Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 49

Thread: Virtual Cockpits?

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skywatcher12 View Post
    I only know one real world A320 captain and he uses FS9 and 2D panels for the same reasons I do.
    Which reasons? You didn't post a single one.

  2. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pzl 104 View Post
    Which reasons? You didn't post a single one.
    FS9 v FSX:

    Incredibly little difference. They are both old and same generation. Visuals are almost identical if running equivalent add-ons.
    FS9 runs brilliantly, never crashes and is completely problem and fuss free.
    FSX needs a 6 GHz processor to run without limitations. When I have one of those, I might very well switch.
    FS9 you can fully max everything out and run absolutely anything without headaches. FS9 from my experience needs a 3.5 GHz processor to have incredibly few or literally no limitations.
    With FSX, if using less than a 6GHz CPU you will always need to compromise to get a workable sim despite what anyone may claim.
    Any FSX gains over FS9 are simply not worth it at this point in time and then there is also VAS to deal with.
    When you can run FSX with a 6 GHz processor then the balance might shift enough that FSX would be preferred over FS9.
    Right now I know my FS9 easily looks and performs better than most users FSX.

    Regarding VC v 2D:

    Quote Originally Posted by Skywatcher12 View Post
    I'll answer.

    I like my view set to 100%. Less than this it is not what you would see if sitting in a cockpit looking out the window. It would be what you would see looking through the viewfinder of a camera and wide angle lens attached out a cockpit window.
    If you set the view to 100% you will now only see a very small portion of the VC in front of you. In a VC, you have now lost all the peripheral vision you would have in a real life cockpit. In real life, it would be like holding up a toilet roll to your eye and sitting in the cockpit looking through that.

    The best representation of a real cockpit is via a 2D panel imo. You can see a vast array of instruments in front of you, it simulates peripheral vision as you would have with the eye in a real cockpit and what you see outside is as real life. The ease of pushing buttons or flicking switches feels more realistic than scrolling around a VC.

    A VC maybe gives a more realistic "general appearance" of a cockpit at maybe around 50% magnification. But at this magnification it doesn't represent a pilot's perspective. It looks like someone is filming inside the cockpit with a wide angle lens. The world outside is too far away and often the confines of a real cockpit are lost.

    A 2D panel in aspects of operating, viewing instruments and representing what you would see out the real windows is most realistic imo. It best simulates the feel of flying a plane from a real cockpit. A VC simply feels and looks like you are playing a computer game not using a flight simulator.
    Mark Daniels

  3. #13

    Default

    I have the impression that you have never sat in a real cockpit or flown a real aircraft IRL, since you can't look out of the window and at the instruments at the same time.
    Being able to look outside and to have the 'vast array of instruments in front of you' is definitely not realistic.

    Don't know what monitor you are using and what's your viewing distance, but with the correct viewing distance and an acceptable monitor size and format you certainly don't need to zoom out to a 50% setting and even at 100% zoom peripheral vision is still ok.
    I'm e.g. using a 80% zoom setting which results in a realistic peripheral vision and the correct perception of speed.

    Btw, I don't know what 2D vs VC has to do with fs9 vs FSX.
    Last edited by pzl 104; 01-11-2020 at 11:59 AM.

  4. Default

    In regard to FS9 v FSX, I made two comments in the post you quoted and I answered reasons to both of them.

    Yes, I have sat in a cockpit. You can't look outside and view the panel at the same time. You can't do that using a 2D panel either. You either focus on the panel or external view. It's as real life but when you do look at the 2D panel, it's a much closer representation than a VC.

    What flight sims need is an independent zoom setting for VC and outside view. It's the only way to improve reality but then you still have the issue of accessing switches. In real life you quickly and easily select any switch. It is much the same with 2D panels. In VC's you need to hunt around with a hat switch to first find the right area and then the actual flicking of the switch can be a task in itself.

    I stand by everything I say. Visually and operationally, a 2D panel is much closer to real life than a VC.

    Each to their own.
    Mark Daniels

  5. Default

    Well I am a real world pilot. And I will not use a VC. Can't stand them. A 2D panel is much more realistic to me. FS2020 needs to have both 2D and VC to make everyone happy. I can honestly say that if there are no 2D panels in the new sim I will not be buying it. I'll stay with FS9.

  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bam1220 View Post
    I will not use a VC. Can't stand them. A 2D panel is much more realistic to me. I can honestly say that if there are no 2D panels in the new sim I will not be buying it. I'll stay with FS9.
    How do you know that 2D is much more realistic since you have apparently never used e.g. FSX, P3D, Aerofly FS2 and DCS?

