^^

Absolutely everything you wrote there is your opinion or personal preference.

 

I said it before, I'll say it again. Technically to be most realistc you'd purchase modules and hook everything up like a real plane. Or at the very least have a monitor down by your side with a radio panel. "panning down" is not the same as looking down.

 

Same goes for up at the overhead. In my opinion a 2D panel on a monitor hanging from your ceiling is more realistic than "panning up".

I take it you didnt read what i said or you just be sarcastic again , if you would have read what i wrote i said it was my opinion, if you didnt see it than go back a read it again. Thx for letting me know it was my opinion forgot that i mentioned it. Beside when do people hang monitors on celing thought that would be quite dangerous for a number of reasons being medically and phyiscally. So you think taxing in 2d is easier than 3d since you seem to disagree, since in 2d you only got a certain amount of views you can have and in 3d you got unlimited number of views.

Personally you don't get realer than a real plane, simple. Can someone lock this topic now or?

So you think taxing in 2d is easier than 3d since you seem to disagree, since in 2d you only got a certain amount of views you can have and in 3d you got unlimited number of views.

 

Taxing in VC is easier because you have reference lines in correct position, thats all.

Personally you don't get realer than a real plane, simple. Can someone lock this topic now or?

 

We are still far enough from real plane in therms of cockpit render. one way or another it just cannot be compared with RL or lvlD sim.

 

...or you are afraid of good arguments 2d panel user posted so you want lock now?

Taxing in VC is easier because you have reference lines in correct position, thats all

So your confirming its easier to taxi in 3d than 2d

Beside when do people hang monitors on celing thought that would be quite dangerous for a number of reasons being medically and phyiscally.

 

This is hilarious. Thanks for the laugh!

This is hilarious. Thanks for the laugh!

lol i thought so too nothing wrong with adding humour in the thread

Personally you don't get realer than a real plane, simple. Can someone lock this topic now or?

Here we have the internet version of "... end of". No, this topic should not be locked just because you don't like to hear different views.

 

I do not understand why "VC only" enthusiasts want to deny 2D users their preference? Why must there be less choice? If all VCs were as good as the J41 or the NGX then perhaps the 2D panels would be less used. My preference used to always be for 2D but I never use 2D in the NGX, even before I invested in EZCA. That began because of the lack of a 2D throttle pedestal for engine starting, but over time I found the VC was good enough to be usable in all phases of flight. However there are many other addons where I find the VC unusable. Also there is the annoying bug in FSX that causes the VC eyepoint to move with heading (this is nothing to do with dynamic head movement, before anyone says it is). Therefore 2D panels are not "dead", but they may no longer be necessary with superior products like the NGX. They are however always good to have available.

 

I simply do not buy the argument that 2D panels consume huge design resources. With a VC of the quality of the NGX the panel graphics can be captured directly from the VC. There is some duplication in coding the panels no doubt but it's not a process which should delay release of the addon by very much. In fact I'd be happy for a product to be released VC and 2D popup only and have the full 2D panels added afterwards as a service pack.

 

Then there are those who insist the VC is an accurate rendition of reality. I wonder how many have sat in a real airliner flightdeck and operated the controls? The VC simply does not look right. Also you have to point accurately at controls and clickspots with the mouse, in real life the switches and knobs are found by touch as well as sight. With 2D panels there is no need to slew the eyepoint to look for the control if it's out of the FOV. FSX's VC head movement is at times anatomically impossible. The most obvious example of this is to look up at the IRS control panel. In the NGX VC you see the IRS knobs from below, upside down. In the real aircraft you see the panel from a very different angle. FSX assumes the eye is at the centre of rotation of the head, which it isn't, so in the VC you are effectively looking at the IRS knobs through the top of your skull. In real life you tilt your head back and the eyepoint moves in a much more complex path. Also in real life when you look up and to the side your brain compensates for the tilt of the head, when you look at such a view through a camera or in the VC the tilt becomes distracting. If your screen is not large you must zoom out to get enough in view, which creates fisheye distortion. So, the VC isn't that realistic. Above everything else, it's still a 2D image on the monitor and the best way to show a flat control panel on a 2D monitor is as a 2D rendition. Every aircraft panel I've ever seen is flat, 2D in other words.

