41 minutes ago, JonathanC said:

Still don’t know if PMDG is involved, saying we can’t comment doesn’t really make it clear. That guy famously says whatever on the forums, just like he did at Aerosoft  

I really don't think that if PMDG were not involved that Mathijs would just for the fun of it say that they can't comment (that's just plain silly and bordering on lying). Given they've already said they're working with Boeing on a special project, this very likely is it.
 

1 minute ago, psolk said:

Chances are this is in a segmented cloud space as well, probably with direct connects so they aren't leveraging the i-net for transport.  

Very cool for MSFS team indeed.  Commercial projects like this can really help drive innovation in the consumer space and vice versa.  Great win-win opportunity. 

Agree! And hopefully PMDG also benefits with better access to Boeing and aircraft info/details.
 

My airline has been using an earlier iteration of this product for the last few years, for new hires and 737 transitions.  It's worth noting that flight is not being simulated.  This is a virtual cockpit that allows the student to practice flows.  It's a replacement for the old cockpit posters we used to sit in front of and practice flows, chair-flying procedures.  The VR environment gives more of a sense of space, cockpit dimension and geometry, reducing the disorientation for a student in the sims / PTs for the first couple sessions.  It also allows for the ability to see systems response, vs just imagining it.  But it's definitely not what you might call "flight training".  It's "flip the switches in the correct order" training, is all. 

Just didn't want to leave the public with the impression that airlines are training pilots with consumer gaming software.  

1 hour ago, JonathanC said:

saying we can’t comment doesn’t really make it clear

I'm not sure that's right. He says that PMDG can't comment, which implies (at least to me) that they are under an obligation not to comment. Presumably that entails a contractual requirement. If PMDG were not involved in creating this new tool, that obligation would not exist, so there would be no obligation one way or the other. PMDG might not wish to comment in that case, but the phrase "we can't comment on this in any way or form" would not apply. PMDG could say whatever they wanted.

One thing that is inferred in some of our discussion is that PMDG is not the only partner with Boeing in this relationship. MS is also involved, and for all we know, Asobo, too. As noted previously, we can hope that some innovations made in this project might one day find their way into the home entertainment product we so enjoy as a community.

Have a great weekend.

25 minutes ago, Stearmandriver said:

It's "flip the switches in the correct order" training, is all. 

Ever since discussions of XP's certification for some level of flight training I maintained if you itemized everything one can learn from ANY desktop sim, you'd quickly learn MSFS will supply a huge amount of this even w/ its aeronautical fidelity being less than XP's--far far more than from just flipping switches in the correct order.

12 minutes ago, Noel said:

Ever since discussions of XP's certification for some level of flight training I maintained if you itemized everything one can learn from ANY desktop sim, you'd quickly learn MSFS will supply a huge amount of this even w/ its aeronautical fidelity being less than XP's--far far more than from just flipping switches in the correct order.

MSFS's aeronautical fidelity being lesser is something that's applicable to the earlier days of MSFS 2020. With properly implemented aircraft, with fleshed out and tested/verified flight and ground models, it is no longer lesser (and of course the fidelity varies from aircraft to aircraft). And especially with the various advancements that 2024 brings to its FDE toolbox and frameworks, when aircraft take advantage of them, the aerodynamics fidelity is second to none IMO and an overall better experience in the world of MSFS with everything else the sim brings to the digital twin earth.
 

Just now, lwt1971 said:

MSFS's aeronautical fidelity being lesser is something that's applicable to the earlier days of MSFS 2020. With properly implemented aircraft, with fleshed out and tested/verified flight and ground models, it is no longer lesser (and of course the fidelity varies from aircraft to aircraft). And especially with the various advancements that 2024 brings to its FDE toolbox and frameworks, when aircraft take advantage of them, the aerodynamics fidelity is second to none IMO and an overall better experience in the world of MSFS with everything else the sim brings to the digital twin earth.

Yes I was just parroting the sentiments from XP land as I really don't know.  But again, it's one that is certified apparently.   That said what you can actually glean from MSFS 2024 is going to be so close to any other sim product it's not worth emphasizing the 'certification' piece.

Cool to hear that it's at least being used for cockpit training. 

That's the impression I'm getting. Still, cool to know. 

What this product from Boeing also tells me is that Microsoft is open to using MSFS in the commercial industry again.  It's not new to Microsoft, they did it with ESP/FSX in the past.  I expect Microsoft to use MSFS in further commercial products in the future.

 

2 hours ago, PhrogPhlyer said:

Actual pilots are most likely doing the same as sim only pilots, going where their time, interests, and wallet allows them to go.

I am a retired military and civilian aviator, and I fly FSX and DCS.

Why? For FSX, familiarity, ability to create scenery and repaints, and it meets my needs for scenery detail FX & RW).

DCS? It's fun, dynamic, detailed and free ($).

