You are on page 1of 16

Development of A Flight Dynamics Engineering Simulator (FDES

at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: An Overview
Shuhaimi Mansor
Assoc. Prof. Head of Aeronautical Engineering Laboratory, PhD, PEng MIEM

Kannan Perumal
Postgraduate Research Student, Airline Pilot

Department of Aeronautical Engineering, Universiti Technologi Malaysia, 81310 Skudai, Johor,

This paper provides a brief history of the development of a PC-based flight dynamics engineering
simulator facility in Department of Aeronautical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM-
FDES). The FDES is a simple, easy to use, flexible and user friendly aircraft simulation through the
implementation of the classical longitudinal and lateral aircraft equations of motion. FDES allows
students to rapidly assess aircraft stability and control parameters and able to give visual
representation of the effect of changing the stability derivatives. Currently it is utilized in the flight
dynamics and control class for demonstration, research and understanding the basic concepts of flight
dynamics, and flying and handling qualities. It has been an effective and efficient teaching and
learning tools of basic principles of aircraft dynamics and flight control systems evaluations in a
relatively short time.

Keywords : Flight Dynamics, Simulation, flying and handling qualities, flight control

1.0 Introduction
Flight simulator is a device that is used to simulate the behaviour of an aircraft in
flight on the ground. The essence of it is in creating an illusion of reality of an
aircraft in flight on ground by which expensive flying time and costs are saved. In
has been widely used in the aerospace and aviation industries for commercial and
military pilot training, test pilot and flight research activities.

PC-based Flight Dynamics Engineering Simulator (FDES) project in UTM started in
mid 1995. The motivation for this project was the need to enhance the teaching and
the learning process of one of the core and most important subject in aeronautical
engineering – Flight Dynamics and Control in a better way. At that point of time the
advances in the computer technology and the low cost programming softwares that
were readily available in the market encouraged for a simple Head-Up-Display
(HUD) simulation. It was also foreseen that such a simple simulator can be used and
will help aeronautical engineering students in UTM in understanding the flight
dynamics and control system design easily help to make the teaching process more
interactive. Few aircraft models were made available with a good numerical and
mathematical model using the aircraft equations of motion built in it to represent the
behaviour of these particular aircrafts. Students were able to fly any of these aircraft
types and appreciate the flying and handling qualities of the aircraft. The project was
developed, built, added to and improved upon through five years as a final year
undergraduate project. Although the accuracy of the flight simulation was not
perfect, but it was un-doubly was a very user friendly and the response was found to
be quite realistic. Figure 1 shows the important elements in the development of

The most usual form of linguistic model encountered in simulation is the mathematical description of the behaviour of a system in terms of a number of equations. Definitions of all these forces and moments components are the key realistic description of an aircraft’s flight characteristics. a model of the system to be simulated. the objective of flight simulation is to reproduce on the ground the behaviour of an aircraft in flight. In research. the mathematical model is primarily the relationship between the air reactions and the motion of the aircraft relative to the air. Figure 2 shows the detail elements of aircraft mathematical model.0 Flight Simulation As its name implies. clear air turbulence and wind shear. The basic structure of flight simulation comprises three parts. Other external forces and moments arise from engine thrust. have all been worked through with the aid of simulators. A mathematical representation of an aircraft and its dynamic response forms the basic model used with the contemporary flight simulators. this can be called aerodynamic model. Flight Control System Keyboard Input Equation of Computer Motion Graphics Output Joystick Input Aerodynamic Variable Stability Database Aircraft Figure 1. The practical value of flight simulation is obvious with the extensive use of the technique in aerospace research and development and by the fact that many flight simulators are in use throughout the world. These are. Solutions to handling problems associated with deep stall. flight simulators allow designers to explore the implication of different design options without having to incur the expense and delay arising from building and testing a range of prototypes. Thus. for training and maintaining the skills of civilian and military aircrew. the flight controls or external (atmospheric) input such as gust and disturbances. Elements of UTM-FDES 2. [1] For a vehicle flying in the air. a device through which the model is implemented and an applications regime in which the first two elements are combined with a technique of usage to satisfy a particular objective. Flight simulation has provided a means of evaluating the likely behaviour and consequences arising from abnormal operating configurations. .

