Hi guys. I am working on a small & simple cockpit using GoFlight gear and CH yokes (low budget).It seems to me like two TVs might be the best option for my 'outside' displays. Even 27" TVs are only about $200-$250 new, and a scan converter is..$150?Two of those is still under $1000 - much less than a projector! Is it possible to run both TVs off of the same computer? It seems to me that if I get one of the 2xDVI GeForce 5600s... I can use DVI to VGA adapters, and then VGA scan converters.Pros & cons of this arrangement? I've heard the image quality isn't so good, but if it's an outside view, it doesn't matter as much, does it?

Hi Tim,An intruiging, original solution for oustide views.A couple things to consider:First, think about a used projector. Even an 800x600 used LCD would give good outside views rivaling that of TV resolution. And I've seen them go on eBay for $250-350. So, your total solution would be less than the TV one - and simpler, to boot!Second, driving two 3D displays from one card would tax it much more than a single output, so I'd expect frame rates to drop significantly.What are your thoughts, questions?Chris

>Hi Tim,>>An intruiging, original solution for oustide views.>>A couple things to consider:>>First, think about a used projector. Even an 800x600 used LCD>would give good outside views rivaling that of TV resolution. >And I've seen them go on eBay for $250-350. So, your total>solution would be less than the TV one - and simpler, to>boot!If you then get an old Matrox PCI videocard in addition to that, and put a 15" or so monitor (or LCD if you can afford it) for the instruments, the outside view quality does not really matter that much, since you see the instruments anyway.>>Second, driving two 3D displays from one card would tax it>much more than a single output, so I'd expect frame rates to>drop significantly.Dualhead cards many times have driver hacks that make the display one "big one" just stretched accross two monitors. In that case there is just one "view" from FS - for two separate views FS needs to recreate the 3d world twice which probably makes most of the slowness, and it doesnt happen here. It might work out.An interesting thought would also be to use the two TV's and stick two fresnel lenses in front of them and angle them just slightly towards your eyes so you can hide the gap between them - making a pretty much seamless view. It might need a lot of testing and tweaking, but it could work out nicely. Fresnels give you the feeling of depth when compared to the instrument panel that is very close to you. This could add a bit to the feel of realism.Tuomas

Just my 2 cents worth, I just purchased a $2K 55" HDTV and bought a good converter to hook it all up to my sim for the main display. All I can say is what a HUGE disappointment!! Horrible pic, flickered bad, blurry, and unusable. That's on a high end hidef TV! I returned it and ordered a 50"LCD display! 1280x768@80Hz. Projector is hard to beat if you got the space. I'm getting ready to sell my new Dell MP3200 projector. First 1450.00 takes it. :) Native 1024x768.Good luck,Rob

Don't those big birds fly IFR? :-)For IFR practice a white bed sheet pulled over the windows is enough for a visual even. I have flown an old IFR simulator that had no visual at all, and it was awesome. Flying the standard approach routes with VOR/DME and no autopilot is cool. Challenging but cool. But of course for entertainment purposes one needs to see the pretty sunset in nice quality..Tuomas

Tim,There is some misinformed information in this thread. We are using 3 Sony Trinitron tubes: http://www.avsim.com/project757/pics/week23.htmland they far exceed any LCD projector we ever used as far as quality goes. And we went through 3 of them all the way past 1024x768.The problem with projectors is that in a cockpit environment, you must sit close to the screen (4ft or so) in order to get a proper prospective and to eliminate side leakage (seeing the room your in). Using a projector at 4ft or so renders very unsightly pixels. We do not have that issue as you can see from these photos: http://www.avsim.com/project757/pics/week24.html>>Second, driving two 3D displays from one card would tax it much more than a single output<

Mike, I looked at your pictures, very impressive. One question to clarify. Are these Sony 27

John,Yes they are in fact Sony Trinitron picture tubes.They are connected via a high fidelity scan converter through the Matrox Parhelia card.Mike

Mike,What brand/model converter are you using and what refresh rate are you at? Anything less than 70Hz gives me a headache in less than 5 mins. I know everyone is affected differently by the screen flicker. I just happen to be real sensitive to it. 98% of all tvs only handle 60Hz.

>If you then get an old Matrox PCI videocard in addition to>that, and put a 15" or so monitor (or LCD if you can afford>it) for the instruments, the outside view quality does not>really matter that much, since you see the instruments>anyway.Hear hear Tuomas! I use a 2nd monitor for glass cockpit as well, and while the outside visuals are nice and I wouldn't want to go without them, they are not nearly as important as your instruments... that is, unless you're purely a VFR flyer.>Dualhead cards many times have driver hacks that make the>display one "big one" just stretched accross two monitors. In>that case there is just one "view" from FS - for two separate>views FS needs to recreate the 3d world twice which probably>makes most of the slowness, and it doesnt happen here. It>might work out.Good point about the stretching, I didn't know that. That would reduce the hit you'd expect from driving two separate displays. But pushing more pixels, even when stretched will take more processing power on the part of the card and/or PC - but it's probably worth it.>>An interesting thought would also be to use the two TV's and>stick two fresnel lenses in front of them and angle them just>slightly towards your eyes so you can hide the gap between>them - making a pretty much seamless view. That's a great idea. I suspect Bug Eye technologies is doing something like that, from the looks of things. www.bugeyetech.com