 

IF you have TrackIR, EZCA AND a large screen then the VC is much more near to realism. Without those three things the VC is much less realistic and controlling a complicated panel is easier with a 2D representation.

 

I'm quite happy with PMDG's decision to proceed with VC plus 2D popups, as the quality of their VC is not in doubt. I'm simply saddened by the "choice killers" in the forum who insist that:

• 2D is dead and anyone who likes it is beneath contempt.
  
• 2D is outdated technology.
  
• VC is realistic enough so 2D is unnecessary.
  

Saying "my way is best and no other way is allowed" or "go with the majority view or miss out" is not the voice of someone who supports freedom and choice. It's a rather authoritarian mentality in fact.

 

The VC or 2D debate will never be settled, in FSX anyway. All I would ask is that the VC fans here show some respect for other people's choices. The VC is never going to be perfect in FSX, there will always be some compromise, so the idea that 2D panels are redundant is never going to be true.

Are these your 'good' arguments.

2d panels are not past as every serious airliner addon have them, just research a little and you will see.

...

Yea, I do not want views in VC, thats just lame, in VC I want Captain and F/O view, all other views are redundant.

...

I think I'll love VC when you start to use 2d panels.

How many of those 'serious' airliners are capable of doing a full function VC?

 

The whole point of VC is that you can have any view you like. If the pilot can position his head in a cockpit, you can see exactly the same view as s/he does. That also means if the pilot can NOT see something, nor can you (so no, tuneing the radio while taxiing is not going to have a happy outcome).

 

I loved 2D for many years. I still have fond memories of taking off from Meigs Field and I stunned when I first flew the LevelD. That doesn't mean I would want to fly either again if I had reasonable alternatives.

The VC or 2D debate will never be settled,

In this I must agree with you. However, your post does make it appear to me that you have never actually tried learning to fly in an aircraft with a decent VC (and yes, there are lots of crappy ones out there). Ideas such as 'The VC simply does not look right' do not match my experience and statements such as 'point accurately at controls and clickspots with the mouse' tell me that no one has shown you how to use the space bar and scroll wheel. And when you say "The most obvious example of this is to look up at the IRS control panel. In the NGX VC you see the IRS knobs from below, upside down. In the real aircraft you see the panel from a very different angle." No actually, you don't. Of course you see them from below, you are below them, but they are not upside down. They are exactly how the IRS panel looks to the pilot sitting in his seat. And if you move your view point to match a person standing in the doorway, you will see the cockpit exactly as a person in the doorway would see it.

Here we have the internet version of "... end of". No, this topic should not be locked just because you don't like to hear different views

Superbly put. I've read this posters many posts, all pointing to towards his undying love for a T7, which I think he hopes to fly once he gets his ATPL, a passion for the T7 which he was posting about long before the NGX came out, and what he wanted PMDG to produce or not produce. Other viewpoints mattered little, so well stated riposte.

Are these your 'good' arguments.

 

How many of those 'serious' airliners are capable of doing a full function VC?

 

 

 

I loved 2D for many years. I still have fond memories of taking off from Meigs Field and I stunned when I first flew the LevelD. That doesn't mean I would want to fly either again if I had reasonable alternatives.

 

Actually my first argument is good, other two are just personal feelings expressed as an answer on personal feeling posted by some other guy (dnt really remember whos post I quoted).

 

According to you, PMDG is only capable to make "serious" airliner for FSX. Thats very far from true.

 

The whole point of VC is that you can have any view you like. If the pilot can position his head in a cockpit, you can see exactly the same view as s/he does. That also means if the pilot can NOT see something, nor can you (so no, tuneing the radio while taxiing is not going to have a happy outcome).

