Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Nath-BDP on November 16, 2000, 08:27:00 PM
-
Whats up with the cockpit of the 109, is it like this on purpose to lesson the field of view for superior LW pilots? Conspiracy! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/AHcockpit.jpg)
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/AHcockpita.jpg)
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/AHcockpitb.jpg)
Now for real pics...
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/g10cockpit.jpg)
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/g6cockpit.jpg)
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/g6cockpita.jpg)
The 2 bars in the front of the cockpit should go straight down, not curve in and be farther away from each other, this realy hampers the field of view for gunnery.
-
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/cockpits.jpg)
Btw why is there the bulge behind the cockpit for MW 50 in the G6? I thought ours was a version without MW 50 (even though the paint scheme is that of a Bf 109G14/AM of Erich Hartmann. AM = DB 605AM that was designed for MW 50 use.) All the 109 variants in AH have this.
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/Ahg6mw50.jpg)
p.s. still missing the extended tailwheel on G10.
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/JG4.jpg)
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/D9/AHg10.jpg)
------------------
Nath_____
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
"It felt as if an angel was pushing..."
-Reponse of Gen. Adolf Galland after flying the fourth prototype Me 262 in May 1943.
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 11-16-2000).]
-
Hi
Nath is right on this they should be parralel and afford a somewhat wider view than we have now.
Not all G10 had the tall tail wheel, most actually had the short wheel, as the G10 was a rebuild of G6 and G14 planes, and it wouldnt help as it did in RL as 109 groundhandling is fine in AH. I rather have HTC fix the cockpit view issue than that.
thanks GRUNHERZ
-
You think it's bad now? You should have seen the original Me 109 cockpit!
-
Look at the two last pics, the real life plane that ours is modeled after had the extended tailwheel... did ya miss that? :P
-
Nath, you must be kidding!
Look closely at your pictures!
The field of view in the REAL 109 was worse than that of the AH 109!
The glass on the front was some 8 inches tall!
Hell, look at your picture, its smaller than the pilot's head!
Your comment about straight down...they do on both your Real Plane and AH Plane pics!
I think they should shorten the AH window and put the 45° cross posts in the rear of the frame.
Being that you have killed me 1-2 times with your 109, I know you like it, but what the HELL are you asking for? More visibility on a plane that is already modeled with more visibility that the real thing?
Did you get shot in the bellybutton at 40K or something?
Honestly, your words don't match your pictures!
SkViper
-
Hey!
I don't understand what you're trying to say!
Explain better!
Look!
Thanks!
-
Are you asking them to enlarge the AH plane viewing area?
If so, then it is you that needs to review your own pics.
The real 109 has a very small front glass!
The field of view was very limited!
SkViper
-
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/AHcockpitbc.jpg)
this is what im asking to be straighted. they should be vertical not pointing inward.
-
You ever stand on a railroad track and look out toward the horizon at them?
If you have, then you notice that they appear to come together in the distance.
This is why they look bent in the straight on view.
It is a visual effect that IMHO is VERY well modeled in AH!
Take a look at the 4th pic down in your original post. You can see the same effect there. Hell, you can even measure the difference between the top and bottom on the screen!
I think HT and gang have done an EXCELENT job!
SkViper
-
k forget you obviously know nothing about this game.
-
16 bit EW!
Haha Nath.
<cussword>
-
PSSSSSSST! It's called perspective.
Notice how the pilot has to look through the gun sight (where the AH views are centered)
It's not in the dead middle of the dash, and while you don't really get the impression, the frame appears to bend in (I assume anyway) because of the proximity of the pilot's face to the wind screen.
While AH is not capable of emulating a pilot focusing on various objects in his field of vision (zoom kinda works though)...it keeps everything within the set view in focus (and appears that the center of the screen is the main focal point, and the gun sight is the a good example)
Notice how the gun sight stays to true dimensions, but how the things surrounding it can be distorted...canopy frames, wings, dash, etc that increase the further away from the center of the screen and from the distance to the object (wings get very distorted in front left and right quarters)
It seems very relative to real life distortion of images outside of focus...the further away from what your focused on the more it seems to slant in. If ya don't believe it, try it...
I think thats what AH tries to emulate.
Oh well, makes sense now, prolly won't later.
