3 ms·

Does anyone have any reading material on how the simulators work? Do they run the same computer hardware as actual aircraft, or is it all simulated? If it's sim

by fyfy18 7y ago

Does anyone have any reading material on how the simulators work? Do they run the same computer hardware as actual aircraft, or is it all simulated? If it's simulated, how do they avoid the issue of a bug not being present in the simulator?

jrockway 7y ago
I don't think the simulator is designed to QA test the airplane. It's only for training pilots, and pilots are only trained on procedures that airlines deem worth training for. This is things like engine failures at inopportune moments, stall recovery, etc. The idea is not to simulate the outcome of strange circumstances, but to get pilots comfortable with procedures. So if there is some bug, it doesn't matter -- if you're training pilots to take off after v1* is called out and an engine fails at that exact moment, the instructor is not looking to see that "hey we applied the brakes and the airplane stopped OK with light rain and 3 knots of wind", they are looking to see that the pilot continues the takeoff anyway and doesn't try to stop on the runway. The pass condition is following procedure, not "well that's not the procedure but it looks like everyone lived anyway". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_speeds#V1_definitions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_speeds#V1_definitions The various data that feeds into training procedures comes from actually flying the real airplane.
- superbrane 7y ago
  Since the planes become more software dependent, the pilots should be trained on procedures to recognize/evaluate/react to software problems/glitches as well. The problems with the B-MAX were actually related to bad software (MCAS). There is probably some delay between how pilots are training and the importance of software in their job.
  - HPsquared 7y ago
    I think, functionally speaking, a software failure is no different to that of hardware-based control / instrumentation systems (think of all the odd behaviour that could be caused by a short circuit or a bad connection somewhere in the wiring). The difference is that software systems tend to be more complex, and failures are in theory less random and more systematic - it's more a case of stepping on an unlikely combination of inputs (i.e. a bug that occurs in an untested corner-case) than encountering a random component failure which is more likely the case for a hardware system. Edit: actually I suppose I just made your point
bdavis__ 7y ago
same software as in the airplane. sometimes the same hardware, also.
jakobegger 7y ago
I asked the same question a week ago and got some great answers: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22032891 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22032891 TLDR: There are many different types of simulators.

by fyfy18 7y ago

jrockway 7y ago

I don't think the simulator is designed to QA test the airplane. It's only for training pilots, and pilots are only trained on procedures that airlines deem worth training for. This is things like engine failures at inopportune moments, stall recovery, etc. The idea is not to simulate the outcome of strange circumstances, but to get pilots comfortable with procedures. So if there is some bug, it doesn't matter -- if you're training pilots to take off after v1* is called out and an engine fails at that exact moment, the instructor is not looking to see that "hey we applied the brakes and the airplane stopped OK with light rain and 3 knots of wind", they are looking to see that the pilot continues the takeoff anyway and doesn't try to stop on the runway. The pass condition is following procedure, not "well that's not the procedure but it looks like everyone lived anyway". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_speeds#V1_definitions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_speeds#V1_definitions The various data that feeds into training procedures comes from actually flying the real airplane.

superbrane 7y ago
Since the planes become more software dependent, the pilots should be trained on procedures to recognize/evaluate/react to software problems/glitches as well. The problems with the B-MAX were actually related to bad software (MCAS). There is probably some delay between how pilots are training and the importance of software in their job.
- HPsquared 7y ago
  I think, functionally speaking, a software failure is no different to that of hardware-based control / instrumentation systems (think of all the odd behaviour that could be caused by a short circuit or a bad connection somewhere in the wiring). The difference is that software systems tend to be more complex, and failures are in theory less random and more systematic - it's more a case of stepping on an unlikely combination of inputs (i.e. a bug that occurs in an untested corner-case) than encountering a random component failure which is more likely the case for a hardware system. Edit: actually I suppose I just made your point

bdavis__ 7y ago

same software as in the airplane. sometimes the same hardware, also.

jakobegger 7y ago

I asked the same question a week ago and got some great answers: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22032891 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22032891 TLDR: There are many different types of simulators.