Couple of questions about P3D?

[AWACS 12]

As I understand P3D is an aviation training tool.  In fact from what I have read it is specifically not for entertainment purposes.  That's fine I need good sim training especially for instrument stuff.  I am wondering though, if this software is for real-world training why is the navdata the same as FSX?  If I wanted to go and practice some GPS approaches at my local airport, apparently I'm not able to do so, because everything is out of date?  When I first heard that P3D was coming out, I got excited because I thought that it would be kept up-to-date, but from what I have heard that is not that case.  Can someone expand on this a bit, I am a little confused.  Thanks!

[hesynergy 67]

If you're serious about navigation then you need a serious plane with good nav equipment most importantly, serious data for those nav aids i.e. Navigraph ....subscribe.

 

Chas

[TheHoser11 39]

http://aero.sors.fr/

[vgbaron 3,508]

Correct - the built in navdata is old but there are several exceptional payware aircraft that support Navdata with the current Airac cycles.

 

 

Vic

[twojastara 85]

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, because I am not using Navigraph (only read about it), but AFAIK it doesn't update airspaces and it doesn't update in-game GPS.

It only updates flight data in navigation computers for some payware aircrafts.

 

Lukasz

[vgbaron 3,508]

Lukasz - that is correct. The in sim GPS will not be accurate so you must fly the a/c that support Navigraph cycles.

 

Vic

[AWACS 12]

Thanks for the replies, I actually brought this question over to the official P3D forums, because I think that instead of asking users why LM didn't put something into it that they should have, I should ask them directly.

 

Ultimately, I think it's wrong in a way for them to not only say that their product is for real-world training, but to go as far as saying that P3D is strictly not for entertainment purposes and then go and leave out something completely necessary to real-world flight training.  I guess for the price, I will stick with FSX, if P3D was like $100 dollars or something, sure why not upgrade, but I can't justify $200 and have the same old data as FSX.

 

Thanks all,

[vgbaron 3,508]

Obviously it's your $$ and your call but, IMHO, you are making a mountain out of a molehill. I have been setting up online IFR flights for a group for several years now and I rarely run into completely outdated data. A few but not that many. Would the data be accurate at a specific airport that you want? Maybe - maybe not but I just think you are making excuses.

 

Most a/c that you might want to train in are payware (for accuracy) and I'd bet that most of them also support the airac cycle.

 

If you want to get P3D - don't let the navdata stop you.

 

Vic

[AWACS 12]

That's fine sir, and I appreciate your input, please don't judge me however, as you're off the mark.  The truth is, I'm not looking for excuses not to do something, just the opposite actually, I'm looking for excuses to purchase.  Shooting approaches and practicing real-world instrument procedures is really what I do for the most part in the sim these days.  It used to be that I would want to have the most complex airliner available and pretend to be captain, now I just want what will help me in the real-world, and I think these desktop sims are well suited for instrument practice.  No offense intended, just wanted you to know what it is I'm looking for.  Thanks!

[Guest]

The P3D SDK exists to do exactly what you ask so I don't really understand your training issue? P3D with 3rd party support meets your goals. LM specifically leave certain doors open for 3rd party.

 

Cheers Rob

[vgbaron 3,508]

Jeff - I understand what you want - you just don't seem to see that it is there. I've had my Commercial & instrument ticket for over 30 years and a whole lot of PIC time and I can say thatP3D is EXCELLENT as a training tool for shooting approaches. It does not matter what frequency you enter or which runway you land on - it's the PROCESS you want to learn. THAT could be done with completely fabricated data. Learning situational awareness, proper instrument scan, CRM can easily be done with the current data in P3D. Some of the data may be inaccurate for current airacs but that really is irrelevant unless you specifically want to try an approach that is brand new and not in P3D.

 

You want to practice your real world skills? P3D is the best available tool out there - AS IT STANDS - and yes, it could be and will be better.

 

I really don't see your problem.

 

Vic

[snglecoil 1,828]

 

 

You want to practice your real world skills? P3D is the best available tool out there - AS IT STANDS - and yes, it could be and will be better.

 

Don't get me wrong, P3D is my favorite platform overall, but for instrument practice, FSX is equally as good as P3D...and to be honest, X-Plane v10 is in many ways even better than both "out-of-the-box" P3D or FSX for instrument training, especially for GPS approaches since the latest version has a solid GNS 430/530 built right in and more current nav data.

[AWACS 12]

Vic, when you said, P3D is an EXCELLENT training tool for approaches, can you expand on that a little bit?  For instance, what makes it excellent, and what makes it better than FSX overall in the instrument department?  Thanks!

Singlecoil,

 

Thank you, I hadn't given much thought to X-Plane as I tried the demo years ago and it was a little clunky trying to setup.  Also, I had difficulty panning around the cockpit, has X-Plane improved in that area recently?  Thanks.

[snglecoil 1,828]

AWACS, X-Plane is still clunky. It is a shame really, because at it's core, it is a really nice sim. The demo definitely doesn't show it in the best light.  Default planes are mediocre to just plain bad. 3rd party support is growing, though, and the same planes available for both FSX/P3D and X-Plane from the likes of Carenado, for instance, are sometimes better in X-Plane than FSX/P3D.

 

X-Plane's scenery still leaves a lot to be desired. Most airports are still completely barren, though most I've used do at least have fairly accurate taxiways and signage. Laminar Research have opted to crowdsource airport scenery development, so airports are slowly being populated with buildings over time as the community contributes. Outside of airports, the default scenery, especially in the US, is pretty sparse and very generic.  They basically autogen everything vs. using any custom, city-specific landmark buildings. Roads and other vector type data is not bad, though. And, it is not that the scenery outside the plane is ugly...it's just very generic. That's why I think X-Plane is a solid option for instrument practice especially.

 

The actual in-cockpit experience is rather nice.  Lighting effects are very well done. Night flying is particularly enjoyable. The default clouds aren't much to look at, but they are "volumetric" so they do give a feeling that you are flying through something with dimension. Almost forgot to add that the camera system in XP 10 is greatly improved. Once you get used to it it really does work well.

 

One other plus for X-Plane is the updated nav data. It's still not the latest and greatest, but it is being updated periodically. I totally get the shock that you expressed that LM is not updating P3D's nav data. It is frustrating. And yes the tools are out there to update the data...but I want to fly, not spend hours updating outdated approaches and navaids.

 

I like X-Plane a lot for what it does well, but for visual flight and all the 3rd party support in aircraft, utilities and scenery, it is hard to beat P3D. Truthfully, I'm glad that I have the option to use both sims.

[vgbaron 3,508]

AWACS - Actually FSX and P3D are pretty close. I just think the overall experience is better with P3D. If you have a well setup and running FSX you can get excellent training practice there too. One big plus of P3D though is the scenarios you can construct to set up specific situations. Much better than the limited function in FSX.

 

Vic