Australian Defence Force Builds $1.7m Linux-Based Flight Simulator 232
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.'"
Kangaroos (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Prior art [imdb.com] I think. Though the Snopes article [snopes.com] is funnier.
It's pretty much a given that they saved money (Score:5, Funny)
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.
Re:It's pretty much a given that they saved money (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Which is why the cost savings on running Linux is funny.
Did you not hear the whoosh go by your head?
Spend millions of dollars on a project, and do stupid things like cut corners that save you statistically irrelevant amounts of money on the project and result in a far more difficult to support product.
And before someone starts screaming about how its better because its OSS, when you do a project like this, even Microsoft will give you source in order to get their name stamped on it.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Spend millions of dollars on a project, and do stupid things like cut corners that save you statistically irrelevant amounts of money on the project and result in a far more difficult to support product.
Agreed that in a project that size the direct cost of the operating system will be relatively small.
But there are many indirect costs resulting from the choice of operating system. There may be better or less expensive development tools available for Linux versus Windows. There may be more or better or less expensive graphics/rendering libraries and other software available for Linux as opposed to Windows. It may be that the software for turning a pile of Linux boxes into a rendering farm is free or less ex
Re:It's pretty much a given that they saved money (Score:4, Informative)
It may be that the software for turning a pile of Linux boxes into a rendering farm is free or less expensive or more efficient than the equivalent for Windows.
Indeed. It's not a coincidence that only 5 of Top500's list [top500.org] are pure Windows environments.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There may be more or better or less expensive graphics/rendering libraries and other software available for Linux as opposed to Windows. It may be that the software for turning a pile of Linux boxes into a rendering farm is free or less expensive or more efficient than the equivalent for Windows.
I remember the keynote to the Queensland TechEd 2007 where they showed the some 600,000 rendered penguins (no, not Tux) in one scene for the animated film Happy Feet. Then I remembered the producer saying the render farm was several thousand Windows boxes running NT4. This in 2007, mind you.
Then I thought -- there's no way Microsoft would have known about the licenses for those thousands of servers, they were so old, and that many would have crippled their budget ...
So there you have it. The state of the
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It's pretty much a given that they saved money (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft has twice before refused to give the source code for Windows for Warships to the Australian Navy, what makes you think the RAAF will have any more luck. The US govt will block this as they have fears that this will be leaked to the soviets (throwback to some 1960's paranoia when Australia was being blamed for intel leaks caused by a CIA double agent)
How, the chair is not just a copy of MS Flight simulator X on a big screen, it's a hydraulic control system that needs to make precise movements in real time to correspond with input, Windows cant even control a mechanical lathe with millimetre accuracy, that's why DOS is still popular in the assembly line. Besides the RAAF's biggest cost isn't in software or hardware, its in operational costs. To achieve similar results using Windows (.net and what not) you need to use more powerful HW, increasing the amount of power it needs, cooling requirements and above all else, maintenance. Windows breaks more often then Linux, so the RAAF would need to spend more time on maintenance with a windows based system.
The RAAF would have evaluated all the options, Windows simply could not perform the job the RAAF asked of it. No corners were cut here. This didn't save "statistically irrelevant amounts of money", the project provided a machine that fits the specifications detailed by the RAAF.
Re: (Score:2)
Instead of going with a licensed OS like Windows...
They had to, Microsoft canned Flight Sim. Though I know of a load of unemployed guys who have some experience in writing this kind of software :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sweet! A flight simulator. Now all they need is an air force! Now we know what they are saving money for!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What makes you think price is why they chose open source? People that are doing high performance computing and visualization are almost exclusively linux. Microsoft has been trying to give it away to those people for years with little success.
Anyway, your comment was funny and worth a mod up, just wanted to point out that if they really wanted to save money they could have cut a deal with microsoft. I've seen how far they're willing to go to buy a customer in this market.
Re: (Score:2)
Industrial Light & Magic (ILM) been using Linux for workstations and rendering farms for years. They said running the apps on linux ran 5 times faster than SGI workstation with the same spec'd hardware! The computer generated special effects on Pirates of the Caribbean were done almost entirely in linux.
Here is a nice write up article about it... http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6011 [linuxjournal.com]
Re:It's pretty much a given that they saved money (Score:4, Informative)
Linux has had an in here for some years now, due to earlier 64 bit support, and better/earlier support for large numbers of files in a directory. I work for a division of a fortune 500 that does datamining/text mining. Windows lost us in about 2004 for these two reasons, and there hasn't been any reason to go back. Cost wasn't the original reason, but cost keeps us from changing. $800 a machine adds up when you are looking at dozens or hundreds of rendering/compute servers. Linux has also proven to be easier for command and control of the jobs. The one thing that I long for is the full featured user identification/authentication support that Active Directory has.
Re: (Score:2)
Nowhere in the article did they mention that the price of O/S licensing was a consideration.
Considering the boffins at DSTO have been using Unix variants for many years for this type of work I doubt that they would have chosen Windows for this even if it were free.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Deja Vu! (Score:5, Funny)
X-plane pro? (Score:2)
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?
Not really news. (Score:5, Interesting)
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!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Not really news. (Score:4, Informative)
Very cool, thanks! I was really impressed until you said "1GHz ethernet". That seems... unlikely =D
He was probably mixing up his terms when referring to gigabit ether [wikipedia.org]. It's not the fastest thing on the block, but it's still pretty nippy (and definitely beats what most people have deployed to desktop level) and the faster options (notably Infiniband) tend to only be used in specialist applications like tightly-coupled supercomputers.
Re: (Score:2)
Most people have gigabit at the desktop now, its been standard for the last few years on desktop PCs
Re: (Score:2)
Most people have gigabit at the desktop now, its been standard for the last few years on desktop PCs
That doesn't mean anything if you've not got a gigabit switch at the other end. And even if you've got that fancy switch, if your connection to the outside world is like most peoples', you'll only be able to use that bandwidth locally. Great for LAN parties, but not much point otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
So everybody should only have 1.5Mbit ethernet, because T1 speeds are some kind of standard outside the LAN?
Gig switches aren't fancy. The last one I bought was $50 and supported jumbo frames.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is ... gigabit ethernet ... which is rather common, can you even buy a computer without it now?
Re:Not really news. (Score:5, Funny)
And it can make the Kessel run in 12 parsecs.
Re: (Score:2)
The machines were diskless - booting from a central server over 1GHz ethernet
You mean 1 Gbps Ethernet, right?
Re: (Score:2)
No. Because "When you have 64 PC his (hyphen) the reliability of all of those hard drives would result in more frequent failures than we could tolerate." :P
Re: (Score:2)
Quick, explain the difference.
Simulating what, exactly? (Score:2, Interesting)
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.
Re:Simulating what, exactly? (Score:4, Insightful)
There's still a lot of work for human pilots, and there probably will be for at least another generation. The first UAVs that can handle manned-aircraft combat tasks are just now being deployed, and in many ways they're Not There Yet. Are you suggesting that air forces should stop training pilots now on the assumption that drones will take up the slack?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There's still a lot of work for human pilots, and there probably will be for at least another generation. The first UAVs that can handle manned-aircraft combat tasks are just now being deployed, and in many ways they're Not There Yet. Are you suggesting that air forces should stop training pilots now on the assumption that drones will take up the slack?
It's also worth mentioning that current-generation UAVs like the Predator are fully human-controlled by remote.
Related, interesting link: http://www.military.com/news/article/human-error-cited-in-most-uav-crashes.html [military.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Simulating what, exactly? (Score:4, Informative)
Actually we'll be retiring the F-111 next year. We will have a mix of Hornets, Super Hornets and JSF for some time, though.
Re:Simulating what, exactly? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
An immersive simulation environment will be quite useful when UAS sensors evolve sufficient to give an immersive operator environment.
One of the objections to UAS is that the "stovepipe" situational awareness is limiting. Increased operator situational awareness can improve safety as well as combat effectiveness. Instead of being a "scope dope", a UAS operator in an immersive environment could employ their system much more like a manned aircraft.
Re: (Score:2)
Sign Me Up! (Score:2)
Screenshots pls (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
The article that Slashot links to has an image on the top right corner of the page. It looks like something rendered in-game. Look at it, come back and tell me how it went.
Re:Screenshots pls (Score:4, Interesting)
Screenshots? How about a torrent!
Okay (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because it's damn cool, that's why.
Re: (Score:2)
Simple - the year of the desktop has been promised for god-knows how long and still hasn't taken hold in significant numbers, so some people need reassurance that Linux is being used in other areas to justify their faith in the platform.
The real question... (Score:2, Funny)
Does it run lin--
Oh wait.
$1.7m is dirt cheap! but missing something (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:$1.7m is dirt cheap! but missing something (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Military and commercial flight simulators do have gravity force feedback. They are mounted on a hydraulic platform so that whe
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
I'm aware of these rather expensive simulators, but they don't simulate 100% of g-forces in the most natural way. I've been in the one at the Mississippi Naval Air Station. It's cool but it feels like a simulator. You simply don't get the g-forces that you would in real jet flight.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
so when do you think we'll see the source? (Score:2)
I suppose it's possible, but seems very unlikely...
