The Introduction of Flight Simulation, Flight Simulator Training, and Flight Test - Case Study Example

INTRODUCTION TO FLIGHT SIMULATOR By Student’s name Course code and name Professor’s name University name City, State Date of submission Introduction The early years of aviation saw the industry pioneers learn in extremely dangerous environments that were characterised by limited on ground training (advise). This was followed by physical learning in which the learner was required to make short hops and eventually long hops leading to qualification. Due to these difficulties faced by the pilots on training, the physical devices that were utilized for on ground training eventually incorporated all features that were found in real aircrafts. Rapid advances in aeronautical technology however saw this kind of training invite more trouble as the pilots did not possess high proficiency required to handle the upcoming models of aircrafts efficiently Allerton (2009). The introduction of flight simulation in early 1920s by Edwin Link was a welcome thought as it sought to exploit the engineering technologies as a method of flight training. Further to this, the simulation concept was found to be having positive benefits because it offered minimum requirements to the trainee as opposed to theoretical training which could always lead to accidents. The cost of training went down drastically with operational disturbance from the environment and weather being thrown to oblivion. Together with this flight simulation achieved a whole new definition as the creation of dynamic flight behaviour for ground based training (Rolfe and Staples, 1997). According to Rolfe and Staples (1997) simulation became a combination of existing aviation technologies and sciences for creation of artificial realism as an avenue for safe but practical training. Simulation consists of three basic features namely the model of aircraft to be simulated, application regime and the implementation device. A model is a typical representation of the aerodynamic structure whether analogue, linguistic and physical. Lee (2005) states that these features are however coupled with the visual scene simulation for advanced training with regard to weather and such conditions as pitch, roll, yaw and roll. The visual scene is therefore provided with the basic parts of the aircraft cockpit i.e. the collision, flight control and the navigation. These are further subdivided to the specifics to achieve full on flight conditions and environment without comprimising any detail. This assignment seeks to disclose the details of the training session held with regard to flight simulation at room C315. During this exercise, I was able to familiarise with the flight simulator software in use within our computer laboratories without forgetting the benefits that came with the subsequent train flight simulator session. On attending room C305, I was introduced to the flight simulator after which I was able to climb aboard and “flew’ it within the predetermined course shown in figure 1 below with the main objective of following it as closely as possible. All the ‘flying’ data was recorded and presented in form of graphs for ease of translation as shown in graphs 1 – 5. Discussion The simulation exercise was successfully carried out with the flight path and the control aspect in mind. The simulation path given for this exercise was relatively easy to follow since there were no complex calculations to be carried out. The start point was well defined with the initial requirement being to follow the heading of 345° at a cruise speed of 100 Knotts which is equivalent to 51.44 m/s in international standards or units. The instructions further required the simulation to climb to a height of 2000ft (App 610m) and then level out. After fulfilling this requirement, the flight test path took a 300° turn at the height of 2000ft and lasted for 2 minutes. At the end of vector completion, the simulator was flown to a climb of 3000ft and a 210° turn taken lasting for 2 minutes within the same height. The simulator was then descended to 2000ft and maintained for 2 minutes within the same height at a 120° vector to the original path. The last requirement was fulfilled by taking a 165° vector heading back to the origin as a ‘The Diamond in the Sky’ shape was finalized as shall be seen in the trail analysis photograph shown in figure 2 below. The resulting data was then Figure 1: Flight test path ‘The Diamond in the Sky’. Figure 2: Picture of flight map. Altitude vs. time The picture of the flight map is shown above as evidence that the flight simulation exercise was undertaken and for analysis purposes. This photograph also contains the trail graph that shows the entire heights at which the simulator was being flown at various times according to the instruction offered. The graph ‘Trail_GBAFM_2014-1-16’ is not however smooth, thereby proving that the set of conditions at which the simulator was being flown were not conducive. Going by the instructions on the test flight path the graph ‘Trail_GBAFM_2014-1-16’ extracted from the simulator indicates that it took approximately 16 minutes for the whole exercise. During the first two minutes of flight, the simulator maintained a zero altitude with a notable climb from the third minute. The simulator climbs steeply to an altitude of 2000ft within two minutes i.e. the third and fourth minute but maintains a level altitude to 10th minute. Again