-
(http://bigdweeb.homestead.com/files/109.jpg)
Okay so they are a little bent, but it's there.
-
Yep the same 3d perspective thingy makes the rails or bars in the 190 unproportionally large and obscuring. But seen from the outside they're 100% right.
Just the limits of 3d software, unfortunately.
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
while(!bishRookQueue.isEmpty() && loggedOn()){
30mmDeathDIEDIEDIE(bishRookQueue.removeFront());
System.out.println("LW pilots are superior");
myPlane.performVictoryRoll();
}
-
Hi
SkViper and Jigster
The effect you guys are talking about is called "linear perspective" basically parralel lines appear to merge at long distances, this is used by the brain as a visual depth cue. The main point is that the effect happends over long distances. A 109 pilots head is only about a foot behind the windshiled thus the change in distance between the top and bottom of the slanting windshield glass is insufficient to produce the effect so drasically. As we have it now the 109s windshield view is correct in height but is far too narrow at the bottom. The supports should be seen as parallel at the short distance the pilots head is from the glass.
The way to correct thois is to straighten out the lines by pushing them outward at the bottom, so they are parallel. Also please just look at the b/w cockpit picture Nath put up, the camera is where the pilots head would be, and the lines are extremly close to 100% parallel.
Another point, Look at Nath's outside screenshot of the 109 canopy/windshield from the front, it still shows the bottom to be narrower than the top. If HTC was modeling any type of depth perspective the top would be narrower than the bottom, since its slant puts it farther away from the cameras viewpoint. I can post a picture of a 109 canopy from this viewpoint if you want me to. The point is that lines the are fixed so that the bottom is narrower than the top, and this is incorrect.
Here is the photo, notice how the top actually appears narrower than the bottom. The same shot from AH shows the top wider and bottom narrower. AH 109 windshiled is incorrect.
(http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta/109g6ho.jpg)
What we have here is that HTC made a small mistake in not modeling the 109 windshield supports correctly, and it would great of them to fix it.
BTW Nath i did miss that last picture, prolly didnt load on my slow-ass connection
before i replied. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
thanks GRUNHERZ
[This message has been edited by GRUNHERZ (edited 11-17-2000).]
-
The AH picture is drawn covering a 90 degree arc from a single point of view. What you are seeing is just a result of this.
As Jigster said:
It's called perspective.
Try this in an F4U Cockpit. Move the view as far forward and backward as you can. Note that the sides of the armored glass appear to be sloping inward at the top, or at the bottom or they apear parallel depending on where the view is.
Hooligan
-
Looks like perspective to me.
-
Hi
Guys it cant be perspective look at the headon screenshot of the AH 109 windshield, the top is still wider than the bottom.
Compare that to the picture I posted of a RL 109 from the same viewpoint there the top is narrower than bottom. The simple fact is that the AH 109 canopy is designed so that the bottom part is narrower than the top.
This is incorrect they were parallel lines.
Also look at the amount of narrowing there is between the bottom and top of canopy lines in the pic i posted, that is from 10feet away and it is still less than we see in the inside view from only 1 foot away in the AH 109.
Basically the effect is innacurate and overdone, from 1 foot away inside the 109 cockpit the lines should be damn near parallel, not slanting so much that it obscures about 20% of frontal view.
thanks GRUNHERZ
-
What it comes down to is that Nath is acting like a twit again.
-
Splitting hairs. I fly the 109's more than anything. Like the power and speed, plus the looks and fscotts sounds.
You're probably a picky eater too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
The 109 is great as is. Don't fix what ain't broke.
Eagler
-
It looks stupid and unrealistic straight down. Granted they could make them a tad more verticle but not by much.
Oddly, I don't see Nath asking for the 109 cockpit head view/movement to be corrected. It's more than obvious that the AH 109 "pilot" sits too far back in the cockpit and has WAY too much room in that cockpit when using the AH view keys to move around the head around. If they change the verticle framing I hope they make the lack of room in a really claustrophobic cockpit more realistic too.
-Westy
[This message has been edited by Westy (edited 11-17-2000).]
-
All the planes have overmodelled cockpit head movement.
Hmmm, anyone else think those two 45º support bars seem to be too small?
