Slashdot Mirror
Australian Defence Force Builds $1.7m Linux-Based Flight Simulator
scrubl writes "The Australian Defence Force (ADF) has revealed its latest flight simulator runs on SUSE Linux-based clusters of Opteron servers and uses an open source graphics platform. The Defence Science and Technology Organisation's (DSTO) Air Operations Simulation Centre in Melbourne creates virtual worlds that allow pilots to experience real-world combat situations without leaving the ground. The visuals software was written in OpenGL, using commercial and open source scene graph engines and making 'heavy use of OpenGL Shader Language programs.'"
I want one! Where can I get myself a sweet flight sim like this?! :-o
Or, I could have bought a 6600, like everybody else.
Kangaroos with stinger missiles?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Instead of going with a licensed OS like Windows or VxWorks, they saved tens of dollars. Smart thinking and good use of money in these tough economic times.
It would be nice to see other departments try to realize these types of gains.
I remember what happened last time they built a simulator.
I like flight sims. Only games I still play are Falcon 4.0: Allied Force and X-Plane. But If I'm not mistaken, there a professional version of X-plane that's FAA rated. Why not start there?
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
I used to work for L3 Simulation - one of the biggest suppliers of flight simulation gear around the world. We used massive diskless Linux clusters for making flight simulator graphics systems - and have been doing it for maybe 10 years now. We used our own Linux distro, software written in C++ and using OpenGL for graphics with nVidia graphics cards. Pretty much every F16 pilot out there plus most US helicopter pilots train regularly on Linux-based flight simulators.
On a typical system, we'd either use a helmet-mounted display driven by two PC's or a dodecahedral "Simusphere" display with 9 rear-projected pentagonal panels surrounding the cockpit mockup. Each display would be driven by either 1 or 4 PC's with a hardware gizmo that combined four raster displays into a single video projector.
Additional Linux PC's were used to stream graphics data into the graphics PC's - more were used to draw the HUD and ancilliary displays within the plane.
The machines were diskless - booting from a central server over 1GHz ethernet. The reason for leaving off the disks on the 'slave' machines was to improve reliability. When you have 64 PC's - the reliability of all of those hard drives would result in more frequent failures than we could tolerate.
Neat stuff - but hardly new!
Given that air forces seem to be moving to unmanned drone fighters, it seems silly to build a new flight sim for traditional *pilot* training at this stage. I wonder if it's aimed at training remote drone "pilots" instead.
linux is war
What about class warfare? Is it ok by you if I use free software to fight the evil of global capitalism?
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
What a delight! Where do I order one? "Bandit on your six, Mate!"
The head article says "virtual words that allow pilots to experience real-world combat situations without leaving the ground"...
The new reality is that most combat pilots in the new air forces around the world will be piloting their aircraft from the ground. Far cheaper and far more effective.
This doesn't mean that simulators are not required. Its just that the difference between simulated combat and real combat may be just what screen you are looking at from your flight station.
The Defence Science and Technology Organisation's (DSTO) Air Operations Simulation Centre in Melbourne creates virtual words that allow pilots to experience real-world combat situations without leaving the ground.
I should be paying all of you for my virtual words I'm typing now.
Yes, because remember kids, nothing good has ever come from military funded research. You know, like the internet...
Specialist Mac support for creative pros, Melbourne
> What about class warfare? Is it ok by you if I use free software to fight the
> evil of global capitalism?
Of course. What he really wants is a political correctness clause. After all, what if someone were to use Free Software to design a coal-fired power plant? Develop a strain of genetically-engineered wheat? Design an SUV? Manage a bank? Run a "right-wing" political campaign?
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Screenies or it didn't happen.
I'm a little disappointed the journalists couldn't ask nicely for some in-sim imagery. This thing must be pretty! I presume current generation military flight simulators have amazing detail like volumetric clouds, weather conditions and atmospheric effects that were traditionally the hardest to replicate in the past.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
It's a disgrace for to kernel hackers everywhere to have their knowledge and sweat used to run the machine of war.
War is just another profit-making venture for the rich.
I'll bet you there's at least a few kernel hackers who don't mind a bit..
Yes, because remember kids, nothing good has ever come from military funded research. You know, like the internet...
I agree. The Internet is a horrible place. You should never go there.
we get it already Linux is used everywhere for all sorts of computing needs. Why is this news in 2009?
Does it run lin--
Oh wait.
http://CryoLANparty.com/ A lan I'm staff on!
Not only that but I hear that the simulator in question uses images of dirty hippies as targets for the shooting practice. Disgrace!
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
Flight simulators are good and all, but even the most expensive simulators are missing an important element -- gravity force feedback in some form or another. Not only do the controls need to feed back, but the cockpit should too. And when we are talking about military aircraft operations, that kind of simulation is quite likely impossible without putting the pilot into a centrifuge.