Simple longitudinal equations of motion were used to represent the dynamics of the aircraft. Phase I The project was first started by simulating a simple Head-Up-Display (HUD) displaying a ‘gull’ shape aircraft symbol incorporating the basic speed. The project development was systematically monitored and supervised in order to ensure the success of the project. This function will allow student to experience the flying and handling qualities of different type of aircraft. student will be able to understand how the stability derivatives of the aircraft affect the flying and handling qualities of an aircraft. such as A4D Skyhawk. NAVION. UTM started in mid 1995. HUD is a projection that allows the pilot to take information from the instruments without taking eye-off from the outside scene. Many improvements and new features have been introduced in each project. The first part of it was to integrate the hardware (a contacless joystick) with the software (Turbo Pascal 7 programming). a simple mathematical model for actuator dynamics and control law was included [2]. Convair 880. From there. The simulation is done using the stability and aerodynamic variable of the aircraft itself [7]. it is an inherent flying of the aircraft. The flight simulator was developed and enhanced through five final year students as part of their final year project. Phase II The main concentration of this phase was to improve the aircraft equation of motion by improving the aerodynamic modelling and adding different aircraft type. This technology is widely used in the fighter aircraft. F104-A. Then. Elements of aircraft mathematical model 3. Performance Dynamics Atmosphere Turbulence Engine Environment Ground effect Mathematical Aircraft Wings (rotor) Aerodynamics Pilot Model response Tail Undercarriage Control system Figure 2. Thus. Boeing 747 and Jetstar. There are six aircraft models in the program database to be simulated. altitude and heading information. There are six types of aircraft available in the program database. . The main purpose of this type of simulation is to allow the user to feel the flying and handling of different kind of aircraft [3].0 Project Development The initial development of the first prototype for the flight simulator in the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering.

Rudder input was added to give more realistic response to lateral motions. 30 60 90 60 IAS 300 5000 ALT Figure 3: Dynamics Demonstration Head-Up-Display Phase III The contactless joystick input was replaced to a normal game joystick. Capability to use the keyboard as the inceptor to fly the aircraft was also added. and meshed with the previous Head-Up-Display (HUD) to create a realistic flight simulator (Figure 4). This made the program more users friendly. student can see the effect of aircraft motion when any of the derivatives is changed [4]. This is where the users can fly the aircraft created by their own. There are 20 stability coefficients can be inserted by the user in the interface. Real time simulation was attempted by having a reference to CPU clock speed. This function is only recommended for advanced user who is expected to have understood the aircraft variable stability well. The meaning of created here does not mean a real aircraft is created. The derivatives for longitudinal and lateral are editable and this will result the change of aircraft motion. The second function is the simulation using user-defined variable stability (Figure 5). Several other indicators such as gyroscope and roll and pitch angle were added. The flight dynamics control system was designed to augment the aircraft response. the user could know what would be the outcome towards the aircraft flying qualities if one of the coefficients is modified. Variable stability aircraft model was included to allow user to modify the existing aircraft parameters. Another purpose for this type of simulation is that. Graphics output of the program has been reviewed and improved where the program will run and display HUD graphics with almost the same speed no matter what is the CPU clock speed. this include the simple pitch rate feedback and PI controller pitch rate error as well as roll rate damper. . A Head-Down-Display (HDD) was designed. Improvement on the HUD display itself was made to a more standard form of HUD symbolic (Figure 3). it means the aircraft coefficients and certain dimensions about the aircraft.The computer codes were made to a modular-type for the ease of management and to be more effective. With this.

