Author Topic: Real cockpit and Aces High cockpit comparisons (Read 2434 times)

Karnak · « **on:** November 23, 2005, 03:58:44 PM »

There has been much talk of late regarding the 3D models of the cockpits in AH and whether they favor one aircraft or another aircraft. What I'd like to see in this thread are photo's of real cockpits and then below that screenshots, posed and positioned so as to best duplicate the photographer's position, of the aircraft in Aces High.

We should probably limit the aircraft looked at to the Aces High 2 standardized aircraft. So show the Ki-84's cockpit, but not the A6M5's cockpit. I'll start off with the Spitfire's cockpit.

Here is a photo Charge posted recently of a Spitfire's cockpit:

And here is an in game shot of a Spitfire's cockpit, cropped to about the same width and positioned about the same:

Crumpp · « **Reply #1 on:** November 23, 2005, 05:55:47 PM »

Hey Karnak,

Are the armoured glass side supporting bars on the AH model too thin at the top?

Is the bottom frame on the armour glass missing as well?

All the best,

Crumpp

Debonair · « **Reply #2 on:** November 23, 2005, 06:03:37 PM »

The AH pic looks a bit more zoomed in & sitting a bit lower than the real pic

2bighorn · « **Reply #3 on:** November 23, 2005, 06:15:26 PM »

Do I read right the flaps are limited at or bellow 130 knots IAS?

That would be 150mph instead of 175mph which we have now.

Crumpp · « **Reply #4 on:** November 23, 2005, 06:23:31 PM »

Spit did not have incremental flaps AFAIK.

They were either fully up or fully down and operated by compressed air. Not a very combat useful flap set up.

All the best,

Crumpp

Charge · « **Reply #5 on:** November 23, 2005, 06:25:31 PM »

Ty Karnak, I'd like to comment the Spit cockpit, as you have been kind enough to present those pictures for comparison, and I have been "un"kind enough to bring this particular case up.

Firstly: from that point the in-game picture does not seem as "off" as I thought it is, but there are some features which I'd like to point out.

The most critical part: The armoured windshield and its shape and size.
In original picture I'm not sure if that is the "sight-line" picture or if the view is slightly too low. Even from that angle the armoured glass is actually less in height than it is in width for abt. 22%, where as in present model the widshield is almost exactly as high as it is wide. So if we could move the view point slightly higher in original to match the model sight line the height/width percentage would be even higher to indicate less visibility in vertical plane.

The outer vertical framing in the model is correct but the windshield should actually look less wide from the upper part than from lower part even if perspective is taken into account. So the vertical supporting bars are not even but thicker from the upper part (not caused by perspective), as is seen from the original, too.

The outer framing is a bit too high from the upper part and in original does not give a very good view forward-up (as in keypad views). The Spitfire had actually a rather low profile cockpit...

The original does not have the hood closed but the framing in Spitfire's hood is done very well as, AFAIK, it does not really considerably increase the area the outer framing blocks from the view. Of course, in some models there is the mirror and the locking mechanism for hood, which brings strange looking clamps that further obstruct the view, but I don't think such details need to be added -to any aircraft. But a functioning mirror would be great in Spit, wouldn't it?

PS. It is incredible how almost every picture from Spitfire's cockpit is of the gauges and very very few of the actual gunsight view which I think would be more valuable to see and know than a few gauges which are usually the same in every a/c of that type...

PPS. Would it be difficult to get permission to put a hand and a digi-camera inside any a/c in any museum and provide this community a few precious and rare pictures of the actual gunsight views of these a/c?

PPPS. I hope I can be of assistance and provide some of the pictures needed in this thread. It would be nice to see Lavochkin c-pit pictures, too.

-C+

2bighorn · « **Reply #6 on:** November 23, 2005, 06:31:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Crumpp
They were either fully up or fully down and operated by compressed air. Not a very combat useful flap set up.

But is very useful in AH environment.

25mph is enormous when you combat planes like ki-84 or Zeros. It gives spit an undeserved advantage over some turners.

Planes like ki-84 have real combat flaps and unexplained limit of the exact same 175mph.