Mike,Let me respond to a couple of your points.>>you must sit close to the screen (4ft or so) in order to get a>proper prospectiveWell, actually I've been working on eyepoint adjustments in both the panel and aircraft configs and have gotten the perspective correct for left seat flying. There was another thread about it here, just do a search on parallax. Of course, for a two seat flight deck, you'd not want to make such adjustments - or - you could load a separate aircraft with the right settings for the PF.>and to eliminate side leakage (seeing the>room your in). Using a projector at 4ft or so renders very>unsightly pixels.Well, the pixels are not bad, and the FOV I can get is quite good. I looked at your pictures and can see why anything less clear would seem unacceptable to you.>>>Second, driving two 3D displays from one card would tax it>much more than a single output<<>>This is absolutely a load of crap.Nice. Thank you ever so much. First, we all help each-other to the best of our knowledge, and most of us are imperfect. I have been known to err as well. But your language is not helpful. Let me take issue with your opinion using simple logic. Whether on a single display or on multiple displays, more pixels equals more computing power required, simply put. In the same way frame rates go down as you increase resolution from 640X480 to 1280X1024, frame rates will take a hit if you double (or triple) the width of your display. Tuomas did make a good point about screen-stretching driver hacks to keep from being hit with an "extra window" penalty. Now if you have a multi-monitor specific card like the Parhelia, it's designed to push more pixels over three separate monitors, and from what I've read it does that pretty well. But that's more power for more pixels. And benchmarks I've seen say it still can't top a single-output card in lower price ranges. But I think 15 - 20 FPS for second is plenty for a good flight experience, so I'm glad it works for you. If you have a card you've been using for a single display and you increase the display width and area by 100%, wouldn't you expect to see a significant frame rate hit?>when your in the simulator you become quite>immersed and really dont pay attention to that.Couldn't agree more! Just like you can overlook unsightly pixels and whatever else. Immersion is where it's at, no matter how you achieve it.Tim, decide what tradeoffs you can live with and dive in! You'll love it.Chris

>>Well, actually I've been working on eyepoint adjustments in both the panel and aircraft configs<>Let me take issue with your opinion using simple logic.<

>Hear hear Tuomas! I use a 2nd monitor for glass cockpit as>well, and while the outside visuals are nice and I wouldn't>want to go without them, they are not nearly as important as>your instruments... that is, unless you're purely a VFR>flyer.Yea. Of course for the "feeling" you want a good visual for IFR as well. This is about entertainment as well, although for some of us this can be a real training aid for practicing your flying skills for real life.>Good point about the stretching, I didn't know that. That>would reduce the hit you'd expect from driving two separate>displays. But pushing more pixels, even when stretched will>take more processing power on the part of the card and/or PC ->but it's probably worth it.You can just make it lower resolution. Remember the instruments are on the other screen so they are sharp and high resolution. If you fly VFR , then a bit of resolution is good so you can see the radio masts and other landmarks well.We in Finland are blessed with a add-on scenery called "FinnMast" that some of the guys did - basically they took the AIP's list of flight obstacles, converted the coordinates and AGL heights to a scene file that used a nice simple macro to generate those red/white radio link masts with strobes and red anti-collision lights.. So they are on the correct places with correct height. *Incredibly* useful for navigation.. Check out http://fisd.fsnordic.net for the other very good scenery the guys are doing - those people are amazing.>>slightly towards your eyes so you can hide the gap between>>them - making a pretty much seamless view. >>That's a great idea. I suspect Bug Eye technologies is doing>something like that, from the looks of things. >www.bugeyetech.comYea. that's exactly it. And it doesnt look that hard to do. I am going to get a fresnel at some point once I finish the rest of the cockpit upgrade - I need to finish the yoke and pedals and convert the panel to a LCD instead of the waaaay curved CRT monitor :)Oh btw, here's a pic of our aviation club sim, a simple GIF animation from what it was a year ago, to what we have now. It starts to look very nice, although there's still a lot to do.http://tigert.gimp.org/vatsim/cockpit-stuf...m-transform.gifThat's our C172 project. Simkits gauges, FSBUS for radios (still to be finished) and a collimated mirror element from a Finnair DC-10 simulator for the visual. Stuffed everything to a C150 fuselage section. Tuomas

Hey, simmers of the world! Let

Okay Mike, now you have my interest. You said Sony Trinitron tubes. Did you pull the tuner part off of the TV, purchase the units without turners or actually run them as TVs.And if you would, can you tell me more about the converter setup you mentioned?John