Lockheed Martin Prepar 3D

https://www.prepar3d.com/

by doener • 4 years ago

188 129 4 years ago

What's interesting about this is that they are using Microsoft's Flight Simulator X's codebase, and I think plugins that work in FSX will work in Prepar3D.

akpa1• 4 years ago

It's veeeeery hit and miss as to if an FSX add-on will work with P3D. One reason is that FSX is 32-bit only whereas P3D is 64-bit as of v4 - they've changed a lot of stuff.

mm007emko3• 4 years ago

Until Prepar3D version 3 it was somewhat true. Since V4 it is 64-bit and it broke the compatibility with most older plug-ins.

dlojudice• 4 years ago

Prepar3D furthers the development of Microsoft® ESP™ while maintaining compatibility with Microsoft Flight Simulator X, allowing many thousands of add-ons to be used within Prepar3D. [1]

Interesting. Microsoft ESP? First time I hear about this Microsoft product. Furthermore the simulation is based on Microsoft Flight Simulator X, 2006 software.

[1] https://www.prepar3d.com/product-overview/

mynameisvlad• 4 years ago

ESP seems to be the commercial platform based off Flight Simulator X:

https://news.microsoft.com/2007/11/14/microsoft-esp-debuts-a...

yodon• 4 years ago

ESP was an effort to turn Flight Simulator into a general purpose commercial and military sim. They assembled a great team to do that, then shut it all down in the aftermath of the 2008 crash. Balmer decided some part of Microsoft Game Studios needed to be shut down to save costs and the Flight Sim team had always been an outsider with the weakest political connections into the core of MGS, so even though the ESP business plan was much more sensible than most of the MGS products, it was the piece that ended up getting killed.

com2kid• 4 years ago

Balmer decided some part of Microsoft Game Studios needed to be shut down to save costs and the Flight Sim team had always been an outsider with the weakest political connections into the core of MGS, so even though the ESP business plan was much more sensible than most of the MGS products, it was the piece that ended up getting killed.

Worse than that.

This was relayed to me by someone who worked on the flight sim team.

So flight sim wasn't actually part of Microsoft game studio, they were in the middle of transitioning over when the shit hit the fan. The head of the organization that they were a part of (I forget what it was called), blocked the transfer so he could keep the flight sim team around as that org's sacrificial lamb to be laid off.

rburhum• 4 years ago

I worked on this product for a year back in the day. The cool thing about MS ESP was that we used the FSX Engine for the "1000 foot experience". Everything looked great from far above, but not close by. The solution to this was that MS Train Simulator 2 made tons of improvements for the "1 foot experience". The idea was to include a "world editor" with world-wide geospatial data, too. https://youtu.be/GXzE1Yb54xU?t=406 The physics models of the planes and the trains were great, but obviously to be a generic simulator you needed to include physics engines for other types of objects like Cars. So we grabbed the physics engine of Forza and included it there. These things combined were honestly beautiful - and add to that the backwards compatibility with all the 3rd party FSX plugins/adds ons. Bummer that this is exactly when the iPhone came out and the cloud-based strategies were taking over "classic" enterprise software. Re-org and bye bye FSX/TrainSim2/ESP. I had left before this happened, but was really a bummer not to see the full potential of ESP :-(

M3L0NM4N2• 4 years ago

I play MSFS a lot with realistic add-on planes like the A32NX or the PMDG 737, even though the flight model isn't quite "as good" as XP or P3D, the visual dominance of MSFS adds so much to the immersion for me.

mm007emko3• 4 years ago

Well, I honestly put flight modelling over graphics every single day. X-Plane 11 might not be as good as MSFS in terms of graphics but everything else (i.e. the really important things) is.

M3L0NM4N2• 4 years ago

For me, I am not a real pilot (yet) and can't really tell the difference in 99% of cases. Also, the fidelity of 3rd party addon planes in MSFS is just as good if not better than in XP.

blt• 4 years ago

I heard somewhere it can be counterproductive to learn stick and rudder skills in sim, that sim time is better spent learning how to use instruments, automation, fly complex procedures like DME arc, etc. So maybe the fidelity of aircraft system models (vs aerodynamics) is also really important?

cardiffspaceman• 4 years ago

There was a "flight simulator" ported from SGI GL to OpenGL+Windows when Microsoft embraced OpenGL. There were a small variety of aircraft in this program. I could take off in the 747, kill the engines and glide to a safe landing. Considering I have no experience whatsoever with real aircraft, that's probably not realistic.

tra32• 4 years ago

I would love to learn about the software development side of the US military/industrial complex. I read the Pentagon Wars [0] last year and it was fascinating. Read Skunk Works a while back [1].

