This post is not meant to be a criticism -- just a question from an enquiring mind. I have noticed a number of very good freeware a/c which have incredibly detailed exterior models, pretty good 2d panels -- but fairly poor VCs. Mainly due to their 'coarseness" and lack of clarity.I am just wondering why ?-- is it because VCs are more difficult to model than the exterior? - or maybe the modeller puts all his/her energies into the exterior and is too worn out to put the same effort into the VC?Just wonderingThanks Barry

I have never developed an aircraft for FS. I am a 3D modeler however. I can not discuss details of the current project I am working on yet, as it is in early stages of development, and has not gone public in any way.What I can tell you is that the model I have been focused on contains a tremendous amount of detail, all 3D. Where I am going with this is that the external model has only been a small fraction of the work. The cockpit has been the longest, most tedious part of the entire aircraft. I have modeled every gauge, switch and button, as well as flight controls and other sytems in great detail. Not only has the project involved countless hours of work, but also has been a challenge to represent all of this detail while still maintaining a reasonable polygon count as well as staying within the texture memory budget.Again, I am not familiar with the FS rendering engine in any detail, but from my experience, a detailed VC can be quite a challenge to do well. Also, an otherwise beautiful VC could turn your realtime simulation into a slideshow if not rendered efficiently.I hope this answers your question.regards,Dave

From what I have been told and my new experience at modeling, the VC is the hardest part of the aircraft to model.Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://mysite.verizon.net/res052cd/mybannercva1.jpgCalVirAir International VACougar Mountain Helicopters & Aviation[link:www.cgrmthelos.com]Cougar Mountain Helicopters

From what I've seen of examining the source files from some very detailed aircraft w/VCs, it looks to me like modeling a good Virtual Cockpit is at least as much work as modeling a good exterior and maybe more so. That's why I'm so impressed that a number of authors have provided such fantastic VCs lately as freeware. And of course, a really good VC is mandatory (in my book) for a payware plane.

'Cos we're lazy and hate making them so we do it all half-arsedly.

>'Cos we're lazy and hate making them so we do it all>half-arsedly.AAH!! An honest man!!! :)Barry

This brings up another question (situation).I would like to replace the default 2D panel on the King Air 350 with a 3rd party 2D panel. The default King of course has a VC. How do you eliminate the default VC so there is no mish mash of panel bitmaps or gauges? Does the VC reside in the AC model folder or the panel folder?ThanksChris

Again, I have not worked on FS models specifically, but the VC should be part of the model, or a separate model which is external referenced to the aircraft model.regards,Dave

>From what I have been told and my new experience at modeling,>the VC is the hardest part of the aircraft to model.>I'd say the advanced gauges are the hardest to model, but a detailed VC is a close second.Regards.Ernie.

Well I am not 100% sure what everyone is talking about. Of course as you may all know I only do GA aircraft but, to me the VC is just as hard, or easy depending on how you see it, as the externals. The VC may require some perspective changes but other than that in my models it is exactly the same as the external interior (copy paste -the pilot).I would say the hardest part of plane making is gauges. Even in a GA plane it can be hard, so I wouldn't even want to attempt a heavy cockpit (I never would cause I hate heavies ;))Thats just my opinion on plane making :)KevinLIC

How do you eliminate the default VC......? From what I understand, you don't. I have a couple of helos for which I've swapped out a 2D panel for another 2D panel, but the VC (of course) remains the same. I've read that the VC is hard coded into the model and can't be altered easily, if at all.-Lindy :-rotor:-wave

Well the Graphics of the VC you can edit such as the panel graphics and such but the 3D model cannot be changed or removed without the source GMAX or FSDS files. Kevin

Thanks Lindy & Kevin.I guess the route for me to go is to find an excellent 3rd party KA350 with no VC and then throw in the panel I had in mind. Off to the library.

I'm not sure what the problem you're referring to is. The VC is a different view entirely from that of the 2D panel, so you should be able to combine whatever 2D panel you like with a VC-equipped aircraft. You may have to edit the side views in 2D mode so that the VC doesn't show, but there should be no problem with using a 2D panel, as it shouldn't be showing at the same time as the VC panel anyway. ???

In the simulation I am developing for, the gauges are modeled in the cockpit, or again, can be external referenced. Callback directives are applied to the DOF nodes for interaction with the simuulation engine. So the process I describe includes VC and gauges. This process is far more involved than the external model.regards,Dave