Another common use of the term, avoided so far in this excellent topic, is to disparage the casual simulator user.
The term "study level" seems to have been created in order to distinguish between those who want to follow every tiny detail
of the real-world procedures and have the results of that replicated precisely and those who are less concerned with such minutiae and just want to fly.
It's that simulator versus game "discussion" again, that always causes problems.

There is no dictionary definintion and it seems to be a term that is used exclusively in flight simulation forums, especially this one.

Anything I have to open a manual just to get the thing started, is study level for me, a default Ctrl-e plane is not. Just my own personal opinion for deciding what addons to buy or not... 

1 hour ago, micstatic said:

While I understand the merits of your argument.  Generally I think the term study level is meant you have to study (learn) the systems.  A piper cub barely even has systems.  if at all.  The reason you have type ratings for airliners and not for simple piston powered airplanes.  Though I agree that landing a tail wheel airplane is a skill that usually needs to be acquired. 

"study level" indicates not only the complexity of the liner systems, but the flight dynamics and the flight model, as well as the engine structure and management. The A2A Piper Cub was one of these "study level" planes, like a real plane you have to follow some maintenance, procedures and checkups, or you will remain sticky on the ground at the best. A2A made a wonderful work with his fleet because they are real GA pilots and know what a real GA plane is, not a simple reading of the manuals or something like that.There isn't nothing simple in simple piston powered airplanes, and you have to know their idiosyncrasies.

Edited January 14, 20233 yr by Claudius_

There are plenty of "real world pilots" - another meaningless term - I mean, real world as opposed to what other world? the "underworld"?? - but that's a different topic...... who enjoy MSFS as a a "casual game".

Just as there army dudes who enjoy playing Call of Duty, or professional athletes kicking back on their expensive Italian leather sofas with a session of Madden whatever. 

I never heard any of these guys "ruminating" about whether the games they are playing are "study level".

IMHO: enjoy MSFS or whatever flight sim in any way you want to. If that doesn't "bring you joy", just Marie Kondo the thing off of your PC and go do something else (like take out the trash, feed the dog, go for a nice walk, etc.)

The actual study that's done isn't just learning how to fly.

I remember my first time using an FMC I had no idea how flightplans work or what an airway is. I had to learn also how systems work and procedures when flying in and out of controlled airspaces and everything in between. I also picked up an approach rating in Vatsim to round it all out.

I have 10 years of simming experience behind me to allow me to just jump back into a PMDG 738 or the Fenix A320 with 5 mins of revision.

The plane that I've actually enjoyed learning and that's given me some sort of challenge is the A310 recently it's been a quiet surprise.

Learning plane systems is easy everything else is where the learning comes.

we get VERY caught up on the term Study Level.  And it's arguably a poor term for what we are looking to convey.  But to me I can understand when somebody says "Study Level" they mean an airplane that is complicated and attempts to simulate the real world airplane faithfully.  Ie, VirtualCol vs PMDG/A2A etc.  That kind of thing.  So while it's easy to get caught up on the term I find it helpful when somebody is talking about an airplane that is coming soon.  If they say it's going to be a study level plane, then I have a decent expectation of what we are going to get.  

Exactly

For me "study level" means I can use the original POH to operate the simulated aircraft. However, that doesn't cover everything. Even if all the systems in an aircraft are simulated completely, the thing might still not "feel" like its like its real world counterpart. Even if it flies by the numbers a real pilot might that knows the real world aircraft might not recognise the aircraft's behaviour in the sim.

Whether that is an issue depends on the individual. Armchair pilots will never know the difference so one could argue why would a developer spend time and money to try and get the flightmodel behave like the real thing. I am a perfectionist and would gladly pay money for an aircraft that supposedly flies like the real thing although I will never be able to determine that for myself.