What I found really interesting about the Pentagon Wars, is how the incentives don't really parallel what I see in "normal businesses". I wonder if it's the same for software?

Is there anything more recent with the focus on software? If not, I'd love to read more about the design/development/testing of hardware as well.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon_Wars

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skunk_Works#cite_note-16

anewpersonality• 4 years ago

I would love to learn about the software development side of the US military/industrial complex. I read the Pentagon Wars [0] last year and it was fascinating. Read Skunk Works a while back [1].

Judging by Ghidra, America's Army and BRL-CAD, it's amateur hour over there.

make3• 4 years ago

are these bad? asking as someone who knows nothing of any of them

it_was_cool• 4 years ago

I thought people were generally pleased with Ghidra. Is this not the case?

CuriousCosmic• 4 years ago

Ghidra and BRL-CAD are absolutely high quality pieces of software. They just don't have time put into shiny UI. The UX isn't really that bad once you learn them though.

Also BRL-CAD's continued existence really should speak for it's quality considering it's the one of the oldest VCS tracked pieces of software and is the oldest public one. It's leagues ahead of a lot of gov and corporate tooling I've seen on both sides of the fence.

But otherwise yes, the mil-industrial complex often leaves something to be desired with development practices. The money all goes towards feeding systems engineers, mechs, mats, and sparkies. Software is usually the last consideration and is for holding together all the stuff the teams couldn't figure out how to do without it.

Things are getting better but it's a slow process and it almost entirely depends on software engineers sticking around long enough to get into leadership rather than leaving for better paying corporate or research jobs. While I'm on my way out now for a number of reasons, the industry is finally starting to get good at software practices and where it absolutely mattered they for a long time have tended to get it right.

mshockwave• 4 years ago

I don't get it, Ghidra is one of best RE tools, what's the problem?

thereddaikon4• 4 years ago

You should be warned, Pentagon Wars is mostly fiction and written by a guy who had a serious bone to pick. He's a member of a troublesome ground known as the reformers who get an outsized share of the attention in popular media while being pariahs in the defense industry.

Source, I used to work in the defense industry and people like Burton and Sprey are loathed.

tra32• 4 years ago

I did not know that. I thought the book was mostly factual, as far as these things go. The program he references though, are real programs. The budgets and overspending were also correct (where I checked). Do you have a link to any rebuttals? I will google myself, but if you have something that you find convincing I'd love to read it.

closewith• 4 years ago

Well, if the claims in Pentagon Wars are even half true, the author would be loathed by the defence industry.

saiya-jin• 4 years ago

Well whistleblowers in banks are loathed too (and pharma, oil, government etc.), exposing and destroying a very finely balanced machinery of theft, corruption, bribery, massive egos, big cocaine/prostitute parties, you name it.

That doesn't make them any less right, does it.

nostrademons2• 4 years ago

Such is the nature of any sort of reformer and institution. You wouldn't be a "reformer" unless you thought the institution needs to be "reformed". That sets you up in opposition to everyone inside the institution, who are presumably inside the institution because they believe in the goals, processes, and structures of the institution.

viggity• 4 years ago

there is an old made-for-HBO movie called The Pentagon Wars... I presume it is accurate enough, although it was turned into a comedy so I'm sure they took some artistic license with it. Highly recommended. It's available for free on youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir0FAa8P2MU

some_random2• 4 years ago

Both the movie and the book are complete BS, they're funny but not accurate reflections of reality.

WrtCdEvrydy• 4 years ago

Yeah, that was a book adaptation.

codethief• 4 years ago

From https://prepar3d.com/product-overview/ :

Prepar3D (pronounced “prepared”) is a visual simulation platform that allows users to create training scenarios across aviation, maritime and ground domains. Prepar3D engages users in immersive training through realistic environments.

m0llusk• 4 years ago

For me the site slowed and then returned only database access errors. It seems they were not prepared.

