Scientific standards regarding the accuracy of aircraft models

[Samuro75]

For my Master’s thesis, I need flight data from simulations, and the question my professor has raised is whether the aircraft models I am using have been verified as being capable of withstanding scientific scrutiny in terms of their aerodynamic properties.
Is there a list of aircraft that meet scientific standards for accuracy or have already been used in relevant academic papers? Alternatively, can I tell from the comments in the models which ones are suitable for my purpose?

[seanmcleod70]

@Samuro75 what sort of flight simulations, with what sorts of aircraft types, do you need to perform?

[Samuro75]

The flight simulations I am planning involve straight-and-level flight, where an autopilot controls the aircraft, maintaining the setpoint for heading, altitude, speed and attitude, under realistic/semirealistic wind simulations.
These requirements stem from the simulation of photogrammetric survey flights.
These flights are normally carried out using aircraft such as the C172, C208, DA62, King Air 200 or similar.

[bcoconni]

The usual procedure to assess the accuracy of models is to compare them against test data and show that they reasonably match.

For the purpose of your thesis, either you get actual data about the survey flights (altitude velocity, throttle position, trimming of ailerons, elevator and governor) or you use published performance data of the aircraft that are available on the internet.

[seanmcleod70]

As @bcoconni mentioned, first prize would be a model that has been compared to real test data.

So here is one example. A report from NASA which details the aircraft model used to develop a 747 simulator for NASA by Boeing, which includes documentation of responses of the simulator compared to flight test data for specific test conditions and inputs.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19730001300

The Simulation of a Jumbo Jet Transport Aircraft. Volume 2: Modeling Data
The manned simulation of a large transport aircraft is described. Aircraft and systems data necessary to implement the mathematical model described in Volume I and a discussion of how these data are used in model are presented. The results of the real-time computations in the NASA Ames Research Center Flight Simulator for Advanced Aircraft are shown and compared to flight test data and to the results obtained in a training simulator known to be satisfactory.

Now it turns out that @Gijsrooy has taken this report, mostly graphs of aerodynamic stability coefficients etc. and generated a JSBSim based model of it.

https://github.com/Gijsrooy/747-400

Although he has modified bits of it to try and model a 747-400 instead of the original 747-100 that Boeing/NASA did, see -
Gijsrooy/747-400#1

In the ideal case you would be able to take his JSBSim model and run the same test cases and compare the simulation response to the response traces in the original report to ensure that in converting the report graphs etc. into a JSBSim model no mistakes were made, excluding the differences regarding the 747-400 vs 747-100.

I mention this because I happened to pick up two discrepancies a while ago, see:

Gijsrooy/747-400#3
Gijsrooy/747-400#2

So maybe you should tweak your thesis to develop an autopilot for the 747 with photogrammetric sensors instead of a C-172 😉

If a major part of your thesis involves the effect of wind and turbulence on your autopilot implementation then ideally you would have flight test data for the aircraft type with recorded wind and turbulence. Otherwise you may end up with a flight model that matches fairly well in terms of trim points (including climbs/descents etc.) but doesn't have an accurate model of the dynamic response of the aircraft, e.g. Cm-q, Cm-alphadot.

Chances are probably pretty slim that you'll come across flight test data with wind/turbulence, but ideally you'd find data for dynamic maneuvers, e.g. pitch doublets etc. so that you can be confident that stability coefficients like Cm-q, Cm-alphadot etc. are accurate enough to model the aircraft's dynamic response.

or have already been used in relevant academic papers?

I'd be surprised whether any or all FDMs referenced in academic papers get peer reviewed in terms of the FDM.