Wow!!! 1 Million Views for my 6DOF Plug & Play Motion Platform 

Thank you so much!🤗

@@madmontys6dofmotionplatfor386 - 01:52 - When you light the burners you should be wiping out the controls before you salute to ensure all control surfaces are free and correct.

@@mynameisray Will do so next time, Sir!

I was doing exactly this 10 years ago 😅

This is the future of Drone warfare. Having Drone carriers on the sea or in the air. Drone pilots could be on the carrier or state side.

Finally someone understands lateral G‘s and when they apply and when they (most of the time) don‘t. Thanks for sharing your comment!

Yeah, the sense of speed you get is insane. I can't imagine VR + a motion rig like this. I need to start saving up. lol

The future of Drone warfare. Soon we will see Drone carriers on the sea, air and space.

Wow - you have really good eyes to have discovered this. After working with Motionsystems on the motion profiles, I came across the topic of landing gear and made the suggestion to implement a short motion when retracting and extending the landing gear. They did a great job. I've now also installed a Buttkicker and it feels super real. Even when I roll over the arrester cable covers on the aircraft carrier, the platform reproduces every bump. It feels ultra realistic...

And the takeoff, crazy!!! ⏸

@@madmontys6dofmotionplatfor386 Can you please post more videos, this is truly amazing! Great job!

nah, I don't like that because it haven't the 720° degree rotation

What he said

@@golemraven7765why do you need 720? It’s not that important. We are already jealous enought of this Yes am late and dont start yapping

😂😂😂😂 right!?

No fr 😂

Thank you and yes, it is hard to handle the fun 😅

Thank you!

And that, my friend, is how it begins....with a dream! From there, the passion grows and makes you work towards fulfilling that dream!😉 For me, it started when I was a kid looking at airplanes flying over our house! Then as a teen, I discovered the PC and flight simulators. Then a little over a decade later..flight school and my Private Pilot's License. My ultimate dream was to become a fighter pilot. However, I've had to live that dream virtually in VR, lol. Just added my 6DOF rig...PT-Actuator. Loving it tremendously!

@redtailpilot When I hit the lotto, I had the honor to crew uh1's and then uh 60's for 4.5 years. I , at age 60, can not get this out my blood. I truly am in awe.. Glad almost all your dreams have come true, and honestly, nothing better after a mission, sit and smoke and joke with friends online, 🤣🤣🤣

@@bulletstop100 that's awesome! Wow, UH-60. Much respect sir. And here I was thinking you were a young kid with a dream, lol. We're roughly the same age. I'll be 59 in October

It is therefore in the basement 😅

yeah, sealt belt would make the immersive feeling even better, but in VR I have to turn around quite a lot while dogfighting and sealt belts restrict me a lot in this.

Not high at all - Energy consumption is much lower than many people think...

It literally cannot be worse than your average washer or dryer.

Sorry for the late reply, pre-Christmas stress :-) First, the optics of the camera seem to be deceiving, the platform has maximum pitch of 30° to the front as to the rear. The fact that there is slightly less pitch to the rear on takeoff than to the front on landing is simply due to the slightly greater deceleration on landing compared to acceleration on takeoff. The platform transmits the values of DCS, which are very realistic. If I understand you correctly, you expect a "hit in the back" when landing. There is also a "hit in the back" via the heave movement, but the decisive force is the deceleration due to the braking and thus the pitch forward. If you wanted to fly with a monitor, this is only possible via a mounting on the cockpit, in contrast to many racing simulators, where the screen is static on the ground in front of you. The platform moves too much for you not to have to constantly adjust your viewing direction. Therefore, the screen has to be constantly in front of you, whereby the real immersion feeling only happens with VR, of course. Keep that in mind when building a plattform. The missing roll to the side in the turns is thus correct. You fly a so-called clean turn, without lateral forces (the center of gravity always remains directed downwards). It would feel quite wrong if the platform rolls to the side. Rolling movements of the platform only happen when you experience strong lateral forces, e.g. in turbulence or during a crash landing (see my other video). Hope this helps you!?

Thank you so much for the detailed reply! Great information!

I can only imagine how good your Christmas presents must be if you can afford a setup like this.

I did a 'simulator' at the museum of flight that could roll all the way over so you could be inverted. If you did a 90 degree banked turn it would tip you 90 degrees. I have never felt so ill after just ten minutes - the visuals and motion mismatch was awful. This set up looks spot on.

@@BernardWilkinson That's the trick, no one gets any so that he can have this lol. Jk I have no idea

Happy wife and 3 sons. Just give flowers every two weeks 😅

Of course you can. The software of Motionsystems has a big range of possible settings. For every force (longitudal, lateral, vertical) and attitude of the plane (like pitch, roll…) you can adjust the intensity (max. movement) and the liveliness (speed of plattform movements) not only for being airborne, but also independently for being on the ground (taxi, takeoff etc). There is actually nothing you can‘t tune…

​@@madmontys6dofmotionplatfor386o

That's a really good question! As I was unable to test the QS-S25 system (it was only released after my purchase), I can only give you my personal assessment for now. Like you, I use the platform for flying and racing simulations, although flying clearly outweighs racing for me. For flying, in addition to the acceleration of the platform, the maximum angles that the platform can achieve are particularly important. Mine can do around 30 degrees, which sounds low, but feels like a lot. If you roll to the side, you're almost afraid of flying out of your seat, while simulated G-forces are very well transmitted to the rear or front. The QS-S25 system simply can't do that, as it is designed purely for acceleration. You don't need the angles for driving, as it would take far too long to achieve them. You want to simulate short, fast movements. This is exactly what the QS-S25 system was developed for and I think it works very well. However, I would not use the QS system for flying for the reasons mentioned above. But with my PS-6TM-150 system you can race really well. Even if I can't compare it to the QS system, it feels really good and realistic. The platform works in the low angle range anyway, but is very agile and fast in its movements. And yes, the platform can easily simulate vibrations from engines, curbs and the like. But I do this even more with the butt kicker hanging on the platform. This significantly increases the immersion. Have a look at the website, there is also the PS-6TL-350 system, which works with linear actuators and achieves almost the same angles as my system, but is about 50% better in terms of acceleration values. That would be a good, but also expensive compromise. Nevertheless, I can recommend the PS-6TM-150 system for racing without any restrictions, and even more so for flying.

How I envy you! When my toddler has pooped his nappy, my older son is screaming, my playroom is in chaos because of the boys and I can feel the force of my wife calling me to dinner, I come very close to your past! 🤣

okay captain obvious

You can find the current prices of the platform and the cockpit in the links of the description. In addition, you have to calculate about 1,000 euros for additional profiles and the racing seat.

You spent 20k for that platform???!!!@@madmontys6dofmotionplatfor386

Actually I did had to wait until I could afford a house. Fortunately, within the years of waiting for a house the motion platforms made a huge development step forward…

How much does one need?

I didn't quite understand that. Do you mean that the platform has to roll to the side in turns? That is fundamentally wrong, as there are no lateral forces in turns. Otherwise you would no longer be able to drink coffee in the Airliner...

I am happy to share my standard answer to this question, which is often asked:: This is unfortunately a common wrong assumption, that the platform should roll to the side in turns. When I drive through turns in a racing simulator, the platform rolls strongly to the side because I have lateral forces. In an airplane, however, there are virtually no lateral forces because a cleanly flown turn always results in a pure, vertical G-force. I am a private pilot myself and have learned to fly "after the ball" of the turn coordinator. You surely know it from general flying. Have you ever had your drink spill to the side during a turn of an Airbus? Exactly not... Therefore - the tighter the turn, the stronger the vertical G-forces and thus the pitch to the rear, but never to the side. MotionSystems, however, has introduced a slider that makes it possible to simulate banked angles in turns. Some people think this is necessary, but as a private pilot it bothers me a lot, because it does not correspond to the real forces. Hope the clarification brings you a little further....

Great goal and we will be so much further in DCS, VR and motion technology then. In 4 years I will be jealous 😆

I would be very happy to buy a real airplane for just 32k more, but after flying myself (without my own airplane) I know that the airplane won't stay in the air for long for such a price...😅

I still get it, but the older I get, the harder it gets! Although difficult to see, there is a small gap on the right and I can climb into the cockpit wonderfully via the step-on profiles. Climbing into a Cessna 172 is more difficult...

el dejo el link en la descripcion

The manufacturer of the Motionsystems platform provides plug&play-capable software that automatically reads the G-forces from all (common) games and transfers them to the corresponding movements of the platform. Of course, you can make completely different settings for the movements in the software setup for each game so that it meets your requirements.

Yes, the platform moves even when the aircraft carrier sways in heavy seas. However, these are of course slight movements, as the maximum deflection must correspond to 9g. As far as your perception of a turn is concerned, there is often the (unfortunately wrong) opinion here in the forum that the platform should roll to the side in turns. Rolling to the side simulates lateral forces (such as in a turn on a racetrack). But there are no lateral forces in turns when flying - think of your drink in an Airbus/Boeing, it never spills out to the side in turns. It's the same in a jet, the turn leads to an increase in vertical forces, so the platform pitches backwards, but not to the side. If there were lateral forces (e.g. in a crash), the platform could roll to the side by up to 30 degrees. However, Motionsystems has a built-in function that allows the platform to roll to the side in turns, but this feels completely wrong to me (as a private pilot), so I leave it in what I consider to be the correct settings. I hope this helps you.