And no-one has mentioned the shape of the Me 109 wingtips, they look almost semi-circular, most odd...
-
I think Grunherz has it right.
The current look seems to over-model the 'perspective' that some might think exists because of the slanted nature of the front windscreen (since the top is slanted back, the bottom would tend to have a smaller horizontal size). Also, the regular 'unzoomed' seat position seems to be too far back.
It seems to me that this depiction of 'perspective, given the short sight distance, is exaggerated.
In addition, the RL 109G glare shield is wider and not so angularly peaked. I think this adds to the somewhat distorted AH front view. Here's an idea of how it might be improved.
(http://www.doitnow.com/~alfakilo/8.jpg)
Andy
-
I do like how Rooster said it.
The guy who is currently the number 7 pilot in the entire arena is complaining about the very plane he uses to get that high.
Also, as Westy indicated, he pays no mind to the fact that you can move your head side to side such that it seems to LEAVE the cockpit to provide you with at better view.
Perspective is not only the way the bars appear to angle, it is also your mind seeing things the way you want to see them. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
SkViper
-
If you want to see the bars vertically, then you will have to move the windshield itself 90 degrees from the perepective the pilot is looking at.
Getting a true perspective on a 2d screen, with a 90 degree field of view is very difficult, as others have pointed out.
If you want the top of the dashboard to be rounded, that will mean adding more polygons, since it looks like only 1 is used for the top deck over the engine.
-
Is this what you want to see Nath?
I moved each bar out 9° at the bottom.
Now the field of view is a little more open in the middle, but more close on the left and right.
(http://www.concentric.net/~skvpr/AHcockpitbc2.jpg)
SkViper
-
Hi
Andy and SkViper thx for those great edited screenshots thats exactly what the corrected support bars should look like. It looks just like the cockpit photos I have from inside 109. I hope HTC can spare some time and fix this for 1.05. Pleez. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
thanks GRUNHERZ
[This message has been edited by GRUNHERZ (edited 11-17-2000).]
-
no edited screenshots neccesary just look at this picture
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/g10cockpit.jpg)
-
Hi
Great picture Nath, it really shows the cockpit view well. I have several more just like it from various 109. I just hope HTC considers the evidence presented and takes some time to adress the issue in 105.
thanks GRUNHERZ
-
Nath, the problem with that image is that what we have in AH is a 90 degree view. The camera used to take that picture probably had a much narrower field of view, and so the bars look straight. 90 degrees is roughtly equivalent to a 16mm focal length IIRC, that picture might be taken with a 35mm or so.
This effect is more and more pronounced the closer you get to the edge, that's why the side bars are really huge in the front view, but in the 45 degree right/left views they look right (since they're in the middle of the picture, where distortion is smallest). That windshield could probably be adjusted a bit, but I think it's pretty close as it is now. I'll have to check, but I suspect that if you zoom in to get a narrower field of view the posts get less bent (or they should, judging from the photo, as your "focal length" would "go up" when zooming in).
------------------
Rickenbacker (Ricken)
-ISAF-
the Independent Swedish Air Force
-
Not trying to be an A**hole, but we've got MUCH bigger fish to fry right now (carriers, ships, new terrain, etc.) than to worry about the angle of cockpit rails on the 109. Believe me, we've got our work cut out for us. So, unfortunately, that is something that will have to wait until after 1.05 most likely.
------------------
John "SUPERFLY" Guytan - Art Director
HiTech Creations
"Touch my tooter, smoocher!" - Ween
-=HELLFIRE=- SQUAD
-
NOPE, WRONG, drive through.
Stop trying to spin this, the fact is that they are supposed to be vertically down not pointing inward, whats the big deal? You afraid that it'll make it easier for me to kill you or something? ;P
plz look at the other pictures in the first post and stop spinning.
plz kthx.
-
Now you're well beyond just continuing to be an bellybutton Nath.
I for one hope they back burner this so far back that you're grandkids will have to carry on the cry for it to be changed.
Bad report card this term?
-Westy
-
nath is right about the 109 cockpit, but super is right too, its not high priority (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
they will prolly get to it for 1.06 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Then explain to me why people keep trying to spin this well-documented fact. Its a bit frustrating.