 

Thats why airliners have 2 members crew. PMDG didnt provide that option, so we have to make compromise. FS2Crew is separate products, so it cannot be used as argument. If PMDG provide us with FS2Crew-ish option in base package that would make VC easier for use for sure. But again, I do not want to spend money on aditional software.

 

So your confirming its easier to taxi in 3d than 2d

 

of course, I wrote that 3x in this tread, just scroll the pages, you will find that.

In this I must agree with you. However, your post does make it appear to me that you have never actually tried learning to fly in an aircraft with a decent VC (and yes, there are lots of crappy ones out there). Ideas such as 'The VC simply does not look right' do not match my experience and statements such as 'point accurately at controls and clickspots with the mouse' tell me that no one has shown you how to use the space bar and scroll wheel. And when you say "The most obvious example of this is to look up at the IRS control panel. In the NGX VC you see the IRS knobs from below, upside down. In the real aircraft you see the panel from a very different angle." No actually, you don't. Of course you see them from below, you are below them, but they are not upside down. They are exactly how the IRS panel looks to the pilot sitting in his seat. And if you move your view point to match a person standing in the doorway, you will see the cockpit exactly as a person in the doorway would see it.

In my post I made it clear that I've been flying the NGX in VC almost from day 1. So I've certainly "made the effort" to learn to do so. A s for not being showin how to use the spacebar and mouse don't patronise me, of course I know how to do that. But it takes two hands, not something you want to do during takeoff and landing.

 

Please looking at the IRS panel in the VC by panning up (you also have to pan right a little). I wrote my first post from memory, actually you initially see the panel from the side, but you mainly see the bottom to the control knobs. If you pan further to the right to get the IRS in the centre of the display it certainly does look upside down. See the screenshots. In the real flightdeck you don't get this impression at all. The IRS is above you and behind but if you look up at it and naturally lean your head back it certainly does not appear to be at an unnatural angle. You can't operate the panel from the VC eyepoint. You have to use pre-defined camera position or some other means to move the eyepoint in x,y and z.

 

Re the screen shots, you need to open them as they may not show in preview properly. I deliberately didn't crop them. The first shows the view you get by panning up to the maximum possible. The second is with enough pan right to see the IRS panel, the third is with the IRS panel in the centre of view.

You know why it's so annoying? Because you all seem really, really ungrateful! So so so many people will die today, so many people will argue about getting a cure for their Cancer yet you all sit here and worry about a 2-D Panel. Be thankful you're alive today, just take a minute to think and realise what PMDG are doing for US. Learn to appreciate Rob and the teams decisions. Take it, then move on. Try think about something a little more important than a 2-D Panel for your Flight Simulator.

You know why it's so annoying? Because you all seem really, really ungrateful! So so so many people will die today, so many people will argue about getting a cure for their Cancer yet you all sit here and worry about a 2-D Panel. Be thankful you're alive today, just take a minute to think and realise what PMDG are doing for US. Learn to appreciate Rob and the teams decisions. Take it, then move on. Try think about something a little more important than a 2-D Panel for your Flight Simulator.

 

Professional spinning, hat off from me, you are talented.

 

PMDG arent doing anything for us, they make airplanes for money, its a business. If they love us so much and do everything for US, whats the problem to make 2d panels?

I appreciate the team by giving them money.

You know why it's so annoying? Because you all seem really, really ungrateful! So so so many people will die today, so many people will argue about getting a cure for their Cancer yet you all sit here and worry about a 2-D Panel. Be thankful you're alive today, just take a minute to think and realise what PMDG are doing for US. Learn to appreciate Rob and the teams decisions. Take it, then move on. Try think about something a little more important than a 2-D Panel for your Flight Simulator.

Errm, this isn't a thread about cancer, or any of the worlds major problems, this is a flight simulation thread about whether a 2D panel is worth retaining as a user option. I think it's you who need to get a sense of perspective.

 

Nice to hear your on such good personal terms with the head of PMDG (or Rob as you know him), but even he isn't infallible. They've taken a business decision, but just because you are happy with the outcome doesn't give you the right tell people to put up with it.