Cockpit bars

[MANDOBLE]

While in RL these bars were not a big obstacle due fast head movements, in AH they are major problems for some planes.
There is a sim with the problem solved, go here and look at the P38 cockpit screenshots.

http://www.xtremeairracing.com/

[Wilbus]

Is the game fun? Good FM? Worth buying?

Bars looking good btw

[MANDOBLE]

No idea, but if you click "UNDER THE HOOD" link, you will find documents about engines and flight modeling.

[Wilbus]

Thanks, downloading teh Demo, 4 minutesleft. Will see how it is and post "grade".

Bars look pretty cool

[MANDOBLE]

LOL, 900Mhz CPU or more recomended !!! I suppose the "enemy" AI has programmed a lot of dirty tricks

Whatever... ...I want these bars

[Andy Bush]

You are right...cockpit framing is not that much of a problem in real life.

Other than the size of the structure, one other thing has always bugged me about the way sim developers design the forward view...and that is the ratio of instrument panel to "sky" that is presented in the typical "F1" view. More often than not, this ratio is about 50/50...and when it comes to what is "seen" in RL, is about 100% wrong!

When I looked OUT of the cockpit in a fighter, that's what I wanted to see...the outside, not the instruments. If I needed to look inside for some reason, it took a conscious eye shift and refocus to do that. And in the airliner that I now fly, the same thing is true.This is not modeled at all in our sims...everything is presented at once and at the same focus.

It is true that seat position has an impact on this. In some fighters, the pilot sits lower than others and is therefore provided with less of an "all around" view. My experience in the F-104 and A-10 is a perfect example of this. The overall forward view in the Hog was much better than the 104...but in both, when I wanted to look forward thru the HUD/combining glass, I did not "see" instruments.

I wish developers would model this a bit better. The forward view should have two parts...an "upper" and a "lower", with the focus being forward airspace in one and the gauges in the other. I realize we can do this by changing views at present or by using the mouse to pan around, but this is not the point.

Instead, your "point" is the point! An "upper" view that is relatively free of instrumentation and cockpit framing is much more representative of what the RL pilot sees.

Andy

[Wilbus]

Flying gliders which generally don't have any bars at all, just a nice plexi glass hood. However same thing there, when looking out (99% of the time) you don't notice instruments, you just fly.

[K West]

Andy, how else would you put a real life field of view onto a 17,19 or 21" monitor? IMO a seperate "guage view" would just be an even more unrealistic feature to PC "flyers"?


 Fortunately in AH if you "zoom" all the way in and adjust your pilot positioning can you get a pretty good approximation of a real life filed of view which can be used in all directions?  I can easily make my forwad view be all sky with only a gunsight, some dash and canopy rails - no visible guages or much of the dash at all. So AH does have that option for those who want to avail themselves of it.
 As far as having transparant canopy obstructions. I don;t like it. I do think some of the planes, the Macchis especially, have far too much structure in the way. But with my CH gear I have the pilot moving buttons mapped on it and can lok around a bit easy enough. But why stop at transparant struts and bars? Why not go all the way and have FA-like glass cockpits?

Just my .02

 Westy

[VWE001]

There are possitives and negatives to every plane in AH, and cockpit bars are part of that equation. If you want a nice lexan canopy go play air racer, if you want to dog fight or in your case vulch( ) then deal with the bars.

[Andy Bush]

This is what I'm trying to say.

Here's a typical 50/50 forward view. It comes from IL-2, but the view is the same in most sims. In this, the pilot sees everything in the same focus. You want "realism"...this isn't it!



In real life, when we look forward, we don't "see" instruments...any more than you "see" your car instruments when looking down the road. In your car...or in a plane...to look inside to see the gauges, you have to do just that...physically look down and refocus. You want realism? That's it.

I suggest a better representation of the forward view is something like this:



As for the thickness of the structure, head shifting, etc...that's a different discussion. All I'm suggesting is that the F1 view show what the pilot is intending to look at...in or out...but not both.

Andy

[Sandman]

If HTC left the view positions alone and just made the cockpit framing a bit transparent like XR, I'd be happy with it.

[Am0n]

In AH one thing that really keeps me contently playing is the versitile veiw system. You can adjust the veiw to your liking and then if you want to see your instruments just hold the forward veiw and the down veiw at the same time and it focus's down in a angle pointed at your instrument panel.

IMO AH modeled the veiw system great, to see the instruments you do just as Andy stated you would in RL, you simply look down at them. In the heat of battle its easier to move your real eyes and as apposed to adjust your veiw on the screen.

[Am0n]

Andy

I dont think those veiw represent what the eye see's at all. They symbolize your head and you use your real eyes to look around. When i play AH, or IL2 and im looking around the sky i cannot read my instruments.

Now if the veiw was supposed to represent what the eye see's i would totally agree with you.

[Lephturn]

I think that system goes too far.  I think flying the bubble topped Jug should be a noticeable advantage over the razorback.  Sure, what we have now might be considered more obstructive than was "real", but the important part is that planes with bubble tops get some advantage from that increased visibility.

Maybe translucent frames like in Extreme, but with loss of the icons when the planes are behind them?  Sounds like a reasonable compromise.

However, this is not likely trivial to implement.  That's even if HTC thinks it's a good idea, which is not necessarily the case.

What we have now works pretty well and I'm happy with it.  Sure, I suppose it could be better, but I don't think this should be very high on the list of priorities.  I put more planes, bigger terrains, the bomber update, new Ack code, and much more above something like this personally.

[K West]

I understand what you're saying Andy. IMO to look at pertinant guages still takes but a glance and does not require any extensive amount of refocusing nor time to perform that glance with the eyes.
  What I'm trying to say is what Amon essentialy just did. When I'm "flying" in any game/sim The guages may be in my view but I do not see them as I'm "looking" out for other aircraft. But I do glance down with my eyse to check them when I need to which, IMO,  is more akin to being realistic than a seperate guage view which is tantamount to whole head-neck movement. How often when flying or driving does one take thier whole head and look down at the dash to check speed or fuel? Maybe just those who tend to have accidents?   While a guage view may be realistic for some guages, usually those of lessor importantance, to view most it would not be. And that is modelled in AH as most of AH cockpits have guages that you cannot see without actually moving you view complety downward to see them
 
 IMO just as a VR helmet could replace/snap/pan views better than a padlock view, so would a hollogaphic home setup replace a PC monitor better, as a virtual cockpit, than implementing a seperate "guage" view (ala WWIIOnline).

 Westy