-
nath if you want to see what a 109 cockpit should look like go to
http://www.bluebyte.net/il2-e/products/screenshots.asp?id= (http://www.bluebyte.net/il2-e/products/screenshots.asp?id=)
its in jg/54 colors too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
Then explain to me why people keep trying to spin this well-documented fact. Its a bit frustrating.
Because you don't seem to grasp the concept of how a camera does not show the same depth perception, distortion, etc, even when at the same given distance as the human eye.
Try focusing on the very top of something of parrallel lines...a door frame, window frame, a big monitor, something to that extent.
Get about a foot away, and level with the top center. Now glance down while remaining focus on the same object and note how the further away from the focus point the more it seems to slant inward.
It's just a limitation of the 3d engine, and the 109 isn't the only plane that has this problem.
-
Without a doubt beautiful cockpits. Now all we would have to do is all go away and give Nate and Superfly 2+ years to work in peace. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Look guys:
This picture represents a 90 degree field of view taken from a single point. Your eyes don't work like this so some distortion is going to happen.
Mathematically it is trivial to figure out how far apart the frame elements should be in this kind of picture for any given distance that it is viewed from. Before you go any further why don't you actually do a little math and figure out exactly how it should look. In fact, if you just tell me the width of the frames at the top and the bottom and how far the bottom of the frame is forward of the top of the frame, then I will do the work for you.
Hooligan
-
Uhh, anyways, the farther you go out the two lines should go towards the horizon, right? Not come together towards earth. Durr...
-
The undesputed documented fact is that those 2 bars go STRAIGHT down, they DO NOT turn in, you can see this in every pic i posted.
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
The undesputed documented fact is that those 2 bars go STRAIGHT down, they DO NOT turn in, you can see this in every pic i posted.
Miss the one I posted?
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
Uhh, anyways, the farther you go out the two lines should go towards the horizon, right? Not come together towards earth. Durr...
The 109's windscreen is slanted, AH takes into this into account, where the side closest towards you will look bigger then the side furthest away(the bottom) to give the perception of depth on a 2D screen.
And again the 109 isn't the only plane with this problem.
[This message has been edited by Jigster (edited 11-17-2000).]
-
Sit back 12 to 15 inches from your monitor look at from any angle you want, pretend the screen is the windsheild and the plastic case are the side rails. Now tell me is that "linear perspective" as pronounced as the screen shot of the 109 from AH? No rocket science required here it still looked like a square box to me.
[This message has been edited by BigJoe (edited 11-17-2000).]
-
Pardon me,
Anyone notice that Superfly, one of the HTC artists, said not right now!
They have it in the Que now and poor Nathy will get his wish eventualy.
I do hope however that he can live with the outcome!
I for one hope they make it so much more realistic that he is forced to fly the 51 just so he can see outside the pit!
I think he just simply had NO FUGGING CLUE what it was like to sit with his head inside a Glass Box that is barely big enough to turn his head, let alone see over the nose.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
Uhh, anyways, the farther you go out the two lines should go towards the horizon, right? Not come together towards earth. Durr...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No! the farther out they go, the closer together!
You need to go back to school!
SkViper
BTW, did you notice that when you push the posts out as we did in the edited pictures that you lose some visibility on the sides?
You are gonna lose something no matter what you do, so why not drop it?
Spanking DEFFINATELY needs to be reinstated in the American home! ;-)
[This message has been edited by SkViper (edited 11-17-2000).]
-
No! the farther out they go, the closer together!
You need to go back to school!
Thats what I said ya silly nut, look over it again.
BTW, did you notice that when you push the posts out as we did in the edited pictures that you lose some visibility on the sides?
You are gonna lose something no matter what you do, so why not drop it?
Partly because I want realism and because there are 'front right' and 'front left' views, don't realy use the two sides. Learn the game better before you type.
Spanking DEFFINATELY needs to be reinstated in the American home! ;-)
Looks like you got it too much, exclamation point boy.
-
Doesn't look vertical to me Jigster, and this isnt a head-on view.
(http://bigdweeb.homestead.com/files/109.jpg)
-
I just noticed the same problem on the P51D, from outside the 2 bars go down and outward to the wings but from inside the go towards the engine, sucks...
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
Doesn't look vertical to me Jigster, and this isnt a head-on view.
