This may be a bit of an unusual question. I am wondering how flight schools, universities, the air force, etc. are actually using P3D. What kind of PCs do they run the software on? How does a training session look like (in terms of learning objectives, instructions and the like)? What kind of graphical settings are important to them? These are just a few sample questions of course. I'm interested in anything related to the topic. I am wondering if they also have addon aircraft/sceneries/tools we have no idea they even exist. Some time ago, I read that ImagineSim created their Barbados scenery for a sea rescue company which gave them permission to also release it to the general public later on. I haven't heard from other developers about such projects, because they probably are under some form of NDA, too.

Maybe we even have someone here who has used P3D in such a setting and is allowed to share some information? That would be fantastic. Thanks a lot for any input!

Marius

Like this...

https://aviationphotodigest.com/raaf-the-next-generation/

Check the last pic.

And here as well.

https://melbourne.flightexperience.com.au/

Cheers R

I have in the past used it for educational purposes on training courses, using it to record stuff for making instructional videos and even once used it to assist in an air accident investigation for the crash landing of an A320 in order to simulate the view the pilots would have had on approach in bad weather when transitioning from instruments to the view through the windows in snow conditions.

I loved that first article having spent time at both YMES and YPEA during my stint in the RAAF.  All new to me of course as I am talking early and late 1980s.

What I really wanted to say though, is "I WANT ONE"  The PC9 or the PC21 or both maybe for MSFS or XPlane  

I had a flight (formation) in the MB326 which was the forerunner to the PC9, which was being phased out and a gradual introduction to the PC9.

Still remember the lovely "angry" sound of the PC9 doing a high speed fly over during an airshow,

Regards

Tony 

Two provinces in Canada are using P3D for Air Attack Officer and tanker group training. This kind of training is not about flying the various airplanes and bombing fires, it is about learning how to coordinate tanker group operations around a wildfire. The key element of the training is actually not the flight simulator but the simulated radios, since adherence to proper communication protocols is essatial if you have a bunch of planes and helicopters that all want to go to the same spot. Hardware is usually just "good" sim computers with the exception of the twin cockpit sim for the AAOs, that uses projectors and/or screens. While graphics are of course important to everyone (who doesn't like nice graphics), they are not essential to the training. "Realism" per se, in the aircraft systems or the scenery is not really a requirement, since they aren't training pilots. VR is also just a concept, but not really an option - the AAO and his pilot have to be able to communicate freeley with each other, look at each other, point things out to each other. Besides, many seasoned pilots who act as role players really hate putting a box over their head.

Government Services - Wildfire Training Solutions Inc

8 minutes ago, Lorby_SI said:

VR is also just a concept, but not really an option - the AAO and his pilot have to be able to communicate freeley with each other, look at each other, point things out to each other.

that is where AR comes into the equation,

exciting products emerging on horizon,

HoloLens is a thing now - what is Apple actually going to release? (after years of mooted R&D)...

Back in 2013, I went to a flight school here in Argentina. I was surprised to see them using FS9 for training. I was more surpised to find that my old laptop (i5-2435M neutered to 2.4 GHz, 6 GB RAM, and just an Intel HD3000 integrated GPU) was running FS9 better (regarding both image quality and FPS) than their training rig. I guess some of them (the ones with more budget) may have already P3D.

I remember they sacrified almost all scenery details. Barely had the runway layout correct, and I think they had the scenery level set to either Normal or Sparse (default SACO in FS9 is so poor...), and no autogen. Forget about weather or texture enhancements. However, I felt they had left the FPS slider to the default 20 FPS. That in a 1366x768 19" screen. My 13" laptop had the same resolution...

Edited April 30, 20215 yr by Luis Hernandez

Businesses and colleges around the world are using Ideal Flight Professional with Prepar3D because it logs a lot of information about a flight and guarantees each student gets the exact same conditions with flights or that the exact same flights can be repeated as often as necessary. I recently gave a discount for ten copies to a university.

Probably the most common use of P3D by flight schools is the Redbird flight simulators.  

https://simulators.redbirdflight.com/products/topic/simulators

Here's a link to a flight school that explains how it can be used for training and maintaining currency.

https://www.iflysummit.com/redbird-sd

 

At my club we can also use the Redbird to satisfy club currency requirements as long as it has been less than 8 months since a check was done in a real aircraft.

 

Edited April 30, 20215 yr by BrianW

Not intending to derail this thread, but I would like to nominate it as the best one for 2021.  

https://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=67987

Scroll down and you'll see an entry about A2A's contract with the USAF for the T-38a Talon trainer. 

On 4/30/2021 at 8:38 AM, himmelhorse said:

What I really wanted to say though, is "I WANT ONE"  The PC9 or the PC21 or both maybe for MSFS or XPlane

Hi ya Tony,

Yep I'd want both the PC9 and PC21 (and I have both).

The PC9 is great to just jump in and fly without any great learning curve, not quite the same for the PC 21 though, so many buttons and knobs to learn and understand what they do...

Originally had just the PC9 in FSX-SE, but just couldn't get into it till I jumped into an x64 sim, since then though I've found it great to fly.

Here we are over the Northern Territory Aust.

3 minutes ago, Rogen said:

The PC9 is great to just jump in and fly without any great learning curve, not quite the same for the PC 21 though, so many buttons and knobs to learn and understand what they do...

Originally had just the PC9 in FSX-SE, but just couldn't get into it till I jumped into an x64 sim, since then though I've found it great to fly.

Here we are over the Northern Territory Aust.

Hello mate, Are you flying these in MSFS and if so how did you convert them.  Do they convert fully and do they fly as well as FSX/P3D?

I had (I think) the PC9 (IRIS) for FS2004 and loved it.  

Please let me know.

Tony 

10 minutes ago, himmelhorse said:

Are you flying these in MSFS and if so how did you convert them. 

Hi ya Tony,

That's a P3D pic, v4.5 no less and while the PC21 is P3D x64 compatible, my PC9 was built out of 2 x86 versions.

One was an earlier version that supported up to P3D v2 and the other was a Steam DLC which although x86, was a later version.

Of course the Steam release was stripped of liveries and also DRM locked, however it was just the model DRM'd and since I had the same model without DRM I was able to combine the two for a great result. There was a bit of fixing for various x64 gauges and I replaced the default lighting with Shockware and dynamic lighting, plus there are still 2 x86 dll gauges inop but I hope to replace those when I understand how they are intended to function.

As to MSFS... probably be a few years for planes of these calibres start to arrive. MSFS is such a moving target atm and the lack of decent SDK and specific limitations means it's a real problem for aircraft devs to bring their aircraft over.

I also think the issue is Asobo are scenery targeting (great scenery though) with a gamers thought process and are finding out it's actually much harder to gain reliable fidelity on flight modelling and such. Plus there is a Windows 10 mentality of always internet connected, constant updates, huge downloads, lack of a beta period, lack of SDK and so on.

Eventually it'll get there provided MS keeps their deep pockets, remember MS Flight and also the Flight Sim World crew? They said they were in it for the long run only to have management pull the plug overnight and fire everyone.

And until such a time as MSFS can actually be certified by relevant gov agencies for professional use (which I doubt the intention ever was), it'll always be a pretty but niche entertainment product, certainly not the next Overwatch or Minecraft, or COD.

But then again Microsoft burned 10 Billion $$ on Nokia and Windows Phone, so I think they can afford to keep the $$ tap on for a while at least, hopefully their MSFS product champion has good influence over their bean counters.

Anyway it's all, hearsay and FUD atm 🙂

Cheers R