11.20 coming to final

[Griphos 138]

VR of the sort we can add to XPlane or P3D does not make these sims in any way more legitimate for actual pilot training. I have no idea to what statements you’re referring (Aerosoft....really?!), but you are sadly deluding yourself to think these sims with VR can be used for actual training. I have no idea what in the world you mean by “LOW-END” training. There is no low-end or high-end training. There is just training that is certified, and everything else is simming for entertainment.

There are ways that simming can familiarize you with certain aspects of actual flight, particularly systems familiarity (GPS, glass cockpit, instruments, etc), and even one or two things in relation to actual flight, such as sight pictures in the pattern (IF you’re flying the pattern correctly in the first place, which, without real training with an instructor is doubtful).  And simming can offer these familiarizations regardless of whether the monitor is 2D or 3D,  

But that’s a LONG way from training, which is why no aviation regulatory agency counts (private) sim hours toward certification.  Flying our sims in our homes is NOT training, and adding VR to them doesn’t change that in the least. In fact, it adds additional UN-realities!  You don’t manipulate controls with a blindfold in an actual airplane, or with strange little pointing devices. 

Here I am actually raining on your parade. If you like VR, great. But arguing that VR is a good thing because it increases the ability of these sims to be used for training is just silly. All it adds is a different, more immersive, perhaps, but still importantly unrealistic in some ways, visual environment. It’s a small 3D monitor in a pair of goggles!  And that’s all it is. Enjoy them, if you like what they add to your sim experience. But that’s all they are good for. Any claim to training value is just a marketing ploy to sell hardware, or simple foolishness. 

Edited March 17, 2018 by Griphos

[Murmur 3,944]

3 hours ago, Griphos said:

You don’t manipulate controls with a blindfold in an actual airplane, or with strange little pointing devices.

Do you manipulate controls with a mouse instead?

[anubhavs 66]

Geez, we are still talking about this? Seems like we are just arguing semantics at this point.

VR gives you spatial awareness. The main aspect that is missing in 2D simulation. That's all really. Oh and its a heck of a lot more fun than 2D.

For my own real-life flight training, I find VR flying to be tremendously beneficial as it increases immersion, "presence" and spatial awareness - all valuable to me when simming. Its not actual training (I agree with you there), but its way higher quality experience than 2D.

Said another way - if you agree than simulator experience is at all helpful in your real-life training, then you may find VR to be an even more immersive. At least most of us do.

And again - its a lot more fun than 2D and there's something to be said about that!

Also you have to keep in mind that VR is still a very new technology and FAA and training certifications may just not have caught up to it yet.

4 hours ago, Griphos said:

VR of the sort we can add to XPlane or P3D does not make these sims in any way more legitimate for actual pilot training. I have no idea to what statements you’re referring (Aerosoft....really?!), but you are sadly deluding yourself to think these sims with VR can be used for actual training. I have no idea what in the world you mean by “LOW-END” training. There is no low-end or high-end training. There is just training that is certified, and everything else is simming for entertainment.

There are ways that simming can familiarize you with certain aspects of actual flight, particularly systems familiarity (GPS, glass cockpit, instruments, etc), and even one or two things in relation to actual flight, such as sight pictures in the pattern (IF you’re flying the pattern correctly in the first place, which, without real training with an instructor is doubtful).  And simming can offer these familiarizations regardless of whether the monitor is 2D or 3D,  

But that’s a LONG way from training, which is why no aviation regulatory agency counts (private) sim hours toward certification.  Flying our sims in our homes is NOT training, and adding VR to them doesn’t change that in the least. In fact, it adds additional UN-realities!  You don’t manipulate controls with a blindfold in an actual airplane, or with strange little pointing devices. 

Here I am actually raining on your parade. If you like VR, great. But arguing that VR is a good thing because it increases the ability of these sims to be used for training is just silly. All it adds is a different, more immersive, perhaps, but still importantly unrealistic in some ways, visual environment. It’s a small 3D monitor in a pair of goggles!  And that’s all it is. Enjoy them, if you like what they add to your sim experience. But that’s all they are good for. Any claim to training value is just a marketing ploy to sell hardware, or simple foolishness. 

 

[Griphos 138]

49 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Do you manipulate controls with a mouse instead?

It seems you intentionally miss the point.  With 2D, you can use hardware that does indeed replicate the controls fairly well (as most of us do), using prop, mixture and throttle knobs, for instance, or throwing switches.  Sure, you can do that in 2D with mouse as well, but you have a choice.  In VR, you can try to use your hardware, I suppose, if you grope around and find it.  But you'll most likely be limited to the VR mouse pointing device, which is less realistic than the hardware.  

And, if you use hardware while flying in VR, then you're STILL manipulating a different set of controls than exists in the VR cockpit, which isn't very realistic either, and just the same as flying in 2D.    

So, do you have anything of substance to add?

Edited March 17, 2018 by Griphos

[anubhavs 66]

1 minute ago, Griphos said:

In VR, you can try to use your hardware, I suppose, if you grope around and find it.  But you'll most likely be limited to the VR mouse pointing device, which is less realistic than the hardware.  

 

That shows you haven't used the VR much at all. I use all my hardware (yokes, pedals, buttons) and no I am not groping around anything. Nor do I use a pointing device. The touch controllers allow your hands to be used as you would in real life by turning dials, flicking switches etc.

[Griphos 138]

6 minutes ago, anubhavs said:

Geez, we are still talking about this? Seems like we are just arguing semantics at this point.