Um they front wind screen isn't vertical now is it? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
And this is a 90 degree angle shot from the glass. Perhaps it would be better to argue that the glass is slanted (from the vertical) at to great and angle? That seems to be fairly off from the actual angle of slant on the real 109's.
Ah yeah, like I said, lotsa planes have those little distortions.
-
Originally posted by SkViper:
Spanking DEFFINATELY needs to be reinstated in the American home! ;-)
Nath's a teenage boy...i'm sure there's plenty of spanking going on in his home (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
SOB
-
Hi
Jigster linear perspective would not produce such a strong effect at only 1 foot away. The effect we have in here is extremly exagerated. Try this with a book measuring about 8 by 12 inches. Hold it 1 foot away with the 12 inch side down and slant it about 60degrees, and then come and post that the 8 inch sides slant in as much as they do in the AH 109 canopy. The fact is the effect is wildly overdone in AH.
VERY IMPORTANT POINT HERE NEXT!
To everyone who says the cockpit picures from RL 109 dont show it accurately becuse of suposed camera 3d limitations.
The effect of "linear perspective" is a monocular depth cue, that is it works with only 1 eye, or in 2D , or WITH A CAMERA, so a camera will pick it up. It is NOT a binocular or 3D depth cue.
Cameras do pick up on linear perspective, here is a repost of my headon picture of 109, notice the canopy top is narrower than bottom. The camera picked that up very clearly. It is a monocular depth cue!
Please note the camera picks up the linear perspective effect from the 109 canopy supports and shows the top as being narrower than the bottom.
(http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta/109g6ho.jpg)
thanks GRUNHERZ
-
Nath, post a picture taken from the pilots point of view with a 16mm lens, i.e. what we see in the game today. Then we can argue about it.
------------------
Rickenbacker (Ricken)
-ISAF-
the Independent Swedish Air Force
-
Nath is right: compare
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/AHcockpita.jpg)
to
(http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta/109g6ho.jpg)
Allied uberdweebs; sometimes the Luftwhiners actually have a valid point. And when we do, we'll become uber arrogant (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
while(!bishRookQueue.isEmpty() && loggedOn()){
30mmDeathDIEDIEDIE(bishRookQueue.removeFront());
System.out.println("LW pilots are superior");
myPlane.performVictoryRoll();
}
-
Ricken it's 18 mm I think. Either way I agree with you. I'm not convinced that the AH model is wrong.
Santa: Looking at the two pictures in your post, couldn't we conclude that the nose of the 109 is also way too fat in AH? Shall we change that too? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 11-18-2000).]
-
Hey funked, go look at the P51 windscreen. This problem is apparent in the A6m and La5 as well...
-
Funked, the 2nd pic is of a G6, notice the two bulges? Those are for the MG 131.
The first pic shows the G10 in AH, notice no bulges? Thats because they were smoothened out for aerodynamic purposes, thats why it looks 'fatter'.
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 11-18-2000).]
-
Look at what GRUNHERZ posted, need I say more? Stop trying to spin this guys...
Hi
Jigster linear perspective would not produce such a strong effect at only 1 foot away. The effect we have in here is extremly exagerated. Try this with a book measuring about 8 by 12 inches. Hold it 1 foot away with the 12 inch side down and slant it about 60degrees, and then come and post that the 8 inch sides slant in as much as they do in the AH 109 canopy. The fact is the effect is wildly overdone in AH.
VERY IMPORTANT POINT HERE NEXT!
To everyone who says the cockpit picures from RL 109 dont show it accurately becuse of suposed camera 3d limitations.
The effect of "linear perspective" is a monocular depth cue, that is it works with only 1 eye, or in 2D , or WITH A CAMERA, so a camera will pick it up. It is NOT a binocular or 3D depth cue.
Cameras do pick up on linear perspective, here is a repost of my headon picture of 109, notice the canopy top is narrower than bottom. The camera picked that up very clearly. It is a monocular depth cue!
Please note the camera picks up the linear perspective effect from the 109 canopy supports and shows the top as being narrower than the bottom.
The fact is the effect is wildly overdone in AH.
And I have noticed that the inside of cockpits is like the reverse of the outside... this is apparent in the p51 where the windscreen bars go out towards the wings from external view and in RL pics but from the cockpit they move towards engine.
