Hi france89,

 

I agree, looks impressive, but, and it's a big but...

 

1. Time on the simulator appears to be on a rental only basis.

2. What does it cost?

3. Can you purchase and install their simulator in your own home?

4. Perhaps not the best or most convenient solution for an aspiring pilot in training who wants to be able to practice procedures in the comfort of his own armchair.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong when I say that my belief is that Prepar3D, like it's predecessor, FSX, offers a flexibility in customisation and third party support that cannot be matched currently or for the foreseeable future by such systems as the DMS LLC F-16 Simulator.

 

Mike

That should be BMS in the title. Another great but challenged effort by passionate simmers. My hope is that P3D could also serve as the foundation for an immersive military sim experience. Never say never.

 

 

Btw- both fsx and Falcon (which BMS is based on) were created and developed about the same time and have both seen their share of challenges from a historical standpoint. Yet they are the best in their category of design. Fsx for general aviation - Falcon for the role of flying an f16 in an active battlefield.

 

The fact that they are seeing further development even today is a good sign those passions are deeply rooted though development is doubtful at times.

That should be BMS in the title. Another great but challenged effort by passionate simmers. My hope is that P3D could also serve as the foundation for an immersive military sim experience. Never say never.

No, that video is from DMS (see my opening post). The one shown in that video was from their last public rental. Rental costs vary from as low as $500/day up to $5,000/day depending on location.

 

I don't what that specific model would cost to purchase, but the version sold to the USAF and other nation's air forces begins at $995,000.00 and goes upwards from there depending on the options desired.

 

In fact, the whole point being made in this thread is that Prepar3D is already being used "as the foundation for an immersive military sim experience."

Please correct me if I am wrong when I say that my belief is that Prepar3D, like it's predecessor, FSX, offers a flexibility in customisation and third party support that cannot be matched currently or for the foreseeable future by such systems as the DMS LLC F-16 Simulator.

Mike, please read (or re-read) post #1. DMS LLC F-16 Simulator is using Prepar3D Professional as the basis for their hardware simulator.

 

The purpose of this entire thread is to point out how third-parties are using L-M's Prepar3D to build professional solutions.

 

The second company for whom I give a link is building and selling complete training solution for multiple aircraft, among others such as the USMC Ground Training Systems Support - West (GTSS-W) program.

 

Here is a video clip showing their ReACT (Reconfigurable Aviation Crew Trainer ) product with a base price of a low, low $100,000:

In addition to having us on hand as a beta-test community, LM also generates a lot of goodwill by letting us play in their sandbox.  We may be a microscopic piece of their customer base, but keep in mind that most of their business is defense, not civil aviation, which means that it's funded by taxpayers, not private investors.  Taxpayer = us.  So it makes good business sense for LM to have us feeling warm and fuzzy about them when it comes time for our elected representatives (not only in the US) to vote on appropriations.  P3D is smart community relations on LM's part.  This is something that big companies used to be good at - say from the '40s into the '60s.  But now it's mostly a lost art.  Opening up P3D to civilians makes LM a throwback, but in a positive kind of way.

Lol... I was responding to the video from France89....that one is BMS.

Lol... I was responding to the video from France89....that one is BMS.

Sorry, but it is not from "BMS." Open the video direct from YouTube, and read the description from the uploader:

 

Published on Sep 25, 2014

This video shows DMS LLC's F-16 Flight Simulator in action at our last rental. The simulator is in High-Fidelity mode, with active color MFDs, Center Pedestal Display (CPD), and DED.

I will do that when I can... But watching that screen is all I need to see to recognize the simulation underneath. That is Falcon...

 

 

aka Falcon 4.0, BMS, Freefalcon... Superpack.... Etc...

 

 

You're LM's public beta testers.

 Whatever I'm doing, I'm having a lot of fun doing it, and I'm learning tons without trying.  I've gotten so used to beta testing so many models of single engine planes, I'm feeling the need to move up to twins.   Best $260 I've ever spent (dev license)

 

 

So it makes good business sense for LM to have us feeling warm and fuzzy about them when it comes time for our elected representatives (not only in the US) to vote on appropriations.

 

Don't you think the $4,075,972 contribution to candidates and the $14,581,800 paid in lobbying in the US might have more to with them "feeling warm and fuzzy"?

 

Anyway some people may think Lockheed Martin, and the taxpayer, shouldn't be spending  money on  games for simmers?

 

Happy Prepar3D Beta Tester and my Lawyer said it is OK to use P3D because my Business card says Professional Prepar3D Pilot.

 

Your lawyer? You asked a lawyer if it was OK to purchase P3D? :huh: Or am I missing a joke here?

 

 

Without doubt the burgeoning third party support for Prepar3D is quickly establishing this product as the de facto flight simulator of choice and it is very likely that anyone with a serious interest will quickly decide to have a licensed copy running on a personal computer

 Yeap.

 

 

Mehh.

  Like I said, others are easily impressed, but when you get serious and do your research, it's P3D where if you're smart you'll tell your dollars to go.

 

 

Don't you think the $4,075,972 contribution to candidates and the $14,581,800 paid in lobbying in the US might have more to with them "feeling warm and fuzzy"?

 

No, it would not.

 

 

Anyway some people may think Lockheed Martin, and the taxpayer, shouldn't be spending  money on  games for simmers?

 

It's not "spending money on games for simmers."  It's  deriving additional income from the professional simulation platform while at the same time generating both technical feedback and a favorable impression of the corporate brand.

 

My perspective is the result of the past 25 years that I've spent advising large corporations on communications and reputation management.

 

What's your perspective based on?

 

Sorry to be blunt - just trying to match your style and charm.

Here's another sample....the F16 pit hardware is "whomever"....but the simulation on the screen is BMS (Benchmark Sims).  BMS is the late iteration of Falcon 4 by Microprose....a truly great F16 simulator.  The hardware interaction is a by-product of community based development through the years.  A very good sim even by todays standards...though some aspects could use the development muscle of a Lockheed to really bring it into present day.

 

Perhaps down the road and through the woods P3d could fill the same gap for the little people.  With Tackpac around the corner, this could be a new phase as to what is possible.

 

 

No, it would not.

 

So Lockheed Martin is wasting its money on contribution to candidates and lobbying?

 

 

It's not "spending money on games for simmers." It's deriving additional income from the professional simulation platform while at the same time generating both technical feedback and a favorable impression of the corporate brand.

 

Taxpayers may think spending its money on games for simmers is wasted. Anyway, in your experience, by how much will Lockheed Martin's revenue increase as a result?

Gerry, please drop the political aspects before I have to lock this thread entirely. :unsure: