Another one bites the dust

[petedob 3]

So I go to buy the Carenado TMB 850 and what do I see in very small print....NO 2D cockpit. Put my credit card away and saved my money. Thats 3 down, including PMDG and Capt Sim, no 2D, no money from me.

 

For you VC addicts, dont bother, I dont like the VC, dont use the VC, dont care about the VC, dont like TrackIR, and really don't care to hear for the umpteenth time that 2D cockpits are a thiing of the past.

 

There are still many developers who dont shoot themselves in the foot and those I will continue to support.

Add a 2d panel like Jim says to do and your troubles are over.

[Boeing or not going 578]

So I go to buy the Carenado TMB 850 and what do I see in very small print....NO 2D cockpit. Put my credit card away and saved my money. Thats 3 down, including PMDG and Capt Sim, no 2D, no money from me.

 

 

What PMDG airplane doesn't include 2d panels??

 

It's interesting how you don't see how one can use an airliner with a 2d panel. I prefer 2d panels for my tubeliners, but I prefer VC when I'm in a GA flying VFR. There's no doubt that the VC looks better, but the functionality is not that good, because the camera moves a bit and the clickspots moves as well, so it can be hard to find the exact spot to click to be able to adjust the MCP, radios etc, especially when you consider that you're a single pilot flying a multipilot plane. Not only do you have to do everything yourself, you also have to fight the interface with it's camera head movement. However, when I fly a GA VFR I'm never using the autopilot, I always got one hand on my stick and another on my throttle. I don't need to fiddle with the MCP, so VC works great. That's why I prefer 2d for airliners, especially complex ones and vc for GA

 

But it's great practice for the real thing. You never always look straight ahead and click the same spots every time. You are constantly looking around and adjusting something. If you want to fly unrealistically with 2d panels, that's up to you. Just don't keep complaining online about how developers are moving away from 2d because 3d has always been the future.

[wims80 121]

But it's great practice for the real thing. You never always look straight ahead and click the same spots every time. ...

What great practice for the real thing? In real life you can reach out and grab the controls on the MCP blindfolded. You don't have to fiddle with the mouse to find the exact clickspot.

[Boeing or not going 578]

Ryan, not sure what you mean, unless your views are messed up. I have been flying since 1970 and every plane I have flown I can see the entire panel just fine  :-)

 

 

Impossible. What airplane do you fly in real life that you do not have to look up down left or right to adjust something? If you want to argue that 2d panels are easier and unrealistic then fine. You don't even need TrackIR, just a yoke with a pan switch and a mouse. You learn cockpit flow, just like in real life, looking to your right and up to turn on fuel pumps then the engine ignition, for example. Rather than just pressing shift + 4 and still looking straight ahead to do the same thing. That's why it's unrealistic and to properly simulate flying, the virtual cockpit cannot be beat. This argument is really tiring, it's been debated back and forth for years, since FS9 started the virtual cockpit in high quality, and FSX making it default.

 

What great practice for the real thing? In real life you can reach out and grab the controls on the MCP blindfolded. You don't have to fiddle with the mouse to find the exact clickspot.

 

No you cannot, you are always being moved around by various g forces, you always pan to the right, and reach out and make sure the button you are pressing is the correct one. This is no different than using the pan/hat switch on a yoke, or trackir, and pressing it with the mouse. That's realism. Cockpit flow. You have none of that in 2d, it's all a small condensed world requiring no skill except pressing the various shift + number buttons and continuing to look forward.

[N400QW 205]

Your looking at a monitor!......Fake

Haha, how often do simmers forget that ALL of this is a SIMULATION on a computer monitor. :-)

[ryanbatc 12,859]

By fake I mean there's too many gauges fitting on the screen at once. It's like a super stretched view of the panel... Fake and unrealistic.

[jaybird1nyc 24]

By fake I mean there's too many gauges fitting on the screen at once. It's like a super stretched view of the panel... Fake and unrealistic.

+1 Ryan.

 

TrackIR + VC + BIG Screen = Closest to real. (not real, but closest we can get)

 

Jay

[starstream707 70]

You can get used to anything with time.

 

 

Jeff

[Slayer 190]

Seriously if you want a 2D panel so bad just get EZDOK you can position the camera exactly square with the panels and flick through them pretty quick if you program joystick buttons. At first it seems complicated but after a few days you will never use anything else again. Many people who loved 2D panels use this instead now. Worth every penny.

 

Even with TIR i still use some "2d" panel views like for the overhead etc. 

[Javiz 104]

If you compare a 2D panel to a real cockpit the pilot is required to be sitting on his knees with the panel smack dab in front of his nose. That's no way to fly a plane, is it ?... Besides that, would look rediculous too, wouldn't it. Thank heaven for Bill Lyons who brought us the first ever VC. A new FS era had begun... ( from that day on the pro and con VC debat had begun too. Remarkable it has still not died out... )

And another thing, we humans can only see a very small spot sharp and clear. Stretch out your arm, hold up your thumb ( a gesture that should not be unfamiliar here in these parts), look at it and see for yourself. It's only your thumb that looks sharp and clear, the rest is a blur... No way a pilot can see a bunch of gauges/instruments clear and sharp like on a 2D panel. It has always been THE most unrealistic item in FS ever.

Here's to Bill ! :drinks:

P.S. I haste to say that without the 2D panel there wouldn't have been something like FS in the first place so i'll happily drink to that too ! :drinks:

[zmak 331]

2D suits me and my brothers out there that truly know the world is flat.

[spesimen 135]

Seriously if you want a 2D panel so bad just get EZDOK you can position the camera exactly square with the panels and flick through them pretty quick if you program joystick buttons. At first it seems complicated but after a few days you will never use anything else again. Many people who loved 2D panels use this instead now. Worth every penny.

this x100

 

i was very resistant to VC flying until i tried ezdok, now i will never go back. it's like making your own 2d panels you can switch to with keys or clicks, but still have the option of peeking around if you want, and it's much more immersive.

 

cheers,

-andy crosby

[JSkorna 137]

I see, a payware program instead of adding a 2D panel for free.

[A330-300 88]

I would switch to using a 3D panel in a heartbeat if it didn't cut my frame rate by almost half. In graphically intensive products like the NGX and AXE I can't use the 3D panel at all. That makes AXE a waste of money for me and 2D panels great on the NGX.

[Jim Padgett 11]

 

Try using a VC with FSOPUS or EZDOC ... I hated vc as well, until I found I had enough credit awards to buy TrackIR .. I love them now..

 

but all you really need is a good view manager you might find you like vc better.

 

 

So I go to buy the Carenado TMB 850 and what do I see in very small print....NO 2D cockpit. Put my credit card away and saved my money. Thats 3 down, including PMDG and Capt Sim, no 2D, no money from me.

 

For you VC addicts, dont bother, I dont like the VC, dont use the VC, dont care about the VC, dont like TrackIR, and really don't care to hear for the umpteenth time that 2D cockpits are a thiing of the past.

 

There are still many developers who dont shoot themselves in the foot and those I will continue to support.