added a touchscreen as overhead, thats why I need 2 D badly!damn, I need a copilot!!

Johan- If you lived on Vancouver Island, I would be your man! Your 2D, seven monitor setup should convince both simmers AND developers of the potential of 2D panels. Viewing that pic- is there anyone who would still choose virtual with pan and zoom as a practical alternative? Thank you for posting.AR

added a touchscreen as overhead, thats why I need 2 D badly!damn, I need a copilot!!

very good setup ...

The 3D cockpit is not perfect.Switches may be not perfectly visible or even obscured by parts of the cockpit and not reachable without panning/moving the view.2D panels are a convenient way to bring up various parts of the cockpit. Especially on planes with lots of controls or multiple stations.A navigator or flight engineer station for example would not benefit much from being 3D.So IMHO 2D panels should stay.

I was just wondering If Flight might stop using the 2D cockpit feature? I know its extremely unlikely, but who knows! I'd love to hear your opinions on the matter! :) Jamie ♥

If it stops using it and the 3D cockpit has the same functionality, then it's ok. I only use 3D cockpits rarely and mostly in long-haul flights where there's little to do in the middle of the flight apart from enjoying the scenery and a 3D cockpit for realism. I NEVER use a 3D cockpit under ATC control online or for aircraft operations because the rate of failure clicking in the spots is fairly high and very inaccurate, and you just can't be inaccurate when flying.So, 3D is okay for eye candy but 2D is required for accurate navigation. My 2 cents :(

2D panels work well with the 2D medium we call a monitor. 3D 'pits are great, but unless they are easily navigable with a mouse (panning/zooming), then a 2D option must be offered. Best regards,Robin.

The target market for every version of FS wants 2D cockpits. Once again you have forgotten you are not the target market, and never will be.

Reversing your comment- hard to see the need for VIRTUAL now that large or multiple monitors setups are commonplace.Virtual was a solution to the problem of tiny 13-15 inch monitors many years ago. When every switch or instrument is always in a different location with panning, and the view/distance perception out of the cockpit windows is constantly being distorted by zooming (to see more than a 45º perspective)- no wonder the FAA does not approve pan/zoom for FTDs. Here are two screenshots to illustrate-One shows how the cockpit gauges/switches can be displayed- ALWAYS in the same location.The other shows the 146º visual perspective- compare it with a real cockpit.So long VIRTUAL- it's been nice knowing you!!!!!AR

Thanks, exactly. Nothing comes close to just hit SHIFT+X and be where I want to be, and always in the same spot. How's that, in the VC I need to turn my head (which in fact I can't), so I use the mouse or the hat or TrackIR if I have it, eventually zoom in to find that click spot that keeps jumping around due to my fancy camera effects, and then trying to hit it, ending up hitting that other one next to it. Oh wait, I could've just pressed SHIFT+X. Or simply use a keyboard key stroke. Works faster in any way. Form follows function. And even that's not correct, as 2D panels have always been the highest resolution possible because they simply don't rely on textures (admitted this changes now with current add-ons that pack HD texture into their VCs), it's resolution could always have been whatever your monitor makes. You don't have to share my opinion, but for me the VC is just the extension of a system that simply can't be realistic for obvious reasons, at least speaking of a 1-monitor setup without any full blown home cockpit around it. We're still talking about simulation here, so somewhere there has got to be the line that seperates it from the real thing. That's why I don't care much for it. I always try to compare to how I would do things in the real world. There I would reach out with my arm to flip a switch. Now this is already where the evil begins, I have that awkward mouse between my arm and the switch (unless I am touchscreen equipped, which most people aren't). At least not having to search for switches and stuff, this is where popup-able panels come in handy. Even better in some cases, if I use a keystroke I at least have a sort of "hardware" button that's right in front of me in the "real" world, not in the "virtual" cockpit, and it takes the fraction of a second to operate, quite close to the real world. Now after all the complaining something on the pro side as well. I certainly do like the fact how VCs have evolved over time, the first major leap being that .gau/.xml files weren't used exclusively anymore and needles and stuff have been modelled in 3D. Now thy put in lots of detail in there and high resolution textures and all, and they sure "look" beautiful, definately more like a photograph than a 2D cockpit. It's just I don't find them usable. It's great to have both as this seems to fit most people's taste. You don't have to use both. But since this was a poll, these are the reasons why I don't use VCs.

Viewing that pic- is there anyone who would still choose virtual with pan and zoom as a practical alternative?

Yep, someone who doesn't fancy paying for six or seven wide screen monitors, and the increased graphics power required to run a 3D display on all of them at the same time. It's a very impressive setup, but not really practical for the average user who couldn't care less about real world pilot licences.

Yep, someone who doesn't fancy paying for six or seven wide screen monitors, and the increased graphics power required to run a 3D display on all of them at the same time. It's a very impressive setup, but not really practical for the average user who couldn't care less about real world pilot licences.

Christopher- go back and look at the pic in #13 post in this thread.Those are are two 17"LCDs with a 19" CRT- yielding a visual perspective width of 45". Monitors such as these (and even bigger) are giveaways!As for computer power, the 'puter that generated that pic was my seven year old AMD 1.8 CPU using two equally old GeForce FX5200 cards.Seems fairly practical for this user.AR

Well, from the PoV of a low-tec user...it took me saving for two years to get a PC capable enough to run FSX smoothly but even now landing in a semi-complex aircraft at an airport near a semi-large town/city means I need to switch to 2D or else my frame rates are down into single figures. People like me will always be behind the curve when it comes to hardware and especially for FS where you can't just bung in a better graphics card but you need CPU power as well. Just right after I bough a new Mobo and a quad-core processor they brought out the i7 chips so that my lovely new Mobo is useless for upgrading! When I do bush flying I never use the 2D panels, but when I do almost any other kind of flying I find them necessary, usually to land, so I voted for them to stay! Colin Martin Thanks for readin'

in FS9, 2x tripleheads, one el cheapo pci video card, 6 cheap (200eu) monitors, saitek set with rudder, and a slow E8650 dual core, for about 3000 eu total.All bought and expanded over two years. Got the touchscreen for free, in use as a overhead.Since I fly often with a friend, who is a handy wood worker, he made me a stand for all the stuff to put in. Setback for only 170eu.No space in between for a pedestal, maybe later if I can find a small enough monitor. Then you have this, and with good payware scenery, rex clouds, all at a locked 25 fps.No need for panning anymore, always all instruments in view, hence no need for a vc.I dont plan to buy hardware instruments, like an a/p because now I can fly any plane whenever I like. No dependencies.

Nice!!

I would like to add that its a most different expirience!Not only the views but the way one flies. Now I look more out of the window outside, better to aim for landings etc.Also a headsdown approach is really a headsdown approach, like in IFR conditions. You actually lift your head to see outside, look actually left or right.One has to typerate his self again.. lol.

That's a pretty stunning setup you have there Johan, is it dedicated to FS or does it double as your everyday pc?