2 hours ago, micstatic said:

we get VERY caught up on the term Study Level.  And it's arguably a poor term for what we are looking to convey.  But to me I can understand when somebody says "Study Level" they mean an airplane that is complicated and attempts to simulate the real world airplane faithfully.  Ie, VirtualCol vs PMDG/A2A etc.  That kind of thing.  So while it's easy to get caught up on the term I find it helpful when somebody is talking about an airplane that is coming soon.  If they say it's going to be a study level plane, then I have a decent expectation of what we are going to get.  

it still would need to specified for whom it is study level. For a beginner, for an advanced simmer, or for a RW pilot ? And who is going to judge about it ?

FBW A320 is study level for a beginner, Fenix A320 is study level for an advanced simmer, FSLabs A320 is study level for a pilot.

It is indeed a completely useless term.

Edited January 14, 20233 yr by 320Driver

The other night I decided to use the HGS on the 737 for the first time in years. The last time I used it was in FSX and in those days the PMDG came with the proper manuals. It doesn't anymore (which I don't appreciate but understand why). Anyway, I pulled the thing down looked at it and then looked at the unit in the pedastal and realised I hadn't a bloody clue how to use it anymore 😄

I had to source the manufactuers manual on "the Googles" and I found two. One from the manufacturer and a QANTAS version. I rather like kangaroos as I find them comical creatures so I went with that one and read through it during my flight. I really rather enjoyed it because I'm such a sad old nerdy git.

To my mind, that is study level but you can make of that what you will. At the end of the day it's really just entertainment for me. It's just that what I find entertaining would send many people snoring even if I explained it to them as they balanced on a washing line. So, I tend to keep this weirdness in myself a bit of a secret from most people and come to hang out with the other simulated aviation weirdos, like me, on here.

When I think of "study level" I think of A2A, PMDG and FSL. There have been and there are others of course.

I think its pretty useful term, It got me too buy PMDG DC6, A2A stuff, wing42 boing247, and other more complex planes, because people reccomending them said they where study level. So I bought and they lived up to the expectation(for me). Nobody ever told me a Carenado plane was study level, so I dont buy it. The term has served me well in my purchases, marketing term or not:p

1 hour ago, 320Driver said:

 

FBW A320 is study level for a beginner, Fenix A320 is study level for an advanced simmer, FSLabs A320 is study level for a pilot.

 

Not exactly, the FBW A320 is a work in progress study level airplane, in the experimental version of their A320 you can follow the devs and participate to the debugging, and you can learn so much things about the A320. The Fenix A320 is a well packed "product" and a good example of study level airplane, but you can't see what's under the hood. These two A320 are complementary in my opinion, if you are interested on a  "study level" A320.

Edited January 14, 20233 yr by Claudius_

Useless?  A term that has been around the flight sim community for many years now, going back to at least the LevelD 767 or maybe its predecessor - Wilco's PIC.  As previously mentioned, when a new aircraft is being released and the developer classifies it as "study level", most virtual pilots will immediately recognize the likelihood of a very detailed aircraft with a progressive set of preflight and in-flight procedures.

Complex vs simple.  Many of us prefer the more complex "study level" aircraft, whether GA, Passenger liner or Cargo, where it may take at least 30 minutes to fully preflight the a/c in preparation for takeoff.  Others may prefer to "kick the tires & light the fire" approach to jump in and get airborne asap. We are fortunate to have many choices available for both types of simmers.

 

36 minutes ago, beechcaptain said:

Useless?  A term that has been around the flight sim community for many years now,

yes, still useless. As mentioned above, who judges about it ? A beginner, an advanced simmer, a RW pilot or the developer itself ?

It's as useless as the advertisement "tested by real pilots". Doesn't say anything if no one knows to what extend it has been tested, what have been his expectations, what kind of hardware equipment he has at his disposal and so on ....

Edited January 14, 20233 yr by 320Driver

For the commercial simulators, used by pilots, they have a four levels classification, I suppose for the PC/Xbox and so on we can also consider some levels of simulation.

We can say that a PMDG, Fenix have complex or high replica of systems while other are basic and so on. Study is a relative word for sure.