No. I'll try it out.

With nicely set up EZCA + VC, you'll give up 2D forever. That is, if your machine is strong enough for VC.

Reading most of the posts here (exluding people with poor spec machines) I dont get what all the complaints are about, using the VC with track IR is the most natural experiance you can get. I still undock the FMC and EICAS screens to other monitors but apart from that they can throw away the rest of the 2D panel. Seriously some of you guy's need to move on, if not developing 2D panels shortens dev times I am all for it, believe me when I say 2D users are in the minority now. It also surprices me how many people still haven't clicked that they can use the pause button with TrackIR, I hear people saying it makes me feel sick the camera is always moving.. Pause the damn thing!! Throughout the whole cruise I normally have it switched off unless I actualy need to use it to look around or configure the overhead.

This is the funniest thing I red on this forum :D TrackIR is everything but natural. Why?Because:1.Even with track IR you have no peripheral vision, so you cannot see 70% of things you can see in RL cockpit. You can move back yourself and "unzoom" view, but then you get fisheye effects, and beside that, you can't read a single number on displays.2.When you move your head up for example, you should expect to see overhead panel in front of you, but guess what? its still on your screen, so you HAVE to move your head up, and in tte same time to move your eyeballs down in order to keep your look on screen. That is natural?3.But, if you move your head to much up for example, you will reach angle when you cannot reach screen with your eyeballs anymore, so you cannot see anything. You can set exponential movement of axis, but that is even more unnatural. Should I mention awful framerate with trackIR connected? I threw my trackIR long time ago, the stupidest thing I ever bought... Actually, yesterday, I tried to fly whole flight in VC... Its nice when you use MCP+autoland flying, but for precise manual flying, it's nothing but disaster. Lj. Prodanovic

This is the funniest thing I red on this forum :D TrackIR is everything but natural. Why?Because:1.Even with track IR you have no peripheral vision, so you cannot see 70% of things you can see in RL cockpit. You can move back yourself and "unzoom" view, but then you get fisheye effects, and beside that, you can't read a single number on displays.2.When you move your head up for example, you should expect to see overhead panel in front of you, but guess what? its still on your screen, so you HAVE to move your head up, and in tte same time to move your eyeballs down in order to keep your look on screen. That is natural?3.But, if you move your head to much up for example, you will reach angle when you cannot reach screen with your eyeballs anymore, so you cannot see anything. You can set exponential movement of axis, but that is even more unnatural. Should I mention awful framerate with trackIR connected? I threw my trackIR long time ago, the stupidest thing I ever bought... Actually, yesterday, I tried to fly whole flight in VC... Its nice when you use MCP+autoland flying, but for precise manual flying, it's nothing but disaster. Lj. Prodanovic

I think you are talking about TIR3.

And this is my point, the problem is with you, not the hardware or software......... You obviously have TrackIR setup wrong. TrackIR comes with software that gives you potentially millions of ways to adjust the parameters until you find something that works for you. Perhaps you should try using it? Also, even if you are one of those people that have zero co-ordination you can completely shut off any axis and use the basic up down left right axis. I'm afraid you cant try to use the exuse that TrackIR does not behave realistically when 1000's of users worldwide including non flight simmers have absolutely no trouble using it.

Maybe I AM using it wrong or there is something wrong with it.I'm finding that it in order to look up at and across the overhead panel, the sensor (mounted on top of the monitor) is losing contact with the reflectors, which limits me to seeing and controlling only the first half of the panel. I'll have a look on Youtube and see how everyone else is using it.

Gents- This was a deliberate decision because of the animation and time resources that are required to model it. 2D panels are going away for all future projects- so this would be a great product to start practicing VC use!

There's no other word for it, this is just... bad, with a capital B. 3D is "pretty" and all, more realistic but hardly as functional as a 2D panel and in some delicate approaches and ATC control online it's just not feasible moving around the 3D panel to click here and there - Missing the right click spot, move fast enough to act and comply with instructions, etc. Most companies are doing this, unfortunately, and if EZDOK works somewhat ok, it's another payware addon, another addon that might cause issues in FSX (and it does) and *STILL* doesn't match the speed and functionality of a 2D panel. Oh well. And i don't even want to talk about the lack of a pedestal... Let's just say that if i knew about it, i wouldn't have purchased the Aircraft.

This is the funniest thing I red on this forum :D TrackIR is everything but natural. Why?Because:1.Even with track IR you have no peripheral vision, so you cannot see 70% of things you can see in RL cockpit. You can move back yourself and "unzoom" view, but then you get fisheye effects, and beside that, you can't read a single number on displays.2.When you move your head up for example, you should expect to see overhead panel in front of you, but guess what? its still on your screen, so you HAVE to move your head up, and in tte same time to move your eyeballs down in order to keep your look on screen. That is natural?3.But, if you move your head to much up for example, you will reach angle when you cannot reach screen with your eyeballs anymore, so you cannot see anything. You can set exponential movement of axis, but that is even more unnatural. Should I mention awful framerate with trackIR connected? I threw my trackIR long time ago, the stupidest thing I ever bought... Actually, yesterday, I tried to fly whole flight in VC... Its nice when you use MCP+autoland flying, but for precise manual flying, it's nothing but disaster. Lj. Prodanovic

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about so I will say one more time. You, yes you couldn't figure out how to set it up correctly so you gave up. That does not mean others have the same problem.You sound like the kind of person who would pick up a guitar, have no idea how to tune it and then complain that it sounds crap. Seriously, if you don't understand how to get it to work fair enough, but don't try to tell me or others that we have the same problems as you just because you couldn't figure it out.

