Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

NathJones1990

2D Panel discussion

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

I am fully aware by now that there is no 2D panel and i am not a computer expert or developer by any stretch of the imagination but how hard can it be to create/make a 2D panel for this aircraft for anyone who wishes to use it? Im not made of money and dont have the best graphics card and so by using the 2D cockpit over the VC it helps a lot with my FPS and ease of use.

 

Thanks

 

Nath 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I am fully aware by now that there is no 2D panel and i am not a computer expert or developer by any stretch of the imagination but how hard can it be to create/make a 2D panel for this aircraft for anyone who wishes to use it? Im not made of money and dont have the best graphics card and so by using the 2D cockpit over the VC it helps a lot with my FPS and ease of use.

 

This topic has been addressed hundreds of times, and dozens in the last few weeks.  The financial argument is not a new one, and doesn't really hold too much water since most hardware to run FSX well is now significantly cheaper compared to 10 years ago.

 

This is going to sound mean, but it's just to put things in perspective:

I'm not made of money either, so I either save up or abstain from the hobby.  I'm not going to walk into RC flying, ice hockey, or polo playing and ask them to alter what they do to accommodate my limitations (financially or otherwise).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic has been addressed hundreds of times, and dozens in the last few weeks.  The financial argument is not a new one, and doesn't really hold too much water since most hardware to run FSX well is now significantly cheaper compared to 10 years ago.

 

This is going to sound mean, but it's just to put things in perspective:

I'm not made of money either, so I either save up or abstain from the hobby.  I'm not going to walk into RC flying, ice hockey, or polo playing and ask them to alter what they do to accommodate my limitations (financially or otherwise).

 

No but surely its not too much work to do? I just dont understand why they dont give you the option. We pay alot of money for the product and they cant create a 2D panel so that the player can at least choose what view they use. Would it take much work to create one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Would it take much work to create one?

From what I have been able to collate having read numerous threads about the 2D------specially when the 737NGX was being first touted-----it uses up a developer's hamstrung resources a great deal for nil profitability. I used to be a dyed-in-the-wool 2D user but once I was forced into using the VC in CS's 707 Captain, it became a game-changer for me, and I adapted. Never looked back since. And that was before I changed graphic cards recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


No but surely its not too much work to do?

 

If it weren't, you'd imagine they'd already have made one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have been able to collate having read numerous threads about the 2D------specially when the 737NGX was being first touted-----it uses up a developer's hamstrung resources a great deal for nil profitability. I used to be a dyed-in-the-wool 2D user but once I was forced into using the VC in CS's 707 Captain, it became a game-changer for me, and I adapted. Never looked back since. And that was before I changed graphic cards recently.

 

Needless to say the limitations of FSX's resources as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, I have always been a 2D die hard because I think the VC is a completely unnatural way of flying, it may be a rendition of real life but in real life you look and press a button not pan, pan a bit more, zoom in and click the button you want or even have to scroll through a set of views to find the panel section you want. Imagine having to work in a real life cockpit as though your an X,Y,Z robot! I think the 777 is easily one of the best addons ever made but as a VC only product which is fine it lags just ever so slightly but I think that's just a matter of personal taste, it has nothing to do with FPS personally. A 2D panel is a great vantage point to fly without having to panic moving around the VC trying to find the buttons you need due to the annoying FSX view system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Apparently he needs more beating.

 

I win!  My horses are just straight impaled in the above image...  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I win!  My horses are just straight impaled in the above image...  :P

 

Unfortunately though, they're still moving.  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately though, they're still moving.  :lol:

 

Damn!  An error in my logic...

 

sheldon-cooper-hands-on-face.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kyle, I would not have been aware of my hero here, Sheldon, in your pic, until my recent rip to NV. Luckily for me they are showing re-runs here. We're at Series 6. Last night saw Series 1 Episode 1 and Penny is still hot. And trust you to pick on such a character to make your point. Like my hero would say, damn you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have been able to collate having read numerous threads about the 2D------specially when the 737NGX was being first touted-----it uses up a developer's hamstrung resources a great deal for nil profitability. I used to be a dyed-in-the-wool 2D user but once I was forced into using the VC in CS's 707 Captain, it became a game-changer for me, and I adapted. Never looked back since. And that was before I changed graphic cards recently.

