VC vs 2D cockpits, opinions?

[LAdamson 240]

I fly in real life as well, and outside of buying new glasses every few years, I have yet to 'zoom in' in a real cockpit to see a guage or a switch, which in some VC's is necessary. In fact normally there is very little 'head movement' either, as most of the time its the eyes that do the scanning, not turning my head.

I sat in my plane with a lap top sitting on the glareshield, and decided I'd need at least six of them to get the full effect. It's still a compromise with less. As to instruments while flying a VC, I use shift Z for airspeed and heading, as well as pop up GPS's. This eliminates the need for zooming in, most of the time.As a side note, just flying the new RealAir Duke............As I deployed flaps while looking out the VC side view, there was a nice sensation of deceleration thanks to the VC and FSX's built in head latency. I always get that in my plane, and it's rather fun that a static desktop monitor can provide the illusion of movement and feel....too!L.Adamson

[jrhoads 6]

as well as pop up GPS's. This eliminates the need for zooming in, most of the time.

And that is a point I left out. I hear people saying they are VC purists, yet they still want (drum roll please...) popups which are indeed 2D elements. Jim

[LAdamson 240]

And that is a point I left out. I hear people saying they are VC purists, yet they still want (drum roll please...) popups which are indeed 2D elements.

That's okay...........Because no 2Ds or VC's are real planes either! We can compromise without guilt... :( L.Adamson

[jrhoads 6]

Correct we can, but the point to understand is that you may like VC, I like 2D and neither one of us is wrong or exclusive to realism.

[ahuimanu 50]

Why not both? However, if I were forced to make a choice, it would be VC with 2D popups.

[robert young 2,897]

And that is a point I left out. I hear people saying they are VC purists, yet they still want (drum roll please...) popups which are indeed 2D elements. Jim

Hi Jim,That's normally true but not in our case. Our "pop ups" are zoomed in static versions of completely 3d portions of the panel and the advantage is that the gauge close ups are also true 3d in shape and not superimposed images on a flat bitmap. It's not that hard to do, so my partner in crime Sean tells me, although he has taken a few years to get it dead right. The beauty of this is that you can tell FSX you do not want that fixed view to move, so it is for all intents and purposes functionally identical to a 2d sub-panel. BUT.....in our case the needle updates exactly at the core frame rate, not at the usual and somewhat slow 18 fps of traditional panels, hence the vastly superior smoothness.Best Wishes,Rob Young

[Gumps 0]

"Not only that, but if a user is not quite satisfied with the 3d views presented, he or she, with hardly any effort, can construct new views which can be fixed, or moveable, or zoomable, can be sized, placed exactly where you like, and you can even assign a hot key for immediate access to these extra views. This is perfectly possible by simply editing the aircraft cfg file and adding as many different views as you like, or by editing existing views."Hi RobI just got the new Duke, and must say, it's a work of art...truly a polished product - my hat is off to you and the team. The smoothness of the gauges in remarkable. Normally 3D panels are more difficult to read than 2D, they just are not near as sharp. I don't know how RealAir did this and maintained high frame rates. (??)My personal preference is for 2D because of the multi monitor setup I use. I'm flying the Duke with my TIR, but given a choice (and of course this is just me talking about my preference), I'd make use of my additional screens including touch screens. In reading your comment above, I was hoping you might be able to elaborate a little on the "new views".I tried creating a 'new view' in FSX, and dragging that new outside view onto another screen, with the VC view on the main screen (and visa versa), and the FPS seemed to go in the toilet. I gave up when I saw that. But your comments made me wonder if there really is a way to spread the views out on multiple screens and have the best of both worlds. With VC and 2D popups, I know this works. But with pure 3D...do you (or anyone else) have some guidance on how to achieve this? Normally I 'undock' the different 2D views, drag them to the other monitors, and then go to 'full screen'. Can these new views be 'undocked', and in practice have minimal FPS impact? (I suspect this may be the stumbling block - FPS. I'm certainly no expert, but I think the reason I can get away with dragging my panels onto other screens, is that they are 2D images, leaving only one 3D image (the outside view) on the main screen(s) - TH2go. I would think that this would be particularly acute on the two screens attached to the second video card, since it's in a PCIe 1x slot. Hmmm, a motherboard with two 16x slots might be in order!)My apologies for the thread creep.Thanks in advanceNoel WBrisbaneHere's what my setup looks like:I wrote a lengthy post on it here if anyone needs any details.