. The real time simulation was further improved so the program will run at a constant speed regardless of the CPU speed and also the intensity of the graphics [5]. Figure 4. Phase IV A new source code for the joystick input was developed in Pascal to give a better control in setting the environment for the joystick hardware interface. Main simulation screen Figure 5: Variable stability aircraft menu (right menu). modification was done to the program to provide better guidance to guide the student on the handling of the program. At this stage it allowed the study on the short period and the phugoid motion with the integral controller. As the flight simulator was aimed to be a teaching and learning tool. At this stage the simulator was complete with four degrees of freedom using linearized aircraft equation of motion.

proportional controller and rate control was to be conducted. e) Yaw damper control system. Student can choose from the menu for the desired flight control system that to be applied on the aircraft. BEGIN Display type menu Main Menu Inceptor Choice 1 = A4D 2 = F104-A Choice = 1 Choice = 2 Joystick Keyboard 3 = NAVION Main Menu 4 = Convair 880 Aircraft Variable Stability Flight Control 5 = Boeing 747 Database Aircraft System 6 = Jetstar HDD Menu ASI+Altimeter+Turn No Indicator ASI + Altimeter indicator+Heading All Indicator Real Time Press 1 Help Start Simulation Simulation Press 2 Press Esc Press 3 Choice = 5 Choice = 4 Choice = 6 Choice = 2 Simulation Center Choice = 3 Choice = 1 Choice = 7 END Figure 6: Earlier FDES main program flow chart . There are six flight control systems where student can choose to evaluate. At the same time. student may also alter the stability of the aircraft by inserting suitable values for the control gain. d) Roll rate damper control system. The third function is the simulation using flight control system. They are: a) Simple pitch rate damper. f) Spiral stabilization. c) Roll angle control system. damping ratio and natural frequency. b) Pitch rate damper using PI controller. At this stage a complete FDES main program flow chart has been developed shows in Figure 6.

Previous version of Flight Dynamics Engineering Simulator was programmed using Turbo Pascal language. q vs t 120 Solid line – Simulator 100 Dashed line – MATLAB 80 60 q (deg/s ec ) 40 20 0 -20 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Tim e (s ec ) Figure 7: Pitch rate response for A4-D Skyhawk using Euler’s Method. however since it was interfaced in the DOS mode. For that purpose. The symbology. The equations of motion was reviewed and improved to include more detailed derivatives to obtain a better solution. The theory values were obtained from calculation using MATLAB (Figure 7 and 8). colouring and finer details of the presentation were emphasized. input and output were also corrected. Visual Basic has been chosen as the programming language to develop the new version of FDES. For example. The initial Euler solution was replaced to be more accurate using the Rungga-Kutta numerical solutions. such as C++. Delphi and etc. editor and library manager. it is the time now for our Flight Dynamics Engineering Simulator to move towards the windows environment.0 is a powerful. In the previous program. . and the program is in the DOS environment. To verify the accuracy of the simulation. Java.04s. Euler’s Method is used to solve the aircraft mathematical model. Some inaccuracies in the equations of motion. a comparison between simulation results and theory using MATLAB was carried out. integrated applications development software package that includes a compiler. Beside that the graphics was further enhanced to look more realistic with actual aircraft. the simulation of the roll motion is found to be stable but the steady state oscillating periodically with ±25 deg/sec was not giving the desired output. in the previous programs. Although there are other more powerful software to develop windows program. there are certain limitations and difficulties when running a program in DOS compared to the windows environment. Finally a more user friendly graphic User Interface (GUI) was created for the aircraft selection and input and output of various parameters. Testing was done to compare the output values obtained from the program with the theory values. there was some limitation in the program handling. Visual C++. numerical solution. Therefore. but Visual Basic has provided enough tools to develop the FDES.Phase V Although Turbo Pascal 7. time step 0. which believed will be more user friendly and easier handling. This was rectified by reprogramming the simulation using Visual Basic. Thus.