the trail shows that there was a steep climb in altitude from the tenth to the eleventh minute as the altitude achieved is approximately 3200ft. This is not accurate with regard to the instructions provided although it is close enough considering an approximate error of 6.7% the simulator is then flown to a steep fall between the 12th and 16th minute achieving the zero altitude, a state that is maintained. This in comparison to the instructions provided is a great achievement. The data set obtained is also used to plot a graph of altitude against time shown in graph 1 below. It is noted that the graph ‘Trail_GBAFM_2014-1-16’ is similar to graph 1. All in all it is true to say that the trail is therefore a plot of altitude against time. Putting this aside, it is also noted that the edges of the graph are serrated meaning they have are fluctuations in altitude in small intervals. This is due to inexperience with controls which is also attributed to achieving of the highest altitude as 3165ft an equivalent of 964.69m. This occurs at the 621st second. Graph 1: A graph of altitude against time. Direction vs. time The graph of direction versus time was also plotted to show whether the instructions regarding bearing were properly followed. This graph however shows that in as much as the instructions were followed, there still were some deviations that were arising. This again is routed back to the controls issue although it shall be improved with time and exercise. The graph shows that from the beginning a course of 358° is maintained until the 215th second after which the course is abruptly changed to 30° as shown in the sample data table below. An approximate course of 30° is maintained for 135 seconds with a maximum variation of up to 39° noted. This shoots up again to the initial 357° instead of the desired 300° while shifting the direction. A steep change is again noted when shifting to 210° course which maintains and later shifts to 120°. A corrective graph 3 is however plotted in order to show how this should have visualised. Time(s) Altitude (m) Heading (°) 206 616.61 351 207 614.48 352 208 612.04 353 209 609.30 353 210 606.25 354 211 603.50 355 212 600.46 356 213 597.71 357 214 595.27 358 215 593.14 0 216 591.01 2 217 589.48 3 218 588.57 4 219 587.35 6 220 586.44 9 221 585.52 11 222 584.00 15 Table 2: Sample data showing the abrupt change in course from 350° to 0°. Graph 2: A graph of heading against time. Graph 3: A corrected graph for heading against time in an ideal control situation. Vertical speed vs. time The graph of vertical speed versus time was also plotted from the data obtained in the flight simulation exercise described above. The data was first converted to SI units for conformity purposes. Again the graph obtained showed a lot of discrepancies in terms of the harmonized curve. The maximum velocity achieved for this exercise was established as 7m/s as evident from graph 4 shown below. The minimum velocity was maintained at zero for the first 400 seconds although drastic changes were noted during the second half of flight simulation when the speed went to an all time low of -8m/s, meaning that during this period there was negative acceleration. This is also the period during which the altitude was drastically falling thereby offering an explanation for the observation above. It is evident that the force of gravity was responsible for what was observed in this instance since the simulator struggled to achieve a zero altitude when the velocity was maintained at a certain level say zero, after which the gravity took effect. Graph 4: A graph of vertical speed against time. Airspeed vs. time The graph of air speed against time was also obtained through application of SI units obtained through a conversion of the initial data. The airspeed was set by the instruction manual at a uniform 100knotts or 51.44 m/s in SI units. The graph shown below however indicates that there were fluctuations from time to time with the highest speed achieved by the simulator being 58 m/s and the lowest being 38 m/s. The graph was characterised by serrated edges which interpret to inconsistencies. It was also noted that unlike the normal flight which is characterised by gradual rise and fall in air speed, there was a sudden rise from zero to 48m/s and a steep decrease from 44m/s to zero. This kind of situation cannot be achieved in an ideal aviation environment. Conclusion The learning outcomes are well achieved through this vigorous flight simulation since the preset course shown above is as per the ‘The Diamond in the Sky’ instructions provided. The graphs are well plotted for the altitude, direction, vertical speed and the airspeed versus time. The observations achieved from the graphs however indicate that there were minor discrepancies in maintaining constant readings on the instruments provided. Further, this is also attributed to the simulation conditions which may not have been perfect during the time of learning. Translation and making sense of the data obtained was relatively easy as most of the graphs obtained were not complex. List of References Allerton, D. (2009) Principles of Flight Simulation, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons. Lee, A.T. (2005) Flight Simulation: Virtual Environments in Aviation, Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Rolfe, J.M. and Staples, K.J. (1997) Flight Simulation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More