>What would make the view perfect would be to raise the upper>sill of the side windows a couple of inches. That way you>would keep the good view over the dash while improving the>view to the sides.>>It doesn't sound like an elaborate fix. Can anyone attempt>it?Only Carenado's aircraft model designer....No elaborate fix ? It will be much like asking Cessna itself to do the same, about complete redesign of the entire aircraft :-bla

>Is anyone else seeing those chunks of the seat your sitting>in when you look to the side? Don't think that's there in>RL.... You have moved your eyepoint (ctrl/enter-backspace) too far back, having 'your head' inside the head rest... Better to move forward a bit and zoom out a tad more ( ctrl/- ) >And if you take a look at the eyepoint of the pilots seated in>the plane from spot view in those same images referred to>above, I don't think their eyepoioint is being obstructed by>the top of the door or as low in relation to the dash as the>way its set from inside....That's not really relevant, just the way the designer modelled the pilot figures. It has occured to me that many FS aircraft designers model their pilot figures too small,myself included. ( ask Freud why we do that...) We have nice scale drawings of aircraft to determine the exact measures of a model. Modelling a pilot figure is all done by 'dead reckoning' ....;-) What we need is a good photo of a real Centurion from the side with the pilot on board in normal position. I wouldn't be surprised if we would not be able to see if he has blond or dark hear or wearing a cap. ;-) Jan

>That's an excellent point, if indeed the VC setup isn't>wrong, why are the 2D cockpit side views normal? You can set different eyepoints for 2D panel views and VC. The eyepoint for left/right view of the VC with the 2D panel is set lower then that of the default VC eyepoint. Set it the same for the VC itself and you wouldn't be able to look over the dashboard.Because we still don't know what the 'normal' left/right view in the real 210 is like maybe better to call the 2D cockpit side views 'convinient'. Jan

Well, since I fly VC almost exclusively, this is a sore point for me and enough to make me wish I hadn't spent the money.I did receive an email response from Carenado stating that the views are a suggestion only and can be changed by the user although they didn't elaborate on how to accomplish it. It's really disturbing to be in VC and have to press SHFT+BSPC to lower the seat to look left or right. I agree that keeping it that way makes it impossible to see over the panel... so where does the fault lie? In a bad panel design?And yes, I get the floating parts of the seat when looking left and it has nothing to do with where I set my view. That is how it came 'out-of-the-box'.Good news is that the plane flies well... bad news is that I can't see clearly when flying it. I bought the plane for VFR not IFR so give me views not panel.

i found this one : http://www.airliners.net/open.file/355090/L/and i don't full happy pilot's face - i can see onlny his nose :-)

This is a great pic, Ericson. It clearly shows that the top of the side window isn't but a few inches above the line of the top of the dash. It isn't a model problem... it's a high wing/high cowling and dash issue.Thanks,

To the comment above about zooming in to get "out of the seat", that's not how the zoom function works. It zooms from a stationary eye position- but that does give me an idea for the fix here. I believe the head position can indeed be changed in the panel or aircraft.cfg file to move it closer to the panel (just as it can be shifted up/down or left/right. That should at least get the eyepoint in front of instead of inside the seat, I'll have to try it later and will post results Phil.As to shifting the side views of the VC upward, I do think the bitmaps caan be edited to do this without too much trouble, I may try it in Photoshop when I have some time and if succesful will make the new .bmp file available.Joel

No, as far as I know they don't have a support forum. But they responeded quickly to the mails I sent to them in the last few days.VOlker :]

The seat problem can be solved by moving the point of view a bit forward. To make a permanent change, edit your aircraft config:[Views]eyepoint=1.00,-0.90,2.40The first value is 0.50 normally, increasing it moves the view point forward a bit.It seems to me that Carenado modelled the 210 very accurately, so the problem with the visibility to the left is a problem of the original Cessna design. The lower point of view in the 2D side views is a quick fix to increase visibility, but it cannot work in the VC for obvious reasons.Just my 2c (EUR),VOlker :]

