Great presentation about how full flight simulators work and how motion cueing works. Worth your time.
7 Likes
Gonna be awhile until I can get one of those at homeā¦
3 Likes
I still hate them. (Also, my brain is far more tricked by VR than any $15M+ FFS Iāve tried yet.)
6 Likes
Agreed. Visuals > Motion
3 Likes
But guys ā¦ visuals plus motion
1 Like
Visuals plus motion like this looks incredible:
2 Likes
Iām guessing that if you fly something like a Pitts and do aerobatics regularly, you develop a highly sensitiveā¦rump. 
I havenāt tried motion for PC flightsims, but I seriously doubt theyāre fast enough to mimic real motion cues for fast jet or aerobatic flight.
Not even professional full flightsims do that, which (amongst other reasons) is why military fighter sims are fixed base.
But for normal PC flightsimmers these motion bases probably add a ton of immersion and fun.
And the way motion cueing works, as described in the video, I think we can safely say that those 360Ā° carnival rides that pops up in a youtube or social medial feed every now and then, are totally meaningless. 
Iād like to try Bergisons Motion Integrated G-Seat, which has slight movement, but also pressure plates that add or remove force to your bodyā¦
2 Likes
I imagine a motion system that gives a āseat of the pantsā feel is far more applicable to racing (car) sims than flight? Ages ago I saw video of Dan Ricciardo driving a F1 sim and thought - ādamn, I would give body parts to have a go in thatā
2 Likes
I got a chance to test out a professional 6 axis system for racing a few years back. One of the perks of being over my agencies driving program. Iāve got video somewhere if I can find it. It is definitely immersive, Iām not sure if itās 100% accurate (sadly my agency has never used Mercedes AMG GT-4ās, and they didnāt have a Ford Police Interceptor Utility available in sim), but it was more than good enough to get a feel for what the car was doing.
3 Likes
If you didnāt use that to advocate for at least one AMG Merc patrol car for your agency I am disappointed 
3 Likes
The problem I see with the currently available ācheapā (that is, thousands to tens of thousands of dollars vs the hundreds of thousands to millions of commercial sims) motion tables is they donāt seem to be moving in the correct way to trick the brain - a left bank induces a left tilt in the platform instead of quick left tilt followed by smooth return to centre. On the bright side, this is all software so easy fix.
The other issue is the tracking on the VR headset, but reportedly thereās already a fix for that.
1 Like
I would like to try that too!
Something to keep in mind, and something the professional Level D sims sometimes fall short of, is that while the motion can certainly add to the immersion (acceleration on takeoff, deceleration on landing/braking, uncoordinated flight), any little bit āoffā it is from what one expects from experience in the real thing immediately breaks the immersion 100%. Taxiing on the ground is absolutely where this is the worst, and where I would expect it to be the easiest to āget rightā, but the motion and the visuals donāt even approach accuracy, nor do they even seem synced up between eachother. This makes taxiing every Level D sim Iāve ever been in a nauseating experience, which is a widespread sentiment among pilots subjected to them.
4 Likes
Same with the one we use.
1 Like
I think they are a waste of space. Each bay is the size of a starter home. My airlineās training campus has the spread of a mid-sized university. With fixed-based sims it would have one fifth the footprint. Maintenance alone is hundreds of thousands for each box per year. Back in the 60s I suppose some people saw a benefit to full motion. Then agencies like the FAA viewed those benefits to be important enough to make them a requirement. Back then, when the visuals were poor, maybe the extra sensory input was beneficial. Today, I donāt get it.
2 Likes