Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Urchin on April 22, 2006, 11:07:44 AM
-
Were they really 14 feet thick?
Its just about impossible to use the plane in the MA, you can lose a plane thats 5 yards away in the bars.
Its disgusting.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Were they really 14 feet thick?
Its just about impossible to use the plane in the MA, you can lose a plane thats 5 yards away in the bars.
Its disgusting.
Cmon urchin quit exaggerating, the bars are only 13'6". :D
Bronk
-
14 feet thick?!?!?!?! :O
-
i'll tell you a secret :D
press the down arrow until your head hits the headrest, that way the bars are far smaller, and you can get the snapshots nice and easy :)
-
Agreed, they should be more like the thickness on the 109F and E. The entire G series suffers from this as well. Also, the cowl bulges on the G6 and 14 are too big as well. They should be more out to the side and smaller, and not protrude so highly. Any of the pictures posted of a 109 cockpit shows this.
-
I pretty much fly the 109 all the time. I like the fact that one has to really fly it to get good kills with it. The canopy struts seem large and adds to the challenge. It is tight cockpit and the aft visibility was limited. They tried rearview mirrors allso but the vibration rendered them useless. But the climb rate of the K will get you out of trouble if need be. Flown well it is a dangerous foe.
-
Ya oughta look at the D11.. bombers disappear behind those things
-
The D-11 has a lot of bars, but they are thin.
The K-4 has no wierd bars like the D-11, but the standard bars are so thick that the viewable area out the front is almost as big as the bars.
-
Hi,
dont anyone use the arrow key´s, page up/down and F10 to store the best views or are you in the wrong game forum and talk about IL-2/FB/PF (lol)??
In the 109K (same like other 109´s) i have my "headswitch front button view" programmed to move the head rearward and up ward, if i release this button the view snap back to the normal gunsight position. This alone make me able to look around the front up frame while looking strait forward.
The front right and front left view shift the head toward the sidewindow, the front up view shift the head rear upward etc.
In this way i always can look around the fat frames, unlike to IL-2/FB/PF(and other games), where a static headposition in combination with the fat frames provide a unrealistic handycap.
Greetings, Knegel
-
I do the same as Knegel, you just have to move your head around and find the best head postion to see from.
Heck, we can probably see out the cockpit of the 109s better than they could out of the real thing, once you start moving your head around.
-
Originally posted by Treize69
Heck, we can probably see out the cockpit of the 109s better than they could out of the real thing, once you start moving your head around.
I highly doubt that.
the REAL 109G-6 cockpit:
(http://hkkk.fi/~yrjola/photo/planes/bf109/mersu_ohjaamo1.jpg)
(http://hkkk.fi/~yrjola/photo/planes/bf109/mersu_ohjaamo3.jpg)
(http://hkkk.fi/~yrjola/photo/planes/bf109/mersu_kuomu.jpg)
-
That proves my point- I doubt many 109 pilots flew with their face mashed against the side of the canopy and their head rotated around 180 degrees looking straight back, the flipped around to a zoomed in view of their gunsight before yanking their head all the way back down in front of the seat and looking back and up to check their high 6 o'clock position.
All we have to do is move our heads around, and their is no limit to where we can look from, as long as its inside the cockpit. The proportions (and contortions) of the pilot in relation have absolutely nothing to do with it.
-
Yeah the Linda Blair syndrome ;) but is that an excuse for not fixing an obvious error in the cockpit model?
-
"Linda Blair syndrome"
I have heard of that but I'm lucky I have movable eyeballs. I can turn them left and right and probably up and down, dunno, haven't really tried it yet. Hey, I can do it, see!!! :rolleyes:
It is a good feature because, unfortunately, my head does not turn 180 deg...
-C+
Hey, BTW notice how thin the armoured window looks from that side view!
-
Originally posted by uvwpvW
Yeah the Linda Blair syndrome ;) but is that an excuse for not fixing an obvious error in the cockpit model?
I think the graphics are result of a detailed and prolonged research. Just because you think they are too thick doesnt neccessarily make them an "obvious error".
-
109 bars are OK. It's well known that axis pilots are pinheads and thick bars are optical illusion when compared to their heads.
-
"Just because you think they are too thick doesnt neccessarily make them an "obvious error"."
I agree, but if they are shown to be (slightly) incorrect I find no obvious reason to leave them not corrected.
You now the armoured glass widens the view quite a bit as is obvious from that side view.
-C+
-
Im pretty sure HT is open to hard facts and backed up data.
-
Originally posted by Charge
You now the armoured glass widens the view quite a bit as is obvious from that side view.
It's just that pilots don't sit outside on the wings. From the cockpit, refraction is not as big. Due to the (close) to 90 degree angle between eyes and armored glass, sidebars wouldn't appeared thinner, top bar perhaps would (since windshield is angled in vertical plane).
EDIT:
You'd really have to lean your head way forward and either side to take an advantage of refraction.
-
You can see the pictures in the other thread taken from pilos seat in real 109 and HTC 109. The view should be slightly wider even from 0 deg angle, and if you lean forward the effect is stronger.
Eg. the windshield in P51 is made very well and its chamfered armour glass is made very well to represent the RL affect of armoured glass. It should be done to 109, too, although its armour glass is not chamfered the same way, so it does not have quite as much benefit of the optical features of thich glass as P51.