On the other hand, if this simulation system were for training people to control unmanned craft, then it's perfect I should think.
Now as for the $1.7m spent? That is an impressively inexpensive system if it matches or beats those that cost $10m or more.
I suppose it's possible, but seems very unlikely...
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
But software which OpenBSD uses and redistributes must be free to all (be they people or companies) for any purpose they wish to use it, including modification, use, peeing on, or even integration into baby mulching machines or atomic bombs to be dropped on Australia.
--Theo de Raadt
http://www.monkey.org/openbsd/archive/source-changes/0105/msg01243.html
Free means free, not "free only if I approve of what you do/look like/think/etc.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
And if somebody throws you a left hook, you should let them. Better yet, make it really easy on them and just lean into it.
Just because the US turn the word "defence" into doublespeak doesn't mean that Australia shouldn't be able to defend itself if the need arises.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Ok, so how far do you want to take that? If you want to get all bat-shit crazy, one could argue that since our taxes directly fund war then GPL software should not be involved with any commercial entity; this includes use, development, donations, etc. Oops...
"It's a disgrace for to kernel hackers everywhere to have their knowledge and sweat used to run the machine of war.
War is just another profit-making venture for the rich.
Does that mean unquestionably defensive wars are unworthy of support and the only moral thing to do is surrender?
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
"The Defence Science and Technology Organisation's (DSTO) Air Operations Simulation Centre in Melbourne creates virtual words"
The words include whoosh and zoom.
Yes. What on Earth has happened to people to make them imagine that this sort of thing is a good idea?
"Free speech should be restricted to things I agree with." "Free software should only be used for things I approve of."
It's just crazy.
The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
Since X-Plane runs on Linux at this point, I'd have to say spending 1.7m for a Linux flight sim just makes you fucking retarded.
www.x-plane.com
And before anyone says something stupid, its FAA certified for training and used by several aircraft manufactures for training of pilots, certification of their test pilots, and most importantly, design testing.
Hell Bell uses it to train thier pilots on military prototypes that are too expensive to actually put the pilot in and scaled composites uses it to test their designs and train pilots.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
So, does that mean that the Linux community will be getting anything back or is it licenced in a way that we won't be seeing one line of code?
Apparently, the OP is really the President of France...
Here's one! It was a small patch, but yeah...
Well, nothing about wanting to make a particular move towards peace requires that you make every move possible all at once.
i guess it's a slow news day. 1.7 million in development is nothing in the real world.
All I am saying is that it's a slippery slope; if you give an inch then they'll take a mile. Just like religion doesn't belong in government, politics don't belong in a software license. It should be Free for all, not Free for some.
Yes, because remember kids, nothing good has ever come from military funded research. You know, like the internet...
That's backwards.
Just because the side-effects of something are good doesn't mean that the primary effects are good.
In other words, war was used to create the internet, but that doesn't mean the internet should be used to create war.
They didn't use Linux "just because it has zero licensing costs" - they used it because Windows isn't going to give them the real time performance on physics simulations that they wanted, to track every projectile and object within a given area takes power, but also has to be able to give the results instantly.
You can sit back and say "I don't want to help fight a war" but after a certain distance away from the matter things are so fungible it's ridiculous. Practically speaking, the Feds could a) build a simulator on free software with your kernel hacks or b) build a simulator on expensive with Microsoft Windows with a little more overhead, spend more on software and computers, and sending more tax money to our friends the Defense Contractors and Microsoft. And the world is a better place because... it... uh, huh, hmm....
"...and uses an open source graphics platform."
Sanity check: NVIDIA's drivers and hardware are not open source.
I think we absolutely must ban open source software from being used in right wing political campaigns. Having something so poorly managed being associated with Linux could backfire on us. I can already see the Microsoft ads:
"John McCain ran his campaign on open source software. Price of Hardware: $76,000. Price of Software: $0. Total Cost of Ownership: Failure. "
Australia wants to be free.
It's only crazy if he's not infallible.
Much of the cost is probably the computer hardware, and Logitech force feedback joystick.
It will go up as soon as they swap out the Cessna 172 cockpit.
I'm safer when our troops use linux in their gear as opposed to waiting for "WinXP" to crash cuz the enemy waits for nobody.
You talk as if the GPL doesn't already draw a line. The GPL deliberately limits freedom to protect a wider, more important kind of freedom. We limit the use of GPL'd software to hurt people's rights and their liberty. By the same token, I think we should be limiting use of software to physically hurt others. Their software liberty is no use to them, if they're dead.
Whoever modded this troll is an idiot. The GNU site itself discusses this issue as a valid concern.
Huh. I'd be proud I was helping the Australian air force.
Make a license and start using it. Maybe it will catch on. I doubt it, though; I wouldn't use it. Hurting people is often justified, and occasionally the right thing to do.