[jrhoads 6]

Hi Jim,That's normally true but not in our case. Our "pop ups" are zoomed in static versions of completely 3d portions of the panel and the advantage is that the gauge close ups are also true 3d in shape and not superimposed images on a flat bitmap. It's not that hard to do, so my partner in crime Sean tells me, although he has taken a few years to get it dead right. The beauty of this is that you can tell FSX you do not want that fixed view to move, so it is for all intents and purposes functionally identical to a 2d sub-panel. BUT.....in our case the needle updates exactly at the core frame rate, not at the usual and somewhat slow 18 fps of traditional panels, hence the vastly superior smoothness.Best Wishes,Rob Young

Hi Rob,Yes, I understand and and am quite aware of camera views. We even do it ourselves. However, as long as you are providing 3D modeled gauges in the VC, you can have the smoothest gauges on earth specific to the VC. But, try it with glass gauges. You are talking an entirely different situation and it is not apples for apples. Also, I wish you well on the Duke.Jim

[Guest SkullxBones]

I sat in my plane with a lap top sitting on the glareshield, and decided I'd need at least six of them to get the full effect.

Or one monitor the same size as your planes panel. When I moved from a 19" monitor up to my current 28" monitor, VC's are much more enjoyable and readable now. I don't have to zoom to read every gauge now. Once they start making 60" computer monitors, VC's are going to hit their sweet spot.

[robert young 2,897]

Hi Rob,Yes, I understand and and am quite aware of camera views. We even do it ourselves. However, as long as you are providing 3D modeled gauges in the VC, you can have the smoothest gauges on earth specific to the VC. But, try it with glass gauges. You are talking an entirely different situation and it is not apples for apples. Also, I wish you well on the Duke.Jim

Hi Jim.I concur. Glass gauges are a different kettle of fish. In which case of course 2d pop ups are probably the only way, at least so far.Best Wishes,Rob Young

[robert young 2,897]

Hi Noel,That's a very impressive setup. I do apologise for this but I do not have enough experience of multi monitor systems to comment in detail, but I suspect that what you imply is true...porting 3d based gauges in the way you describe probably costs in frame rates. But, within the system that relies on camera view-based alternatives, all you are doing is effectively focussing in on what is already there. So you can create theoretically as many alternative and close up views as you wish and as long as only one view appears at any one time, surely frame rates are not affected except positively, because a close up 3d gauge view is shutting out scenery, weather and all sorts of other frame rate hogs.As soon as you effectively double up the number of 3d gauges then you are probably asking for trouble, in which case, with multi monitors 3d is not the solution.Best Regards,Rob Young

[scott967 62]

I find with "mouse look" in FSX I can use the VC effectively, but if the panel requires being able to really read a gauge I can't do it in the VC without moving way in. So either I have popups (which are fixed when you move your view and kind of negate the whole VC concept) or go to 2D. As long as there are simmers who want a home 'pit, rather than just doing VC on a single monitor, there will be a need for some sort of 2D. I would like to put together a G1000 system with 2 15in touchscreens to hold the main displays which would mean an outside view only on the main monitors. I don't see how you can possible do that with a VC-only approach.Long live 2D.scott s..

[Arklight1 140]

I prefer a VC both when I am using my TrackIR and when I am not using it. I am actually suprised most users here don't prefer VC's. Most LCDs out these days are widescreen and with the exception of a few cases, most 2D panels are squished/streteched when used with them. I run a 30 inch Dell and a 23 inch Acer, and utilizing the VC on either one of these monitors is absolutely amazing. I try to look at 2D panels, but I just can't get used to my vision being stuck forward. It completely ruins the immersion for me. When I am at FL350 in a heavy, I still prefer the VC. There is nothing else to do up there but look around.....using a 2D panel takes that away. LOL

[Sean Moloney 102]

Hi Guys,As far as I can make out the real issue here isn't 2D vs VC but how people like to interact with the panel. From what I can gather from this thread, those who prefer 2D panels prefer them for the following reasons:* Straight-on viewing angle.* Ability to have windows pop up with a keystroke.* Ability to move windows across to additional monitors.* Ablity to have everything layed out for easy acccess without panning or cycling views.Does that sound about right?All the best,Sean MoloneyRealAir Simulations

[jrhoads 6]

Hi Guys,As far as I can make out the real issue here isn't 2D vs VC but how people like to interact with the panel. From what I can gather from this thread, those who prefer 2D panels prefer them for the following reasons:* Straight-on viewing angle.* Ability to have windows pop up with a keystroke.* Ability to move windows across to additional monitors.* Ablity to have everything layed out for easy acccess without panning or cycling views.Does that sound about right?All the best,Sean MoloneyRealAir Simulations

Hi Sean,Those are all positive traits, but I simply don't like to use VC's because they feel "toy like" to me. That is my personal opinion and has nothing to do with anything else but my opinion. :( Best,Jim