Slashdot Mirror
Swedish Flight Simulator Adds G Forces
jonerik writes "According to this article in Aviation Week and Space Technology, Sweden's Dynamic Flight Simulator (DFS) is believed to be the first flight simulator which actually allows fighter pilots to experience G forces under simulated conditions. Designed and built by California-based Wyle Laboratories, the DFS is essentially a flight simulator capsule (in this case for Sweden's JAS 39 Gripen fighter) located at the end of a 30-foot centrifuge arm. 'We wanted to give pilots the ability to "fly" and interact with the environment rather than just be a passive [centrifuge] rider,' said Will Roberts, program manager for Wyle Laboratories' DFS programs. 'We've come a long way in being able to translate the six degrees-of-freedom you get in an aircraft into the three degrees-of-freedom that we can control in a centrifuge. It's not perfect, but we think it's pretty good. There's room for more research to make it even better.'"
No poor standards as far as we know (specifically), but the US has always made a point to make advances in training. Early on there were the T-38 trainers. Eventually the Navy started the whole TOP GUN program. The Air Force has it's advanced facilities out in Dreamland. Much of the military training programs were started to meet a specific goal, but some were simply because the advance was possible.
If you can effectively train a pilot to handle the effects of G-forces in a cockpit-like environment before sending them up in a multi-million dollar (and potentially classified) plane (with added liability, potential for damage), moreso the better.
It's also interesting that this is getting investigated from a security perspective, as the possibility of foreign nationals being trained inside our our jets becomes a larger concern. Publicity on longer "grounded" training could discourage moles/spies from enrolling in the programs, knowing in advance that they wouldn't be granted access to real equipment.
Nothing but the finest in meaningless drivel
Attention! Runs MS Windows! High crashability!
Sounds like they took what Disney created for its new ride at Epcot and made it interactive.
sPh
What is it exactly that the Swedish use these fighters for? [..] I'm just thinking that I can't recall hearing in recent memory of a Swedish border conflict, or a Swedish peace-keeping force.
That's because there weren't any. They're that good.
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
The Gripen is, like it's predecessor Viggen, designed to take-off and land on normal country roads. I guess that photo was taken during an exercise.
The majority of fighters are single seaters with no room to bring along an instructor.
Given the cost of modern fighter aircraft, I'd much prefer my tax dollars pay for a couple of simulators you can crash again and again.
You could always rotate the "cockpit" so that it is actually moving backwards... the person inside would not perceive their backwards motion, only the acceleration, which would then match your left turn.
IIRC, the Swedish military has focused on drastic technological improvements so that they can become a faster, leaner, more efficient fighting force, making them useful as a member of international military efforts.
Their military is very small, but they want it to be very very good so that it can be of some use around the world. It's not for border defense (although I'm sure it'd help there too).
There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
Sweden was a big power back in the 15th-17th centuries, then the rise of Russia stole thier thunder.
In the Second World War they got really spooked by the Russian invasion of Finland and ramped up thier aviation industry by licensing German designs, then British designs and tossing that in with home-grown technology while making a profit from selling raw materials and arms to both sides.
In the Cold War Sweden took a slightly pro-western approach but was openly neutral, and thats when thier aerospace industry really took off.
They had a series of 3 great fighters from the 50s to the 80s with the J35A Draken, J32B Lansen and JA37 Viggen.
During the Post-War/Cold-War era the Swedes also bought American and British aircraft, araments and technology.
The current fighter the Swedes are building is the Gripen, there have been foriegn sales - Switzerland and South Africa IIRC and Saab Aerospace has been bought by British Aerospace recently.
The Gripen is less "home-grown" that previous Swedish fighters
Flight control system, product series 1, Lear Astronics, USA
Flight control system, product series 2, Martin Marietta, USA
Basic engine F404, General Electric, USA
Air conditioning control, Hymatic Engineering,UK
Landing gear, AP Precision Hydraulics,UK
APU and engine start aggregator, Microturbo, France
Emergency power and transfer, Lucas Aerospace, UK
Inertia navigation, Honeywell, USA
Cannon, Mauser-Werke, Germany
Ejection seat, Martin Baker, UK
Main generator, Sundstrand, USA
Hydraulic system and transfer, Dowty, UK
Brakes, Aircraft Breaking Systems, USA
Fuel system, Intertechnique, France
Sidewinder AIM-9 AAM, USA
AMRAAM AIM-120 AAM, USA
http://www.sci.fi/~fta/sweden4.htm
What is it exactly that the Swedish use these fighters for?
