Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Karnak on October 16, 2005, 06:24:35 PM
-
I was looking at the Spitfire cockpit graphics again when I noticed that the trigger in the Mk IX and Mk V cockpits was for a Spitfire armed only with machine guns such as a Spitfire Mk Ia or Mk Va.
In this screenshot you can see the trigger button is a simple, single action device used to fire all weapons:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/spit91.jpg)
Here is a photo of a Spitfire Mk IX's trigger mechanism:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/cockpit3a.jpg)
Pressing the top fired the machine guns and pressing the bottom fired the cannons.
Here is a second shot of it:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/cockpit4a.jpg)
Pressing the middle fired all guns.
And here is a shot of the action used in controling the ailerons:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/cockpit2a.jpg)
-
A trigger?
What a about the c-pit framing?
:huh
-C+
-
Originally posted by Charge
A trigger?
What a about the c-pit framing?
Hard to judge without seeing it in the default view position. The view position has been pulled way back to show more of the gauges, and controls.
-
So technically, you couldn't fire both machine guns AND cannons at the sametime, in Spits?
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Pressing the middle fired all guns.
I think they can fire all at the same time ;)
-
Originally posted by Karnak Here is a second shot of it:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/cockpit4a.jpg)
Pressing the middle fired all guns.
-
:furious
-
Ill post this link here, too.
http://www.simflight.com/%7Ereviews...lAirSpit_34.jpg
Of all the pictures I found of Spitfire c-pits this was the most realistic one, IMO.
I have one additional picture which shows the framing proportions quite well and the new model seems to be too thin.
That picture is of a Spit(9?) with internal armour but wasn't there external armour for Spit 5s? I don't know how that looks like as I couln't find any pictures of the external armour. I think they differ mostly on how the upper part of the armor obstructs the forward-up view.
What about the mirror? How common was it? Wasn't it round one for later Spits and rectangular for older ones?
-C+
-
Heh, the page went down?
http://www.realairsimulations.com/msfs-aircraft/spitfire/screenshots/vc/10.jpg
-C+
PS.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=31290
-
http://www.simflight.com/%7Ereviews/com-ras-spitfire/RealAirSpit_34.jpg
-C+
-
Charge,
SUPERFLY has said that the cockpit bars are exactly the same dimensions as the current Spitfire's cockpit bars. Are you saying that they are currently too thin as well?
-
IMO yes, but tell me what you think from the pics I sent on the topic on General section.
-C+
-
Originally posted by Charge
Ill post this link here, too.
http://www.simflight.com/%7Ereviews...lAirSpit_34.jpg
Of all the pictures I found of Spitfire c-pits this was the most realistic one, IMO.
I have one additional picture which shows the framing proportions quite well and the new model seems to be too thin.
That picture is of a Spit(9?) with internal armour but wasn't there external armour for Spit 5s? I don't know how that looks like as I couln't find any pictures of the external armour. I think they differ mostly on how the upper part of the armor obstructs the forward-up view.
What about the mirror? How common was it? Wasn't it round one for later Spits and rectangular for older ones?
-C+
Early Spit Vs had the external armor. THe internal armored windscreen was added somewhere in the Spitfire V production run.
-
Why O Why did you put the ammo counter down low?
It was perfect up top. If you fly with the cockpit in a more up close postion (more like it would seem if you actually in a real one) (instead of zoomed back) you wont be able to read your ammo counter.
Please put it back up top:cry
-
Spits shouldn't have ammo counters at all.
-
Cockpit framing is perfect. If you make it too thick (as in the new FWs), you can't see well enough to make deflection shots. The latter is extremely difficult to do as it is, but at least, it can be done to some degree, after months of practice.
-
Ah, didn't see that part. So they needed three buttons to fire two weapons.. (*shakes head*) Brits.. :D
As for the ammo counter, I'm beginning to think that it's a universal thing. Instead of removing the ammo counters totally, I think they're making a compromise and putting it at places where you can't look it up at a glance, and would need to consciously change the view/angle to see it - which would make it a bit more difficult in combat.
So far, none of the newly modelled plane has an ammo counter visible in the default view. (Well, you can sort of see it on the P-47, but...)
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Ah, didn't see that part. So they needed three buttons to fire two weapons.. (*shakes head*) Brits.. :D
Only one rocker switch, unlike the 190 which had 2 seperate buttons. (*shakes head*)
From the comment, it would seem you do not understand how the gun firing switched worked.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Spits shouldn't have ammo counters at all.
I'm talking about the one we use in the Sim Sir....:confused:
Why did it get moved to the bottom of the dash? It was perfect were it currently is
-
"Cockpit framing is perfect. If you make it too thick (as in the new FWs), you can't see well enough to make deflection shots. The latter is extremely difficult to do as it is, but at least, it can be done to some degree, after months of practice."
I really don't understand your thinking TDeacon. I want the c-pits as realistic as possible and even those numeric ammo counters are too much IMO (why are they not switchable from the menu?).
BTW the new XIV c-pit looks much better than the other Spits. Yet it still could be better...
-C+
That rocker switch on Spits handle is really simple in construction. There is a switch in upper and lower part of the button. Press the top part for MG and lower part for cannons and center to fire both.
-
Charge,
The Spitfire XIV cockpit is identical to the Mk IX's cockpit. That is what we have been telling you, it is the view position that is making the other's look thin. The only difference on the Mk V's is the external armor instead of the internal armor.