IceHegel• 4 years ago

This looks about as good as heavily modded battlefield 1942. That's not saying it's bad sim software, but its look is behind the times.

ramesh31• 4 years ago

This looks about as good as heavily modded battlefield 1942. That's not saying it's bad sim software, but its look is behind the times.

It's a modified FSX engine. So yes, about the same vintage as BF1942.

t0mas884• 4 years ago

It's based on an old version of MS Flight Simulator from around 2009 or 2010 or so.

The graphics aren't any worse than most multi-million dollar full flight simulators used for pilot training. Even better compared to some of the slightly older simulators.

afterburner2• 4 years ago

Thing about multi-million dollar full flight simulators used for pilot training is, I doubt they're as concerned about having the latest picture perfect beautiful graphics.

akie• 4 years ago

Google cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:cKimjW...

gigatexal2• 4 years ago

Not to be used for fun? Aww dang it

criticas• 4 years ago

If you've bought a license, who's going to know? "Developing Mission Scenarios" is indistinguishable from "Flying the Cessna under the Golden Gate Bridge".

The question is more "Is it worth buying a Dev or Academic license"?

gigatexal2• 4 years ago

I’ve not got an edu license :/ so a dev one is one I’d have to do

fffobar• 4 years ago

With the successes of F-22/F-35, PAC/Patriot and HIMARS/M270 (each is an obvious top of the shelf product in its category) - is Lockheed now going after Boeing's professional flight simulator supremacy?

gbraad• 4 years ago

They have flight simulator centers here in Beijing based on Prepar3d. Very impressive. My kids have flown a Cessna in those several times to teach them the basics.

theYipster• 4 years ago

When Microsoft shut down the old Flight Simulator development team and program (FS1 up to FS X, not including the new MSFS2020,) they licensed the commercial version of the platform to Lockheed Martin, who took over development and kept it going as Prepar3D. Lockheed's biggest contribution to the platform over their years of stewardship was to port the codebase to 64-bit and to modernize for DirectX 11.

There is still a very rich library of add-on software for the old MSFS, including some very detailed simulations of airliners, that today are flown on Prepar3D.

Since Lockheed Martin doesn't want to be seen as a video game company, the $60 license is an "academic license." However, this is what most people looking simply for a modernized FS X engine will buy for their home use.

caycep2• 4 years ago

How does it compare w/ the new MSFS, or the other big names w/ commercial "gaming" development efforts behind them, i.e. Xplane, DCS, etc?

Macha7• 4 years ago

The base game is very very sparse compared to newer offerings like XPlane or MSFS.

Due to its long history of development it has some of the most well received third party aircraft add-ons, but be warned, these will cost more than the sim itself.

If you want a video game, you should get the new MSFS. If you want something more realistic you should get P3D + third party aircraft for airliners or XPlane for GA aircraft (+ setup ortho scenery for XPlane), but much of the ecosystem is slowly releasing MSFS ports too.

I am a little worried for what will happen to hobbyist flight sims after MSFS though. A large part of its appeal is the bing maps powered streaming of good terrain and other map features, and I suspect Microsoft won't maintain that forever. If they lose interest for a similar length as between FSX and Microsoft Flight or between Microsoft Flight and MSFS, that could be a bad time for the flight sim world if they've gotten too used to MSFS.

---

If you do get into the P3D third party ecosystem, be warned that many of the developers are older hobbyists turned devs which have been in their own universe and so can have weird ideas from time to time. Like a support system that is a public forum where you must manually sign your real name at the end of each post or get banned (PMDG), or uploading the chrome username/password DB of suspected hackers based on a check for username (FlightSimLabs).

mmaunder4• 4 years ago

Those are games that can be used for training. Prepar is a military and civilian training tool that can be used (against its license terms) for gaming. It’s the only direct to consumer product that Lockheed has - so it’s basically their military trainer that they’ve been nice enough to make available to us. The motivation behind this was probably for the dev ecosystem it would bring. The non-entertainment term in the license is a legacy from their deal with MS when they bought it.

hadlock• 4 years ago

Prepar3d uses the MSFS X engine, so 90%+ of mods/add-ons for MSFS X/10 work for Prepar3d.