Useless waste of money, if you ask me .....
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
Are you sure they are dirty hippies or just hippies that look dirty?
must be a slow day..
I for one welcome our (sigh) nnnn never mind
What! Do I look like a people person?
Uh, I'm New Here
Free speech should be restricted to things I agree with." "Free software should only be used for things I approve of.
And when I get elected dictator, that's exactly how it's going to be!
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one less travelled by. (Robert Frost, 1916)
But does it run on Linux?
Can anybody connected to the project comment on which open-source scene graph library was used?
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
> Air Operations Simulation Centre in Melbourne creates virtual words
Vs. those pesky actual words others use?
Tsk.
> > "Kangaroos with stinger missiles?"
Hardly! To quote Wikipedia: "The FIM-92 Stinger is a personal portable infrared homing surface-to-air missile developed in the United States and entered into service in 1981."
How could you postulate arming a 1946 Australian-designed fighter aircraft, the CAC CA-15, (that never went into production) with a Surface-to-Air shoulder-fired Infantry weapon?
( ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC_CA-15 )
Oh, and, "although the CA-15 bore a superficial resemblance to the North American Mustang (P-51), the CAC design was not based directly on the US aircraft and had quite different performance objectives and dimensions . . . The sole prototype did not fly until March 4, 1946.[1] The CA-15's overall performance was clearly superior to existing single-engine, propeller-driven fighters. It was also faster than most first generation jet fighters."
Now, if you really meant the Sidewinder Air-to-Air missle . . . .
(David Bowman, EVA near HUGE Monolithic Win-PC in orbit around Jupiter) "My God - its full of Malware!"
There must be a line to the front door to try that baby out!
Someday we'll hit the human carrying capacity. And the band will just play on.
If you'd read my original comment on this, the problem then is fragmentation of the community.
And if you think hurting people is ever the right thing to do, we have little common understanding to base a discussion on, I'm sad to say, so it's best to just leave it here.
Today's Air-Combat simulators run efficiently on a single Dual-Core Pentium machine with a good graphics card. Military Simulations barely need more than 5% of CPU time these days (disclaimer: I work in the field as a programmer). Why do they need a cluster of machines to run the simulator?
With respect, the gnu tools do not make up a complete system either and most embedded versions of linux have no gnu tools or gnu C library at all. The GPL is a very fine thing but that is not enough to pretend that it is the operating system of Mr Stallman and the other people in gnu that also left some fine tools behind for others to work on so many years ago. IMHO there is no gnu linux until gnu bring out a distribution (which you would perhaps call an OS), after which they can call it whatever they like.
The gnu/linux thing is simply MIT staffroom politics that escaped into the wider world to stop taunting about how HURD was doing. It's the rather tasteless tradition of taking credit for the work of others made even worse by Mr Stallman's years of saying "Linux? Never heard of it" in every interview. Google LiGnuX from when it all started and you'll see just how silly the justification really is and you should find the gnu newsletters that baldly state that it was done to try to raise the public profile of gnu. It's irrelevant now because gnu has gone. We have the FSF which is a purely political body and we have a pile of independant projects. The prefix now is really just there to advertise Mr Stallman's past glory which is pointless since we've all heard of him by now and nobody else cares.
Linux has had an in here for some years now, due to earlier 64 bit support
We were running 64 bit Windows NT on Alpha chips in 1994. When did Linux first provide 64 bit support?
New Flight simulator not compatible with sound. Australia looks to open source community for help. Everyone looks away and ignores them. More news at 11.
And this has been another installament of Captain Obvious!
How is the fact that a flight simular for whatever government's defense is made of Linux and OpenGL news?
You'd have to be completely out of your mind to pick any other solution. Don't tell me in the US they use Microsoft Windows?
Crikey! look at the size of that linux-based cluster of Opteron servers!
Linux is a platform that is used to host a myriad of defense products. 1.7million is chump change compared to many of what is done on Linux. Linux itself is the operating system for a lot of COTS defense products.
Needless to say that Linux is protecting your borders now.
As much as I hate to inject some reality into this slashdot pissing competition... The RAAF contracted Wormalds International to build the F-111C 1993, which they did under Trusted Irix running on various pieces of SGI hardware using OpenGL and some interesting shared memory technologies for low-latency inter-host communications which fundamentally gave them shared memory clustering. It is almost certain that the code-, data- and object-base built for the F-111C sim is being reused here to a very large extent. Using Linux almost certainly facilitates that reuse, irrespective of whatever other attributes it may bring to the table.
The US Navy's sonar and fire control systems are all moving to Linux as well, this is really just another chip in the bag.
Windows just can't handle the data we have to crunch, AND provide real-time like we need(The last thing you want is explorer.exe locking up when you're trying to hit the fire button on your main guns, eh?)