Nil profitability? That's just not true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If 2D panels are obsolete, why does the FAA refuse to accept virtual panels in "approved training devices"? 

The reason is that REAL aircraft instrument panels do NOT zoom in & out, up & down, nor twist around in sync with the earth's horizon.

The FAA  requires that any instruments, gauges, switches & buttons shown on such a device, must remain in a fixed or unchanging location. The idea being that the trainee pilot needs to learn these exact locations by rote- without having to think about it.

In a virtual system, the instrument panel is synched to the horizon. In a real aircraft, the panel is "synched" to the airplane AND to the pilot's eyes & brain - regardless of aircraft attitude.

Just imagine trying to fly inverted with a virtual aerobatic plane!

------

That said, market place economics undoubtedly have led to virtual technology leaving 2D as an "also ran".

But I wonder what would happen if a developer were to simply chop his virtual panel code into three, fixed 2D segments- to be displayed synched, side by side on multiple monitors. Perhaps there is a whole new market out there for a truly wide screen simulation that more accurately represents what a pilot REALLY sees!!!!

(Three very cheap 19" monitors, all running at modest resolution for high system performance, will produce a panel image of about 50" width- not too far from the real world size. And yes, simple bezel adjustment will make 3 separate images appear as one- just like the windows in your car.)

 

january

 

Fokker 100 on Juneau approach  (AMD XP 2200 @ 1.8 GHz)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2D panels are stupid and un-realistic, nobody cares about 2D anymore.

 

We're in FSX, not FS95.

Interesting first post....  :mellow:  Ignore listed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until I got my new i4770K I was a staunch supporter of 2D panels. With the gorgeous T7 two things occurred for me:

 

VC graphics have completely caught up with 2D graphics (T7 is gorgeous)

I can run the VC without FPS issues

 

As I have the Opus weather add-on I configured FIXED VC views that behave pretty much exactly like 2D panels. No more nausea.

 

Having said that I think that it would not cost developers that much more to develop basic 2D panels. Just one 2D panel for takeoff and approach would be sufficient. Most people have hardware good enough for cruise flight in a VC.

 

But I fully understand the pain of those of you that cannot get the latest hardware.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I prefer the 2D is that I can have the runway zoomed at 100% and I see the full panel.  In order to get this, I need to reduce to 50% zoom.  Look at the 2 777 videos (they are at 50% zoom).

 

Some argue you really can't see the runway and the instrument panel at the same time, so you better be at 100% zoom and pick either the panel or the runway. 

 

Even with TrackIR, you can't mimic the milli-second transition of your eyes from the instrument panel to the outside view. 

 

So for me, I love the 2D.  I have learned to live with the 3D, but I's pay $50 to anyone who develops the 2D for the 777.  I hope the 787 by the "other guys" will have a 2D.

 

One more note - I still can't believe someone would start this topic that has been beaten to death and more absurd is that I continue to add my 2 cents to it.

 

Time to fly my crappy 3D 777 now.

 

Paul

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No disrespect to January, but that 3 screen panel set up looks far from realistic to me with a hodgepodge of panels on each screen. I cant see how anyone could enjoy flying or looking at that compared to a beautiful VC.

 

Jim Burke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking for a new ping pong gif. Already used a few in these 2d threads. Don't want to rehash the gifs. Need to stay fresh in these stale threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim- you are quite right- it is a hodgepodge of 2D pop-up panels and not very true to life- except that all gauges and instruments are fixed and instantly available relative to the pilot's eyes. My intent with the pic, was to show the need for "width" in panel display 

 

But you miss the point that a 2D full width triple monitor panel could perhaps be created from existing virtual, "works of art" panels.

 

What I'm lobbying for is to retain the superb virtual panel artwork but provide an option for it to behave in a manner like fixed real world cockpit panels- no panning / no zooming and fixed relative to the pilot's eyes. 

That requires WIDTH which can only be achieved with multiple monitors. (Or multiple projectors as in commercial simulators.)

january

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.