Flight Simulators

Greg Bockelman

Greg Bockelman

Touchdown! Greaser!
PoA Supporter
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
11,225
Location
Lone Jack, MO
Display Name
Display name:
Greg Bockelman
I learned something on my last trip to recurrent training about the flight simulators we use.

The simulators are VERY good at duplicating the flight characteristics of the airplanes we fly but the visual displays are rather "cartoonish". The comment was made that the technology is there to make the visuals "Photo realistic". In other words, they could be capable of looking just like the real thing.

Trouble with that is that apparently people get sick when they are using them. "Why might that be?" you ask? Well think about it. Your eyes tell you that you are in the real thing. You see the details of the environment. Looks JUST LIKE the real world. However your ears tell you that you are not moving at all. The disconnect is something the brain just can't seem to reconcile for a lot of people. The solution is to tone down the visuals to the cartoonish displays.

I found that rather interesting and it makes sense.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I learned something on my last trip to recurrent training about the flight simulators we use.

The simulators are VERY good at duplicating the flight characteristics of the airplanes we fly but the visual displays are rather "cartoonish". The comment was made that the technology is there to make the visuals "Photo realistic". In other words, they could be capable of looking just like the real thing.

Trouble with that is that apparently people get sick when they are using them. "Why might that be?" you ask? Well think about it. Your eyes tell you that you are in the real thing. You see the details of the environment. Looks JUST LIKE the real world. However your ears tell you that you are not moving at all. The disconnect is something the brain just can't seem to reconcile for a lot of people. The solution is to tone down the visuals to the cartoonish displays.

I found that rather interesting and it makes sense.
Click to expand...
I was in the NSCA virtual reality lab recently to do some work. The visuals are still rather cartoonish there but even with them you can easily get sick moving around. Anytime there is a disconnect between your eyes and ears there is a potential for sickness. The NCSA guys require people in the simulator there to have a bag with them at all times. Sometime even your brain gets in the way because it has some instinctual survival safeguards in it.

I was getting queasy during one thing we were looking at. The floor to the lab is flat. I saw it when I entered the lab and I knew for a fact that nothing was going to move. But after I put on the headset the visuals that I saw had me standing on a block that was only 1 foot by 1 foot square and had a large drop off if you stepped off. I could not move my feet off of the virtual block. My brain kept telling me I was going to fall if I did even though I also knew that I was in fact on a flat floor. It was really weird.
 
Last edited:
I don't think that photo realistic visuals are the problem here.

I use photo realistic scenery in the FSX simulator - never had a problem.

You get dizzy when the simulation frame rate and the response time to your inputs are too slow.

The latest CAE level D simulators display amazing life-like scenery ...I don't believe that air crews are barfing during training because of it.

This http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNK9DiP1oV8 is more likely to induce nausea...

Alon
 
Last edited:
Greg Bockelman said:
The simulators are VERY good at duplicating the flight characteristics of the airplanes we fly but the visual displays are rather "cartoonish". The comment was made that the technology is there to make the visuals "Photo realistic". In other words, they could be capable of looking just like the real thing.
Click to expand...
The night simulations are very realistic... at least in the two sims I've been in so far.

Ryan
 
Greg Bockelman said:
But are you FULLY enclosed? NO outside visual references? It makes a difference.
Click to expand...

You've got a point here...

But how do you explain that professional pilots training in full motion (level-D ) simulators do not experience that problem (with photo realistic scenery ) ?
 
Armageddon Aviator said:
You've got a point here...

But how do you explain that professional pilots training in full motion (level-D ) simulators do not experience that problem (with photo realistic scenery ) ?
Click to expand...

Well, for what it is worth, I have never seen a level D with that degree of realism. Ours are as state of the art as they get and they aren't that real, as far as the visuals go.
 
RyanShort1 said:
The night simulations are very realistic... at least in the two sims I've been in so far.

Ryan
Click to expand...

This is true, but at night, even real world, there just aren't that many visual cues that cause the sort of motion problems that a day photo realistic display can cause.
 
Armageddon Aviator said:
This http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNK9DiP1oV8 is more likely to induce nausea...
Click to expand...

Grrrrrrr.

The highest rated comment there includes the statement "The guy was just messing with his passengers, if they don't like it they don't have to fly with him."

I would like to highly encourage everyone to click the link and vote "thumbs down" on that comment. What a terrible attitude - one that will not serve the GA community well. :mad:
 
Armageddon Aviator said:
You've got a point here...

But how do you explain that professional pilots training in full motion (level-D ) simulators do not experience that problem (with photo realistic scenery ) ?
Click to expand...

Uhhh... Greg IS a professional pilot for a major airline, and is talking about their sims (from what I can tell)...
 
Armageddon Aviator said:
You've got a point here...

But how do you explain that professional pilots training in full motion (level-D ) simulators do not experience that problem (with photo realistic scenery ) ?
Click to expand...

Well, of course it's ancient history now, but when I worked on an F-5 sim in the mid 80's what we experienced was that after a few 1/2 hour sessions, the pilot adapted and could do both the real aircraft and the sim with no problem. It was the initial ride that they limited exposure to 20 minutes max.

Non-pilots were not bothered by the sim.

So our results were it was an adaptation.

John
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Well, for what it is worth, I have never seen a level D with that degree of realism.
Click to expand...
I haven't either. But I'm wondering if the reason they don't go to photo-realistic scenery is a cost/benefit issue. You're not really there to look at the scenery. Other than taxiing, taking off and landing, the only time you depend on looking outside is on the circling approach. To me, visuals in the sim are somewhat hard to interpret, especially the glide path for landing when there is no electronic or visual aid. Luckily they don't grade the landings unless you crash or something. :redface:

I think the sims do a better job with the motion than the visuals but it's still not quite like a real airplane. While they can simulate certain forces, they are unable to duplicate a sustained g-load like you might find in a steep turn. I also don't think the fidelity is quite there when manipulating the controls and looking outside on the ground or in the air. That's probably what causes some of the motion sickness and is why taxiing is a real challenge to do smoothly.
 
Speed said:
Taxiing the Level D sims during day simulations is the only thing that messes with my head. The sim may fly like the airplane, but I swear the Falcon I fly does not have NWS as sensitive as the sim!
Click to expand...

Same. I've never had any sort of proclivaty to motion sickness. Turbulence, aerobatics...none of it really bothers me (with only one notable exception - 3 hrs of thermaling in the back of a glider with Tony). But when it comes to taxiing the sim, I can't do it. The Q sim used google earth imagery for its base map with FSI's 3D buildings on top of it. Pretty damn realistic. When we were up flying, in the rare instance that we weren't in the clouds, I was fine. The sim itself doesn't move much and the visuals are still pretty far away. We have to do a visual circling approach on every ride, and I never had an issue with that. But down on the ground, the sim tries to recreate G forces by tilting (pour on the coals, it rocks back to simulate acceleration; turn left it leans right to simulate centrifugal force; etc). I always end up over correcting and, by the end of a four hour sim session, making myself REALLY dizzy if we do much taxiing.

It was even worse in the Beech, which used only a few different shades of green and brown, and that was the extent of the visual sophistication. The ears and the eyes just can't agree and the brain ends up mad.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Trouble with that is that apparently people get sick when they are using them. "Why might that be?" you ask? Well think about it. Your eyes tell you that you are in the real thing. You see the details of the environment. Looks JUST LIKE the real world. However your ears tell you that you are not moving at all. The disconnect is something the brain just can't seem to reconcile for a lot of people. The solution is to tone down the visuals to the cartoonish displays.

I found that rather interesting and it makes sense.
Click to expand...

maybe they're pregnant....:goofy:

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/yellowbook/2010/chapter-2/motion-sickness.aspx
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Grrrrrrr.

The highest rated comment there includes the statement "The guy was just messing with his passengers, if they don't like it they don't have to fly with him."

I would like to highly encourage everyone to click the link and vote "thumbs down" on that comment. What a terrible attitude - one that will not serve the GA community well. :mad:
Click to expand...


What an a$$. These are the types that ruin GA for many many folks -- not just the girl barfing in the back.

Moron super stud would have probably barfed too, except he was at the controls.

Best case here -- Sky King runs out of money and leaves GA.
 
The most recent sim I've flown to date was the FS Sikorsky S-92. It has the wrap around visual and what I thought was pretty good visuals (looked like google earth).

Even with all the motion going and visual clues hovering still gave me a bit of motion sickness.
 
dmccormack said:
What an a$$. These are the types that ruin GA for many many folks -- not just the girl barfing in the back.

Moron super stud would have probably barfed too, except he was at the controls.

Best case here -- Sky King runs out of money and leaves GA.
Click to expand...

The pilot was wearing a uniform. So he likely was flying on someone else's dime.
 
Rotor&Wing said:
The most recent sim I've flown to date was the FS Sikorsky S-92. It has the wrap around visual and what I thought was pretty good visuals (looked like google earth).

Even with all the motion going and visual clues hovering still gave me a bit of motion sickness.
Click to expand...

They do use Google Earth, however there is a limited database of airports that have that level of visual. They still are not where they need to be for realistic visuals for helicopter simulator training in terms of the offshore and off-airport environments. As long as you're working the airport though, it's great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top