Re: (Score:2)
well in full accordance with the GPL the packet with the manual has the source dvd included
Too stupid to buy a copy of X-Plane eh? (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
Well there you go, if Hell Bell is using it, then people who are not are just fools!
But, not to insult your obviously incredible intellect ( judging from your scornful post ), ever thought that maybe ( just *maybe* ) X-Plane doesnt fit their needs exactly?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I must have missed the part on the x-plane website that shows how it can 'allow pilots to experience real-world combat situations' and 'is also configurable, which allows the evaluation of "novel systems and concepts"'
And where does it say that the AUD 1.7M is on software?
FTFA: Linux for real-time scheduling (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Re:FTFA: Linux for real-time scheduling (Score:4, Insightful)
Care to back that up at all? It's ridiculous that think that just about any modern platform can't carry out real time flight combat simulations.
NT doesn't have a realtime mode unless you buy one as a third party product. It is unquestionable that timer resolution &c are superior on Linux as compared to the NT that Microsoft will provide you. Sure, you can get realtime performance from NT, but you have to spend still more money on top of your client licenses, and your client access licenses...
It sounds like given what they wanted to accomplish, there were no advantages to using Windows, and numerous obvious drawbacks.
Free! (Score:2)
Yeah, but can it run HALO2? (Score:2)
Useless waste of money, if you ask me .....
Re:I want one! (Score:5, Informative)
I want one! Where can I get myself a sweet flight sim like this?! :-o
In the Australian Defense Force?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
In the Australian Defense Force?
No in the Australian Defence Force
Re:I want one! (Score:4, Informative)
Even their website is defence.gov.au [defence.gov.au]...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That's an Americanism. We're talking about Australia. The summary even spells it Defence
Did you not see the WOOOOSH?
Re: (Score:2)
*ironic woosh*
Re: (Score:2)
Since when is your deliberate miscorrection of spelling deserving of a wHooosh? Oh, and yeah. its wHoosh, not woosh...
You must be new here...
Re: (Score:2)
/me looks at the UIDs
Uh, you must be new here...
Re: (Score:2)
/me looks at the UIDs
Uh, you must be new here...
/me looks at your sig... You must be Australian mate...
Re: (Score:2)
But does it run Linux?
Re: (Score:2)
But does it run Linux?
Maybe you should RTFA or just assume no...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey fatty - you fail it.
Ahhh no son, apparently you should become An Hero...
Re: (Score:2)
I see you've discovered 4chan. How is it? I haven't been there in about 3 years.
I prefer 7chan....
Re:I want one! (Score:5, Funny)
sudo apt-get install oz-flight-simulator
Re: (Score:2)
www.x-plane.com
Costs a lot less and has far more testing and time put into it as well.
Re:I want one! (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not at all familiar with X-Plane? but is the FAA-certified version already used in science & industry (i.e. by NASA, Boeing, the NTSB, etc.)? In other words, is it accurate enough to actually simulate meaningful training exercises, like certain types of mechanical/electrical/software malfunctions? Can it accurately simulate jet wash, wind shear, microbursts, etc.? I've seen the multi-million-dolar flight simulators used by NASA and major aerospace companies. They seem to be a lot more robust that anything that could be run on a desktop PC. So I'm just wondering if X-Plane is actually of sufficient quality to be useful for something like crash investigation or military training.
Also, the website mentions extensibility and being able to "hack" the software to do more. Would the military be able to customize the software to add combat training capabilities a military flight sim would no doubt need? A military flight simulator probably has some very specific requirements that you aren't going to find in a consumer product. I'm guessing they probably chose to develop their own flight sim because either it's cheaper than licensing commercial solutions, or there are no available flight sims that fit their need. The short-term costs might be higher, but they would have full control of the source code and be able to tailor it to their specific needs (like integration with classified military systems).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The flight simulator pictured was built for the Royal New Zealand Air Force as a P-3 Orion Flight Training Device.
It runs x-plane. Austin Meyers (the author of x-plane) worked with Fidelity Flight Simulation to add unique features required.
I was the acceptance test engineer.
Re: (Score:2)
What about class warfare? Is it ok by you if I use free software to fight the evil of global capitalism?
Re:OOS should never be used for war (Score:5, Insightful)
> 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?
Re:OOS should never be used for war (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:OOS should never be used for war (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, because remember kids, nothing good has ever come from military funded research. You know, like the internet...
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you sure they are dirty hippies or just hippies that look dirty?
Use OpenBSD instead (Score:2)
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 [monkey.org]
Free means free, not "free only if I approve of what you do/look like/think/etc.
Re: (Score:2)
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 [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
"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?
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Whoever modded this troll is an idiot. The GNU site itself discusses this issue as a valid concern.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, nothing about wanting to make a particular move towards peace requires that you make every move possible all at once.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)