karrilon

It is already qualified Level-D. It's a CAE Full Flight Simulator. The X-Plane 12 software is still under development and will not replace the original visual system until we're satisfied it is Level-D compliant with all Authorities. OK..... what else would we use it for? We have completely different requirements from a simulator than the consumer market. You want real-world weather, live traffic external camera views. We need weather conditions that we can control and that must be completely repeatable, full control of runway and taxiway lights, we don't need external camera views or live traffic. None of the big three sims have got low visibility distances right yet, fog isn't correct in any of them. X-Plane are working on all these right now. Our flight model and systems models are using Boeing and GE data to the numbers. There is no consumer study level add-on that is accurate enough YET to replace what we are using on our host, we also have to drive a full real 747 cockpit and a motion system so yes, X-Plane's pretty pictures are all we will be using when they are Level-D compliant. I'm feeling this is veering down the 'which sim is most accurate' route so I'm not going to be replying on this thread anymore. I hope you all enjoy the improvements in X-Plane 12.

A good explanation from @Murmur there that covers a big chunk of the issues. To add to this, another issue is scale. In P3D, XP and MSFS you have one CPU and GPU processing flight data, WXR, NavDB, visual rendering. On my Level-D system I have separate PCs and software modules doing each job and relaying all that processed data to a central host computer which then feeds the necessary information to the FMS, system hardware, I/O and Image Generators. The biggest hurdle of all though is the Data Package licence. Every Level-D device is required to have a flight data package from the manufacturer of the aircraft that the simulator represents to ensure that the aircraft is accurately simulated. This data package licence is required for each simulator and costs MILLIONS of Dollars which also accounts for half of the cost of a Level-D device. Without this data, the flight model can only be approximated. Now from all this, please don't think that I am in anyway putting P3D/XP/MSFS simulation down. I have designed and built an FNPTII+ level Spitfire simulator and a 737-800 FNPTII/MCC simulator plus others based on P3D and X-Plane and they have great training value and perform very well. It was my idea to interface X-Plane with a Level-D simulator, firstly because I'd always wondered if it could be done because the visuals are way better than anything in the professional simulation world and secondly to show that our form of simulation needs to be taken seriously and can offer a lot to the commercial simulator industry. Hopefully X-Plane 12 Level-D is just the start.

It's a 747-400, I did the integration with one of my colleagues. There are a few points that need clarifying. None of the simulators available whether its XP, P3D or MSFS are suitable for Level D approval by EASA, UKCAA or FAA. The aircraft flight and systems models are nowhere near the standards required for that level of certification, FNPTII/MCC level is the highest that any of these simulator packages could achieve as the simulator's host software. X-Plane 12 is being used as a Level-D compliant visual database and that is how it will be certified. The reason X-Plane is being used is because it is the only package that can be interfaced easily and completely with a commercial FSTD and meets/ will meet the performance criteria of a steady 60hz and full control of weather, runway and taxiway lights, correct appearance and correct visual distances for RVR and CAT I,II,III visibility. The good news for you guys is that many of these professional standards that we are assisting the Laminar Research team with will also be implemented into the consumer version.

The three view method brings the sim to it's knees, I get between 8-12 FPS, so at the moment I put up with the fishbowl effect which doesn't seem that bad on a large display. The view angle you get in the Warrior cockpit when navigating VFR isn't really affected by the distortion but I'm hoping that Denali's distortion fix will eventually cover a 210 degree display. Cheers Richie

Hi Andy The cockpit is a PA28 Warrior. I'm a Flight Simulator Technician and I built it as a concept for a low cost flight training solution. The instrument panel is made up of Simkits gauges and hardware and the rest of the operational bits are real aircraft components that I modified for use in the sim through analogue input cards. The visual is 210 degrees by 40 degrees FOV run on 3 GTX 680s and 3 short throw projectors, one projector per card in 3-way SLI Surround and warped with Warpalizer. The next phase of the project is a multi-engine cockpit which will eventually be certified as an FNPT2. There's a video of an early test flight on YouTube, nothing exciting, just a circuit at Cardiff Airport but it gives you an idea of what it looks like. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GBLOdrzvJk4. All the Best. Richie

I'm running a home cockpit with 3 projectors on 3 GTX680s in NV Surround with ORBX UK scenery and holding a steady and smooth 32fps.Beau at LM recommends driving each display from it's own card in Surround mode.

Hi Rob. Are you running with Unlimited frames or locking off? If unlimited, what fluctuation range are you getting? Cheers, Richie

I've tried both. It looks amazing but gave me quite a significant frame rate hit.

You can legally hold as many different type ratings as you wish but may only exercise the privileges of two different TRs for public transport (I'm current on the Citation and RJ85). I see no reason why the two TRs used couldn't be Airbus and Boeing if the pilot's airline was a mixed Airbus/Boeing fleet. Whether the airline would allow it or the pilot would want to retain currency on both is another matter.

Hi Mike Right click on the P3D icon and it will give you the option to start the program with the 'high performance graphics processor'. Hope this helps. Richie

Hi Glen As far as I know, there's still no UT2 control implemented in VoxATC so you will need the UT2Bridge. Richie

<p>This is my set-up. I wouldn't go back to monitors now.</p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/96251060@N06/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/96251060@N06/</a></p> <p> </p>

Apologies, I didn't realise it linked to a specific page, it was supposed to link to the entire publication. All the visual requirements and authorised corrective methods/surgery are available in the 3 subsections for Opthalmology. As it happens, the OP has already found FCL-3.

JAR FCL 3 is published by the JAA now EASA. All European Aviation Authorities/Airlines take the medical standards for flight crew licencing from this publication.

The visual requirements for Class 1 and Class 2 medical certification are available in JAR FCL 3 http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/1859/JARGuidanceV3-07.pdf Good luck mate

I've tried both the Horizon VFR and ORBX England. I'm just coming to the end of my PPL so flying lots of navexes. I started using Horizon in FSX to practice my routes before I flew them and it's great for VRPs, towns and cities etc but not so great when you are looking for masts, windfarms, chimneys or tall buildings enroute. I installed ORBX England into P3D and was very pleasantly surprised to find that the majority of features on the CAA 1:50000 charts are modelled and accurately placed and haven't used FSX/Horizon since. True, the cities and towns aren't photorealistic but they are the right shape and in the right place and major landmarks in the bigger cities are included. I would say it depends on what you want to use it for. If you just want to fly and have 'England below you' then go with Horizon. If you are enroute and need to be looking for Wells TV mast, windfarms etc. in the positions your chart says they are, then I recommend you give ORBX a try.

Hi All I installed FTX England yesterday and even with VFR London layer at the top of my Scenery Library I'm getting water all over London. Any ideas? Richie

Sorry Andrew, this isn't the case. I installed FTX England yesterday and on the first run Horizon VFR was still there. FTX didn't generate until I deselected the Horizon scenery in the Scenery Library.