I wrote about it here:
http://fly.dsc.net/u/Download?url=/pdfs/chelton.pdf
The Chelton system is much better than the Garmin or Avidyne but I don't think synthetic vision is its biggest strength. There is an article I wrote about it here:
http://fly.dsc.net/u/Download?url=/pdfs/chelton.pdf
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with drauk - there is little pressure.
Displaying terrain really well is trivial nowadays - anybody seen FSX? It's amazing. You could land in zero-zero with that sort of quality.
There are issues with the databases. The only way to get the database accurate is using airborne or space imagery, and space imagery (space shuttle radar, basically) is the only way to get decent world coverage.
The current SRTM data is accurate to 100ft USA and 300ft non-USA, IIRC. So somebody somewhere has to do some extra work to bring this up to "obstacle clearance" requirements. Perhaps there is a non-free version of the SRTM data which is sub-100ft; obviously the data actually taken will be the same accuracy whether over Washington or Sakhalin Island
so it's a case of somebody in the US govt deciding what resolution will be classified and what resolution will be released, and how much for.
Then, the process of generating the data needs to meet some paperwork/procedure requirements before it can be sold for real use. This doesn't mean a great deal in reality (the terrain colouring in some TSO129 MFDs is thousands of feet wrong) but I suspect it does need to be a bit better in this case because somebody might just rely on it in an emergency...
Displaying terrain really well is trivial nowadays - anybody seen FSX? It's amazing. You could land in zero-zero with that sort of quality.
There are issues with the databases. The only way to get the database accurate is using airborne or space imagery, and space imagery (space shuttle radar, basically) is the only way to get decent world coverage.
The current SRTM data is accurate to 100ft USA and 300ft non-USA, IIRC. So somebody somewhere has to do some extra work to bring this up to "obstacle clearance" requirements. Perhaps there is a non-free version of the SRTM data which is sub-100ft; obviously the data actually taken will be the same accuracy whether over Washington or Sakhalin Island
so it's a case of somebody in the US govt deciding what resolution will be classified and what resolution will be released, and how much for.Then, the process of generating the data needs to meet some paperwork/procedure requirements before it can be sold for real use. This doesn't mean a great deal in reality (the terrain colouring in some TSO129 MFDs is thousands of feet wrong) but I suspect it does need to be a bit better in this case because somebody might just rely on it in an emergency...
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also many firms already manufacture them for the experimental market at rock bottom prices. Blue Mountain, OP Technologies and Grand Rapids Technology to name but a few. It's that word "Certified" that's the problem.
