Not much talk about the new "clickable" VCs

[Guest jason2112]

I'm not sure if larry meant he really moves his position, or rather zooms out a bit. I use FSUIPC to program one key to set the zoom to 0.67x. Funnily enough FSUIPC does not use the display FS zoom value, but rather seems to imitate focal lenght values like in 35 mm photography. In order to achieve 0.67x zoom I need to enter a value of 43 (mm). That's a very mediocre wide angle, nothing extreme yet. A rule of thumb says that 50 mm is about the normal view, without peripheral vision. So 43 mm gives you just a bit of that peripheral vision that is so important in judging your position without distorting the surroundings. The standard 1.0x feels like a tele lens to me.Just my 2c (EUR),VOlker :]

[maxter 0]

On a completely un-related subject...Anything new from Realair on the horizon???Chris Porter:-outtaPerthWestern Australia

[Guest jason2112]

I think I heard they were working on the Cittabria and Decathlon for FS2002/FS2004. RealAir Simulations released both of these planes for Fly!II some time ago.Take a look at the old versions here: http://www.realairsimulations.com/aircraft/aircraft.htmlI'm sure the new FS models will look even better.VOlker :]

[maxter 0]

Thanks VOlker much appreciated.Cheers,Chris Porter:-outtaPerthWestern Australia

[Guest]

ChrisI am not involved with RealAir Simulations anymore. Due to personal family problems I had several months ago and a big commitment with ImageAir (my realworld corporate aircraft consultancy/management enterprise)We decided to go our seperate ways.Rob and Sean are now RealAir and they are best placed to answer you.All the bestPeter

[LAdamson 240]

For "pulling back", I use a combination of Ctrl enter & Ctrl backspace, along with rolling the mouse thumbwheel and active camera. The ctrl enter keys won't change the zoom rate of the outside scenery.The effect is in this pic. Works great for landings because of peripheral views. I also infinately adjust while flying depending on preference at the "moment". Note: On a 22" monitor, the instruments are quite easy to see!

[maxter 0]

Shame to hear it Pete, hope things will be better for you soon.Best regards as always,Chris Porter:-outtaPerthWestern Australia

[Guest]

LarryYour picture describes very well the problems because even in your back seat position you are not getting the field of view that the Real Pilot would have.In your picture taken from a back seat position the view cuts off at the screen pillar. Infact sitting in the pilot position your field of view would take in side window views as well with your head looking straight ahead.It doesnt and this will create a problem flying downwind a runway waiting for the point to turn base.The position of the runway should be in the corner of your eye with you looking ahead but isnt :-(hmmmmmpeter

[Guest]

But in all fairness to FS, wouldn't it technically be impossible to emulate real-life field-of-view in a standard monitor? Considering that humans can see things within a wide, curved arc (I don't know the specific angle) and a monitor is simply a flat square I just can't think of how it can be done (without considerable distortion). However, I believe setting up two adjacent monitors at a slight angle to the center monitor and using something like WideView would suffice for this problem of peripheral vision.-Derek

[LAdamson 240]

>Larry>>Your picture describes very well the problems because even in>your back seat position you are not getting the field of view>that the Real Pilot would have.>>In your picture taken from a back seat position the view cuts>off at the screen pillar. Infact sitting in the pilot position>your field of view would take in side window views as well>with your head looking straight ahead.>>It doesnt and this will create a problem flying downwind a>runway waiting for the point to turn base.The position of the>runway should be in the corner of your eye with you looking>ahead but isnt :-(>But as I said, I move the eye-point back and forth at will....... and rather quickly!! And when goes worse to worse, it's full screen, no panel, & digital readouts in the upper left screen..What ever it takes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)L.Adamson

[Guest]

It wouldn't. Human peripheral vision extends in an arc around 150 degrees wide. You'd need 7 screens set up like that or more...Plus of course several screens on top of each of those because that vision extends up and down as well, say a minimum of 21 screens total.