Thoughts on panels anyone?

[Shane Herbel]

I have gone on the record in other forums telling of my hate for the FS2004 cockpits.
Ok so hate is harsh but lets just say improvement is needed.
I dont know if anyone else uses other flight sims as I do, but it seems to me that the
default 2D cockpits in FS2004 need to be seriously looked at by the next FS release.
Ala! IL2 Pacific Fighters users will see the great use of graphics in their 2D/3D cockpits.
I think a good idea for a 2D FS2004 cockpit would be to give it 3D charecteristics.
Example: If you are passing through turbulance. The cockpit should move a little
giving you the impression that you are at least moving inside the aircraft. This is greatly
simulated in IL2. I'm not asking for the panel to move around vigorously. I just think a
small amount of movement would render the feeling of being in a cockpit environment quite nicely.
So if you bank left for example the cockpit would move to one side.



Post Edited ( 07-08-05 07:05 )

[fruitfly]

Haven't you tryed ActiveCamera? ( http://www.anticyclone.be/ )

I'd sure like to have more light in VC!!!

[Shane Herbel]

Hi fruitfly, Im not sure what this has to do with my post re FS2004 cockpits.
But this program I have already used. I think some people might like it. But
it did nothing for me.

More light in VC. I agree with you 100%.

[fruitfly]

Well... it swings the VC left-right and up and down according to the inertia or turbulence...
I thought that's what you meant when you said "The cockpit should move a little
giving you the impression that you are at least moving inside the aircraft".
Sorry... obviously have misunderstood you.

[mach_one_man]

I definetely think the ol' 2D panels should be abandoned in FS10. Racing simulations used to have just 2D sprite panels but now
virtually all have 3D equivalents of "virtual cockpits" which have the slight motion and really add a sense of realism if they are well made.
The main problem with VCs at the moment in Flightsim is that they are not really that great quality, even on the defaut models and some
addons have appauling or no VCs. Even in some of the standard aircraft there are sections with bad textures, with controls on them that
are required to fly properly - like in a situation running FsP. Therefore what I am saying is that many lack functionality of a 2D panel. Some
people may argue that 3D panels would be too complicated for large airliners with many buttons to recreate accurately with working
instruments, however some addon developers have actually created VCs providing similar frame rates to 2D panels and even more
functionality. Also in VCs all of the controls are in the real places, so using trackIR or just by looking round using the mouse you can use
all controls (without opening up new windows all the time and look around for other aircraft more realistically. I think if this was done as
the only panel option, people would put time and effort into virtual cockpits so they would be as good in functionality and have all the other
advantages over 2D panels.

Anyway, thats my 2cents

[Shane Herbel]

Ahh fruitfly I understand now. Yep. I agree.

mack _one... I would also like it if the VC were made perfect so that is clearer aswell.
i wouls aldo like it if the view movements were a little quicker.

[davidvoogd]

I love the 2D panels, if they were removed from a version of flightsim I probably wouldn't buy it. I find them far clearer, easier to read, more
accessible, and overall I by far prefer them to the VC.

[mach_one_man]

davidvoogd, have you seen some of the amazing new Virtual Cockpits that some companies have been making, the experience of flying
in them is just so much more immersive. I went to a flight sim stand at an air rally and all of the systems running flightsim were all on
Virtual Cockpit. I personally at the moment still fly on 2D panels as most of my aircraft do not have great VCs. However im waiting for it all
to go into virtual cockpits - it is the future.

[bdparris]

I agree also. MSFS has progressed pretty far from the SubLogic days, so it will get better in the future. I just hope I'm not 90 years old then.

Most VC gauges are totally unreadable as is for higher resolution monitors. MSFS did a decent job with it, but more and more people are
getting faster cpus and video cards, so I think that it will improve. I think that when gauge design progresses a little more, we will see
better virtual cockpits with all mouseable switches. There are already some very nice gauges out there and in some of the payware
models.

One of the biggest problems is when you have high polys in a model, non-DXT bitmaps, all the scenery, traffic and etc..., current cpu's will
take a hit. There are a few addon aircraft out there that can't be flown smoothly with any scenery settings set above normal, let alone 25 ai
aircraft taxing around the airport. Fs9 took a big jump in the weather department when it was released, so maybe we can see the same
improvement in the flightdeck with both 2d and 3d in the next version.

[SWAFO]

I only fly with 2D pits. I hate the 3D ones. It's all a matter of personal preference. 2D usually has a lot more detail, and just works better
for me. Does activecamera work on 2D pits?

[Deacon]

Both RealAir aircraft - SF260 Marchetti and the RAF Spitfire -- use active virtual cockpit technology. Both aircraft, though providing some 2D cockpit
control if you want it, have been designed to be flown exclusively from the VC. RealAir has succeeded. These are two great aircraft. And both have got
to be two of the most accurate and tight flight dynamic models I've ever flown. Your virtual cockpit DOES move and react as thought you had peripheral vision and were pulling g.

Treat yourself.

(not a paid endorsement!!)



Post Edited ( 07-11-05 06:33 )

[bdparris]

Activecamera only works on the virtual cockpit. It is usefull because you can padlock other traffic, and move into parts of the plane you
wouldn't be able to get to as fast (if they are in the model). If FS stutters or the frame rates are low, you are in for a very jerky ride with it
though. They do have a suggestion forum over on their site I think the target framerate for it to work smoothly is something like 20-30 or
so.