Full Motion vs. static simulator.

Through real movement on all relevant axes, learner drivers physically experience acceleration, braking deceleration, and cornering forces — this supports the development of a realistic driving feel and intuitive vehicle control.

Without physical movement, training relies more on visual and acoustic stimuli. Basic procedures such as operation, traffic rules, and route navigation can still be taught effectively.

A precisely calibrated, low-latency Full Motion platform reduces the discrepancy between visual and physical perception that typically triggers Motion Sickness.

Since there is no physical movement, the risk of acceleration-related misperception typical of motion sickness is largely eliminated — however, purely visual movement without physical feedback can also create a sense of discrepancy.

A tangible, real driving feel is often perceived by learner drivers as more motivating and credible, as it is closer to the actual driving experience.

Static systems are often perceived as having a lower barrier to entry, as the exercise resembles familiar video games — however, the real driving feel remains limited.

Higher initial investment due to actuators, steel frame, and motion electronics, which can be amortised through more intensive, differentiated training benefits and higher utilisation.

Lower acquisition costs and easier maintenance, as no large moving components are installed.

The platform's range of motion (Motion Travel) requires additional space around the cockpit so that the actuators can operate freely.

More compact footprint, as no movement space for a platform needs to be reserved.