MSFS X is, like a lot of games, a warmed-over version of a previous game engine, with improved directx support and tweaked to run on the latest (at the time) version of windows. I forget if it has it's roots in MSFS 3.0, 4.0 or 2002, but it was a pretty old engine in 2006 and has gotten a few updates over the last decade but is pretty crufty and when you play it, unless you have $300 of after-market add-ons, is very obvious it's old, especially compared to x-plane etc

As the other guy said, the people still heavily invested and running the modding scene for a 20 year old video game are... esoteric.

Playing MSFS X as a newcomer at this point in time is mostly to inspect a historical artifact, but it's a very detailed simulator if you want to take off in a 747 from LAX and fly it to London or Moscow non-stop.

stby2• 4 years ago

I think it should be noted that Prepar3D exists for 12 years now [1] and has been heavily used by flight sim enthusiasts after FSX development was stopped and before MSFS came to the market. It is somewhat unclear were exactly this is used for professional training. The US Air Force apparently uses it for their pilot training [2], and some sort of F-16 simulator seems to exist [3]. I assume their F-35 simulators are also based on Prepar3D.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Flight_Simulator#Loc...

[2] https://youtu.be/NMLg7THwhAI?t=164

[3] https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/r...

anarcticpuffin• 4 years ago

I believe Perpar3D powers the Redbird simulators [1] some of which are accepted by the FAA as AATDs (Advanced Aviation Training Device), meaning they can be used for a portion of the training requirements for the Private Pilots Cerficate (often called a license), Instrument Rating, etc. I've trained using one and while they're not perfect, they do save you some money and time with certain procedures. They're also great for more accurately simulating subtle systems failures.

[1] https://simulators.redbirdflight.com/

TimTheTinker• 4 years ago

I'm pretty sure RedBird is based on X-Plane. I flew one a few weeks ago and the functionality was very familiar.

altgans• 4 years ago

"Accurate topography with regionally and culturally appropriate textures"

What does that mean?

maxerickson• 4 years ago

Speculating, things like crops and building decorations (if they have 3d buildings anyway).

KineticLensman2• 4 years ago

culturally appropriate textures

'Culture' in the sense of human artefacts (buildings, etc) laid down on an underlying terrain. Such culture will be specific to particular regions of the world.

_fat_santa• 4 years ago

I would think things like roofs. If you're flying over Florida, make it "culturally appropriate" by making the roofs look like they are made of that tile rather than regular shingles.

Edit: There's a Florida joke in there somewhere but I'm not going there.

mmmpop• 4 years ago

That's no fun, especially when I don't really know where you're trying to go with this one?

buildsjets• 4 years ago

They won't auto-generate thousands of replica KFC restaurants in rural Mongolia, as they did in Flight Sim 2004. If Google Image Search worked anymore, I'd link a screenshot.

https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/showthread.php?48720-Giant-ch...

adolph• 4 years ago

Wht a fascinating EULA stipulation:

Prepar3D is not to be used, offered, sold or distributed through markets or channels for use as a personal/consumer entertainment product.

https://www.prepar3d.com/product-overview/prepar3d-license-c...

jaywalk2• 4 years ago

Lockheed Martin just doesn't want to be in the "video game" business. They'll still gladly take your money, though.

iggldiggl• 4 years ago

It might possibly also have been one of the contract stipulations when Microsoft licensed the FSX code to Lockheed.

joezydeco3• 4 years ago

Funny thing is... they used to be.

https://segaretro.org/Lockheed_Martin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real3D

Macha7• 4 years ago

Microsoft sold off the rights to FSX to two parties. Lockheed got the rights to the "professional" version and Dovetail the rights to the "consumer" version. Same starting codebase, Lockheed released Prepar3d and Dovetail the somewhat successful Flight Simulator X Steam Edition and later the unsuccessful Flight Sim World.

I'm sure this is a CYA clause to show they're not stepping on dovetail's license and little else.

caycep2• 4 years ago

It's the new new economy when "Lockheed Martin" features a YouTuber to promote its commercial military software...

armchairhacker• 4 years ago

Slightly off-tangent, but i really wish there was a good, freely available, decent-quality dataset of the world surface (like Google Earth but anyone can use it). I obviously don’t expect everywhere to be fully mapped but even popular cities like Boston don’t have very good models. And it would be amazing to even have models of some of the more rural places.

It would make a great scene for games and animated movies. The world is a beautiful place and seeing places you’ve been is nostalgic.

dewey• 4 years ago

It always makes me a bit sad to see how much time, energy and money is wasted on mapping and 3D modelling the same place over and over again and everyone accumulating all this data in their own silos.

Google Maps, OSM, Apple Maps, Bing Maps and all the work that Microsoft Flight Simulator is doing by building 3D models of every airport and city from scratch.

MS at least have a good way of utilizing Bing maps in the game and probably have data flowing both ways in case they improve something but seems like a giant waste of resources.

somat• 4 years ago

"Google Maps, OSM, Apple Maps, Bing Maps"

One of these things is not like the others.

mmaunder4• 4 years ago

I wonder if the NGIA might release their radar mapping of the Earths surface at some point. Kind of like the mapping databases available from the census dept.

fortysixdegrees• 4 years ago

Search for SRTM DEM for global elevation data, and Microsoft building footprints for buildings. That will get you pretty close

joezydeco3• 4 years ago

Here's a YouTube livestream where someone hooked up Prepar3D to an ADS-B receiver and created a virtual planespotting system at LAX:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0GrpAgdBFI

r212• 4 years ago

Thats so cool

illwrks• 4 years ago

That's brilliant! It took me a few minutes to understand what I was looking at... realtime data, hooked into a flight sim, live streamed.

joezydeco3• 4 years ago

It seems like there's of potential for synthetic displays like this in other areas or industries - the buzzword du jour being "digital twin" but that's more for simulation, maybe this is more augmented reality? But you need a really solid set of incoming data to make it happen. The openness of ADS-B is the huge advantage here.

mmaunder4• 4 years ago

On a related note, Foreflight integrates really well with MSFS and when you combine that with PilotEdge it's a great learning tool. Works with Prepar and X-Plane too.

t0mas884• 4 years ago

Yes, perfect for IFR and procedure training. The lack of control loading / feedback in home simulators makes it not a great choice for primary training. I've had to teach some simulator enthusiasts in real aircraft for primary training, there is a lot to unlearn. Especially in terms of trimming, fine gained control and looking outside.

But for IFR training if you already know how it fly it's amazing what home sims can do. Add in Navigraph to get up to date data / procedures and Jeppesen charts and you get a better real world representation than some of the certified simulators used in flight training.

ngcc_hk2• 4 years ago

Really like airplane flying in.

johnohara• 4 years ago

The Warthog Project on YT is worth mentioning here as an example of what happens when passion meets technology. Been watching since the second vid. Never disappointed. [0]

He uses Digital Combat Simulator (DCS) from Eagle Dynamics SA. They also sell commercial versions of their simulator software. [1]

Getting the terrain right is one thing. Getting the cockpits right is another matter entirely. [2]

[0] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJq3cq9N6xYF0fAvTgpwoBg/vid... [1] https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/ [2] https://www.rferl.org/a/u-s-deports-russian-convicted-of-smu...

dharmab3• 4 years ago

Other cool related resources are OpenHornet and /r/HotasDIY

billfruit• 4 years ago

Does it have crash/collision physics?

Macha7• 4 years ago

No, most modern flight sims refuse to implement them because they don't want to be branded a 9/11 simulator when someone would inevitably make a youtube video of them crashing into buildings.

Also the ones that use real planes have licensing from manufacturers to deal with, who don't want their planes portrayed being destroyed (similar to limited damage modelling in modern driving games with licensed cars).

You'll want a combat sim.

choonway2• 4 years ago

it’s not implemented because it’s a lot of work and doesn’t add to training value.

The time would be better spent on improving damage models

Aspos• 4 years ago

Does anyone have experience with its API? I use Microsoft AirSim for drone simulations, but it lacks fixed-wing aircraft physics. Having skimmed through Prepar3D SDK docs it is not clear if I can get images from the engine, not sure if it is possible to control aircraft from external code. Does anyone know if it is possible?

metadat• 4 years ago

Is there a way to run a demo version or otherwise try this out to make sure I want it before buying a full-fledged license?

On a related note-

Recent HN submission covering Geo-FS: a free, web-based, global satellite imagery flight simulator

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30345760

gamedna• 4 years ago

Am I missing something - what exactly makes this HN worthy? AFAIK Prepar3d has been around for a long time, and the headline is from 2021.

Lockheed Martin Prepar 3D

Related Stories