FSX with VR headsets

I'm quite excited by the prospect of virtual reality flight-simming, and it looks like someone is almost there for FSX on the Oculus Rift: http://flyinside-fsx.com/

 

I think this could be better than (and certainly 2 or 3 orders of magnitude cheaper than) full static flight simulators, so I'm thinking of getting the credit card out and buying an oculus. Or is it still worth waiting a bit longer? It's rarely good business being an early adopter.

I'm interested. Not sure I want to get involved, but interested. Anyone out there who loves to tinker & has extra money to play?

 

Please advise!

A friend who owns a VR company here is Seattle said the DK-2 would work very well with FSX. It looks like a developer's version is available now for $600.00. The production version should be out in February (hopefully costing less by then)

A friend who owns a VR company here is Seattle said the DK-2 would work very well with FSX. It looks like a developer's version is available now for $600.00. The production version should be out in February (hopefully costing less by then)

 

And the recommended minimum specs for it are:

NVIDIA GTX 970 / AMD 290 equivalent or greater

Intel i5-4590 equivalent or greater

8GB+ RAM

Compatible HDMI 1.3 video output

2x USB 3.0 ports

Windows 7 SP1 or newer

 

And if any mods are required to FSX to be able to accommodate VR they will need to be made by Steam. Do they even have a developer license to allow this?

 

My understanding of the Rift tech is that it needs a high sustained FPS to work. Anyone actually have a rig that can run FSX at a high sustained rate?

 

Thought not.

I'm quite excited by the prospect of virtual reality flight-simming, and it looks like someone is almost there for FSX on the Oculus Rift: http://flyinside-fsx.com/

 

I think this could be better than (and certainly 2 or 3 orders of magnitude cheaper than) full static flight simulators, so I'm thinking of getting the credit card out and buying an oculus. Or is it still worth waiting a bit longer? It's rarely good business being an early adopter.

 

Depends on your type of flying really. Are you using any external panels or controls or documentation? Like the Saitek switch/radio/multi panels or (multiple) control units? Then be aware of the fact that you cannot see those when wearing the Oculus. Or running an EFB, maps, charts, systems docs, checklists on a seperate computer/tablet/paper, a printed briefing package from FSCaptain or PFPX? I do, so for my deskpit it just would not do, even if it is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Good point about check lists and flight plans! I hadn't thought of that issue at all!

 

Unless you spend all your time shooting touch and gos, I don't think you're simming if you don't make a flight plan. And you obviously need a checklist for even touch and gos as well. I make sure I have an accurate printed out checklist for everything I fly.

I have read of reported problems with people getting headaches and nauseous with this. I know when I fly it is for several hours at a time. I think I will just stick with my TrackiR and the VC. :)

absolutely a % of people should be getting nauseous with VR, that proves it's working and confusing your brain - that your eyes tell you you're moving, but your body doesn't. Probably the same % of people who get motion sickness on boats and planes.

 

As for accessing clipboards and maps etc. while flying. I guess it comes down to whether you're willing to sacrifice some of that for the feeling of total immersion in the cockpit. And I'm sure with the addition of voice commands it should be possible to view maps etc. from within the VR.

 

As for accessing clipboards and maps etc. while flying. I guess it comes down to whether you're willing to sacrifice some of that for the feeling of total immersion in the cockpit. And I'm sure with the addition of voice commands it should be possible to view maps etc. from within the VR.

 

But that's just it (for me anyways). If I can't take a paper map/checklist/flightplan into my own hands and look at it, make notes on it (like time and fuel at waypoint), cannot touch and turn the knobs on my radio stack, cannot look away to my EFB and set up a new approach on it, cannot rub my eyes because they hurt, cannot drink, cannot sneeze, like I do in RW, the immersion is destroyed. I am confined to the box around my head and whatever manipulation tool the VR provides, this has absolutely nothing to do with real life. For me it is not enough how things look.

I think many GA pilots would disagree with you on this one, particularly in the UK! On the VR question, it's not just the external switch panels and tablets that would cause a problem. I would think that most of us use keyboard shortcuts at least occasionally (if not regularly) and, just as with switch panels, you can't see the keyboard. It will need someone to make a headset that allows you to look down beneath the display to really make it work in FSX. Also, as mallcott pointed out, to quote the Oculus Rift support site "Recommended specifications: A desktop computer running a dedicated graphics card with DVI-D or HDMI graphics output, with capability of running current generation 3D games at 1080p resolution at 75fps or higher". That would appear to rule out most FSX users.

 

LOL!! Lesh I certainly agree with you especially flying GA for the 100 dollar or in your case pound, lunch flights.