The reason that MSFS is dominating the forums is that it is also dominating the sales market and user counts.

I'll purchase MSFS eventually, but not today. Maybe there will be a good Black Friday sale?

 

Not everyone that took the Navigraph survey is a real life pilot, but I think something like around 30% of the Navigraph survey takers were real life pilots.  But for the last Navigraph survey, 77% of the Navigraph survey takers chose MSFS (MSFS 2020 + MSFS 2024) as their primary civilian flight simulator, over the other options (XP, P3D, FSX, etc).  And Navigraph users are probably the "hard core" flight simmers, as they are willing to pay a monthly subscription to Navigraph (I doubt your casual flight simmer will buy a monthly subscription to Navigraph).

Edited November 7, 2025Nov 7 by abrams_tank

2 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

Just didn't want to leave the public with the impression that airlines are training pilots with consumer gaming software.  

It’s a very, very thin line…

There’s no inherent difference between Prepar3D/XP/DCS vs MSFS. 

1 hour ago, Noel said:

it's one that is certified apparently.

XP, in and of itself, can NOT be “certified” as an FTD.

That said, the simulation standard for an FTD is shockingly low.

TL,DR: only systems and processes for using them can be “certified” for IRL training.

6 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

XP, in and of itself, can NOT be “certified” as an FTD.

That said, the simulation standard for an FTD is shockingly low.

TL,DR: only systems and processes for using them can be “certified” for IRL training.

Correct, no sim in of itself can be certified, it is a combination that includes having specifically approved HW which in some cases is really the same as consumer HW at this point but at 4-5X the price LOL

https://www.virtual-fly.com/shop/faa-approved-flight-simulators/solo-pro-a?_gl=1*gnin21*_up*MQ..*_gs*MQ..&gclid=CjwKCAiAzrbIBhA3EiwAUBaUdQEyHWgPmnPXMz91sm-_IWfFbp5cHNhJzPJOoZ8MVKXCAymVbb8XERoC5ysQAvD_BwE&gbraid=0AAAAADB7-Zrwu5p6ybj5ZXpmi9mFDARNX
 

FAA Advanced ATD. Training Perks.

Approved as an FAA Advanced Aviation Training Device (AATD), this simulator provides loggable credit under Parts 61 and 141 per your FAA LOA, with recognized fidelity for procedures, scenarios, and evaluations.

For trainees: build instrument proficiency with repeatable approaches, holds, tracking, and abnormal/emergency drills—then apply the approved credit. Maintain instrument recency and complete proficiency work with an authorized instructor, as permitted by your LOA.

For institutions: cut cost and weather risk, boost throughput, and standardize instruction with identical avionics and repeatable scenarios. Integrated logging streamlines task, time, and endorsement records for audits—delivering safer, consistent training.

1 hour ago, lwt1971 said:

With properly implemented aircraft, with fleshed out and tested/verified flight and ground models, it is no longer lesser (and of course the fidelity varies from aircraft to aircraft).

This is so true. 👍

there are quite a few aircraft I’ll happily fly in Prepar3D or DCS but won’t bother with in XP or MSFS.

the simulators themselves are an incredibly important component of a realistic simulation, but as you noted, without equally good aircraft, it hardly matters. 🤙

22 minutes ago, psolk said:

Correct, no sim in of itself can be certified, it is a combination that includes having specifically approved HW which in some cases is really the same as consumer HW at this point but at 4-5X the price LOL

https://www.virtual-fly.com/shop/faa-approved-flight-simulators/solo-pro-a?_gl=1*gnin21*_up*MQ..*_gs*MQ..&gclid=CjwKCAiAzrbIBhA3EiwAUBaUdQEyHWgPmnPXMz91sm-_IWfFbp5cHNhJzPJOoZ8MVKXCAymVbb8XERoC5ysQAvD_BwE&gbraid=0AAAAADB7-Zrwu5p6ybj5ZXpmi9mFDARNX
 

FAA Advanced ATD. Training Perks.

Approved as an FAA Advanced Aviation Training Device (AATD), this simulator provides loggable credit under Parts 61 and 141 per your FAA LOA, with recognized fidelity for procedures, scenarios, and evaluations.

For trainees: build instrument proficiency with repeatable approaches, holds, tracking, and abnormal/emergency drills—then apply the approved credit. Maintain instrument recency and complete proficiency work with an authorized instructor, as permitted by your LOA.

For institutions: cut cost and weather risk, boost throughput, and standardize instruction with identical avionics and repeatable scenarios. Integrated logging streamlines task, time, and endorsement records for audits—delivering safer, consistent training.

Exactly. 
additionally, for these to be used as IRL training devices, they have to be part of an IRL training program. 
further, certification isn’t a once and done deal, even for the system. There’s lots of ongoing paperwork, etc. to maintain it. 

a flight sim is like a race car engine: literally can’t race without it, but simultaneously useless without the rest of the car, and the team that makes it run.