Level D Simulator Data Production - *snip*

reply to post by backinblack

How can they, they keep getting banned..

"they" have had "their" say. About a hundred times, over and over and over and over....ad infinitum, with no alteration, and each instance blatantly "plugging" (American slang for advertising) "their" own website.

As far as I've seen they have been the polite and civil posters.

And, abusing the privelege of membership here.

THINK about that...don't discuss it, think about it....

Originally posted by turbofan

Most people don't understand that the same guts are in the simulator as the real aircraft. Therefore the
same outputs are produced.

There is NO WAY of telling the difference.

Your claim is a double-edged sword. If, as you claim, that the Level D Simulator can accurately generate all the necessary and correct flight parameters in a simulation event and then record those parameters to a CD-ROM for submission as fake “AA 77” flight data, then you must also agree that a real aircraft could, then, fly that exact same flight profile.

If that Level D simulation is indeed as accurate as you claim – and I have no reason to believe they are not – and it would not let a specific or group of flight parameter occur if indeed it could not occur in a real and actual flight, then a stock off-the-production line 757 could indeed fly that profile.

If you maintain this position, then any claim of “impossible” with regards to the flight path and ultimate impact of American 77 goes out the window.

As things stand right now, you have nothing but a theory backed up by a complete absence of proof of occurring. Saying that something *could* happen, as you are here, while failing to provide any proof that it *did* happen is about as un-credible as anything can be, but is true to form for the Truther crowd who specialize in creating theories without proof but based on nothing but their blind ignorance and bias.

The fact that American 77 slammed into the west facade of the Pentagon is supported by flight data recorder data, radar data, eyewitnesses, DNA, bodies, damage, aircraft wreckage and any and every other indicator you or anyone would care to come up with.

If someone did "over-write" data on a flight recorder chip, it can be detected, and the original data can be "extracted" unless the chip was "erased" or "shredded," and that can be detected, as well. There are more ways to "fix" data, and even more ways to find-out if data has been "fixed."

If the same government or private sector is involved in all areas of any investigation and wishes to do this, then why even have transparency or FOIA requests? In this case, transparency is an "illusion," where "realities" can be reverse-engineered and manipulated to suit the views of any party to maintain control of information.

Dog eat dog.

reply to post by trebor451


(just) One more problem for turbofan....

If, as you claim, that the Level D Simulator can accurately generate all the necessary and correct flight parameters in a simulation event ...

Besides the numerous other things that do NOT exist, except in real world, and recorded as such (and not in the same way, in all cases, comparing simulator/airplane)...the biggest fallacy in this "fake data" claim is that a simulator does not have an accelerometer.

Unlike the real airplane.

The acceleration readings are plotted in the NTSB Report. There is no capacity in a simulator for the forward deceleration off-scale as shown in the data.

As shown in other examples, simulators either just "fly through" any "obstacles"....when the crash "logic" is inhibitted. Or, they 'freeze' in a "crash" scenario....

Originally posted by weedwhackerBesides the numerous other things that do NOT exist, except in real world, and recorded as such (and not in the same way, in all cases, comparing simulator/airplane)...the biggest fallacy in this "fake data" claim is that a simulator does not have an accelerometer.

Unlike the real airplane.

YES IT DOES. THE ACCELEROMETER DATA IS EMULATED JUST LIKE FUEL, LANDING GEAR,
ENGINE RPM, ETC. ETC.

Weed for crying out loud, how the hell does your PFD in the simulator report fuel level and landing gear
position and ALTITUDE if the damn box never leaves the ground?!



How many times to keep avoiding this fact?

The data frame from the sim. MUST BE EXACT as the real world jet. You cannot have bits and words missing
from the data frame or it will not work.

Trebor, the simulator has logic than can be switched off (crash logic, and stress logic I believe are the terms) that will allow
you to fly the simulator outside the design limits, and/or allow & avoid crashes with other objects.

IF anyone has a problem with these points, type out a damn question word for word and I will call a sim company and record the conversation.

NOBODY has done this yet, but they continue to talk out of their butts.

Type out a question, or just get over it.

reply to post by weedwhacker

And, abusing the privelege of membership here.

