Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:24:18.279Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Converging towards synthetic environment interoperability

Part of: Sustainable Aerospace

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

B. Lalonde
B. Lalonde*
Affiliation:
Common Environment Engineering, CAE, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The evolution of simulators from proprietary hardware platforms to affordable commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) platforms has gone on for the past 15 years and is now nearly complete. Nevertheless, past efforts to standardise simulator synthetic environments (SE) have only been partially successful and have engendered considerable aggravation for users in need of creating content that can be deployed to distributed full-mission simulators. This paper provides a detailed description of the SE generation pipeline and the reasoning that has modeled its evolution over the past few decades. The arrival of digital multi-spectral high-resolution satellite imagery and highly capable visual systems now requires orders of magnitude more storage and processing than equivalent databases just a few years ago. These factors are threatening the equilibrium of the SE pipeline and are becoming important elements affecting SE interoperability, portability and re-usability. Past design trade-offs and compromises, appropriate at the time, must now be re-examined along with all SE-related processes, starting from ingestion of raw source data right through to the processing by the simulator devices. Clearly, greater standardisation is needed within the simulation community and a comprehensive, open SE representation would palliate to the many challenges we now face. To this end, this paper provides a checklist of the characteristics for a future ‘ideal’ SE representation and evaluates four emerging synthetic environment initiatives against this extensive checklist.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 112 , Issue 1129 , March 2008 , pp. 171 - 177
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2008 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Lalonde, B., CDB: Controlling the cost of simulator synthetic environments, 2006, RAeS conference on Cutting Cost in Flight Simulation: Balancing Quality and Capability, Autumn 2006 proceedings.Google Scholar
2. Concept papers in support of the virtual environment development for the synthetic environment core (SECORE) initiative, US Army Program Executive Office Simulation Training and Instrumentation Command (PEOSTRI).Google Scholar
3. Lalonde, B., CDB: The next step in distributed simulation environments, 2006, RAeS conference on Advances in Synthetic Training, Spring 2006 proceedings.Google Scholar
4. Lalonde, B., CDB: A common environment database for realtime simulation, SIMTECT 2005 proceedings.Google Scholar
5. Simons, R. and Lagacé, M., An all encompassing environmental database for networking special operations simulation. IMAGE 2004 conference proceedings.Google Scholar
6. Gourley, S., Mission training preparation systems, http://www.special-operations-technology.com/article.cfm?DocID=749.Google Scholar
7. Tiron, R., Special ops aviators press industry to improve trainers. http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2004/Feb/Special_Ops.htm. Google Scholar
8. Tiron, R., Special operators’ training relies on high-quality images. 2005. http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2005/Feb/Special_Operators_Training.htm.Google Scholar
9. Fuhr, J., The times they are a changin’. http://www.special-operations-technology.com/print_article.cfm?DocID=796.Google Scholar
10. Report: N61339-01-D-0725/0003, G005 common database for realtime simulation, October 2005, published by CAE for United States Army program executive officer for simulation, training and instrumentation (PEO STRI).Google Scholar
11. TIFF rev 6.0 Adobe Developers Association, Adobe Systems, California, USA.Google Scholar
12. OpenFlight scene description database standard, Version 16.0, November 2004, Revision A, MultiGen-Paradigm.Google Scholar
13. ShapeFile technical description, ESRI White Paper, July 1998.Google Scholar