[simpits-tech] Fed up with MS etc... Maybe New Sim

[Chris Brace]

Well, this is now a good idea, only one problem for me (well its not
really a problem) I have already done this and created my own toolset!

For the past couple of years we have been developing just such a system.
Its what I call a "systems emulator".
We have built three versions over that time, starting with VB, then
Delphi but the last iteraton was written in C# (C Sharp).
We call it the "Opifex Simulation toolset" or "Opifex" for short,  and
while it not completely finished it certainly works well for what we
designed it for (aicraft systems emulation)

One of the fundamental design strategies was to be hardware and software
independent so that Opifex doesn’t care what simulation package or
interfacing hardware you want to talk to. Currently we have it talking
to MSFS and are working on an interface module for Xplane now. Basically
all messaging to and from h/w and s/w is encaputalted and produces an
interface to the internal engine, this way the system doesn't know (or
care) what it is plugged into or what simulation its talking to, it just
get messages from various interfaces that are destined to be processed
in some way and then handed on to other interfaces.

Over the course of development it became quite obvious to us that what
we had created could be used to build and emulate system for practically
anything device or system we wanted. For example we could configure and
make an emulator for a microwave oven!, better yet plug in some off the
shelf hardware for switches, knobs, displays etc, and once running it
would emulate what the oven does. It’s a simple principle and it works
well. 
Obviously still some things to work on but in all we are pleased with
progress to date.

Cheers
Chris.


-----Original Message-----
From: simpits-tech-bounces at simpits.org
[mailto:simpits-tech-bounces at simpits.org] On Behalf Of Manuel Bessler
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 10:50 AM
To: Simulator Cockpit tech list
Subject: Re: [simpits-tech] Fed up with MS etc... Maybe New Sim


On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 11:41:01 -0600
Phoenix2000 at phoenixcomm.net wrote:
> >The point "can't talk to it" is definately not valid for FlightGear. 
> >There are a bunch of methods to get data in and out of the simulator.
> >
> >While flightgear is "monolythic" in the sense that everything is 
> >compiled into the main binary, it can be used sort of "modular".
> 
> Not Not Realy


> >the individual modules. This additional layer of communications would

> >slow the whole thing down.

OK, maybe I understood you wrong... I thought you meant the whole
simulator as individual modules. What you write below sounds more like
you meant to modularize the "systems simulation only".

On that I totally agree. I was planning on writing some code for an
external system simulation (for homecockpit sim use). 
... when I'm "done" with my hardware and interface software.

For the purposes of simulating aircraft systems (electrical, pneumatic,
hydraulic, and the whole logics behind them) it'd be great to run this
outside the actual flight simulator engine.

The simulator would fill in the part of "the real world" and its forces
and stuff, like 3D inside/outside views, winds, and forces/physics of
the environment acting upon the aircraft.


> 1. No Not At all when I worked on the X-29, cockpit integration, we 
> were doing 50/60hz frame rates, and that my friend was along time ago.

> 2. Jets have been fly around by fly by wire for more than a few years,

> and have been using mil-1553 which runs at 1mb. or AIRINC-429. etc 3. 
> The bus structure for the 777 etc. is AFDX Switched Ethernet. You just

> send / listen for UDP messages. not a problem for 10baseT (thats 10x 
> over 1553/429), you want faster 100baseT, or Fiber.
> 4. and the advantage that you did not see is that you dont like a
> module? Take it out, replace it with software, or hardware.

OK, so if I'm right, all you want could be written to use flighgear as
the 3D view and physics simulation, while all systems can be written as
external modules. There are alot of interfaces into flightgear, and
another one can be written easily.

Of course if things are kept somewhat indepentent, the systems
simulation software modules could be plugged in to another simulator.


> >Writing a new sim from scratch, even with lots of stuff already 
> >adaptable (fgfs scenery, simgear library, a few fdms) is still a huge

> >task and will most likely involve years of work.
> 
> maybe but most likely I'll have the first cut, up in a few months. (we
> 
> write a lot of code in C/C++/FORTRAN/Perl/and a little Java), and it 
> would just be the core modules, Pilot, FD, INS, NAV. we are working on

> the message format right now, and message viewer..

What platform are you doing this on ?
Unix/Linux ?

Will it be free software/open source ?


Regards,
Manuel
_______________________________________________
Simpits-tech mailing list
Simpits-tech at simpits.org
http://www.simpits.org/mailman/listinfo/simpits-tech
To unsubscribe, please see the instructions at the bottom of the above
page.  Thanks!

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.2 - Release Date: 1/21/2005
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.2 - Release Date: 1/21/2005