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 11-18-2000).]
-
Nath I know the P-51D and other planes have the same "problem". The "problem" is perspective.
The dimensions on the 109 framing may well be wrong, but with the AH optical setup (90 degree field of view) things are going to look different from inside the cockpit than from outside the cockpit.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 11-18-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
no edited screenshots neccesary just look at this picture
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/Cockpit/g10cockpit.jpg)
Looks like the first horizontal bar above the sight is also modeled a little to high in AH. It should be lower, other wise I concur with Nath.
------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew
"Best is the trash talk. Severly and viciously going after your enemies, their mothers, and their shabby sheep."
StSanta
-
Hi
Mino slant the supports in that picture as much as they are slanted in the AH 109 and youll see they are pretty much the exact same height. The Ah 109 front view is correct in heigth but is incorrect in the width becuse of the exaggerated slant of the side supports.
The reason it looks taller is because our brain is programmed to percieve shapes that come together in the distance as being farthr away or longer thats what "linear perspective" is, thats why train tracks come togeter at very LONG distances. So when the bars angle so steeply it creates the impression that the distance between the top and bottom is greater than if the supports were upright and parallel. Making it appear as if the AH view was taller than RL, but when its actually correct in heigth.
Just look at Andy Bush's or SkViper's modifies screenshots and they look almost exactly the same as the b/w cockpit picure.
Because their side supports are much more upright and accurate.
thanks GRUNHERZ
-
Sat in the Cavanaugh Museum's 109 a few years back at Nellis.
Even with the canopy open, looking out the front was like looking through a peep hole.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
If you get this will it make you even more sneeky in that 109 Nath? I would agree with Nath in effect that the mental view of a 90 degree line is lost when rendered from a fixed point onto 2D plane of view. Take a book or a magazine and place it in front of your eyes (use a picture of favorite plane to kill if you like) and tilt it bottom forward. Notice that your mind knows it's still 90 degrees but also from a perspective, mathmatically on a 2D surface, it's now like the rendition in AH that hooligan stated.
-- senna
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
Look at what GRUNHERZ posted, need I say more? Stop trying to spin this guys...
The fact is the effect is wildly overdone in AH.
And I have noticed that the inside of cockpits is like the reverse of the outside... this is apparent in the p51 where the windscreen bars go out towards the wings from external view and in RL pics but from the cockpit they move towards engine.
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 11-18-2000).]
-
I guess it's just plain pointless trying to expalin to some people why "objects in a rear view mirror appear closer than they are"... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
lynx
13 Sqn RAF
-
Lynx and senna:
check the outside pics. Compare to AH. Real life cameras also catch this thing called perspective.
But you will, if you're not totally biased, see the difference.
Nath *is* right, despite being a LW driver.
It happens, you know.
Much more frequently than the allierte schweinhunde think.
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
while(!bishRookQueue.isEmpty() && loggedOn()){
30mmDeathDIEDIEDIE(bishRookQueue.removeFront());
System.out.println("LW pilots are superior");
myPlane.performVictoryRoll();
}
-
Anyone with a 3D program? Render 2 simple pics, one with say 35mm camera settings and the other matching AH's 90deg FOV of an simple rectangle representing the Bf 109's windshield at apporpriate distance. Render them at the same resolution as the previous screenshots were. I'd do it my self but I don't own any 3D software at the moment...
// fats
-
Mein gott! mien 109 is kaput!
Und mien underwaren is upen mien cracken !
Off with der Superflyen's headen.!
-
punt... "after 1.05..."
-
The interior and exterior models for the 109 seem to be different. When you see it from the outside at a distance the cockpit isn't rendered. The cockpit is wrong.
------------------
===>Frosty
====>Exposure2k.com
=====>Frosty@exposure2k.com
-
Jigster, that is awesome terrain man!
Dont care less about the 109, but what I see in the RL pics vs AH pics, I do think those bars should be straightened... perspective correction or not, it still hampers view and aiming a LOT.
If the RL pilots saw it straight, it should be straight in AH.
-
NATH, have you ever got to sit inside a Bf-109G-10 cockpit?
I have.
Believe me, a realistic cockpit is the LAST thing you want.
