Not sure why people say that this is just a VFR sim

[sd_flyer 6,041]

1 hour ago, Cristi_Neagu said:

Not true. Taken from A2A's website:

PMDG were trying to enter the certified simulator market. I don't know if they ever made it. And Reality-XP XPlane Garmin units are used for certified training, if i remember correctly.

Don't confuse definition of an aid. If you stick your hand and pretend it's an airplane while imaginine maneuvers this is aid! I'm going to repeat it over again MSFS, XP11, P3D are entertainment platform no matter what you call them. Why? Not of the hour you log in PMDG study level 737 can't count in real world toward currency, certificat or flying experience. 

Can any of those platform enter professional flight simulator market . Yes certification process and approval will make it out of reach of 99.9% simmer . Just to give you pricing an idea https://simulators.redbirdflight.com/products/topic/simulators

 

 

[omarsmak30 4,068]

3 minutes ago, Cristi_Neagu said:

My guess, as uninformed as it may be, is because third party addons was never their main focus. I don't think Asobo was very familiar at all with the flight simulation community when they went into this.

Actually my thinking is at the other direction, by supporting Simconnect, I think they thought the migration for third party developers from FSX/P3D to MSFS it would be easier, which is true if you have decoupled code that can run on both interfaces without much of hassle, just picture for example PMDG migrates its code from Simconnect based to whatever new based is that. However, I think as you said, they underestimated the shortcoming of Simconnect APIs. 

[Gilandred 690]

8 minutes ago, Cristi_Neagu said:

Been there, done that, got the silly t-shirt... https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/reality-xp/392140

Wouldn’t you have better success if you posted this in the wishlist or Q&A sections where it can be voted up?  I suspect the tools and utilities thread doesn’t get nearly as much community traffic.

Edited May 6, 2021 by Gilandred

[Cristi_Neagu 134]

5 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Don't confuse definition of an aid. If you stick your hand and pretend it's an airplane while imaginine maneuvers this is aid! I'm going to repeat it over again MSFS, XP11, P3D are entertainment platform no matter what you call them. Why? Not of the hour you log in PMDG study level 737 can't count in real world toward currency, certificat or flying experience.

That ignores the fact that some addons are more realistic than others. Not to mention that since some developers are actually selling certified products, that makes them much more qualified to deliver very realistic addons. Also, just because it may not count towards your hours, it doesn't mean it's not useful. Reading certified training resources won't count towards your hours, but i think it's kinda hard saying that it doesn't count as studying.

My top-of-my-head definition of study level is: "It relates to real life, and it can be useful in real life"

Edited May 6, 2021 by Cristi_Neagu

[RXP 2,338]

17 minutes ago, Gilandred said:

If you can get enough community support then at the very least it should be addressed on a monthly Q&A.

Like I said in back in March: the 2 most voted topics for the last Q&A where both asking Microsoft/Asobo to get in contact with Reality XP. I won't judge why they still aren't, there is no need to judging this, but I sincerely thank everyone who is supporting us, this means a lot:

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/live-dev-q-a-guided-question/370628/14?u=cptlucky8
https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/live-dev-q-a-guided-question/370628/59?u=cptlucky8

Having said this, and not judging at all, but don't you find peculiar new comers get's approved on the Market Place for selling modded default files (vegetation for example), but 20 years old experienced and renown RXP engaged with Microsoft under an NDA since Dec. 2019 should resort to getting supportive votes in the public forum... I mean you might not remember it, but RXP was the first commercial offering for a GPS add-on in Flight Simulator, at the time there was a few payware aircraft only:

"UPS Aviation Technologies is pleased to support the Reality XP product. The product’s ability to simulate the real-world workings of avionics systems is so good that we suspect many pilots who operate our equipment will acquire the Reality XP product for training purposes."

— Sam Seery, Director of Sales and Marketing

http://reality-xp.com/flightsim/apollo/customers/index.html

Edited May 6, 2021 by RXP

[Cristi_Neagu 134]

6 minutes ago, Gilandred said:

Wouldn’t you have better success if you posted this in the wishlist or Q&A sections where it can be voted up?  I suspect the tools and utilities thread doesn’t get nearly as much community traffic.

Probably. It didn't seem like the correct location at the time. I suppose i can try moving it...

[RXP 2,338]

1 hour ago, fppilot said:

I was referring to Asobo and their reluctance or refusal to release a full SDK or otherwise cooperate with some third party developers.

And I concur this is detrimental not just to RXP, but I also believe it is bad for FS2020 in the long term.

I often get supportive private messages or emails, but this one less than a week ago is special:

Quote

Yes i think it is shame that MS and ASOBO dont give chance to have a direct link for people like you that is a milestone in this industry . Since i was 20 i see realityXP in this circus ! I hope also (for all people like me that dont have a big company in the backend) have my chance continue to give users “tools simple and useful” …

You see, in spreading FUD and in not engaging with older companies like RXP, they are even creating fear among some newcomers who feel they'll be treated even worse. I really feel sadden for him and for our hobby.

I'll keep thinking for now they've have been really busy chasing bugs and helping other 3rd party vendors they didn't have much resources for RXP yet, but this is just an unfortunate delay. I've had the chance to exchange a few with Asobo developers in the private dev forum and I've always received good feedback to my suggestions privately, so I believe they are open to communication, at least at Asobo.

Edited May 6, 2021 by RXP

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

1 minute ago, RXP said:

And I concur this is detrimental not just to RXP, but I also believe it is bad for FS2020 in the long term.

I often get supportive private messages or emails, but this one less than a week ago is special:

You see, in spreading FUD and in not engaging with older companies like RXP, they are even creating fear among some newcomers who feel they'll be treated even worse. I really feel sadden for him and for our hobby.