Geez, why wouldn't we still be talking about this?  Nothing in my responses involve mere semantics.  What I suspect you mean by that is that you don't like the discussion.  But no one is forcing you to participate. I responded to GCBraun's suggestion that VR is for training for real flight.  It's not.  And you admit it's not.  

I have no argument about whether some people find it more fun, nor have I said anything to suggest that.  

Edited March 17, 2018 by Griphos

[Griphos 138]

12 minutes ago, anubhavs said:

That shows you haven't used the VR much at all. I use all my hardware (yokes, pedals, buttons) and no I am not groping around anything. Nor do I use a pointing device. The touch controllers allow your hands to be used as you would in real life by turning dials, flicking switches etc.

Of course you can use pedals.  Your feet rest upon them at all times.  And you can use a yoke just fine.  But you have a big opaque set of goggles on your face which doesn't allow you to see your hardware, so if you're flipping switches, you're doing so by groping to find them blind, right?  Which you wouldn't do if you were in an actual aircraft.  And you can't actually see your pedals or yoke.  And you can't actually see your live environment, so you can't use hand held charts or your iPad Foreflight app, or other handy (and of real value to real flying) resources.  

A touch controller is the same as a mouse in the sim.  It allows you to manipulate the virtual cockpit, so no advantage there for VR.  

The point, clearly stated, is that VR doesn't add any particular realism to simming, just visual immersion, as I and you both have pointed out.

I'm sorry some of you continue to get all hurt because I don't think VR is appealing, and that it involves a trade-off that I'm not sure is worth the price, and I am certainly arguing that the claim that it makes our sims training devices is just wrong.  

What in any of that is actually objectionable for you?  I've repeatedly said that if you like it, great!  But just say you like it.  Don't make exaggerated claims of its value.  

 

Edited March 17, 2018 by Griphos

[anubhavs 66]

9 minutes ago, Griphos said:

Of course you can use pedals.  Your feet rest upon them at all times.  And you can use a yoke just fine.  But you have a big opaque set of goggles on your face which doesn't allow you to see your hardware, so if you're flipping switches, you're doing so by groping to find them blind, right?  Which you wouldn't do if you were in an actual aircraft.  

A touch controller is the same as a mouse in the sim.  It allows you to manipulate the virtual cockpit, so no advantage there for VR.  

The point, clearly stated, is that VR doesn't add any particular realism to simming, just visual immersion, as I and you both have pointed out.

The opaque glasses have a notch that allow you to peek into the real world and touch your hardware (thus the not groping). You also have muscle memory built up at that point so you know exactly where everything is.

And no - I disagree with your point that VR doesn't add any particular realism to swimming because of the added spatial awareness which is a massive aspect! How someone can argue that sitting in front of a 2D monitor is more immersive than a spatially accurate visual depiction is beyond me (and I suspect you haven't had more than a few hours at max in a VR simulator).

So please do us all a favor and give it a real shot before telling us that its inferior. 

FWIW - my instructor himself uses VR instead of 2D and has repeatedly encouraged use of it.

And I repeat - its not as good as real life training (nothing is), but it is BETTER than 2D.

Edited March 17, 2018 by anubhavs

[tonywob 4,769]

Come on guys, no need to get heated over this :). At the end of the day, VR isn't for everyone, and that's just the way it is for now.

[Griphos 138]

The "realism" in question here is the realism of actually flying.  Peeking out of goggles to look at an actual world while being surrounded by a graphical reproduction of a 2D world (which is what VR does) is something I have no interest in and doesn't replicate actual flying at all!  Good on you that you like it.  I don't, and won't, no matter how long I try it.  I'm not going to sit at my desk with a big goofy set of goggles on my face cutting me off from the world just so I don't have to visually leave the simulated environment, at the cost of being blind to the larger environment, some of which contains my preferred means of interacting with the sim.  

I'm not arguing that it's not visually more "realistic" not to see the edges of a 2D monitor.  I'm arguing that single improvement is not worth the costs for me.  You seem to be insisting that it is.  I'm not telling you not to prefer it.  But it's ridiculous for you to be telling me I should.  

[Griphos 138]

I'm not heated at all.  I'm surprised that others are over completely objective and unobjectionable statements about the value (real or supposed) of this one expensive and in some ways compromising piece of hardware.  

[anubhavs 66]

1 minute ago, Griphos said:

The "realism" in question here is the realism of actually flying.  Peeking out of goggles to look at an actual world while being surrounded by a graphical reproduction of a 2D world (which is what VR does) is something I have no interest in and doesn't replicate actual flying at all!  Good on you that you like it.  I don't, and won't, no matter how long I try it.  I'm not going to sit at my desk with a big goofy set of goggles on my face cutting me off from the world just so I don't have to visually leave the simulated environment, at the cost of being blind to the larger environment, some of which contains my preferred means of interacting with the sim.  

I'm not arguing that it's not visually more "realistic" not to see the edges of a 2D monitor.  I'm arguing that single improvement is not worth the costs for me.  You seem to be insisting that it is.  I'm not telling you not to prefer it.  But it's ridiculous for you to be telling me I should.  

Let's move on.

[GCBraun 2,392]

12 minutes ago, Griphos said:

I responded to GCBraun's suggestion that VR is for training for real flight.  It's not.  And you admit it's not.  

I know at least two flight-schools that already use VR for flight-training in my area. Anything that enhances your spatial awareness for a relatively low-cost surely can be used for flight-training. Seeing your arguments just make me feel that you are relatively clueless about the VR technology, how it is evolving, how it can and may be used, etc. Sorry, but you are kinda embarrassing yourself at this point, really.

 

[tonywob 4,769]

Just now, anubhavs said:

Let's move on.

Good idea. Time to move on.