 

I've spent a lot of time in the Slaughters, the Wollops & on other A B & single track roads in England & the Highlands of Scotland, Skye, etc. driving a car or riding a motorcycle. I'm not surprised at the reticence of flight plans for day tripping in those small areas!

 

To be honest, in most cases GA day trips here are pretty much the same as in Blighty. My comment was pointed to the huge number of people who like to fly the aluminum tubes, circumnavigations, or IFR.

 

We old chopper guys, long before GPS was even dreamed of much less attempted, often flew ifr. Not to be confused with IFR. We considered flying ifr to mean "i fly roads."

 

The highway maps were much more useful out in Texas or someplace like that with a soft floor of 500' AGL & a hard ceiling of 1,000' AGL while ferrying not yet accepted choppers from Philadelphia Pa. to Santa Ana Ca.

 

More than once, we landed in a field or empty lot near a gas, petrol, station out in the country, go in and buy a sandwich and something to drink & ask, what town was that we just flew over? So we could reorient our position on the highway maps and continue.

 

VFR supplements told us all the restricted areas we had to try to avoid. But road maps helped us actually navigate. But in our case on ferry flights, flight planning had a lot more to do with where we could find jet fuel every 250 miles or less than anything else. In the 60's most GA airports away from the cities didn't carry jet fuel.

So I came across this site looking for scenery for EGMC.

 

I have a Oculus Rift DK2, FSX Steam, and the Flyinside FSX Alpha release. The results are SO impressive. It's very difficult for non-users to understand how good it is, you really have to feel the immersion to understand it.

 

I'm running an i7 3770k, Radeon HD 7770, 8gb DDR3-1600, Average hard drive with a 16GB caching SSD and even with the settings up full in FSX I get 60-70 fps.

 

Dan who developed FlyInside FSX has managed to master asynchronous time warp in the build so in those instances where the frame rate cant keep up with head movements, it reuses the old frame but moves the position slightly to make the head movement smooth. It beats the crap out of TrackIR.

 

If anyone is considering a multi monitor set up, then don't - buy a Rift DK2 instead. Its cheaper AND better.

 

The resolution on the rift is full 1080, but split across each eye so it can appear a bit grainy if you have your face up against the gauges. But future versions of the Rift may improve that.

 

And in response to people's comments on keyboard shortcuts, use a joystick with lots of buttons that allows custom mappings. I bought the T-Flight HOTAS for £40 and it does everything I need it to. The full version of FlyInside FSX will have the ability to have checklists and flightplans on clipboards in the cockpit with you, as well as the ATC window etc. Just open them up, then drag them to the side (you can literally put them on the co-pilot seat so you just look at the seat to view the list.

 

Check out the kickstarter for the full version here:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1232710074/flyinside-fsx/

 

The free alpha release is here:

http://alpha.flyinside-fsx.com/

Ditto to everything neiloakley said.

 

FlyInside is nothing short of wonderful. This is the flight simulator I've always wanted.

 

TrackIr is quality gear and I love what they've done for flight simulators. Multi-monitors are an other good solution although quite expensive. But nothing even comes close to FlyInside. You feel like you're actually sitting in the cockpit. It's absolutely amazing. Dan has done a stellar job making the Oculus Rift work with FSX.

 

If you can find a way to check out a DK2 Rift with FlyInside, do it. Don't spend money on more monitors or gear until you do... I guarantee you'll agree, but find out for yourself.

 

Jim

Just to update on FlyInside - you now get a full virtual desktop and can bring windows from the desktop into the cockpit. If you fly with real weather, you can pull in web-based weather radar, notepad, pdf files, even YouTube or other videos all into the cockpit. So checklists, charts, whatever, are all now accessible. This is on the "pro" version. You can't do that on the free preview version, but you can still try out VR in the preview version but you do need a DK2. Oculus just stopped sales of DK2 in preparation for the consumer model in a couple of months or so. But DK2 was only $350 and not $600 as someone else reported. Also, Dan has enabled a pass-through with a device called a Leap Motion so you can see your keyboard and also use your hands to activate cockpit controls. That's not fully fleshed out yet, but he's working on it. Switch boxes like Derek Speare Designs stuff can also help to unload joystick buttons.

 

And the effect is phenomenal. It puts you in the cockpit. Everything you see looks just like what you would really see. A little more cartoony, but so many of the aftermarket planes look wonderful, add in good scenery and weather, and the effect is pretty nuts.

 

Check this and see what you think: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsphAOkGYRI

Check this and see what you think: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsphAOkGYRI

 

I think they should ditch the 3D. I've said this elsewhere at length, but I consider it a huge step backwards to present this with such a miserable horizontal FOV. Also the Rift DK2 is not 'full 1080' as someone reported above - it is 1200 x 1080, which is somewhere between 720p and 1080p (though with the aspect ratio turned sideways). And the Leap Motion? a gimmick to compensate for the obvious major drawbacks of a HMD.

 

So yes, send me one and I'll enjoy playing with it but for flight simming I think this is a blind alley :pilot:

The reason for the extreme wide angle distortion is the lenses stretch the images way out to about 100 degrees or so FOV. It's not as wide as normal human field of view but it's amazingly good. You don't see those narrow windows in the head mount display.

 

The resolution is actually 960 wide by 1080 tall per eye. The display itself in the DK2 is a 1920x1080 Samsung Galaxy Note 3 display. The Oculus CV and HTC Vive will both be using separate display panels for each eye of 1080 horizontal by 1200 tall. That's really how you have to look at it - as resolution per eye.

 

Have you actually tried flying in P3D or FSX in a Rift DK2? Reason I ask is how you stated the FoV issue. It sounds like you haven't tried it. The FoV in the consumer Vive and Rift is set to be a bit better as well. Not much but enough to make a difference. Also, as for resolution, Dan has a zoom function he built in that lets you zoom in on intruments, GPS screens, or whatever you are looking at. I can read the text on the panel of the Alabeo Waco without zoom but with zoom it's crystal clear. Having the full and 1:1 match on head tracking makes it way faster and more natural than using keyboard keys or a hat to look around and much easier at least for me to use than something like TrackIR and a triples setup.

 

Plus you get depth. Real depth. It's trivial to judge distances to a runway, rates of descent, etc.

 

I'm a long time sim pilot and I even had a flight instructor unfold a sectional across the panel so I would look out the window instead of flying by instruments. They can almost always spot sim pilots by them not looking out the windows. Now when I get into the sim, I not only look out the windows, I also check taxiway and runway crossings for traffic. It's just that much more like real flight. Real pilots who try it all - I do not know of a single exception but maybe there are - come away saying how real it feels to them.

 

But nobody is forcing it on you. I just posted the update to what was going on with FlyInside since this thread had slowed way down and wasn't current, and posted a link to a flight that had the guys I was flying with and me just amazed at how it looked to us. A video does not do the in-HMD visual justice. It only gives a taste.

 

If you haven't ever tried it, you really should. I bet you change your mind. Maybe not. But if you haven't tried it, I would give way better than even odds you do. Far from being a blind alley for flight simming, I believe it is the future. All the guys I was flying with and I had all gradually lost touch with flight simulation over the years. VR brought us back and big time. I took out the conversation and substituted the music, but that was one of the topics as we were flying around for several hours last Sunday. Just how amazing it was, how we were all old-time sim pilots, and how VR brought us back. For real. I swear I'm not making that up.

That's really how you have to look at it - as resolution per eye.

...

Have you actually tried flying in P3D or FSX in a Rift DK2? Reason I ask is how you stated the FoV issue

 

Well I'm not convinced. No I haven't tried it, but don't confuse the two different things I said. First, regardless of how it looks and performs I think it is a blind alley for flight simming. So much effort is being put into simulating things we do not need to simulate - virtual cockpits, 3D, flipping switches. The gold standard for a flight sim is a real cockpit with switches and windows, a technology that we already have. The HMD route will make for nice games I'm sure, and when it's good enough and cheap enough I will probably buy one. But as far as more realistic simming goes, it's Disneyland. Kind of like trying to do real work on an iPad.

 

You mentioned FOV. As with all display technologies the balance is between FOV and resolution. As you have described, the horizontal resolution (dpi) is miniscule - 960 pixels across 100 degrees. That is what I mean with the FOV. In the Kickstarter demo it was clear the only way to make sure this didn't look rubbish was to be massively zoomed out, which means the perspective was distorted and you couldn't read the gauges. Your comment about 'resolution per eye' makes no sense to me - the images overlap to simulate stereoscopic vision, so the effective resolution is still (going with your numbers) 960 x 1080 pixels.

It's obvious you have made up your mind and VR is something you really need to experience to "get". I won't be able to tell you what the experience is like, the feeling of presence in the virtual world, or how real it all looks because the brain accepts what it sees like that as reality. I think you are wrong about flight simulation gold standards. The gold standard is actually flying. Everything else is an approximation that is somehow deficient. You get to pick what you want to give up when you simulate and that is why it's a simulator and not actually real.

