[q]For any real pilots, or any aspiring pilots, that want to get maximum benefit from this sim., USE THE VC mode only.If you take a sim user, that uses 2D only, and has never seen the aircraft in real life, it is very unlikely that they would recognize things like, Cowl flaps, Gear, Trim etc. It is a very different experience when you use the VC Mode, this is what we call Positive transfer of knowledgd.[/q]You are not going to learn to fly the plane from using a virtual cockpit any better than with 2D panels (BTW - you cant learn to fly from either... you need to be in a real aircraft). There is still no tactile feedback and motor connection to the various controls and movements of any aircraft even when using the VC. One thing the sim can be used for that translates directly to real world flying is instrument scan, instrument procedures, and situational awareness. The 2D panel in my opinion is by far the best for this at least when it comes to the skills mentioned above. Just my opinion

Hi, Randy.I am not sure how much flying you do but this kind of an attitude will likely get you in a lot of trouble. I can

With Yoke and Peddles you can also brush up on taxing around the airport as well. Many people starting off have the biggest problem controlling the plane on the ground let alone in the air... So that's one right there.Flight Simulator actually helped me with my flight lesson's so I'll whole hardly hold up FS2k4 as an alternative to paying $120 a flight. IN THE VC you can practice not only scanning your instruments but proper scanning when looking outside the aircraft. The only thing FS2k4 can't give you is the feeling of motion, everything else is there. If I wanted to fly to Aspen in real life having never been there in real life, I can see a good representation of it in FS2k4 which would help me with any hazards I might have to avoid (mountains, etc).I'm so sick of many of you downplaying FS as a potential trainer of some sort...Here's what FS2k4 can't help you with (in no particular order):1. COG is very important in real life. Your POH becomes your best friend in the real world (for those that don't know, it's the planes owners manual. Imagine having to look at your car's manual every time you drove somewhere. Well that's mandatory when flying an aircraft). The importance of it is something most simmers can't comprehend. Weight and Balance, Fuel load, and Passenger placement all becomes a factor. In FS2k4 all this is really not an issue as this is part of pre-flight in the real world.2. Engine management is very important. Most simmers never visit the run-up area before takeoff to test their magnetos and many other engine related things I don't feel like going deep into. When is the proper time to use Carb Heat and why. In FS2k4 this is not really an issue.3. Filing a plane with FSS before takeoff and getting a weather brief is of utmost importance. Knowing all your ground checkpoints before hand, VOR/NDB etc. The proper way to file a flight plane is not modeled in FS. Simmers don't know how complicated this actually can be until your used to it...4. Fuel planning is something most don't think about. Here is another case where so many things are tied together. Based on your weight and luggage loaded, how much fuel can you have to takeoff safely??? Again you have to consult you POH. Fuel has to be assed for every checkpoint. You need to figure out exactly what can get you to point A and B. Weather comes into play as well because you'll have to factor in your Presser Altitude for a safe takeoff if your at higher altitude.I could go on and on but what I'm mentioning above is what FS2k4 can't give you. The basics of flying the aircraft FS2k4 can teach and that's an important aspect that people don't want to acknowledge. If your not lazy you can go into your 'FS9.cfg' file and adjust your pan rate setting to be as fast as you want it. What you can get from FS2k4 can't be had using the 2D panel. You need to constantly SCAN YOUR INSTRUMENTS (Randy) and look outside as well. You don't just do one in real flight you do both and you do a quick scan of your instrument and keep your eyes mostly outside the plane looking for traffic....For the record my case for the discussion is for those choosing to peruse aviation in real life. Lifetime simmers can stick with 2D panels from now on... Real aspiring aviators CAN use FS2k4 to practice what you learned in your lessons. When your practicing stalls your instructor will tell you to reference your side views while doing an instrument scan when your nose is pitching up in the air trying to get the plane into a stall. You need to make sure your wings are not banking. There's no way you can practice basic maneuvers like stalls properly if you can't quick glace to the left and right in a fluid motion. You shouldn't have to snap your head to a quick 90%, that's not realistic.All the simmers out there I can understand (not that much though) your love for the 2D cockpit. Real aviators in training go with the VC combined with CH's Yoke & Peddles, you'll at least have a much easier time learning how to taxi :-roll ....I can't wait till Microsoft ends this mess once and for all. 2D panels are really overdue for the bone yard in Arizona...Geofa said it best even though he's on the other side of the fence... "WOW", I can't believe real pilots are supporting 2D panels at this late stage of the game.... :-hang

I guess I am not as suprised that you might prefer 3d panels as much as I and others prefer 2d.We all use the sim in different ways-and that is the beauty of Ms-the ability to customize it just the way we want to use it.I think scanning for traffic is pretty lame with either a 2d or 3d panel on a 1 dimensional computer screen. If you are talking instruments-I can't buy the 3d-the angle is wrong-and the timing off for me."You 2d supporters"?! I didn't realize this was politics/religion! :-)By the way-a photo real panel of my second aircraft-no scrolling needed-and very real since everything including the instruments is made from photographs from my head angle...http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/95575.jpg

Well sir I would have to disagree. You seem to suggest that flying in VFR is the norm? I don't think all the guys I watch daily coming into KOAK are looking out the window much since in fact most of the time the clouds-rain precludes them from seeing anything to avoid. One has TCAS, weather radar and hopefully ATC on top of separation issues to guide one in. Now in clear weather it's a different story and certainly one does not want to sacrifice heads up insted of programing their FMC around the terminal area. As for 3D panels, how in the world can one react to a sudden speed change when the gauge refresh rates are so slow? not to mention SMALL! (Again mostly on larger sims not typical GAs) Sudden burst of headwind, oh let me zoom in with my mouse to see what effect it had on my speed lol. No I am not proclaiming unsafe flight simming my friend. Best Wishes,[h4]Randy J. Smith[/h4]http://www.rawbw.com/~bdoolin/shinault/Animation1.gifCaution! Not a real pilot, but do play one on TV ;-)AMD 64 3200+ | NEC LCD 1980SXi 19" | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro |

Not bad at all. Still prefer the real thing though :)Thanks for sharing,Bruce.

Hi.All that on a 13 In. screen :-hmmm That should be a thing to see. You are not getting the difference, read that you don't want to, and so I am afraid you cannot be helped. You will forever be IMC. Maybe somone else can help you. Good luck to you. TV

Hi.I am not sure how to explain something that is that simple to you. The updates of the VC instruments can be as high as 20 per second. The same for the 2D. The problem is that the designers are overloading your system with the useless "eye candy" THE UPDATES of the engine are NOT the problem, the system's capability to render everything timely IS.> As for 3D panels, how in the world can one react to a sudden speed change when the gauge refresh rates are so slow?

Wow - what an interesting discussion.I use the VC for light aircraft (up to and including the Howard) but use the 2d panels for the heavy equipment.To me the vc for VFR and 2d panels for IFR makes a lot of sense. As far as vc`s go , most of the 'view manipulation' (i.e pan rates, default eyepoints, zoom levels etc) issues can be resolved by those of us willing to tweak .cfg files. However, the two issues which dog current vc`s are gauge update rates and readability. The good side of the vc (for me ) is the immersion and the freedom to move around the cockpit.2D panels suffer from restricting where are 'sat' in the cockpit and, in some cases, they take up a huge amount of valuable monitor area. However, the good points are that the gauges are pretty much always legible (in a good panel) and the update rate of the gauges. In some cases there are some good hybrid set ups. The F1 C421 has a pop-up 'big six' instrument panel which can be used in conjunction with the VC to provide fast gauges when on final approach. The IK DC9 has a similar arrangement. To me, this concept (vc and overlaid 2d subpanels) represents the best cockpit solution. However, to each his own, and I am stunned to hear people suggest that the 2d panels should be phased out. Customisability is what makes FS a truly great product, and anything which hampers that freedom to customise is a bad idea.On a totally unrelated subject, I have just got back from a weekend away - we flew from Nelson (NZNS) to Wellington (NZWN) in a Saab 340A wearing Air New Zealand colours. How I would love a decent Saab 340 for FS - as long as it has both 2d and VC panels! Happy Simming! Rottenlungs