it is assumed that the motions of the aircraft consist of small deviations about a steady flight condition. depends on the requirement of the user. it yields sufficient accuracy for practical engineering purposes. Initially the Euler’s numerical method was used. There are several numerical analysis methods that can be used such as Euler’s. (b) 0.01s time step for Euler’s Method 4. Solid line – Simulator Dashed line – MATLAB Figure 8: Comparison of roll rate output using (a) 0. The general equation given by Euler’s Method is: y1 = y 0 + hf 0 (2. Runge-Kutta. All these methods are varying in accuracy. Although this theory cannot be applied to problems in large amplitude of motion. Milne’s. complexity and error produced.0 Aircraft Equations of Motion and Numerical Solution The equations of motion used in the FDES are a set of linearized equation derived using the small perturbation theory.1s.2) ⎢Δr& ⎥ ⎢ β ⎥ ⎢ Δ ⎥ Δδ 0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ δa N δr ⎥ ⎣ r ⎦ r N ⎢ ⎥ ⎢N β Np Nr ⎢⎣Δφ& ⎥⎦ ⎢ Δφ ⎢ 0 ⎥ ⎣ 0 1 0 0 ⎥⎦ ⎣ ⎦ ⎢⎣ 0 ⎥⎦ Numerical method was used to perform the task of integrating the first order differential equation and produce the desired output.3) . The simplicity the equations of motion can be separated into two groups - Longitudinal motion and lateral motion with appropriate assumptions in the form of state space equation without coupling between the both longitudinal and lateral derivatives [7]. Longitudinal motion: ⎡Δu& ⎤ ⎡ X u Xw 0 − g ⎤ ⎡Δu ⎤ ⎡ X δe ⎤ ⎢Δw& ⎥ ⎢ ⎢ ⎥ = ⎢ Zu Zw u0 0 ⎥⎥ ⎢⎢Δw⎥⎥ ⎢⎢ Z δe ⎥⎥ ⎢Δq& ⎥ ⎢ 0 + [Δδ e ] (2. In applying the small perturbation theory. Hamming’s [6].04s and (c) 0.1) Mw Mq 0 ⎥ ⎢Δq ⎥ ⎢ M δe ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢⎣Δθ& ⎥⎦ ⎣ 0 0 1 0 ⎦ ⎣Δθ ⎦ ⎣ 0 ⎦ Lateral motion: ⎡Y Yp ⎛ Y ⎞ g cos θ 0 ⎤ ⎡ Yδr ⎤ ⎡Δβ& ⎤ ⎢ β − ⎜⎜1 − r ⎟⎟ ⎥ ⎡Δβ ⎤ 0 ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ u0 u0 ⎝ u0 ⎠ u 0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ ⎢⎢ u0 ⎥ ⎥ ⎡Δδ ⎤ ⎢Δp& ⎥ = ⎢ L Lp Lr Δp 0 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ + ⎢ δa L Lδr ⎥ ⎢ a ⎥ (2.