Furthermore, think of 109 series...

TDeacon · « **Reply #7 on:** November 23, 2005, 06:37:13 PM »

Karnak,

I think there is a logical flaw in your proposal. Even if they match side-by-side, you are ignoring the "fisheye lens" view we have in AH, which exagerates the blocking effect of a given width of canopy bar. The AH canopy bars need to be a bit thinner to compensate for this.

There are other reasons as well, and many of them have to do with the difference between a small square 2-D monitor screen and what you can actually do inside a real cockpit (example, the slow speed of the "move" commands compared to how quickly you can shift your head from side to side in real life).

Therefore slightly thinner canopy bars may well be more realistic in terms of "net effect". This ties in with the fact that there is more to the game than just sitting in the cockpit, looking straight ahead, and thinking that it looks just like a picture one took from a real cockpit.

Therefore, I would hope that the LW enthusiasts, instead of urging HTC to ruin the allied cockpits, would instead urge HTC to thin the bars on the LW cockpits. The desired relative visibility between Allied/LW would still be achieved, but without damaging the ability to see, and shoot at higher angle-off. (I used to fly the FW-190A5 a lot before the new cockpit, and now no longer do so due to the horrible view).

This second edit is directed at Crump, who I know is a LW enthusiast... :-)

Crumpp · « **Reply #8 on:** November 23, 2005, 06:42:55 PM »

Quote

Would it be difficult to get permission to put a hand and a digi-camera inside any a/c in any museum and provide this community a few precious and rare pictures of the actual gunsight views of these a/c?

I will be filming the cockpits of the following aircraft next week:

P40
Hurricane
Spitfire Mk IX
Bf-109E
Corsair
Maybe the P51D if the maintenance is complete.

All the best,

Crumpp

Waffle · « **Reply #9 on:** November 23, 2005, 08:16:29 PM »

lol - man, this is getting funny -

all the arguments about having all the flaps and performance set to "documented" references....then asking to make a concession made on the GE cockpits because "I can't see, the bars are too thick"

Sorry folks, but the 190s and 109s had some major differences as compared to the US 51s and the Brit spits...

Hopefully the pics will reach....

Look at the size of the pilots in realtionship to the cockpit...especially on the 51 pics versus the 109 pics....you can see how small the 109 pit actually was. - and how thick the windsheild frame was.

Waffle · « **Reply #10 on:** November 23, 2005, 08:17:09 PM »

Waffle · « **Reply #11 on:** November 23, 2005, 08:18:14 PM »

Crumpp · « **Reply #12 on:** November 23, 2005, 08:31:45 PM »

Quote

all the arguments about having all the flaps and performance set to "documented" references....then asking to make a concession made on the GE cockpits because "I can't see, the bars are too thick"

Hey Waffle,

I don't see any reference to LW plane cockpits in this thread. Karnak simply posted a picture of the spitfire cockpit asking if it appeared correct.

I for one think they should be modeled accurately. I am not bothered by the Focke Wulfs cockpit in AH. Certainly will check it against ours when it's complete.

All the best,

Crumpp

Waffle · « **Reply #13 on:** November 23, 2005, 08:36:22 PM »

It's all over other threads, you should know that as well as I do....

'and it was mentioned in this thread as well.

From Tdeacon...

"Therefore, I would hope that the LW enthusiasts, instead of urging HTC to ruin the allied cockpits, would instead urge HTC to thin the bars on the LW cockpits. The desired relative visibility between Allied/LW would still be achieved, but without damaging the ability to see, and shoot at higher angle-off. (I used to fly the FW-190A5 a lot before the new cockpit, and now no longer do so due to the horrible view)."

Not knocking anybody or anyone's post....

Have fun filming the C-pits - sounds like an enjoyable day.

-Waffle

Crumpp · « **Reply #14 on:** November 23, 2005, 08:38:33 PM »

Quote

Have fun filming the C-pits - sounds enjoyable.

Been planning it for a while, ever since I located the aircraft and read the RAE evaluation.

Thought I would include it in comparision so readers could form their own opinion.

All the best,

Crumpp