 

If I have a full cockpit with all the switches and knobs in their proper places then I am stuck simulating that one airplane. If I have a virtual cockpit, I can simulate any airplane and all I have to do is find a way to activate the switches and knobs that is least cumbersome. Mapping joystick and switch box knobs and buttons for common things works great and so does a mouse.

 

I don't understand what your point is. I have "flown" military T-37, T-38, F-16, and Huey Cobra sims, both full motion and stationary, but all had all the switches and knobs in their proper place. They were very specific for that particular aircraft and cost millions of dollars each. Any one would take up a full room or my entire house. I would think a full sim like those would epitomize your gold standard. But if I have a Cessna cockpit it is wrong if I want to fly a P-38, Piper Cub, or a 737. Much more wrong, in my opinion, than a virtual cockpit with everything where it is supposed to be. All the displays were "flat" even though they were full hemispheres, facets, or whatever. Honestly, I take VR flight over all the stationary sims. The full motion ones would be a toss up because the motion cues are another very powerful VR effect. But VR just feels that good. My opinion but my VR rig at home beats the million dollar stationary sims. Hardly an "iPad".

 

And the resolution is great even on a DK2 which is way better than a DK1. CV1 will be even better. FOV will also get better. It's not perfect. It doesn't approach eye resolution. To push that many pixels and calculate the two eye views at 75 fps (on the DK2 - CV1 runs at 90) takes a pretty powerful computer. It's just all that can be done right now. But at 90 fps another effect kicks in. The eye isn't all that high of resolution itself but your eyes and head have microtremors that work with the brain to effectively increase the resolution you see. The consumer HMDs are both refreshing and tracking fast enough that that mechanism comes back into play. Instead of seeing the individual pixels, which you can now in the DK2, you see a higher res image than is really there. But no, it's not perfect but it is improving.

 

There is one guy who is a flight instructor who posted about using VR as a training supplement for his students. There are a lot of people who can't easily turn a 2D monitor image into a 3D mind's eye view of the world and for them, using regular desktop simulators wasn't helping them. He tried putting them in VR and they immediately "got it". He said it totally changed their ability to practice patterns, approaches, and so on.

 

Inherent in the term simulator is the limitation that it isn't actually real. Something is going to be lacking. Whether it's a flat world with no depth, or virtual switches and knobs that you have to map to buttons or keyboard keys, it's not real. Each type of simulator can be optimized to mimic specific aspects of real flight. Cockpits with all the buttons and knobs are great for practicing procedures for those who want to learn "muscle memory" for that type. Simulators that present the world in 3D, that provide real depth, and that show you what the real cockpits and views look like for the real aircraft have their place as well.

 

You don't have to like VR or even accept it. But it sounds like you have some preconceived notions about the limitations that aren't entirely accurate. Nothing about VR means you can't have all the real knobs and switches. Actually, if done right, that could be the very best way. If you see a virtual depiction of something in its exact real location, who cares if you aren't actually seeing the real switch? You still reach out to the same place, still feel the same thing, and still activate it the same way.

 

But to each their own. All I can tell you is I have flown full on military sims, real aircraft, been a passenger for formation flight, and know what the visuals are like for real flying and real aircraft. VR comes the closest of any simulator I've ever been in and tricks the brain into thinking what you are seeing is real. A bit more colorful version of the real thing, but it still looks real. The brain is very primitive in that respect and accepts VR as reality. It's very weird to experience. But you feel the tinge of fear from the altitude and you really, really don't want to crash. Crashes actually get to you in VR. You have to take a moment to realize it isn't real. You aren't trying to convince yourself it's real. When you crash you are having to remember it isn't. Nobody I've talked with takes crashes lightly in VR. That just shows how real it feels.

I don't understand what your point is...

But to each their own.

 

I agree with much of what you say but I don't have to try the Rift to know that a HMD introduces a fundamental problem (it hides the real world) that we have not yet, in the general case, managed to solve. That is my argument, nothing more.

My career has been flight simulation - with the US Navy and Boeing in Seattle - and I have found the Oculus Rift + FlyInside experience to be the best approximation to the real thing (I'm a Private Pilot as well). The opportunity to fly an F-22 deep inside the Grand Canyon and look way up at the the walls or fly a dusk helicopter rescue mission from the rim down to the river is amazing. Flying a 777 with speech recognition help from a virtual copilot like Multi Crew Experience to run all the knobs and switches seems just right. I agree that I would like a bit more AA and resolution but even now, certain cockpits seem fine. We are just getting started in VR for FSX/P3D but I can say I haven't enjoyed my profession as much for a long time - monitors (even my three of them and TrackIR ) just don't come close. I really enjoy looking around naturally and the stereo inside the cockpit and portrayal of hilly scenery down low is the best. I intend to link up with Robert and others flying biplanes in formation - excellent!

Wait, awhile longer! been talking with some developers of VR and AR systems. It will take some time to work out the kinks and get FSX or Prepar3D to work correctly.

 

David...

 

See the following post:

 

"The future of Flight Simulation?"

https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?288636-The-future-of-Flight-Simulation&p=1913782#post1913782

See the following post:

 

Another aspirational but fictional video, conveniently set in a dimly-lit room with objects that appear solid. Finding a way to mix reality and VR is the holy grail but is anybody doing it successfully? If Microsoft's HoloLens is the state of the art, we are in for a long wait. (And do I need to point out that he picks up an actual hardware device at 0:36?)

 

If I remember correctly the KS video for FlyInside mentions the possibility of pass-through, which I presume would be achieved by mounting a video camera on the front of the headset with some sort of keying. Luma and chroma keying are well-established technologies in other domains but I guess they must be tricky to get robust or we'd all be doing it by now!

The pass through is already there with no chroma key. It uses a Leap Motion camera and you just bind a button to activate pass-through. Press the button and see your desktop and hands. I haven't tried it so can't really comment but it's listed on the FlyInside web page.

 

About the wait a while longer post, unless people want to pay out the nose since used DK2s are apparently now going on ebay for between $700 and $800, the consumer Rift and Vive are due to hit in the next months. Vive in December and Rift possibly/probably in January/February. Neither will likely have a second version for around a year while software is being updated rapidly.

 

And if anyone thinks the experience isn't there, I just refer you again to the video we made last weekend (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsphAOkGYRI). That was what it looked like. That was how smooth it was for me. That was what I saw. I captured that video, just edited it up, and added music. That is exactly the resolution we see but without the HMD you see the distortion, don't see the field of view, and don't get the depth perception unless you cross your eyes and then it's backwards. What I wasn't doing were using any of the virtual desktop things bringing charts or maps into the cockpit, Leap Motion pass-through, or the zoom functionality. Didn't need any of that.

 

So for now you can't even buy a DK2 without being pretty much robbed and the consumer versions won't be out for a bit longer. But once they hit, there really is no reason to wait. VR in flight sims works and works amazingly well. If you haven't tried it yourself, keep in mind that the experience is like nothing you have experienced before unless you count real flight because that is the closest thing to it. It does take a powerful computer if you want to turn detail up above minimum but I fly wit REX, Orbx, and aftermarket planes, all with FlyInside and have no problems. My system is pretty powerful though. But needing a good system is just how it goes. All anyone accomplishes by waiting is depriving themselves of some amazing experiences. Just my opinion.

 

And Whitav8 - we'd love to have you up there with us. It was a blast!

Another aspirational but fictional video, conveniently set in a dimly-lit room with objects that appear solid. Finding a way to mix reality and VR is the holy grail but is anybody doing it successfully? If Microsoft's HoloLens is the state of the art, we are in for a long wait. (And do I need to point out that he picks up an actual hardware device at 0:36?)

 

If I remember correctly the KS video for FlyInside mentions the possibility of pass-through, which I presume would be achieved by mounting a video camera on the front of the headset with some sort of keying. Luma and chroma keying are well-established technologies in other domains but I guess they must be tricky to get robust or we'd all be doing it by now!

 

My friend check your facts before posting, Windows 10 is AR and VR compatible from the start and could be used with advanced programming and games, but FSX and P3DV.1 and 2 are older programs and need updating. In the future there may be 3rd party adaptations to make FSX and P3D V1 and V2 work, this is why I say wait till these upgrades to become available. But any new games using Windows 10 will be able to use the AR and VR capabilities that Windows 10 already has built into it. I think the new HALO game is able to go to AR and VR Goggles but someone would have fact check it for me.

 

See below:

http://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-hololens/en-us

 

David :pilot: ...

Never liked that distorted views in flight videos, GoPro eyes is not for me.

My friend check your facts before posting, Windows 10 is AR and VR compatible from the start

 

I'm not sure which part of what I said you are responding to but perhaps you have misunderstood. I already mentioned the HoloLens which, like all state of the art 'AR' solutions, relies on overlaying a reflected image on a translucent head-up display. This projective approach will be useful for a small subset of applications (like shoot-em-up games in dark corridors) but in general it will not do what that video suggests it will do - i.e. mix life-like, solid-seeming images with the real scene. Or at least not very convincingly. (For a much clearer picture of what it cannot do just check out the Magic Leap home page.)