a 43 = 8 8 1 3 a51 = . a 52 = 0 .1 + h ⋅ a 43 ⋅ k u . c2 = .3 = X u ⋅ (u 0 + h ⋅ a31 ⋅ k u .6) θ = θ 0 + q0 ⋅ dt (2.5) ( q = q 0 + M w w0 + M q q0 + M δeδe ⋅ dt ) (2. k u .1 ) − g ⋅ (θ o + h ⋅ a 21 ⋅ kθ .1 ) + X w ⋅ (wo + h ⋅ a 21 ⋅ k w. dt used in the simulation.8) ( p = p0 + Lβ β 0 + L p p 0 + Lr r0 + Lδa δa + Lδr δr ⋅ dt ) (2. 2 ) − g ⋅ (θ o + h ⋅ a31 ⋅ kθ .10) φ = φ 0 + p 0 ⋅ dt (2.1 = X u ⋅ u 0 + X w ⋅ wo − g ⋅ θ o k u .3 ) + X w ⋅ (wo + h ⋅ a 41 ⋅ k u . 2 ) + X w ⋅ (wo + h ⋅ a31 ⋅ k u . a 32 = 6 6 1 3 a 41 = .7) Lateral motion: β = β 0 + [(Yβ / u 0 )β 0 + (Y p / u 0 ) p0 − (1 − (Yr / u 0 ) )r0 + (g cos θ 0 / u 0 )φ0 + (Yδr δr / u 0 )]⋅ dt (2.14) ⎝ j =1 ⎠ 1 a 21 = 3 1 1 a31 = . c4 = . a 42 = 0 .1 ) k u . b4 = . a54 = 2 2 2 1 2 1 b1 = . Longitudinal motion: u = u 0 + ( X u u 0 + X w w0 − gθ 0 ) ⋅ dt (2.1 + h ⋅ a32 ⋅ kθ . 2 ) k u .1 + h ⋅ a32 ⋅ k u . a53 = − .3 ) . c5 = 1 3 3 2 h = time step Since the mathematical model for each variable is too complex to be displayed here.1s. u is shown. b5 = 6 3 6 1 1 1 c1 = 0 . only the formulation for forward speed. 4 = X u ⋅ (u 0 + h ⋅ a 41 ⋅ k u . or the integral of time. c3 = .where h is the constant step size.13) where k i = f ⎛⎜ t n + ci h.1 + h ⋅ a 43 ⋅ k w.12) Euler’s method was later replaced by the use 5-stage 4th order Explicit Runge-Kutta- Mason Method to obtain better accuracy with a times step of 0. The 5-stage 4th order Explicit Runge-Kutta-Mason Method employs the recurrence formula of the form: 5 yn +1 = yn + h ∑ bi k i i =1 or y n +1 = y n + hb1 k1 + hb2 k 2 + hb3 k 3 + hb4 k 4 + hb5 k 5 (2. 2 = X u ⋅ (u 0 + h ⋅ a 21 ⋅ k u . b2 = 0 .4) w = w0 + (Z u u 0 + Z w w0 + u 0 q 0 + Z δeδe ) ⋅ dt (2. y n + h ∑ aij k j ⎞⎟ 5 (2.1 + h ⋅ a32 ⋅ k w.11) ψ = ψ 0 + r0 ⋅ dt (2. b3 = 0 .9) ( r = r0 + N β β 0 + N p p 0 + N r r0 + N δa δa + N δr δr ⋅ dt ) (2.

.5 (roll angle) r = ro + hb1 k r .1 + h ⋅ a 43 ⋅ kθ . For higher accuracy (real time). 2 + hb3 k β .5 = X u ⋅ (u 0 + h ⋅ a51 ⋅ k u .5 (pitch rate) θ = θ o + hb1 kθ .1 + hb2 k p . 4 + hb5 kψ .. − g ⋅ (θ o + h ⋅ a 41 ⋅ kθ .1 + hb2 k r . 2 + hb3 k q.5 (pitch angle) β = β o + hb1k β .3 + hb4 k β .3 + h ⋅ a54 ⋅ kθ .3 + hb4 k p .1 + hb2 kθ .2618 rad .5 (yaw rate) ψ = ψ o + hb1kψ . 2 + hb3 kφ ..5 (roll rate) φ = φo + hb1kφ .04s and input 00.5 Other variables are: w = wo + hb1k w. Time step of 0..1 + h ⋅ a53 ⋅ k w.1s using the Rungga-Kutta method was found to give better accuracy the 0.1 + h ⋅ a53 ⋅ kθ . 4 ) + X w ⋅ (wo + h ⋅ a 51 ⋅ k u . Figure 10 and 11 show the effect of numerical solutions and time steps on simulation results. 4 ) − g ⋅ (θ o + h ⋅ a51 ⋅ kθ .3 + hb4 k u . 4 + hb5 kφ ..1 + hb2 k β .04s using the Euler method.3 + hb4 k r . 4 + hb5 k r .3 + hb4 k q .1 + hb2 k w.1 + hb2 k q . smaller time step should be used.5 (yaw angle) 5.3 + hb4 k w. 4 + hb5 k q . 4 + hb5 kθ .3 + h ⋅ a54 ⋅ k w.. 2 + hb3 k p .0 Accuracy of Simulation and Time Step The execution times and accuracies are the two main important factors in the flight simulator.3 + hb4 kψ . 4 ) u = u o + hb1k u . 4 + hb5 k u .. 2 + hb3 k w.1 + hb2 kφ . Solid line – Simulator Dashed line – MATLAB Figure 10: Comparison of roll rate between Runga-Kutta 4th and 5th order for time step 0.3 + h ⋅ a54 ⋅ k u .1 + hb2 kψ .3 + hb4 kθ . 4 + hb5 k p . 2 + hb3 k u . 4 + hb5 k β .. 2 + hb3 kψ .5 (vertical speed) q = q o + hb1 k q .. 2 + hb3 k r .5 (side-slip angle) p = p o + hb1k p . As such a good compromise between both is required.1 + h ⋅ a53 ⋅ k u . however this reduces the execution time.3 + hb4 kφ . 2 + hb3 kθ .3 ) k u .1 + hb2 k u . They directly affects the performance FDES. 4 + hb5 k w.