The cockpit is pathetically small, not much wider than my head. When the guy closed the lid, I felt like I was being locked into a cage. I literally COULD NOT turn around all the way to see behind me. I could not raise my head more than an inch; visibility over the nose is totally non-existant. I was actually against the canpoy when I tried to sit up any. It's that small.
The cockpit is so narrow it was difficult to get into--and this plane didn't even have a working (centered) control stick getting in my way. I could not turn around to look behind me; looking over my shoulder for a slightly aft view was even a strain.
I cannot imagine any plane that would have benefitted more from having a rearview mirror. However, I have yet to see a 109 with a mirror modeled in a game.
I could only imagine how much worse it would be if I had a bulky flightsuit and a helmet on. It's amazing that people could fly these in combat at all. Side visibility was the only direction I could see fairly well. That and above me.
Sitting in there I could understand why so many 109's were wrecked landing.....landing that plane would be guesswork at best. It is NOT something I would want to go to war in.
If you want a realistic 109 cockpit, then the ability to raise your head should be disabled, as should the "6" view. As well as severly limiting the head movement allowed. Seriously.
J_A_B
-
All planes have unrestricted head movement jab.
-
JAB keep in mind that during WWII the average man in his early 20's was 5'4" and hair over 150 pounds if wartime rations allowed.
It is believed that the generation that grew up during the great depression and then dealing with WWII had stunted growth so to speak due to widespread malnutrition.
One only needs to look at US WWII vehicles like the Jeep or DPW's to see how these vehicles were contoured around this body size.
Btw Tac that's one of Nuttz's terrains...I can demo a few of them sometime for ya but Nuttz has stopped messing indefinately with the TE due to other commitments
- Bess
-
Bud Anderson weighed only bout 147lbs according to his book.
-
haven't got the reference at hand, but I recall one german pilot saying "between the wars we forgot to build planes with a good 6 o'clock view". Or something like that....
I'll go along with JAB that a pilot, strapped into his cockpit never had the field of view AH is offering us.
I'd really love a more realistic view system because to me its part of a planes "performance features". We all want the planes to "feel right" as far as speed, turn rate etc goes. These have a great affect on how you have to fight (b&z vs T&b...) but visibility also plays a big role in how one "would" have to fight... The spitfires 6 o'clock view shoulden't be as good as it is now - I fly mostly spits but still I'd welcome the "handicap" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I know alot of ppl here will not agree... so it's rather pointless I guess (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
After all, when I flew EAW I was "shocked" about the 6 o'clock view... Nothing obscured your view, no seat armor, no fuselage, no nothing...
What really shocked me though was that it didn't bother any of the guys flying the game...
...I wonder how many would "still" fly the C-Hog when they'd be restricted to a more realistic view... and how many would then start flying P-51's because of a view bonus...
That's what makes planes like the 190 and P-51 really special... but as it is now ya can fly any plane and still get similar 6 o'clock views.
Effdub
-
I agree with JAB
Views are major part of plane performance.
Speed, Turn rate etc dictate how one flies the different aircraft, but field of view also has a great impact on flying style.
I haven't got the reference at hand, but I recall one geran pilot saying: "between wars we forgot to build planes with a good 6 o'clock view".
The P-51 and Fw190 should have a bonus because of their good field of view, whilst spit drivers (like me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) should have a handicap in that department...
But this subject is lost on many ex quakers/now flightsimmers - I learnt that lesson whilst trying out EAW... It has the "worst" 6 o'clock gamey view I've ever come across... but it didn't bother any of the so called virtual "pilots" there (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
Effdub
-
I agree with JAB
Views are major part of plane performance.
Speed, Turn rate etc dictate how one flies the different aircraft, but field of view also has a great impact on flying style.
I haven't got the reference at hand, but I recall one geran pilot saying: "between wars we forgot to build planes with a good 6 o'clock view".
The P-51 and Fw190 should have a bonus because of their good field of view, whilst spit drivers (like me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) should have a handicap in that department...
But this subject is lost on many ex quakers/now flightsimmers - I learnt that lesson whilst trying out EAW... It has the "worst" 6 o'clock gamey view I've ever come across... but it didn't bother any of the so called virtual "pilots" there (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
Effdub
-
punt