View Full Version : Virtual Cockpits Part 2
08-26-2002, 11:11 AM
The quality varies greatly - I actually like the Super Cub/Archer 2. Best VCs yet. The default VCs are terrible. Capt Sim's are OK and FSD makes a decent one. The Falcon 50 is really really nice, but brings my 1.9 P4 to it's knees :-)
The distortion and general blockiness and blur of VCs still hasn't nailed it yet as well as the 2D panel. You just can't build in the detail and quality of movie/DVD quality CGI yet with today's computers, I think.
One purely functional problem with VCs is that you have to zoom out to get the full view which fisheyes the screen.
Then to pan and tilt around, it's hard to get your view (using the hatswitch) back precisely to the front. I wish it would "lock" forward like my old Novalogic F-16/MiG-29 sim used to.
08-26-2002, 02:01 PM
Can you say that this VC is a blurred one? I don't think so ;-)
Fully working gauge backlights:
All these shots are from Dreamfleets very-soon-to-be-released Cessna C177B Cardinal...
08-26-2002, 02:39 PM
As far as locking back to the front of the view after panning about... you probably already know this, but if not... space bar. :)
08-26-2002, 02:49 PM
Actually, I understand what he is talking about. Granted, the Dreamfleet and FSD VC resolution is top-notch... as is shown in your top screenshot. Unfortunately, at this zoom level I have no idea if there is sky, trees or buildings in front of me.
When pulled back to allow for simultaneous views of both the panel and the environment ahead of the plane, as in the second two shots, you have to agree that the gauges are not as "crisp" as in the 2D cockpit and can sometimes be difficult to read with any accuracy.
I am in NO WAY, at all, complaining about any of these products... I love them. But, I do find mysely needing to shift back into 2D during "hairy" approaches so that I can read the gauges... Not the designers' fault... it's an inheirent limitation of the technology.
08-26-2002, 02:54 PM
Unfortunatly the space bar also resets the viewpoint and position in the virtual cockpit. You should use the 8 button on the numerical pad. That only changes the view to forward.
08-26-2002, 03:53 PM
22" monitor and 1600*1200*32 resolution, and high VC res. setting, solves all of the above problems. All important gauges are easy to read. But I also use the digital readouts during landing phases anyway. I want "instant" speed readouts.
08-26-2002, 04:22 PM
>Actually, I understand what he is
>talking about. Granted, the
>Dreamfleet and FSD VC resolution
>is top-notch... as is shown
>in your top screenshot.
>Unfortunately, at this zoom level
>I have no idea if
>there is sky, trees or
>buildings in front of me.
>When pulled back to allow for
>simultaneous views of both the
>panel and the environment ahead
>of the plane, as in
>the second two shots, you
>have to agree that the
>gauges are not as "crisp"
>as in the 2D cockpit
>and can sometimes be difficult
>to read with any accuracy.
>I am in NO WAY, at
>all, complaining about any of
>these products... I love them.
> But, I do find
>mysely needing to shift back
>into 2D during "hairy" approaches
>so that I can read
>the gauges... Not the designers'
>fault... it's an inheirent limitation
>of the technology.
Yeah, I know what you mean with that. But have you tried the Cardinal? I wouldn't say anything like that before trying this plane. Though, I'm afraid that you will need to wait for next friday ;-)
08-26-2002, 04:43 PM
Hmmm, never tried the 8 before... I'll have to give that one a whirl... thanks.
As for trying out the Cardinal... Graduate School has now done begun... probably won't be making any FS purchases till Ph.D is in hand... same goes for buying 22" monitors :-lol... budget, budget, budget, darn.
08-26-2002, 06:15 PM
Granted. As far as VCs go, that's a nice one. But notice the blocky sun visors, A pilars, etc. Just not sharp, too computer graphicky looking. Blocky and fuzzy. Believe me, I understand why - it would take HUUUUUGE polygons to render a photorealistic cockpit worthy of Toy Story.
So, for now, I love the DreamFleet approach of 2D bitmaps for alternate views and a full VC in virtual view.
I wish DreamFleet would get back into the airliner biz! Where's that 727?
I love the heavy iron. But I know, they're harder to design.
08-26-2002, 08:39 PM
>The quality varies greatly - I
>actually like the Super Cub/Archer
>2. Best VCs yet.
> The default VCs are
This is terrible?!
Wow, I guess we have very different tastes then. I for one love the default Caravan and Baron (well, not with default airfiles I must admit) since they are both my most flown FS2002 aircraft. I even got a few payware planes too which I also enjoy alot. :)
08-26-2002, 10:31 PM
Eatin' crow here :-)
You picked the two best VCs in default aircraft. They still aren't as good and clear as the 2D panel.
I was thinking more of the FS2002 737/747/777 jetliners. They are uniformly blurry, distorted and yucky.
I think it'll take a PC of the contemporary Silicon Graphics workstation power to do VCs right. Few years off, perhaps?
The kind of computer that could render Toy Story in real time
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.