I think this whole issue is about keeping the xbox and pc platform uniform.  I don't think they will ever let people do what you can in P3D or XP11 with third party injection.  It not in their plan. 

[RXP 2,338]

8 minutes ago, fogboundturtle said:

I don't think they will ever let people do what you can in P3D or XP11 with third party injection.  It not in their plan. 

And I'll be blunt, but you're assuming wrongly what it is we are doing and what it is we are needing in the FS2020 SDK. For more details, I've already posted all of these and how this is not about injecting anything in FS2020. Just search my post history.

PS: besides, if it is about injecting anything in FS2020, we can already in many ways, including a new loophole I just found out yesterday, and the WASM sandbox which can be bypassed to grant any add-on access to any DLL and programs on your computer, and they won't be able to secure this one at all unless they restrict the CRJ from running properly!

Edited May 6, 2021 by RXP

[sd_flyer 6,041]

15 minutes ago, Cristi_Neagu said:

That ignores the fact that some addons are more realistic than others. Not to mention that since some developers are actually selling certified products, that makes them much more qualified to deliver very realistic addons. Also, just because it may not count towards your hours, it doesn't mean it's not useful. Reading certified training resources won't count towards your hours, but i think it's kinda hard saying that it doesn't count as studying.

My top-of-my-head definition of study level is: "It relates to real life, and it can be useful in real life"

Yes some add on more realistic than another. And yes as we simmers are welcome more realistic products. But going back to definition "study level", sitting in chair and pretend you flying doesn't allow you to log hours, but it helps your in training! So yes any sim technically  training aid can be anything (given you are using it right). In this sense there are no superiority among simming platform as each platform could be served as study level.

Also certification is slippery slope. Developer may get certification to use manufacturer brand name in their representation but it doesn't automatically make their product "study level". Think about about Asobo stock planes? Will Microsoft will be liable if after using G1000 in MSDS on get in real life accident? So "study level" is marketing term as far as I know it's nowhere defined in real world anywhere. For example in FAA we have definition of basic training device or advance training device but no definition studly level. In contrast, a training it can be literary anything. For example, will it help if a drew a traffic pattern on a board using non permanent marker for my student. Yes. Ok then a board and marker are training aids. We also may call that particular board a study level board because it helps in training. Does it make sense?

 

 

[fogboundturtle 2,708]

27 minutes ago, RXP said:

And I'll be blunt, but you're assuming wrongly what it is we are doing and what it is we are needing in the FS2020 SDK. For more details, I've already posted all of these and how this is not about injecting anything in FS2020. Just search my post history.

PS: besides, if it is about injecting anything in FS2020, we can already in many ways, including a new loophole I just found out yesterday, and the WASM sandbox which can be bypassed to grant any add-on access to any DLL and programs on your computer, and they won't be able to secure this one at all unless they restrict the CRJ from running properly!

that's interesting....

[Cristi_Neagu 134]

10 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

So yes any sim technically  training aid can be anything (given you are using it right).

Not if it teaches you bad practices. Some simplified addons require you to do things differently than in real life because of limitations. Others simply do not care if you take shortcuts that would be dangerous in real life. If you spent a lot of time fiddling with the in sim Garmin unit and you'd be very used to how it works, if it doesn't work like the real thing you will run into issues in real life. That could be very dangerous, especially if it suddenly occupies all your attention as you're trying to figure out why it's not working and how you can get it to work.

Yes, we should all be aware of the limitations of the hardware and software we are using. But we can't know them all. Study level aircraft simply have fewer caveats than others.

14 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Also certification is slippery slope. Developer may get certification to use manufacturer brand name in their representation but it doesn't automatically make their product "study level".

When i said "certification" i mean certified for training. PMDG have always been officially recognized by Boeing.

[omarsmak30 4,068]

41 minutes ago, RXP said:

PS: besides, if it is about injecting anything in FS2020, we can already in many ways, including a new loophole I just found out yesterday, and the WASM sandbox which can be bypassed to grant any add-on access to any DLL and programs on your computer, and they won't be able to secure this one at all unless they restrict the CRJ from running properly!

I don't know why but my gut feelings is that, they will at some point of time, just give up on the sandbox and let PC based third party developers to access DLLs as long they are not targeting Xbox platform. Let's see 

[Cristi_Neagu 134]

1 minute ago, omarsmak30 said:

I don't know why but my gut feelings is that, they will at some point of time, just give up on the sandbox and let PC based third party developers to access DLLs as long they are not targeting Xbox platform. Let's see 

If it were up to them, they probably would. But i think Microsoft will have a thing or two to say about that.

Edited May 6, 2021 by Cristi_Neagu

[sd_flyer 6,041]

35 minutes ago, Cristi_Neagu said:

Not if it teaches you bad practices. Some simplified addons require you to do things differently than in real life because of limitations. Others simply do not care if you take shortcuts that would be dangerous in real life. If you spent a lot of time fiddling with the in sim Garmin unit and you'd be very used to how it works, if it doesn't work like the real thing you will run into issues in real life. That could be very dangerous, especially if it suddenly occupies all your attention as you're trying to figure out why it's not working and how you can get it to work.

Yes, we should all be aware of the limitations of the hardware and software we are using. But we can't know them all. Study level aircraft simply have fewer caveats than others.

When i said "certification" i mean certified for training. PMDG have always been officially recognized by Boeing.

 We are walking in circles here.  Anything that is  not certified can teach you bad practices; therefore, anything is defined "aid" or use on your own risk.

PMDG officially is not certified for any real world training! So it falls in the same category as any other "aid" . Please do prove me wrong show me under which category PMDG FAA certified for training