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about so I will say one more time.  You, yes you couldn't figure out how to set it up correctly so you gave up. That does not mean others have the same problem.You sound like the kind of person who would pick up a guitar, have no idea how to tune it and then complain that it sounds crap. Seriously, if you don't understand how to get it to work fair enough, but don't try to tell me or others that we have the same problems as you just because you couldn't figure it out.

Actually, I gave to much chances to that hardware. You know, I learned to play piano without anyone to help me, so I'm more than patient with new things.You can try to read what I wrote and tell which part is not true?It's not about settings, its about hardware limits.Ok, its not complete disaster as I said at the end, but it not more natural than 2d cockpit, or homecockpit or something third...If you like it I dont want to stop yo using it, just to say other people who may want to buy it:Do not beliave in everything you read on internet, TRY BEFORE BUY it, or you could regret.YOu may like it, but you may dont like it at all.Lj. Prodanovicadn ##### is wrong with forum? anyone experiencing problems other than mme?

Ok I don't want to get drawn into this but to answer you question.1. Peripheral vision is the same, 2d or 3d the only way around that is to use additional monitors.2. When I move up I see the overhead panel, because I spent time setting up the smoothing and curve actions for each axis. And yes it feels the same as when I sit in the real thing.3. Again you have trackir setup wrong, nothing I can do about that, only you.And I have never seen a framerate hit, if anything it makes the sim appear smoother.So, it is a disaster for you because you don't know how to set it up to your liking.That is the only point I am trying to make.Regards

Ok I don't want to get drawn into this but to answer you question. 1. Peripheral vision is the same, 2d or 3d the only way around that is to use additional monitors. 2. When I move up I see the overhead panel, because I spent time setting up the smoothing and curve actions for each axis. And yes it feels the same as when I sit in the real thing. 3. Again you have trackir setup wrong, nothing I can do about that, only you. And I have never seen a framerate hit, if anything it makes the sim appear smoother. So, it is a disaster for you because you don't know how to set it up to your liking. That is the only point I am trying to make. Regards

1. This is not comparison between 2d panel and track IR+ VC. You stated that "track IR is the most natural experiance you can get". Its not. 2. When you move your head up there is no way you can see overhead panel without your eyeballs moved down. To compensate that, you HAVE TO set exponential movement of track IR axis. exponential movement of axis is everything but "natural experience. 3. No, I set it exactly as it should be set, but as I said exponential movement of axis is not the most conformable for human eye and brain. We disagree at this, so, maybe its better to stop this now :) Regards, Lj. Prodanovic

Sounds like you are using a 14" monitor so I will leave it there. I use a 50" screen but even prior to that I used a 21" screen for a while and never had the problems you describe. The funny thing is if the points you brought up were valid for everyone most people would return the hardware, in reality it is a small fraction of users that report issues like yours. If that does not tell you something then nothing will. It's not rocket science, tweak the software until you have a profile that works for you.Anyway like I said I will leave it here, sorry you can't get it working the way want.Regards

I have to admit that with 50" screen you may set it to work nice :) Lj Prodanovic.

Simulation is about compromises. Is using a TrackIR exactly like sitting in the cockpit? No. Is it closer to real life than 2D panels? Yes. People who insist on 2D panels are part of the stubborn crowd, that can't embrace progress when it changes their habits. Apple has a nice solution for customers like this. They don't care about their thoughts. Apple always cuts and removes legacy features - if they hamper development. Do people stop using Apple products because of this? No. Stubborn customers learn to adapt when their "favorite" legacy feature are cut and removed, because they have no choice. I'm almost certain that 90% of the 2D crowd still would buy the product, and that 90% of them would be perfectly happy with 3d panels within a week or two. The customers lost, would come back sooner or later, if not, the money saved in development by cutting legacy features would be made up for in shortened development time anyways.

Simulation is about compromises. Is using a TrackIR exactly like sitting in the cockpit? No. Is it closer to real life than 2D panels? Yes. People who insist on 2D panels are part of the stubborn crowd, that can't embrace progress when it changes their habits. Apple has a nice solution for customers like this. They don't care about their thoughts. Apple always cuts and removes legacy features - if they hamper development. Do people stop using Apple products because of this? No. Stubborn customers learn to adapt when their "favorite" legacy feature are cut and removed, because they have no choice. I'm almost certain that 90% of the 2D crowd still would buy the product, and that 90% of them would be perfectly happy with 3d panels within a week or two. The customers lost, would come back sooner or later, if not, the money saved in development by cutting legacy features would be made up for in shortened development time anyways.

You underestimate 2d panel users. I hope you understand that 2d panels are feature of products, and it gives you a CHOICE. Like you can choose whether you want to fly with WL or without WL, with honeywell or collins. Yes, collins is better, but you can still use honeywell one. With your logic, in NGX they should install HGS only, collins only, WL only, ETOPS only, just because legacy equipment is not that good as new one? Lj. Prodanovic

This has been said before, but it is not valid to expect one to spend $50 in addition to the program to buy addons like EZdok to make the program work correctly. Henri

You underestimate 2d panel users. I hope you understand that 2d panels are feature of products, and it gives you a CHOICE. Like you can choose whether you want to fly with WL or without WL, with honeywell or collins. Yes, collins is better, but you can still use honeywell one. With your logic, in NGX they should install HGS only, collins only, WL only, ETOPS only, just because legacy equipment is not that good as new one? Lj. Prodanovic

My point is that when some features have past their date of extinction, they can and should be cut. Sharpening and focusing development efforts. Boeing does not offer JT8D engines on their 737's any more, thats logic. Anyways, it seems like you understand my perspective very well, so I don't need to elaborate on it. Anyways, people who say they will not buy the 777 because it will be VC only, will probably change their mind when they realize how good it is, even in a VC only world. It's often not hard to convince people who insist on legacy features.