:-)
If you believe Saab's advertising, the Gripen was the prototype for their new sports car
Sweden takes part of peace-keeping missions all the time, mostly under U.N. flag, but they also have troops in Kosovo; I believe in the British sector.
Although it may not be that recent, Sweden did have a long-standing maritime border conflict with the USSR, during which Soviet MiG fighters would violate Swedish airspace on a regular basis. JAS 39 Gripen was designed in part to make sure that the RSAF would be able to outfly the Soviets. A little obsolete right now, though, especially since those areas are now the Baltic countries with which Sweden has excellent relations.
The end of the Cold War definitely has put the role of the traditional Swedish military in question. The threat of an invasion is currently zero, and the only realistic way that could change would be a major and very sudden change in Russia. This is also true of NATO; I personally suspect that we'll see a major realignment of the role of NATO, the EU defence force (WEU), and the neutral countries (Sweden, Finland, Austria and Ireland) within the next decade.
It is roughly the same as an F-16(multi-role) but from what I've heard, its faster especially at sea-level. I've heard that the F-16 is only good for about 550 knots at sealevel fully loaded. The grippen was built for climbing and acceleration. Also, with its front canards (sp?) it lands at a steep angle (like its landing on a carrier) as opposed to a "flare" landing.
Hooo Son! This'uns a Hawg!
Well, maybe it looks a bit like an f16 because it's single-engine.
It's supposed to be able to do all 3 traditional airplane roles (Fighter, Attack, Reconnaissance), but the emphasis is on air superiority.
It's light, quick and very modern (actualy the most advanced aircraft in service anywhere in the world right now, since the F-22 and EF2000 are not in service yet).
Who knows? ;)
Gripen is simply Swedish for The Griffin.
Hm, I always thought that "G-force" was just a way of measuring the force created by the acceleration (something about f = ma) by comparing it to gravity. So a force equal to twice that of gravity would give you 2 G's - what exactly is the problem?
sic transit gloria mundi
USAF Tech Report
Envy my 5 digit Slashdot User ID!
actualy the most advanced aircraft in service anywhere in the world right now, since the F-22 and EF2000 are not in service yet
I thought that spot was taken by the Rafale...
Maybe we deserve this world ?
Um, on the page http://www.kuka-roboter.de/robocoaster/english/dat en.html, it lists the device's features, including:
"Microsoft Windows operating system"
Am I the only one that this would worry? I mean, the BSOD could become literal, or to a lesser extreme, a "hang" could get boring / nauseating.
actually, if you go traveling in the woods of smaland you'll notice that everyone km or soo there is a flat space out in the wood.. thats because when they land the aircraft in the middle of nowhere they use those flats to park the plane one..
;)
i guess ill have to watch out for the swedish security police for revealing this now
Acceleration is not a force...
You are right, acceleration is not a force. It is what happens to an object when it is acted upon by some force. However for simplicity's sake, the term "One Gee" is used to describe the force of Gravity on earth. The apparent "Force" encountered when acceleration meets inertia is also described using these same units of measurement.
To the average person, there need not be any difference. To physicists, maybe; but not for "Joe Six-pack".
-- This space for rent.
Depending on what the orientation is of the pilot with respect to the gravitational force AND what the visual system in the cockpit is showing him he can basically feel any linear acceleration in any direction. The problem is that the cockpit has to be gimbaled and the rotation must be slow enough so that the pilot does not notich it as a "false cue" (= something he should not feel). Another problem is that you can only vary the centryfugal force so fast, hence the large motors to accelerate and slwo down the centrifuge.
An interesting solution is in one of the other posts (see this post of DESDEMONA).
Infinite was a bad choice of words, but the energy required is still much much greater. There are two kinds of friction, sliding friction and static friction. The coefficient of sliding friction is lower than that of static friction. Static friction contributes more to overall friction because the surfaces in contact are partly bonded together by molecular forces. However, since this bonding isn't instantaneous, surfaces that are moving don't end up bonding together as strongly. So to get something moving you have to overcome static friction and then just keep pouring in a much smaller amount of energy to continue to overcome the sliding friction.
It appears Ockham lost his razor and grew a beard.