>To the comment above about zooming in to get "out of the>seat", that's not how the zoom function works.Indeed,Joel, but i did not say 'zoom ' but 'move'. The latter is done with CTRL/ENTER and CTRL/BACKSPACE and *does* as promised, 'move' yourself forward or backward. Same as Numberpad 8 and 2 does when you use AC. 'Zoom' works with SHIFT/- and SHIFT/+ and works the same as f.i. a photocamera zoom lens, your field of view gets nearer or further away while you stay put.>As to shifting the side views of the VC upward, I do think the>bitmaps caan be edited to do this without too much trouble, I>may try it in Photoshop when I have some time and if succesful>will make the new .bmp file available.I'm afraid you are confusing a VC with the well known and probabely soon ushered out 2D panel cockpit views *bitmaps* . These are not used in the Centurion model. Like the external model of an aircraft, a VC is also a 3D model consisting of dozens of seperate textured parts. Sure you will be able to find the bitmap which contains the texture for the internal door and roof but it won't help you to 'move 'm up a bit', you'd still be looking at the internal door and roof *parts* at the same place,only wrongly textured now...

>i found this one :>http://www.airliners.net/open.file/355090/L/Great catch, Ericson ! Just what we needed ! ;-) The photo proves undoubtly that, as with the external model, Carenado modelled the internal model just perfectly. If the pilot turns his head to the left the top of the door frame and part of the roof will partly block his outside view. He will need to bend his head to get full outside left view. As far as i'm concerned the case is clear !

Good picture. I would say it shows just the opposite. If you zoom in, you see that the pilot's head is turned directly toward the camera and is not lowered at all. His eyes are clearly visible. The upper sill of the window is even with the hairline above his forehead.

I pretty much have found .81 the best compromise zoom setting and sometimes .75. Here are some tweaks I made to the panel.cfg eyepoint settings:VIEW_FORWARD_ZOOM=0.81VIEW_FORWARD_EYE=0.0, -0.022, 0.0VIEW_FORWARD_DIR=6.0, 0.0, 0.0VIEW_FORWARD_RIGHT_ZOOM=0.81VIEW_FORWARD_RIGHT_EYE=0.0, -0.022, 0.0VIEW_FORWARD_RIGHT_DIR=6.0, 0.0, 35.0VIEW_RIGHT_ZOOM=0.81VIEW_RIGHT_EYE=0.0, -0.08, 0.0VIEW_RIGHT_DIR=6.0, 0.0, 90.0VIEW_LEFT_ZOOM=0.81VIEW_LEFT_EYE=0.0, -0.06, 0.0VIEW_LEFT_DIR=13.0, 0.0, -80.0VIEW_FORWARD_LEFT_ZOOM=0.81VIEW_FORWARD_LEFT_EYE=0.0, -0.022, 0.0VIEW_FORWARD_LEFT_DIR=6.0, 0.0, -35.0VIEW_DOWN_ZOOM=0.81VIEW_DOWN_EYE=0.0, -0.022, 0.0VIEW_DOWN_DIR=-30.0, 0.0, 0.0I pretty much exclusively fly in the VC unless I need a panel button. I made it so you can see the left wing with left view as well as a part of the right wing.Try it out and let me know what you think!

Carmine,Am I I correct that the above changes are to the 2d panel views?Joel

Quite right about the zoom, my mistake. I've actually made changes to the view eyepoint in the .cfg file and am now quite happy with the VC setup, and it seems to be relatively realistic with only the need for slight seat adjustment during landing. As a whole, though, I find this sort of thing to be the big difference between Dreamfleet and many other payware developers, the kind of detail sweating before a product goes out that makes it more than a pretty (or in this case gorgeous) model; having my head enveloped in the seat headrest sort of makes me wonder about more significant details that may have been overlooked but not so obvious.Joel