>Wow - what an interesting discussion.>>I use the VC for light aircraft (up to and including the>Howard) but use the 2d panels for the heavy equipment.>>To me the vc for VFR and 2d panels for IFR makes a lot of>sense. >>As far as vc`s go , most of the 'view manipulation' (i.e pan>rates, default eyepoints, zoom levels etc) issues can be>resolved by those of us willing to tweak .cfg files. However,>the two issues which dog current vc`s are gauge update rates>and readability. And really, both of these issues are highly affected by design choices the author makes. You CAN have decent gauge update rates by using at most, two vcockpit entries in the panel config, but some aircraft use a half dozen or more. Readability is impacted by choosing too small of a projection bitmap.>The good side of the vc (for me ) is the>immersion and the freedom to move around the cockpit.I have a little USB gamepad joystick that cost me less than 10 bucks that I use solely for moving about the cockpit. You can of course do this by mapping the arrow keys on the keyboard to the eyepoint movement commands, but I like to banish the keyboard into a drawer while I'm simming. I'm planning to buy another gamepad to disassemble and turn into a radio tuning box. lord, how I hate to use the mouse to adjust radios, whether it's in the 2D or 3D mode.DanDan

Hi DanCouldn`t agree with you more re: dismantling cheap controllers to build flight controls. I have an old 3 axis joystick which I have converted into a throttle quadrant. I have the two buttons on the front of the box for trim, and then three axes for the engines. A couple of profiles, one with two separate engines for the jets, the other with the three axes assigned to the throttle, pitch and mixture for GA work. One day I will expand it to 6, currently feathering is a sketchy business - sometimes the feathered (dead) engine pops back to fine pitch, which is most unsettling when trying to go missed! Vmcg arrives very quickly - ouch!On the subject of VC (sorry for the digression above), I didn`t know that about the number of vcockpit entries - is this something that can be refined in existing aircraft or does it rely on how the gauges are packed in their cab files? I don`t know a huge amount about panel design, beyond moving the odd gauge had collating 2d panels.. I`ve never played with vc configuration.CheersRottenlungs

You know-someone that knocked on my door and tried to convert me to their religion said the same thing.....Hardly ifr only-and one click away...but then that is my preference.I said much the same to the person who knocked on my door....http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/95594.jpg

Jeez, lighten up TV, it's just a game afterall...why can't you accept that some prefer to use the 2D instead of a VC. Why do you have to try and convert each and every simmer.I like using the 2D panel aswell when flying, mainly because I fly online and I find that the workload can become very high during a landing or takeoff. In order for me to be able to execute the instructions fast enough I need a panel that I know my way around, which is the 2D. So for me it's a question of what I'm most comfortable with.

I believe his opinions rest for the most part in GAs in VFR conditions. One can certainly PAN to the side as easy as one can in the VC to look, that ones has to pan in either is a limitation of the computer use. Fact of the matter is that a VC is no better at projecting a realistic view out the window than a 2D panel. Put three 2D views on three monitors and you have a much better view than a far sitting VC could ever hope to display...nuff said.Best Wishes,[h4]Randy J. Smith[/h4]http://www.rawbw.com/~bdoolin/shinault/Animation1.gifCaution! Not a real pilot, but do play one on TV ;-)AMD 64 3200+ | NEC LCD 1980SXi 19" | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro |

Not a pilot, however, using the 2d panels, on additional monitors is a simple way to attempt to fix the panel/outside view issues. 2 monitors in front of you displaying instruments with a projector running the outside view is very effective. If I were made of money I would be running more projectors for a near 180 deg out the window view.So, for those of you wishing the 2d panels to go away, please be a bit more conciderate of those of us that are attempting to suspend our disbelief even further. Discussing 'more realistic' when only using a single monitor is a laugh. It's more of what you prefer. I'd prefer if you'd stop campaigning to remove what is an integral part of my flight simmimg experience. Thanks.--jeff