THINK about that...don't discuss it, think about it....

Many members post links to other website..
I haven't seen them promoting it, merely linking to it for information..

As for spamming the same stuff, I also so many others do that who are still members..
Nothing you have said warrants a ban..
But then I will never know the whys.....

reply to post by turbofan


reply to post by turbofan


It is??

YES IT DOES. THE ACCELEROMETER DATA IS EMULATED JUST LIKE FUEL, LANDING GEAR,
ENGINE RPM, ETC. ETC.

SHOW us then. That you can answer this next question:

What, exactly, provides the acceleration data? Which devices? AND, most importantly, on the real airplane, WHY?

And......just how would a simulator "emulate" the off-scale deceleration value seen on the American 77 FDR??



As I said, in a SIM...."...crash" logic can be disabled....so, "impact" with solid objects won't affect the "flight". You just keep "flying". The simulator WILL NOT "simulate" a "real" crash scenario, either. Such as, breaking apart while being scattered across the landscape. If it senses a “crash” (usually, with the “ground”), it just freezes....this protects the hydraulic actuators from possible damage....they have limits, built in, that if allowed to be exceeded would maybe break something, in the support struts, or the pistons and valves, etc. AND< if things get too far out of hand, the instructor/SIM operator has a “freeze” button too. This “freezes” all visual simulation, inside and “outside”...and the device, when viewed from the exterior of the unit, slowly relaxes and settles back to its default “ready” motion-on position, on its struts.

They have a “powered down” state, which is what they are in when the loading bridge is lowered....then, after the bridge raises, they “power up”, get up on the hydraulics, and are then ready to “rock and roll”.


The ONLY possible "G-force" value it will calculate would be in the form of positive Gs....say, if you wanted to see an estimate of what the real airplane may have experienced after a hard landing....the computer just uses mathematics of vertical velocity at the time, and will calculate Gs that way. (I presume such a feature may exist...though never saw an instructor pull any such thing up...just surmising it may be a feature...>shrug

reply to post by weedwhacker

As I said, in a SIM...."...crash" logic can be disabled....so, "impact" with solid objects won't affect the "flight". You just keep "flying". The simulator WILL NOT "simulate" a "real" crash scenario, either. Such as, breaking apart while being scattered across the landscape. If it senses a “crash” (usually, with the “ground”), it just freezes....this protects the hydraulic actuators from possible damage....they have limits, built in, that if allowed to be exceeded would maybe break something, in the support struts, or the pistons and valves, etc. AND< if things get too far out of hand, the instructor/SIM operator has a “freeze” button too. This “freezes” all visual simulation, inside and “outside”...and the device, when viewed from the exterior of the unit, slowly relaxes and settles back to its default “ready” motion-on position, on its struts.

But they can turn off motion without effecting the readings..
In fact you are the one that mentioned that when talking about re enacting the crash...

Originally posted by weedwhacker

YES IT DOES. THE ACCELEROMETER DATA IS EMULATED JUST LIKE FUEL, LANDING GEAR,
ENGINE RPM, ETC. ETC.

What, exactly, provides the acceleration data?

A computer program.

Which devices?

A computer program

A AND, most importantly, on the real airplane, WHY?

Hmmm...perhaps to compute the stress limits and inform the pilot(s)?! Inertial Navigation? Redundant system
in case of main system failure. Hmmm, anything else? Certainly there must be?

And......just how would a simulator "emulate" the off-scale deceleration value seen on the American 77 FDR??

A computer program.

The same way the same electronics produce a limited deceleration value in the real airplane.

Would you like me to write a program that illustrates this?

Gee Weedy, if the simulator never leaves the ground how can it show 30,000 ft of altitude in the simulator?

Do you know that the simulator doesn't have an altimeter...you do know that if it did have a pressure Alt, or
Rad alt. it would measure the local pressure in the room, and the distance to the floor...and that's it right?

Well Weedy, let me tell you that several sensors are emulated like I keep expaining to you over, and over
and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over...but you keep making excuses.

Now if I don't talk to an actual flight sim tech., it's not good enough huh? How about I try to call a flight sim
manufacturer and speak to an engineer. Is that good enough? Yes, or no?

