Yeah absolutely agree, the problem is Bing's coverage (or what Microsoft have chosen to include?). You can get the SDK and import from Google pretty easily though to fill any specific gaps you want where coverage exists.

There's a good video on YouTube of someone doing Lincoln - the result is fairly convincing.

The issue with "low level" rotary style is always the limitations of texture from aerials - DCS infills with computer generated waving grass etc.

This is nicely detailed and everything but not needed for military simulations and instrument flying. And even commercial VR-glasses are so far off what (super expensive) military glasses can do, I see no technology trickling down from commercial entertainment to professional flight simulation.
Having said that the old MSFS got sold and converted to become Prepar3d used for basic mission training and rehearsal.

Too bad MSFS 2020 is useless to serious pilots.

It how accurate are the kangaroos and the missiles? ;)

Agreed Less Hair - but only in some very, very, very limited cases. And it would be interesting to look at the where the bits for the "(super expensive) military glasses" come from. Yes, the end product may be better with specific mods for front line Mil use and, quite likely, some very specific components included but a lot of it would be made up of non-Mil bits. More and more items are taking, when appropriate, COTS parts to make up a Mil product even "(super expensive) military glasses" I'd wager.

But back to Simulators tho and I'm afraid your Mil Flight Sims are all COTS stuff - been that way for years! Provided an item meets FFF criteria, does it need to be capable of surviving a drop from the cockpit onto the hardstanding when the sim is only a couple of feet up from the platform or EMC protection from a nuclear strike? Nah! In the stuff I bought (and we are back in the early 90's) most of the controls, including sticks, switches, even quite complex control units and displays etc were all working replicas entirely using COTS parts but which looked/felt/operated exactly like the real thing ..... but at a fraction (and I mean a fraction) of the cost of the real thing! Even for several items (Control Panels and such like) where I thought GFE would be needed (ie would be the most cost-effective), the Supplier opted for a scratch-build as it was easier (= cheaper) for them to build it from scatch and integrate that rather than to interface with the real GFE panels (which also worried them on the reliability/maintainability front). Made our life easier as it turned out as we would have no "GFE! Not our problem!" arguments if a bit stopped working. They even took some GFE, stripped out the innards, and just used the shell with their gubbins inside! Graphics were projected thanks to a company who specialised in "entertainment, enterprise, and healthcare" according their blurb. Great projectors they were! The graphics cards? All bog standard kit!

Roll forward now to just 2 years ago and a Company I was working for were still taking requirements to all sorts of Subbies to provide kit for "Mil Sims". If a "Games Company" can provide the most cost effective solution - bingo! It will be there!!!! It will be rebadged with the Prime Contractors logo (and you'll be charged the Primes mark-up!!) but, if you look ever so closely, you'll see a Licence statement hidden away somewhere! Most of the stuff in the cockpit was scratch-built. Why? Cost - why have a certified bang seat (or anything else) which is never going to go... er, bang (or go flying)!

Again, agreed - for today - but, as prices drop and expectations (of the students - see my previous comment) rise...... Best analogy is probably in your pocket - your phone. Early days my mobile did what I wanted it to do and my requirements have changed little. It made phone calls! Endex! Today, while I can do some interwebby stuff on my phone and take snaps if out and about the main use as a phone is unchanged. Can you even buy a simple phone today? Not seen a basic phone for sale for ages. Even one for £12.99 has a camera!!!! I only want a phone damn-it!!!!!!! Extreme, but the point is, why spend money to provide low-res graphics from scratch when a games company could, in the future, provide high res graphics for a fraction of the cost? In the Air Defence world, what are the "Radar Screens" at Boulmer? Bog standard PC displays from a picture I saw recently - probably off the lowest bidder for a std x cm SVGA display! And that display is of that quality and for that price because of millions of PC Gamers and those who watch Videos on their PC! Not because of a handfull of steely Air Defence peeps!!!

What happens today is not what will happen tomorrow - and in the capability drive the Mil are an increasingly small player except in some niche areas! Anyway, just some thoughts! Cheers, H 'n' H

I found the article that started me thinking and resulted in this thread

https://www.aerosociety.com/news/10-...-game-changer/

H'n'H fascinating insight, thanks, your replies have been informative and interesting reading.

No probs NutLoose and, Less Hair, I'm really not "having a go" at you if it sounds that way - I do apologise if it sounds like that. Not saying MSFS is suitable "as is" but the technology (and their software programming resources) should not be dismissed. And, for the benefit of future generations, we really should go "how may we use this in the future to improve things for them?" rather than closing things down. PS I hate MS with a vengeance and use Linux and LibreOffice - I only flash up Windows for one specific graphics package which won't run on Linux! :E

PS A very interesting article from a good source to comment. And I'll take my hat off to what sounds a great new (meaning "new") product. Particularly interesting "Although Microsoft has sold the licence for professional commercial usage of its previous sim, FSX to Lockheed Martin to develop into P3D, it in not hard to foresee that real-world aviators and aerospace industry could take advantage of this sim - whether is using it to brush up knowledge of VFR landmarks at a local flying club, licensing the Azure Cloud AI and graphics for another simulator, or using the amazing graphics to market airline livery designs or new aircraft concepts or renders of airports.".

Of course, it would probably be a small step to, under licence, overlay the "Mil" aspects of such an environment; so, for Typhoon, take the "cloud" world, mirror it onto the Secret "MoD Servers", add the overlays there and use the SLI to deliver the environment + overlays to the Sims at Conningsby or wherever! I must ring BAE Systems and offer my services!! :ok:

They've come a long way ... (ignore the cropped reports either side of the main bit)


JAS

Well, they did sell the code to the last version ( before this) to Lockheed-Martin, who then developed it further and remarked it as Prepar3d

https://www.prepar3d.com/

So the possibilities are there

Ttfn