Someone is looking very closely! However, I think you are mixing up the term Heave, which describes the vertical movement of the platform, with Surge, which describes the horizontal movement. The platform does it right with Surge, when accelerating strongly it moves forwards jerkily so that I am pressed briefly and strongly into the seat, the platform immediately compensates for this movement with a slow (imperceptible) movement backwards to return to the centre position. You can probably see the slow movement rather than the jerky snap forwards, which happens at the same time as the pitch movement. When landing, it's exactly the opposite - the platform has to jerk backwards to give me the feeling of being thrown out of the seat... Hope that helps you! PS: The same principles apply to Heave, which also works with vertical acceleration

@@madmontys6dofmotionplatfor386 Ah yes, I was mixing up my terms... and now that I'm watching even more closely, I see it now. What I was originally seeing is the return-to-center motion. Now that you explain this, I can see even better. Thanks! I appreciate the response and explanation.

The platform’s software does all the compensation perfectly and automatically

Please visit the link provided in the description, Motionsystems have a very good website about their products and software...

I thought about wind simulation (the software supports it), but in the end I would only find it realistic if I fly an open biplane or drive a convertible. Interesting fact - it feels so real that when I land after a 1-2 hour combat mission and open the canopy, I feel like I'm breathing fresh air 😅

@madmontys6dofmotionplatfor386 I thought that as well but even driving a car with open windows is still makes me feel like I'm driving a car more than when it's off

Hello and sorry for the late reply, I was traveling abroad. The platform comes with a steel plate as a top cover. The two crossbars are 160x80mm aluminum profiles (e.g. Alu Profile I-type, groove 8), which are screwed downwards to the platform. The manufacturer has pre-drilled me in the steel plate the holes so that they fit exactly for the two crossbars. I then put a ready-made cockpit from Monstertech on top of the crossbars. At that time there was still the MTX cockpit, today it is called MTS. The MTX I have then individually still a little adapted, which is the same profile system as with the crossbars. The crossbars were only necessary because the forward cantilever of the MTX would otherwise have collided with the base of the platform if it pitched forward a lot. So now I have sufficient clearance for all maximum movements. Hope this helps you!?

Take a look at my other videos, there is one with a crash at the end. You don´t want to experience that too often 😅

Hi Cory, MotionSystems' platform comes with their own software (ForceSeatPM). This also includes VR Headway, which extrapolates all the movements of the platform and allows you to sit centred in the virtual cockpit while the platform is moving (see my other, more detailed answers on this). The MotionSystems software solution is plug-and-play. As complicated as the setup looks, it is very easy to use. Set up the platform, connect it and start the software. That's all. No matter which (supported) game you start, a perfectly functioning synchronisation with the game takes place automatically, without any lags or other problems. You can really make all kinds of settings in the software to adjust the intensity of the movements according to forces and axes. This is not rocket science either, but is done via sliders with detailed descriptions. It is really simple to use and I can only recommend MotionSystems to you. Excellent support (response within a few hours) and regular updates, as a customer you can't be more satisfied.

A few days ago the same question was asked in German, here is the translation of my answer: This is unfortunately a common wrong assumption, that the platform should roll to the side in turns. When I drive through turns in a racing simulator, the platform rolls strongly to the side because I have lateral forces. In an airplane, however, there are virtually no lateral forces because a cleanly flown turn always results in a pure, vertical G-force. I am a private pilot myself and have learned to fly "after the ball" of the turn coordinator. You surely know it from general flying. Have you ever had your drink spill to the side during a turn of an Airbus? Exactly not... Therefore - the tighter the turn, the stronger the vertical G-forces and thus the pitch to the rear, but never to the side. MotionSystems, however, has introduced a slider that makes it possible to simulate banked angles in turns. Some people think this is necessary, but as a private pilot it bothers me a lot, because it does not correspond to the real forces. Hope the clarification brings you a little further....

Yes, I looked at the options at the time. But especially in combination with the software and the compensation of the platform movements for VR headsets, the platform is in a different league. It's all very professional. That's why I saved a lot of money so that in the end I'd rather have something that works for a long time for a lot of money than a lazy compromise for little money. Start Citizen I unfortunately don´t play.

Actually I am above the 150kg, I guess I am at 170-180kg including myself. But Motionsystems confirmed to me, that everything up to 200kg is fine. The 150kg results from the 3DOF Plattform stress test with 3 motors, this 6DOf has 6 motors so the higher payload is no problem at all. Actually it is very agile / quick im movements despite 170kg, it has so much power that I have to press escape when being shot down - it feels like a bull ride 😅

@@o.v.1959 Hah! That's great incentive not to get shot down! Thanks for the info. It looks fantastic!

@@o.v.1959 I'm very confused about the angles. It doesn't seem to match when rolling.

@@einarabelc5 It´s not about angles, it´s about Gforce simulation. which obv has nothing to do with angles but acceleration

@@o.v.1959 Funny, I had a Geforcefactory Edge6D delivered a few weeks ago. Same deal with Il2 and X-Plane. I get tossed around like a rag doll when crashing. I need to turn those effects down a tad. I looked at your setup but they only had the 220v option. Need 115v in the US. Could’ve added that to the house but figured the Edge6D was good enough. Same 150kg payload limit but yours has greater range of motion. What interface software do you use with DCS? Outside of the native interface I can use SimTools and FlyPT but haven’t had the time to look into them.