To answer your question with a very simple illustration, I will show how acclerometer data is produced by
emulation using a computer program.

Well , let's see...since the altitude is emulated by a computer it will produce an altitude and display it on
the PFD. That same data will get recorded.

So let's say the first instance of altitude showing is 1,032 feet and one second later you descend to 1,000 feet.

At that rate you have moved 32 feet per second.

That equates to ~32.174 ft/s^2, or approx. 1 g!

So the computer needs two variables to memorize these atltitude values and uses a program (formula) to compute
the force.

Let's say varirable one is y1 and variable to is y2 to represent the change in vertical accel.

Let's make gy the output variable which stores the difference of the vertical accel measurements.

The computer formula would appear to be something like this:

gy = G (y1*y2)/(d^2)

(don't quote me on the formula, it's just an example. I'm not sure if Earth's gravity is accounted for,
nor am I sure if the units need to be converted from meters to feet. THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE).

Would you like me to issue an example in Excel? C#? Visual Basic? Other?

Once you get it through your head that a majority of the sensors are emulated in a simulator and that the
sim is grounded and doesn't really fly up 30,000 feet you will hopefully begin to understand what emulation means.

Now, please don't reply without answering and providing the following:

- Would you like me to phone/e-mail a level D sim manufacturer and speak to an engineer, or would
speaking to a tech at the sim school be sufficient for our needs?

- Which out those several questions in your previous reply would you like to formulate into a question(s) for
the nice people to answer when I e-mail/phone?

Note: I'm done repeating myself to you and anyone else. We're going to call a professional sim. company
and end this crap. Provide a well thought out question so that there's
NO CHANCE OF AMBIGUITY

Originally posted by turbofan
Trebor, the simulator has logic than can be switched off (crash logic, and stress logic I believe are the terms) that will allow
you to fly the simulator outside the design limits, and/or allow & avoid crashes with other objects.

That begs the question...if the "crash logic" and "stress logic" was "switched off (I love how you just run through these terms like you know what you are talking about), how did the program generate the "crash" deceleration data that was found in the FDR?

If you claim it was simply added by hand, this has gone from merely humorous to downright hysterical.

So here's a question for your "Sim Engineer" phonecall/email...if "crash logic" is turned off and the aircraft can fly through or not be affected by any flight parameter that otherwise would not be allowed to occur in a Level D Simulation (impact with ground, building, excessive speed, excessive G, etc), how are accelerometer readings of ( LATERAL ACCELERATION (G's) and LONGITUDINAL ACCEL (G's)) -0.564g and -1.083g (the max the value the FDR can record) with the plane registering a radio altitude of 4 feet (putting the plane about 10 - 15 feet off the ground) recorded - ALL if the "crash logic" was turned off? According to your theory (make sure you explain to him what YOUR theory is with this and why you want a specific answer), none of that should have been recorded.

reply to post by trebor451


Actually, I do know what I'm talking about. I communicate with check-airmen that operate the level D sims.

Even your buddy Weedy called it crash logic ... so I guess I just made up the term huh?



YOu should know there is a different between the stress logic and crash logic. If the crash logic is still enabled,
the crash data terminates the flight when the simulator sense an impact with an object.

Here's a screen shot from a simulator to give you a clue...yes, it's just a game but it highlights the ability
of the program to enable one, or the other ...or both...just like the LEVEL D SIM!!!!!!!!!!!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1bfb34e3edb2.jpg[/atsimg]

Shall I take down your question and ask it then "trebor"?

P.S. I love how you think I don't think I know what I'm talking about

Originally posted by turbofan


Shall I take down your question and ask it then "trebor"?

P.S. I love how you think I don't think I know what I'm talking about

Fine with me "turbofan". Make sure you tell the Sim dude what you are after, "turbofan" - that you want to prove that *every piece of data* from a specific flight on a Level D simulator can be transferred to a CD-ROM in a format that mimics *exactly* the data taken from an actual Flight Data Recorder.

Then you can ask him how, if crash or stress logic is turned off, the aforementioned max-high readings were generated at the termination of the flight when the aircraft would have flown through any impossible flight-ending maneuver or event.

