Next Level Racing Motion system and DCS?

[lasvideo]

Since this is a once in a lifetime purchase for me, I am closely looking at all alternatives.

Has anyone use the Next Level Racing Motion system and DCS?

 

 

http://www.nextlevelracing.com/products/next-level-racing-motion-platform-v3/

 

I am considering this as a possible alternative to the DOF Reality.Heres why...

 

 

1. Software and hardware are well designed and manufactured

2. Entire motion unit is hidden under chair

3. Great seat comes with...

4. Good in small space

5. DCS friendly with no need to figure out setting up Simtools

6. Seat mover, but HOTAS can connect to seat assembly

7. Available from Amazon so any returns or fixes are easy. Less chance of product damage since its not going from Ukraine to Vegas.

 

Cost is ridiculous...but Im retired and can almost afford it (Not a DIY guy) ;)

Edited November 14, 2017 by lasvideo

[Thadiun Okona]

Honestly this type of motion platform is of limited use for aircraft flying... if you are limited to two axis for flight you really want pitch and heave (z-axis up/down), not pitch and roll. Also, with the pivot point located so far below the pilot's sensors (your inner ear), changes in pitch/roll will also have false queues as your head describes an arc vs your body being rotated with your head at the axis. That is one of the main reasons 6dof platforms are used, the additional axes allow the machine to interpolate the pivot point to be at the pilot's head to minimize false motion queues.

 

What they are showing in the video is what is colloquially referred to as 'arcade motion' (I work in this industry). The machine is attempting to mimic craft attitudes rather than trying to mimic craft accelerations. Flying feels nothing like what they are showing in the video... coordinated flight pushes you straight down in the seat... and why roll is not generally included in real 2dof flight systems. What you really need is something that subtly but convincingly mimics accelerations... mild but accurate 'suggestions' of accel are far more convincing than machines that mimic attitude, even ones that spin all the way around and such or put focus on extreme excursion.

 

For a motion sim to work it doesn't need high excursions, it needs accurate ones and also req very low latency from signal to motion and the ability to operate at high frequency so it can handle what is thrown at it. Poorly thought out motion translating programs are a recipe for sim sickness due to vestibular mismatch when your eyes and inner ear disagree though, and a motion sim is only ever as good as the program driving it. There are some good stuff out there, but what is in the video is not worth it or at least not in the mode they are using it... it's possible there are other settings to allow realism.

 

The machine itself might be worth it to you if you also simrace, but not for flight alone imo. Not being a diy guy puts you are a disadvantage in this dept, because all of them no matter what req a lot of tinkering. Even a super rad turnkey motion platform represents a bottomless pit of tuning to your applications and understanding the hardware intimately is kind of important.

Edited November 14, 2017 by Thadiun Okona

[Fab]

You know, there is a Russian company, that makes 3 dfo platforms for sim, and they will only set you 1000 dollars back

[lasvideo]

You know, there is a Russian company, that makes 3 dfo platforms for sim, and they will only set you 1000 dollars back

 

Thanks! Yes, DOF Reality. Ive been in touch with them. I prefer this setup for the reasons listed above.

Edited November 14, 2017 by lasvideo

[lasvideo]

Honestly this type of motion platform is of limited use for aircraft flying... if you are limited to two axis for flight you really want pitch and heave (z-axis up/down), not pitch and roll. Also, with the pivot point located so far below the pilot's sensors (your inner ear), changes in pitch/roll will also have false queues as your head describes an arc vs your body being rotated with your head at the axis. That is one of the main reasons 6dof platforms are used, the additional axes allow the machine to interpolate the pivot point to be at the pilot's head to minimize false motion queues.

 

What they are showing in the video is what is colloquially referred to as 'arcade motion' (I work in this industry). The machine is attempting to mimic craft attitudes rather than trying to mimic craft accelerations. Flying feels nothing like what they are showing in the video... coordinated flight pushes you straight down in the seat... and why roll is not generally included in real 2dof flight systems. What you really need is something that subtly but convincingly mimics accelerations... mild but accurate 'suggestions' of accel are far more convincing than machines that mimic attitude, even ones that spin all the way around and such or put focus on extreme excursion.

 

For a motion sim to work it doesn't need high excursions, it needs accurate ones and also req very low latency from signal to motion and the ability to operate at high frequency so it can handle what is thrown at it. Poorly thought out motion translating programs are a recipe for sim sickness due to vestibular mismatch when your eyes and inner ear disagree though, and a motion sim is only ever as good as the program driving it. There are some good stuff out there, but what is in the video is not worth it or at least not in the mode they are using it... it's possible there are other settings to allow realism.

 

The machine itself might be worth it to you if you also simrace, but not for flight alone imo. Not being a diy guy puts you are a disadvantage in this dept, because all of them no matter what req a lot of tinkering. Even a super rad turnkey motion platform represents a bottomless pit of tuning to your applications and understanding the hardware intimately is kind of important.

 

Thanks for the detailed response!

 

6DOF at present prices is not even a possibility for me. Academically your thoughts may make sense. But believe me, I tried this system out in VR and the small movement cues easily fooled my brain into enjoying another layer of immersion. Is it like real flying? Of course not. Is flying a A10C desk like flying the real thing? Of course not. But is the VR flight experience enhanced...you bet your bippy :) (In my year of having crazy fun in VR I have never experienced the pukeys. So that isnt an issue for me). After lengthy research I found that other systems I can afford dont match up to the points Ive listed above (IMO)

[frenzon]

Honestly this type of motion platform is of limited use for aircraft flying... if you are limited to two axis for flight you really want pitch and heave (z-axis up/down), not pitch and roll. Also, with the pivot point located so far below the pilot's sensors (your inner ear), changes in pitch/roll will also have false queues as your head describes an arc vs your body being rotated with your head at the axis. That is one of the main reasons 6dof platforms are used, the additional axes allow the machine to interpolate the pivot point to be at the pilot's head to minimize false motion queues.

 

What they are showing in the video is what is colloquially referred to as 'arcade motion' (I work in this industry). The machine is attempting to mimic craft attitudes rather than trying to mimic craft accelerations. Flying feels nothing like what they are showing in the video... coordinated flight pushes you straight down in the seat... and why roll is not generally included in real 2dof flight systems. What you really need is something that subtly but convincingly mimics accelerations... mild but accurate 'suggestions' of accel are far more convincing than machines that mimic attitude, even ones that spin all the way around and such or put focus on extreme excursion.

 

For a motion sim to work it doesn't need high excursions, it needs accurate ones and also req very low latency from signal to motion and the ability to operate at high frequency so it can handle what is thrown at it. Poorly thought out motion translating programs are a recipe for sim sickness due to vestibular mismatch when your eyes and inner ear disagree though, and a motion sim is only ever as good as the program driving it. There are some good stuff out there, but what is in the video is not worth it or at least not in the mode they are using it... it's possible there are other settings to allow realism.

 

The machine itself might be worth it to you if you also simrace, but not for flight alone imo. Not being a diy guy puts you are a disadvantage in this dept, because all of them no matter what req a lot of tinkering. Even a super rad turnkey motion platform represents a bottomless pit of tuning to your applications and understanding the hardware intimately is kind of important.

 

Wish I'd found this response before spending all night researching this! Do you have any recommendations for what we should be looking at instead if not doing the DIY g-seat thing?