Subject: PC flight simulators
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 11/17/03 7:35 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 17 Nov 2003 02:29:49 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: PC flight simulators
From: "Gord Beaman" )
Date: 11/16/03 5:42 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

(ArtKramr) wrote:

They are not really simulators. They are just computer games.
Arthur Kramer


Pretty inconsiderate Art...just because you don't play with them
why denigerate someone elses fun?

I flew real simulators. And I have flown the crap they make for
computers.And
anything that you can do on a computer isn't even close. If you want to fly
your computer for fun ok,bur remember it is just a toy. but don't confuse
it
with real flying or flying a real simulator. I guess you have never flown
Air
Force simulators. If you had you wouldn't be talking such patent nonsense.
Now
be a good guy and just go away.

Arthur Kramer

Well, I've got to disagree, Art. I've not had the opportunity to fly
the latest operational simulators, but will be the first to
acknowledge the incredible state of the simulation art. They make it
almost practical to conduct total training on the ground without ever
getting airborne. Certainly the heavy jet simulation capability is a
$$$-saver for the airline industry.

But (there's always a "but" somewhere in the background), several
years ago while working at Northrop on ATF (the F-23 program), we were
grappling with the best way to train fighter pilots for that elusive
capability called "SA"--situational awareness. It's the sort of "big
picture" that the best tactical aviators can carry in their head which
allows them to know instinctively where their support is, where the
bad guy's support is, which way is "bug out", how much longer they can
stay engaged, and what to do ten, fifteen and thirty seconds into the
future.

We had a massive mainframe computer running three domes and capable of
being reprogrammed to flight models of virtually anything the
designers could propose. We did trade-off evals of RCS
(radar-cross-section) changes against flight agility. We did full
instrumentation mock-ups to test symbology and ergonomics, but we
weren't satisfied with SA training.

What did work, surprisingly well, was a system of linked "desk-top"
stations that let us increase the number of players to 12 and then to
24 plus computer generated entities. A 25 inch color monitor,
configurable for instrument, HUD and sensor display; a stick grip ala
F-16, and a throttle. No motion, no video, no detailed cockpit mockup.

Surprisingly, a cadre of highly experienced tactical aviators--FWS,
Top Gun, test pilots (Edwards & Pax River)--all quickly became
immersed in the "video games". We learned a lot about teaching higher
level tactical analysis, force integration and weapons employment
without the clutter and overhead of multi-million dollar massively
mobile flight simulators.

If you want to learn to fly the jet, full motion or video simulators
are great. If you want to learn how to integrate the force and fight
the weapons in many-v-many scenarios there is a place for PC based,
network simulations.

IMNSHO.


I understand. But you are hardly talking about Flight Simulator on a home
computer are you? Sounds like what youy are decribing is way out if the reach
of anyone with a home setup..You are also talking about a highly specialised
dedicated setup to solve very specific puposes. Not the sort of stuff readily
available at Best Buy is it?



Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer