Originally Posted by
Timelord
........ Actually a better solution which is now possible is to link the AWCS, ship, tanker, red air , JTAC sims to achieve the required level of immersion
As you say
Timelord, this is where a lot of effort (money) is going into these days with more and more net-centric solutions appearing, including in training - I was working for a short while a couple of years back where this was taking place. And, as you imply, we only provide, assuming people are playing the game, what the TNA (Training Needs Analysis) dictates is needed.
Originally Posted by
NutLoose
I was reading that the new software used in Microsofts new flight sim is in a way a demonstration to military and other agencies as to the possibilities their software is capable off, a sort of a commercial advert ........
However, as a concept, what
NutLoose raises is also actually a sign of the times. I'm sure I'm teaching granny to suck eggs here but, out of WW2 and through the Cold War, Mil investment/technology tended to flow out into products in Civvy Street. Today that flow is working both ways with more and more Civvy stuff coming back into the Mil. COTS procurement is growing (as lamented on threads such as the MFTS Thread indicate
) but, as consumer demand drives down costs/raises performance, where appropriate, defence Projects can utilise these gains, provided such reverse-flow is wisely applied (as noted repeatedly in the MFTS Thread!!).
That, plus the fact is that demographics are changing and the kids of today (the FJ Jocks of tomorrow) will be used to increasingly realistic immersive environments. Any self-respecting TNA should, amongst other things, consider what their Target Students expect as a norm and strike a balance as it is an important aspect of "learning". If MSFS-type programmes can seamlessly (and cheaply?) pan around in a high quality visual environment, then processing and projecting the same over 180 deg (even 360 deg) or, maybe via VR headsets, is probably not such a technological/financial hurdle.
Now, I wouldn't care to put figures to how far that's progressed, but that's how it's going. Certainly, back in the '90's when I was the Mil PM for some Mil Training Devices, I was
most interested in what was being done in the world of Civvy Sims to see what I could "appropriately import" (and, hopefully, free up more of the budget up for the real bang/whoosh Mil aspects). My benchmark was "does it meet the requirements in the TNA?" plus all the usual cost-effectiveness, reliability, maintainability, supportability and expansion/interoperability etc etc etc requirements. The Airlines seemed to have some fairly impressive R&M requirements!!!!!! And penalty clauses if these were not met!!!!!
As
Cornish Jack wisely notes there are always limitations to what a Sim can do but
CJ also highlights some of the advances between the VC10 sims and B777 sims and that's how things will continue to go. With the rapid development in Neuroscience, who knows what will be going on in 50 years time when it comes to Sims. "Lay down on this couch Flt Lt Snodgrass. When you wake up you will have rehearsed your Top-Secret mission ........ to recover that nano-UAV we sent in to undertake a <<Classified Activity>>. Just put on this Neruo-helmet now and see you in an hour!!!! Oh, is it a NATO-std Coffee when you wake up?????" Better stop here before I get this Thread shifted to JB .... but it's most definitely a case of "never say never"! OK, well, maybe the Stude will have to get their own coffee!!!! Some things NEVER change!!!!!
Today? Well, maybe not.......... But tomorrow? ........................