6 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

And these meet the FAA’s definition of either a Basic or Advanced Aviation Training Device?

OTD (Other Training Device) Cockpit Procedures Trainers, used for accruing up to 8 hours of type rating time.

https://www.flightvectors.com/Products/OTD/

 

3 minutes ago, mSparks said:

OTD (Other Training Device) Cockpit Procedures Trainers, used for accruing up to 8 hours of type rating time.

https://www.flightvectors.com/Products/OTD/

 

Nice dodge. The correct answer is no…but you probably already knew that.

 

/derail

6 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

Nice dodge. The correct answer is no…but you probably already knew that.

trying to cover up you didn't know there were more classifications of simulated training than BATD and AATD - a lot more?

How is that related to your assertion that "the hardware" is what makes certified training devices hard? its not, its the software and the hoops you have to jump through to get it certified.

6 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

/derail

Not at all, you seemed to have missed the link earlier to certified xplane hardware

https://flypfc.com/shop/all/x-plane-professional-software/

XP12 is going to need to jump through those hoops again (but no one will bother until its at least a little stable)

Which aircraft do you think this "resembles"?

Edited February 14, 20224 yr by mSparks

7 hours ago, fogboundturtle said:

On 2/12/2022 at 4:41 PM, MrBitstFlyer said:

I like to chat about scenery, but I really do cringe when the discussion is to criticise an early alpha build - especially one where the developer acknowledges certain things need improvement.

It's not an issue to acknowledge they have a lot of work ahead of them. If they didn't want people to criticized their alpha build than don't show it to the whole internet.

I personally appreciate the fact LR is sharing development updates with the community.  Your reply is exactly why I cringe - even though they say the roads, coastlines and clouds are not final so please don't comment, you still comment negatively!  I have to wonder what your motives are.  If the final release product looks exactly like this, don't buy it and have a discussion on the forum.

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

Which aircraft do you think this "resembles"?

I see (a bunch of) hardware and software that appears to be consistent with the requirements outlined below - appendix B
 

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_61-136B.pdf

 

Edited February 15, 20224 yr by snglecoil

25 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

I see (a bunch of) hardware and software that appears to be consistent with the requirements outlined below - appendix B
 

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_61-136B.pdf

 

And if you actually read it and the documents it refers to (the same documents I already posted but you said you didn't care because you weren't Canadian), rather than just post the first FAA link you found on Google (from 4 years ago) you would understand why this isn't true:

11 hours ago, snglecoil said:

Unfortunately, FAA certification is more about the integration of hardware representative to the plane being simulated than the underlying software. P3D is still very heavily used in the ATD market...and believe me, It's not for the flight modeling 😄

Since it even says in that document you linked:

"ATDs  cannot  be used for ... aircraft type specific training"

Edited February 15, 20224 yr by mSparks

11 minutes ago, mSparks said:

And if you actually read it and the documents it refers to (the same documents I already posted but you said you didn't care because you weren't Canadian), rather than just post the first FAA link you found on Google (from 4 years ago) you would understand why this isn't true:

Since it even says in that document you linked:

"ATDs  cannot  be used for ... aircraft type specific training“

That “4 year old link” is the most current FAA advisory circular. Type specific training has nothing to do with the benefit of an ATD. If you cared to continue reading, here is a rather important nugget: 

A.2.2 Basic Aviation Training Device (BATD). A BATD is a device that:
1. Meets or exceeds the criteria outlined in Appendix B, Basic Aviation Training
Device (BATD) Requirements.
2. Provides an adequate training platform and design for both procedural and operational performance tasks specific to the ground and flight training requirements for Private Pilot Certificate and instrument rating per 14 CFR parts 61 and 141.
3. Provides an adequate platform for both procedural and operational performance tasks required for instrument experience and pilot time.

That’s time that can be logged as aeronautical experience toward a private pilot  (little benefit) or instrument rating (significant benefit). It is also sufficient for logging experience toward instrument currency - which is very nice!

18 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

Type specific training has nothing to do with the benefit of an ATD.

Indeed, so what makes you think you need hardware that represents the aircraft type for them (an ATD)?

rather than just, say, displaying the instruments on an LCD screen.