p vs t (RK 5. \ Table 5.3 333 .1 and 5. t100 (second in count for 100s (second in real time) simulation simulation time. tim e step 0. time) (100/ts) Euler RK5 0.04 2500 7. Table 5.1: Comparison of execution time for different numerical method and time step to obtain 100s simulation time. ts Number of loop Execution time for 100s simulation time. this will require more execution time because the smaller the time step is used. 3. Time Step. But.40 0. tim e step 0.1s) p vs t (RK 5. 1. The conflict between the time step used and the accuracy of the simulation require some trade-off for optimum simulation result.5s) 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6 8 10 Figure 11: Comparison of roll rate response using Runge-Kutta 5th order for various time step and input 00. if high accuracy is desired in the simulation.2 500 . tim e step 0. To obtain the real time simulation.65 0.1 1000 . 1.2s) 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6 p vs t (RK 5. higher time step is required in order to control the total program execution time. smaller time step should be used.2618 rad.91 5. tim e step 0. the more time required to perform the same load of calculation. As a conclusion for the discussion on the execution times and accuracies.2 summarized the execution time for different numerical method and time step.17 0.05 .3s) p vs t (RK 5.

Yaw Damper (frmVarMach) (frmMain) 6. user is able to record the output of the simulation so that the response of the stability and control which relates to the flying handling qualities of different aircraft can be analysed.0 Current Status To extend flight simulator’s function further as an engineering analysis tool.003164 0. 0. Set input value Sim Option Keys Help 2. Roll Rate Damper END 5. ts Execution time for one loop [ t100 / number of loop ] (second in (second in real time) simulation time) Euler RK5 0.2: Comparison of one loop execution time for different numerical method and time step Time Step. Pitch Rate Feedback (Simple) View Calculated Variable 2.1 . Spiral Mode Stabilization Select Simulation Type User-Defined Flight Control Selected Aircraft Variables System (frmActype) (frmVar) (frmFcs) Analysis Tool (frmAnalysis) Main Simulation Screen (frmHUD) Option 1. START Advanced Variable Editing (frmVarAdv) Splash Screen Type of FCS (frmSplash) 1.002068 0.04 0.003153 6. Table 5. This is achieved by preparing a data recording function during the simulation. 0.3 . Preset Input (frmOption) (frmHelp1) 3.0034 0. 0. Pitch Rate Feedback (frmVarView) (P+I Controller) 3.0033 0. HUD Mode Figure 9: Improved FDES main program flow chart . Roll Angle Control Calculate IAS & Mach Main Menu 4.2 .

Figure 13 FDES program shows option to select type of simulation and fly with different types of aircraft.The user interface played an important role for the user to interact with the flight simulator program. The new user interface is developed using Visual Basic Programming. The important criteria is that it has to be easy to use and user friendly. With the windows environment. the FDES becomes more user-friendly. Figure 13 to 16 show the current status and the capability of the FDES program which show the important feature such as type of simulation. selection of aircraft and head-up display. and option to save simulation data for analysis. . Thus. which allows program handling in windows environment. the simulator has to have a good guidance for the user on the program handling. as a learning tool.

