20,741
edits
Implementing VNAV support in FlightGear: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Implementing VNAV support in FlightGear (view source)
Revision as of 23:33, 3 December 2013
, 3 December 2013→Problem
(→YaSim) |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
In comparison with other flight simulators, FlightGear has been lacking support for simulating VNAV features found on many modern aircraft since day one. | In comparison with other flight simulators, FlightGear has been lacking support for simulating VNAV features found on many modern aircraft since day one. | ||
So far, the general consensus has been that it simply isn't yet possible in FlightGear to properly implement VNAV because VNAV depends on having access to an aircraft-specific performance database to provide the proper pitch/thrust changes to make certain altitude/speed constraints, which boils down to a lack of support by the FDMs (JSBsim/YaSim) actually. | So far, the general consensus has been that it simply isn't yet possible in FlightGear to properly implement VNAV because VNAV depends on having access to an aircraft-specific performance database to provide the proper pitch/thrust changes to make certain VNAV altitude/speed/time constraints, which boils down to a lack of support by the FDMs (JSBsim/YaSim) actually. | ||
As an open source project, we do not have access to the corresponding flight data or such a performance database, and even if we did, we probably couldn't easily use said data due to its proprietary nature. | As an open source project, we do not have access to the corresponding flight data or such a performance database, and even if we did, we probably couldn't easily use said data due to its proprietary nature. | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
In addition, a real performance database would probably not serve us too well, because our FDM configurations are custom, too - i.e. the performance database would need to match the performance of the simulated aircraft. | In addition, a real performance database would probably not serve us too well, because our FDM configurations are custom, too - i.e. the performance database would need to match the performance of the simulated aircraft. | ||
Thus, a performance DB would ideally be provided by the FDM itself. Either in a pre-created fashion, i.e. compiled during an offline "test | Thus, a performance DB would ideally be provided by the FDM itself. Either in a pre-created fashion, i.e. compiled during an offline "test flight", or preferably at runtime by running a simulation of the FDM inside the actual FDM. | ||
It is one of those "holy grails" in FlightGear, | It is one of those "holy grails" in FlightGear, we are not aware of any aircraft that currently support a proper FMC/CDU "progress" page - creating the page is trivial, but making it functional requires some more work - look for threads with the keywords "performance database" or "vnav", and you'll see that this has been talked about for over half a decade meanwhile. (computing remaining fuel vs. fuel consumption per hour is fairly trivial, but once you want to compute range, you need to be fully aware of the flight plan (speeds, altitudes) and weather/configuration (and aircraft/engine performance in particular) to make a reasonable guess at remaining range). | ||
So, we currently do not have any aircraft with a properly working FMS and performance database support. | So, we currently do not have any aircraft with a properly working FMS and performance database support. | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
And it is also not foreseeable when that will change, because it will require changes in the FDMs we're using or use of some 3rd party/proprietary performance database. | And it is also not foreseeable when that will change, because it will require changes in the FDMs we're using or use of some 3rd party/proprietary performance database. | ||
Otherwise, it is not currently feasible to come up with VNAV | Otherwise, it is not currently feasible to come up with VNAV modes that properly work for different aircraft. | ||
The 3rd party approach is being used for TPPs data, but in the case of FDMs, we would need 100% accurate FDMs, too - so it would be better to directly use the FDM for computing a performance DB. | The 3rd party approach is being used for TPPs data, but in the case of FDMs, we would need 100% accurate FDMs, too - so it would be better to directly use the FDM for computing a performance DB. | ||
Supporting VNAV | Supporting VNAV still is tricky for other reasons, and currently not on anybody's agenda - it's not just something that can/should be tackled by a single aircraft developer, it requires lower-level changes in FlightGear's architecture and the way FDMs are used. | ||
{{cquote|Altitude constraints are a mess - in the short term, they are best avoided. Keep in mind the GPS code doesn't really do proper vertical navigation - it computes some data like the altitude change and climb/ descent rate for a leg, but I'm not sure if any real aircraft is driving the VNAV mode of an autopilot from it. | {{cquote|Altitude constraints are a mess - in the short term, they are best avoided. Keep in mind the GPS code doesn't really do proper vertical navigation - it computes some data like the altitude change and climb/ descent rate for a leg, but I'm not sure if any real aircraft is driving the VNAV mode of an autopilot from it. | ||