Edited February 15, 20224 yr by mSparks

Because if I had said category rather than type we might not have had this enlightening conversation. 

20 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

Because if I had said category rather than type we might not have had this enlightening conversation. 

No. Still, you cannot use an ATD for any kind of type/aircraft/category specific training. The hardware is generally not important, and no more difficult than hardware generally. 

The FAA also has more regulations than you need for international flying, "certification" is not a singular thing, in terms of training it would be certified against defined time in parts of a training program (e.g. min requirement of 40 hours in type, 8 of which can use the cardboard - 40 hours just pulled out of my behind, anything more than 8 is the point).

You CAN get xplane certified for type/aircraft/category specific training, because of its flight model, which means it can be used for a greater proportion of hours in a training program.

___

 

-> Included as a component of our FAA-approved systems. PFC and Laminar Research have teamed up to provide you with exciting new and innovative training devices. Thirty-five aircraft models to choose from and more aircraft will be added soon. Seven optional turboprop and two jet aircraft are also available. Optional customized panels are available to match your aircraft fleet (call for detail)

 

____

 

Then hardware does start to matter, like for example the cardboard cutouts I posted earlier....

Still nothing you have posted supports your assertion that:

12 hours ago, snglecoil said:

Unfortunately, FAA certification is more about the integration of hardware representative to the plane being simulated than the underlying software. P3D is still very heavily used in the ATD market...and believe me, It's not for the flight modeling 😄

Which hardware specifically are you referring to, and how much real world flight time does it shave off an actual training program?

Edited February 15, 20224 yr by mSparks

33 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Indeed, so what makes you think you need hardware that represents the aircraft type for them (an ATD)?

rather than just, say, displaying the instruments on an LCD screen.

Ok I see where the disconnect may be. The hardware requirement is not the instrumentation. The flight instruments most definitely can be software base.  It is the physical interfaces. See B.3.1 and B.3.2. 

16 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

Ok I see where the disconnect may be. The hardware requirement is not the instrumentation. The flight instruments most definitely can be software base.  It is the physical interfaces. See B.3.1 and B.3.2. 

and that covers the hardwares measurement accuracy and the frequency it sends those measurements to the software - not what it looks like.

Harder than picking up a low budget off the shelf joystick, but nothing compared to the software needed to interpret those high frequency wide bitwidth measurements, and also only marginal for actually learning.

Edited February 15, 20224 yr by mSparks

What @mSparks basically means is that the response time of the controller with simulator is what I think gets certified by the aviation authority of a region.

Edited February 15, 20224 yr by Humpty

11 hours ago, mSparks said:

You CAN get xplane certified for type/aircraft/category specific training, because of its flight model, which means it can be used for a greater proportion of hours in a training program.

Understood and agree. And I admit that I’m focused on the more narrow ATD segment as that is where my student client base lives. 

I would love to experience an Xplane-based trainer to compare with the BATD and motion AATD that I have available. Even as someone who sees enormous value in sim training, the “flight” experience in ours is such that it, unfortunately detracts from the learning opportunity. 

Apart from flight modeling, I also appreciate the systems modeling depth that is built into XPlane.  Definitely looking forward to XP12.

32 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

the “flight” experience in ours is such that it, unfortunately detracts from the learning opportunity

i'd say the certified component of xplane is relatively underdeveloped. I foresee a lot of growth there.

XP10 got a fairly decent following, 11 was mared by significant changes over its life that really meant getting it certified was problematic (at least 3 "final" releases which had changes that required aircraft mods - no 60fps until very very recently). At least as I understand it, the pro market was quiet enough that there were definitely issues.

XP12 should be different, good chance of a nice selection of certifiable aircraft on the first day it goes final.

Pro market lags the consumer market simply because getting a cert is expensive - not something you want to have to do every 2 months when a new point release comes out.

But from a user perspective, the "hard" part is little more than calibrating the controls so as not to get negative learning for muscle memory. You need a test pilot to do that to log the hours in your log book, you only need to satisfy yourself it's close enough to not add hours onto your training rather than reduce them.