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skywatcher12 View Post
    In VC's you need to hunt around with a hat switch to first find the right area and then the actual flicking of the switch can be a task in itself.
    Ever heard of TIR or VR? Especially VR it's exactly as IRL e.g. concerning switch location.

    Btw, finding a switch on an overhead panel is much more difficult IRL (same in a VC) than on an unrealistic flat 2D overhead panel.
    Last edited by pzl 104; 01-11-2020 at 01:42 PM.

  8. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pzl 104 View Post
    I'd like to know how you display e.g. the instrument panel, the pedestal, the overhead panel and the scenery at the same time.
    Ever heard of TIR or VR? Especially VR it's exactly as IRL e.g. concerning switch location.
    TIR your primary movement is your head. In real life, your primary movement are your eyes. I spent a day using TIR, brings no extra realism for me.
    VR, my god, when it's proven it will be a useful technology in the years to come I will look at it. VR crowd is no different or less loud then the 3D TV crowd. The 3D TV crowd are all gone now as are 3D TV's.
    Last edited by Skywatcher12; 01-11-2020 at 01:41 PM.
    Mark Daniels

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skywatcher12 View Post
    In real life, your primary movement are your eyes.
    That's new to me. You do need to move your head (and even the whole upper body) to be able to e.g. find/operate switches on the overhead panel.

    I never got used to TIR either and I still prefer the classic hat switch. Nevertheless VR is simply breathtaking realistic. Presently the only remaining real drawback is IMO the too narrow FOV.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Westminster, CO
    Posts
    6,979

    Default

    In real life, your primary movement are your eyes.
    Huh? In real life I rarely hold my head still. If I did I couldn't see a LOT of things that I NEED to see, in aircraft or out. IRL my head AND eyes are moving most of the time, often while leaning forward, or ducking my head a bit, depending on what I need to see at the moment. I need to see a LOT more than the panel. I have to lean forward in a turn to see past the wing, or maybe duck my head a little, or both. Also, I'm glancing left, right, ahead, etc. frequently (out the window, that is), both to see the aircraft's attitude and to check for traffic. In a Cub, for one example, the trim crank is down by my left hip. I have to glance there just for a split second, though in the sim I use a control on the stick. In an Aztec or Apache (and other early Pipers) the trim crank is almost directly above my head, so I have to glance up a bit, though only for a split second. Or I glance down and right to see the trim wheel in a Cessna or Bonanza. This also is true for light switches, altitude setting knob and more. Even when flying in IMC, I still need head movement, though not quite as much as in VMC.

    With TrackIR, I can move my head side to side, up and down, fore and aft, as well as left and right and tilting it up and down, right and left. So as I'm on downwind, I can swing my (virtual and real) head to the left, then lean left and down and forward a bit to look back to easily see the runway behind me at the "45º point" (or further), then immediately look back forward while sitting up straighter. In my, for example, turn to base, with that Cessna wing in my desired viewing path, I can lean forward and down, then look up and left to see the base leg path, perhaps even the runway behind me. During ALL of this my hands stay on the stick and throttle. And how about those quick glances I mentioned above; I can do those with TrackIR, but not with a hat switch and keyboard controls to change the view. And it's all smooth movement, unless you have the display parameters set too high, which also makes the frame rate low and the display a bit jerky, even for the "2D" view.

    Try that in your so-called 2D "cockpit."

    I spent a day using TIR, brings no extra realism for me.
    I'm not quite sure what that is, but if it's anything like TrackIR it takes a little getting used to initially, but most folks can adapt and then it will become as natural as looking in real life, but that doesn't become "natural" in just a couple of hours -- useful, but not natural.

    I had a friend who bought TrackIR at the same time I did, and he never did get used to it -- he just didn't have the patience to spend enough time with it for it to work for him (he had lots of patience for some things that I didn't, though, too). So he tended to do away with panels, for the most part, and have just the small stuff the 'W' gets you at the bottom of the screen, along with making heavy use of the external views, especially spot and flyby. It wasn't that he thought it was more realistic, just that he couldn't get used to the way you have to use it. And he, too, was a real world pilot and CFII with well over 10,000 hours.

    So different people have different needs and different tolerance for various "features."

    Larry N.

    As Skylab would say:
    Remember: Aviation is NOT an exact Science!

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. analog cockpits vs. digital cockpits
    By BryanButler in forum FSX
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-12-2017, 04:59 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-22-2014, 08:43 PM
  3. Aircraft with good virtual cockpits? Do they exist?
    By AlphaInfinity in forum FS2002
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-22-2002, 09:56 AM
  4. Virtual Cockpits
    By James81 in forum FS2002
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-18-2002, 04:25 AM
  5. Virtual cockpits with addon 737?
    By Yigg in forum FS2002
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-09-2002, 06:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •