2 hours ago, jrw4 said:

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.

Nah, not necessarily true. 

"I'm afraid I can't comment one way or another on whether PMDG called me yesterday to get my approval on the new 787 launch".

All you know is that I won't comment. Did they call me? Did they not? Who knows. I can't comment on this in any way or form. You don't know if there's an NDA or not ...

Anyway, this is friendly nitpicking 🙂 - I'm sure PMDG did have something to do with it, all I was saying is that I haven't seen anything official from PMDG or Boeing confirming this, that's all. When they do tell us more I'm sure it will be interesting to read. 

Edited November 7, 2025Nov 7 by JonathanC

1 minute ago, UrgentSiesta said:

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. 

Bingo!  Every 5 years 🙂  

And don't get me started on race engines, especially when they combust and the inside of your engine ends up outside your engine!! LOL

Quote

This approval is valid for sixty (60) calendar months from the date of this letter. Any requests for a new LOA should be made in writing to The General Aviation and Commercial Division at least 90 days in advance of expiration. The General Aviation and Commercial Division may require a review of the QAG, an on-site functional evaluation, and verification of all the AATD requirements as described in FAA Order 8900.1 Volume 11, Chapter 10, Section 1, Approval, Oversight, and Authorized Use Under 14 CFR Parts 61 and 141 before a new LOA is issued. This approval expires on 02/28/2026.

 

3 hours ago, Stearmandriver said:

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

Exactly, sometimes people want to hear things and don't realize the difference between the two. The certification process for an airline vs a VIRTUAL airline is so complex and stringent. For a VA, it self-regulates under its own rules, whereas an airline is heavily regulated by authorities such as the FAA, EASA, and ICAO, etc. For sure, none of these "gaming simulators" are certified for a CBT or  flight training, as much as some would love to believe.

Edited November 7, 2025Nov 7 by LRBS

2 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

30% of the Navigraph survey takers were real life pilots.  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).

We have to be careful about conflating Popularity with Accuracy. 

for eg, I’m sure every single one of us would choose a Lexus over a Toyota at least 77% of the time. 😉

or perhaps more analogous, we’d choose a Lexus over a Honda - yes?

doesn’t mean the Lexus is a superior car, it simply means it’s more enjoyable. 
🤙

Edited November 7, 2025Nov 7 by UrgentSiesta

.... slowly walking away from this thread....

Time to get  back on topic or it will be locked.

2 hours ago, psolk said:

And don't get me started on race engines, especially when they combust and the inside of your engine ends up outside your engine!! LOL

 and  😂

As long as YOUR bits stay in good order, I'll call it at least a draw. 👍

6 hours ago, lwt1971 said:

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

Well, here's to hoping the MAX is indeed theirs, and that it's Coming Soon^TM

While I note that the 777X is mentioned as pending, the current 777's aren't. Which makes me think back to Randazzo's repeated assertions that the PMDG 777's are capable of "flawless" heavy maintenance check flights. I can't remember reading about him making such assertions in re other/previous PMDG products...?

I know our IRL 777 experts here take exception with aspects of the FbW implementation (and I believe them!), but... this is all very enticing & encouraging news!

Edited November 7, 2025Nov 7 by UrgentSiesta

57 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Well, here's to hoping the MAX is indeed theirs, and that it's Coming Soon^TM

based on the video, it's Asobo's 737 Max

3 hours ago, LRBS said:

For sure, none of these "gaming simulators" are certified for a CBT or  flight training, as much as some would love to believe.

What is it that XP's expensive version (certified for something presumably) offers over just using the software gaming simulator?  Is it essentially because that version of XP is to become part of a teaching suite including qualifying hardware and curricula and so LR charges $1000 (or whatever it actually is for its use?

18 minutes ago, Noel said:

What is it that XP's expensive version (certified for something presumably) offers over just using the software gaming simulator?  Is it essentially because that version of XP is to become part of a teaching suite including qualifying hardware and curricula and so LR charges $1000 (or whatever it actually is for its use?

It's a Commercial Use license. Rather similar to the various price levels Lockheed Martin charges for Prepar3D. In P3D's case, there are certain functional enhancements to at least some of the higher priced versions (e.g., weapons and such), but as they're all too rich for my blood, I haven't looked into it closely.

IDK if there's extra functionality with the XP comm version (like, isn't there an Instructor Station available, or is that also in the consumer version...?). I'm fairly confident there's an enhanced level of tech support available (based on other comm software with which I'm available).

In the case of use in Integrated systems as you shared, notice that they all share a pre-built PC setup and ready to go as part of the AATD. That's all to ensure everything operates as expected (e.g., the specific tuning of the hardware flight controls, etc.), and with greater reliability than with most consumer builds, etc. Won't be an optional item for certified systems.

 

Edited November 7, 2025Nov 7 by UrgentSiesta

35 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

based on the video, it's Asobo's 737 Max

Huh...I'm surprised the FMC and switchology is accurate enough for official procedural drills...?
At least when first released, it was reported there were several items during startup that didn't follow IRL procedures...?

Not saying it can't be a thing, but having a default addon be good enough for general startup and shutdown procs is (pleasantly) surprising, if so.

The Boeing training shows how MSFS spans the field in its usefulness. From Career Mode to Missions / Challenges to the more sophisticated avionics by World Title, MSFS offers something for everyone (at every level) including training.

I took note of the training aspect when Sportys online flight school adopted MSFS in their supplemental training exercises, even building a freeware airport for MSFS.

I am pretty sure that in the next 5 - 10 years, there will be some pilot (at any level) recounting how it all started with an xbox and a gaming pad, to a more sophisticated flight sim set up, to flight school, to where they are now…and how they have used MSFS in some form at every stage.

1 hour ago, Noel said:

What is it that XP's expensive version (certified for something presumably) offers over just using the software gaming simulator?  Is it essentially because that version of XP is to become part of a teaching suite including qualifying hardware and curricula and so LR charges $1000 (or whatever it actually is for its use?

This. I assume the software is essentially the same.

Laminar (like many other companies) is doing market segmentation -- charging different customers a different price for the same product based on what they're willing to pay for it. Software entrepreneur and blogger Joel Spolsky has an article on this called Camels and Rubber Duckies that I really like.

Edited November 7, 2025Nov 7 by martinboehme

18 minutes ago, OverTheEDJ said:

I am pretty sure that in the next 5 - 10 years, there will be some pilot (at any level) recounting how it all started with an xbox and a gaming pad, to a more sophisticated flight sim set up, to flight school, to where they are now…and how they have used MSFS in some form at every stage.

That reminded of this article talking about how MSFS helped them with pilot training and passing their checkride on the C172: https://fsnews.eu/using-msfs-for-flight-training-helped-pass-private-pilot/ ... From late 2023 when they used MSFS 2020 (and the C172 has since improved even more in terms of flight dynamics, especially in MSFS 20204). An interesting and long read.
 

Edited November 7, 2025Nov 7 by lwt1971