. Figure 15 Selection of flight control system design.Figure 14 Calculation of natural frequency. damping ratio and time constant as a function of aerodynamic stability and control derivatives.

interesting and fun. The synergistic learning potential has improved due to more of hands-on experience with FDES and the ease of use has made the course easier to teach. This simple . where the initial speed is defined as well as the altitude is defined as sea level.0 Conclusion It was concluded that PC-based flight simulation can be a valuable tool for illustrating flight dynamics to aeronautical students and can be challenging. include automatic flight control system in the future FDES.0 Future Development The suggestions for the future development of FDES are as follows: a) Engineering accuracy: Since the aircraft model of FDES is derived using Small Perturbation Theory. complementing the classical and modern classroom theories. d) Improve the graphics further to represent the actual aircraft display. the simulator is only accurate for low or small amplitude of flying performance. the simulation is done at steady and level flight. e) Further improvement on the real time simulation. inclusion of thrust and atmospheric effects. With automatic FCS. At the same time. For this. 8. Figure 16 Latest cockpit and HUD display 7. c) The interface and analysis for flight control system need to be improved to a more user friendly one. At the same time. non-linear equations of motion need to be developed. b) Addition of non-linear full six degree of freedom (6 DOF) simulation for higher amplitude of motion. user can perform more analysis on the dynamics of aircraft. If possible. that is less than 15 degrees.

1999. ψ . HUD . r . [6] Ahmad A. Dimensional force derivatives of y-axis due to change in β. (Aero). Staples K J. Dimensional moment derivatives of z-axis due to change in β. References [1] Rolfe J M. Ixy Iyz Ixz . y. Mech. 1998. 1997. Moment of inertia about x. Mech. Mech. “Computer Graphic Display of Aircraft Head Up Display (HUD)”. Mech. p. Dimensional moment derivatives of y-axis due to change in w. Federal Aviation Administration ALT . [4] Ling J W C. δe δa δr . Rolling. Utot . yz and xz axis. (Aero). “PC-Based Flight Dynamics Engineering Simulato”. Initial flight airspeed. r. C. Angular rate of x.v. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. q and δr Zu Zw Zδε . Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Thesis B. 2nd Edition. (Aero). Eng. δa and δr Mw Mq Mδe . g .FDES also serves as a motivation and a starting point for the UTM ambition of a full-scale flight simulator to serve as an engineering. Yβ Yp Yr Yδr . “Development of Nonlinear Flight Dynamic Simulation”. φ.w . r. (Aero). Roll (bank).. Airspeed about x. p. Acceleration due to gravity. “Aerodynamic Database for Flight Simulator”. aileron and rudder). [2] Perumal K. Xu Xw . z axis.(Aero). p. y and z axis directions. 2001. Eng. Eng. Eng. “Application and Modification of Flight Simulator Software”. “Flight Stability and Automatic Control”. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Thesis B. 1999. Dimensional force derivatives of x-axis due to change in u and w velocities. [7] Nelson. θ. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Thesis B. Altitute IAS . Mech. u. y and z axis. 1996. Eng. [8] Chua Y Ch. [3] Yaacob A F. Singapore: McGraw-Hill Book Co. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Thesis B. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Thesis B. LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS x. z . “Flight Control System Design Using PC-Based Flight Simulator”. Dimensional force derivatives of z-axis due to change in u. Pitching and Yawing axis. δa and δr Ix Iy Iz . q. Product of inertia about xy. 1986. 1998. q and δe Nβ Np Nr Nδa Nδr . Control surface angles (elevator. Mech. Dimensional moment derivatives of x-axis due to change in β. w and δe Lβ Lp Lr Lδa Lδr . R. Pitch and Yaw (azimuth) angles. “Flight Simulation”. research and instructional tool. Eng. (Aero). Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Thesis B. Indicated Airspeed . p. [5] Srinivas B K. y. Head-Up Display FAA .