Actually the present model looks as if there was no armoured glass at all and the outer part of windshield framing obstructs the view which it does not do in case of actual armour glass.
I was lucky to find a piece of 55mm thick perspex glass and experiment how much effect the glass actually has. IIRC at 45 degrees view to glass the 90 deg cut side should be optically about 27,5mm wide but it actualy looks only 18mm wide and that is the widest view at the side! So you actually CAN look behind a corner with thick armour glass.
-C+
"Im pretty sure HT is open to hard facts and backed up data."
Of course. I wouldn't imagine they would discard any data presented to them in form of actual pictures of actual a/c in question.
Edit. "You'd really have to lean your head way forward and either side to take an advantage of refraction."
No you don't. It works right from 0 deg up to 180 deg -if you can put your eye that close to the glass... ;)
-
Originally posted by uvwpvW
I highly doubt that.
the REAL 109G-6 cockpit:
Hi,
just before some weeks i did sit in a 109G2, the bars are very big!!
I think the HA viewsystem provide very credible 109 and 190 inside cockpit view possibilitys.
You need to see it in combination with a pilot´s head!
(http://www.raf-roy.com/share/knegel/Screenes/BF_2.jpg)
(http://www.raf-roy.com/share/knegel/Screenes/BF_Cockpit_3.jpg)
Dont forget, from the default viewposition in the AH 109 cockpits, you look with a 45° angle to the frames, you see the frame of the movabel part of the canophy and static part linked to each other. Shift the head toward the window and you will see how thin the frames are.
The AH viewsystem, right adjusted and used, provide a perfect clear view out of the 109 cokcpits in all situations!
Greetings, Knegel
-
That's a G-2. The G-2 and early G-6 had heavy cockpit framing. Pilots complained and later G-6, G-14, G-10 and K-4 had the Erla-Haube and Galland-Kopfpanzer which improved visibility greatly. The 109G-6 which I posted pictures of above has the correct framing and armor. The AHII G-14 and K-4 models have this framing and armor.
(http://www.adlertag.de/bilder/g-10_schw_2/manching/07.jpg)
(http://www.jg51.de/JG51/report/treffen04-2/46.jpg)
-
The front section doesn't appear to have been changed at all. Very large improvement otherwise.
-
No it's well known the Luftpilots liked to look through toilet rolls as it is portrayed in AH.
How about next version they just paint the windshield dark so you cannot see anything outside.
-
I don't know which part you guys skipped, but it was not about how thick the frames are, but how much the aroured glass lets you see "through" them.
*sigh
-C+
-
Why are the bars in the G6,G14, and K4 so much thicker than the F4?
I took screenshots to compare, they are noticably thicker in the front.
The top cockpit bar looks to be about 50% thicker than the F4s, the side bats are more than twice as thick. By the side bars I mean the side bars in front, they make the sides of the front "square" you look out, and curve up to meet the bar going across the top (I assume that one is the hatch, or whatever the hell its called).
The side bars are very much thicker, it is really easy to see the difference.
-
I USED to fly mainly 109's.
Now IMHO the 109's are porked!
The F no longer has gonds.
The cockpit bars are ridicules in all the other models and the k 30mm sux.
-
Originally posted by Charge
I don't know which part you guys skipped, but it was not about how thick the frames are, but how much the aroured glass lets you see "through" them.
Has anybody calculated amount of refraction yet? If it adds up more than an inch, then HTC should consider revision, if it's any less, then it's not really worth it, IMHO.
-
Originally posted by Glasses
No it's well known the Luftpilots liked to look through toilet rolls as it is portrayed in AH.
How about next version they just paint the windshield dark so you cannot see anything outside.
:rolleyes:
gawd, what dont you understand about 'stop whining'?
-
Originally posted by Urchin
Why are the bars in the G6,G14, and K4 so much thicker than the F4?
I took screenshots to compare, they are noticably thicker in the front.
The top cockpit bar looks to be about 50% thicker than the F4s, the side bats are more than twice as thick. By the side bars I mean the side bars in front, they make the sides of the front "square" you look out, and curve up to meet the bar going across the top (I assume that one is the hatch, or whatever the hell its called).
This is what I don't undertand either, since both have the same amount of armor in the front windshield. Look at this thread, it provides comparisons of which you speak
http://hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=165607&highlight=cockpit+109k4
-
Yea, I was looking for that thread earlier but I couldn't find it.
If you look at the triangular braces that are present in both the 109F4 and the K4, the side bars just about fill up that area on the K4, that is how thick they are. On the F4, there is about half the space left over (the bars fill up the top half, but not the bottom).
Why is that? I think that the thickness of those two bars, combined with the added thickness of the top bar make the G model 109s feel hard to see out of, while I don't really have that problem in the F4.
-
Just FYI, the infrared head-tracker from Naturalpoint (with "Vector" add-on) allows you to "lean" around the canopy frames in AH: left-right, up-down, back-forth. Over in WB, lacking true 3D cockpits, they only have suport for rotation around one view point, the so-called "Linda Blair Syndrome" mentioned above. AH's full support for the Naturalpoint "Vector" is a much, much better view system, IMHO.
-
F4 has external bolted armour glass which is visually less restrictive in vertical plane.
-C+