2D cockpits becoming a nuisance ...?

[graaant]

With the appearance of the RealAir SF-260 upgrade, following their equally brilliant Spitfire Mk XIV, is there a chance that for many single -engine aircraft the 2D cockpit is on the road obsolescence?

Understanding that many fellow-simmers swear by 2D cockpit, and that it may be a real necessity with more complicated aircraft, with the Sf-260's great pilot view, crystal-clear panel and smooth-as-silk dials, for me even the mini-panel has become a bit of a pain, an unwelcome and unnecessary intrusion between the Spot and VC views -- and if I need quick detailed views of, say, the radio stack, there's always the pop-ups.

Anyway ... it could be technically impossible with FS2004, but if there's any tech guru out there who knows of a way to entirely remove the 2D view for specific aircraft -- ie. eradicate the whole 2D step, not just the panel -- it'd be much appreciated.

Hopefully,
Grant

[MeltedPixel]

I agree with you, I have the spit and I'm in the process of installing the SF260 update. I don't use the 2D panel in the Spitfire any, and I doubt I will in the SF260.

[Zevious Zoquis]

In any plane that has a VC like that of the Spitfire and 260, a traditional 2D panel really becomes completely redundant and unnecessary. Of course, planes that have VCs like the Spit and 260 are few and far between. :) But that's likely to become less and less of an issue as time goes by.

[psolk]

Even the more complex aircraft such as LVL-D's fabulous 767 really never require you to go back to the 2-d mode. I have flown the 767 entirely from the VC since day 1. You know it is only a matter of time before someone comes along and tells us how wrong we all are and how much better the flat 2-d bitmap is opposed to a full 3-d environment. ;) Heck what do we know...
-Paul

[nwabri]

You know in the end, it all becomes a simple matter of preference.

For large Airliner type aircraft, I prefer the 2D panel, (Again, on a personal level), but on Smaller GA aircraft, the VC is a bit more useful to me, as I spend more time looking out the sides.

It all boils down to what each individual likes...not as a general nuisance.

[rservice]

On aircraft with more complex panels, 3d cockpits may not be clear enough to read the instruments, but I agree that the Realair Spitfire is an indication of what can be done with 3d.
Ron

[DK8290]

I like the 2d panel view so I can have the GPS opened and other panels. Even with a good VC, many things require zooming in and clicking GPS buttons (or other switches) with active camera's head latency becomes a bit difficult ;-). Some VC's with built-in GPS's are quite small and so it's nice to have things such as that on the 2d panel view.

Perhaps being able to select which views are shown in the next/previous view cycle would be good. People could just have the views they like (such as take out the tower view)

[Zevious Zoquis]

hmm, the GPS is pretty much always available as a seperate pop-up. I generally use those even in the 2D panel as the buttons are bigger. Same goes for the radios.

[burnside]

I really like the VC in the SF260, but when it comes to doing IFR flights in multi engines, I still prefer the 2d panels. I must say, however, that RealAir has shown what can be done - the gauges are clear and responsive, the panel lighting eliminates the usual VC darkness when flying toward the sun, and the frame rates don't drop to the level of a slide show.

I hope future aircraft developers take the same path as RealAir - offer the option of a 2d panel and a really good VC.

Dale

[simman]

I have tried really hard to change the view cycles. I tried to eliminate the 2d cockpit view but could not find anywhere how to do it. It HAS to be programed somewhere. Has anyone been successful?

Don