Then you can ask him how, if crash or stress logic is turned on, how the aircraft managed to fly such a profile if it indeed was too fast or too low or exceeded the g limits or should have departed controlled flight as the the idiot P4T clowns claim.

Then you can ask him why the crash "g" data would even be generated in the first place on a simulator when they is no need to track that level of data.

If you knew what you were talking about you won't be calling Simulator engineers now would you, "turbofan"?

And make sure you ask him, since you know what you are talking about, and assuming the person you contact is a real engineer and not some salesman, why programmers would build into a simulation something - specifically crash data to the degree of multi-decimal-place acceleration data - that is of no use whatsoever to the intended use of the simulator? Ask him what it would cost - simulation engineers love to talk cost - to build in useless data generators, "turbofan".

reply to post by turbofan

Note: I'm done repeating myself to you and anyone else. We're going to call a professional sim. company
and end this crap. Provide a well thought out question so that there's
NO CHANCE OF AMBIGUITY

I have a question you can ask the simulator dude, Turbo.

Dear Mr. Simulator Expert, did you see a 757 fly over the Pentagon? Because no one else sure as hell did.

Originally posted by trebor451
Fine with me "turbofan". Make sure you tell the Sim dude what you are after, "turbofan" - that you want to prove that *every piece of data* from a specific flight on a Level D simulator can be transferred to a CD-ROM in a format that mimics *exactly* the data taken from an actual Flight Data Recorder.

Gee, that's simple. Transferring data from EEPROM to a CD. Should be an easy thing to answer...
too bad you can't figure it out for yourself.

Maybe do a simple test on your own? Copy a song from your USB/MP3 player and transfer it to CD.

Does the song sound the same, or is it missing a few words?

Then you can ask him how, if crash or stress logic is turned off, the aforementioned max-high readings were generated at the termination of the flight when the aircraft would have flown through any impossible flight-ending maneuver or event.

Easy, as I already explained...and you didn't understand, the stress logic is different from the crash logic.

That means, if I turn off the stress logic I can fly the aircraft over its design limits but if I hit an object, the
aircraft crashes.

Easy enough?

Wow, two questions answered and I haven't called anyone yet!

Then you can ask him how, if crash or stress logic is turned on, how the aircraft managed to fly such a profile if it indeed was too fast or too low or exceeded the g limits or should have departed controlled flight as the the idiot P4T clowns claim.

See above. Learn the difference between stress and crashing.

Three questions, no phone call.

Then you can ask him why the crash "g" data would even be generated in the first place on a simulator when they is no need to track that level of data.

Wrong. There is a need. As explained earlier and you didn't understand.


All words and bits of a data frame must be accounted for. The level D sim uses the same avionics as an
aircraft. That means the same data is output from the avoinics.

Since all sensors and systems are emulated, the avionics will output the same data as the real aircraft.

That means the g forces will be calculated via computer program and sent out the data stream.

If you knew what you were talking about you won't be calling Simulator engineers now would you, "turbofan"?

edit on 25-1-2011 by trebor451 because: (no reason given)

If you knew what you were talking abuot you would have understood the prior points and not asked these
questions.

Also note, I haven't called a sim company and I"ve answered all of your questions.

Thanks.

This is what I'd call, "checkmate" for those that were too lazy to perform their own research and question
the ability for a flight simulator to produce data like the real aircraft.

You wlll notice the bold and underlined text which states these simulators can accept data from flight
recorders of the real aircraft and upload the information to replay in the sim and even use a training
to recreate the environment.

Sorry Weedy, Alfie and Trebor. You're wrong, and I've done more than my part to prove it.

Source:

www.ainonline.com...

SOQA is similar to CAE’s corporate flight operational quality assurance (C-FOQA) program, which uses real-world flight operations data for accident ­analysis and training. The company is offering C-FOQA services through its Flightscape and SimuFlite divisions. Flightscape experts can take FOQA data downloaded from aircraft data recorders and generate animations that show the flight in deep detail for debriefings, or use the data to power a simulator training session.

Some links to show the detail that goes into certifying a Level D simulator. Even the sounds heard in the cockpit
area for engines, and call-outs, etc. require certification.

videos.howstuffworks.com...

wapedia.mobi...