thinking out loud...

[Guest william273]

i have all you IR Track VC guys making those cool videos to thank for my problem here.:) i'm just thinking out loud a bit if you don't mind, trying to make a decision as to turn this perplexing problem into a solution of some sort. in a nutshell it's like VC cockpit or 2D cockpit. eventually i'm sure i will make a decision but in the mean time...lets have a flame war.:-) ok, i have to admit that while the VC graphics aren't the best the sensation of flying and landing so just so #### cool. it is hard to ignore. i am taking a VERY serious and close look at this VC flying and by that i mean VC from takeoff to touchdown. it is a whole new concept for me. one question i have is this: is this VC flying meant to be taken seriously or is it more of a novelty of sorts like just for fun only, ya know...like, don't try this at home. i did put up a post like this awhile back but am asking some more serious questions this time. have to after seeing these new videos. i guess the big showstopper for me right now would be the graphics change. i do like the 2D panels but then ya don't get that experience from them either. would like to hear from anyone about how they turned this corner and started flying VC. listen up!!!! no argueing and please respect each others opinions. this CAN be discussed without slamming a board over someones head. thanks, william

[LAdamson 240]

>is this VC flying meant to be taken seriously or>is it more of a novelty of sorts like just for fun only, ya>know...like, don't try this at home.If someone was to argue that 2D flight is more serious, then I'd argue that neither 2D or the V/C really fly's. For the sheer fun and realism of landing, and using critical inputs such as throttle, ailerons, and the rudder (pedals are a must), then the VC only RealAir Spitfire taildragger is about as authentic as it gets. There are many senses & visual cues from a VC that you don't get with 2D.But on the other hand, if I'm doing aerobatics where instant views from the wingtip to straight ahead are required, as there is no time for even quick panning, then I use static views programmed into my Saitek throttle swutches.When a lot of instrument/gauge monitoring is required, then it's either 2D or partial popup panels. There is usually no choice, as VC gauges might show up to small on the average monitor. But I also use shift Z for on screen digital readouts of airspeed, heading, and altitude. Airspeed is critical for landing in a VC.With the limitations imposed by a single monitor, it all comes down to what you're flying. If it's seat of the pants stick and rudder, then a virtual cockpit certainly can seem the most realistic. For a full fledged airliner cockpit, the 2D and VC combinations for certain phases of flight will work.As to myself, and a preference of flying high performance, but smaller single engine or twin GA and military airplanes; I usually prefer a well done virtual cockpit.L.Adamson

[1mikel151 71]

Everyone has their preferences and none are wrong. I have had real pilots tell me that the VC is unrealistic AND realistic, go figure. The main reason I am VC only is so I can get a better impression (immersion) that I'm in an aircraft looking out at the FS world, not looking into a computer screen. If I had a home cockpit then I wouldn't have a need for a VC, just open screen as the desk area/housing in front of me would be the aircraft.I am probably going to invest in a TrackIR system this month and we'll see how that goes.Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/mcdcvabanner.jpgCalVirAir International

[Glynn 405]

Hello MichaelYou will love the TrackIR and Vector attachmentI wont fly without it now

[LAdamson 240]

>Hello Michael>You will love the TrackIR and Vector attachment>I wont fly without it nowI thought the video link posted yesterday was quite convincing! I'll repost it, in case anyone missed it.http://www.mikejgolfdesign.com/KSFOfun.wmvL.Adamson

[Avcomware 1]

Hi, Larry and everyone.If you have the Z axis available on you Joystick, try to assign it to Pan Left Right View, see pic. below.This does two things, Gives you a quick Right Left and it centers your Forward View, on the Horizontal Left/Right axis.This is what I use for the Commercial and Aerobatics maneuvers. You can also use it to check your 45 on Landing, works really well. You may have to adjust your Sensitivity and your Null, depending on how far Left/Right you want to turn, and how much slack / slap / noise you may have on the Z axis.I highly recommend this to everyone that uses VC mode. If you only have one Jstick have your Z axis assigned to Rudder, I would select Auto coordination and assign the Z axis to Left/Right. The Twist for rudder is very unrealistic. TV>>But on the other hand, if I'm doing aerobatics where instant views from the wingtip to straight ahead are required, as there is no time for even quick panning, then I use static views programmed into my Saitek throttle swutches.<<http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/131369.jpg

[1mikel151 71]

Hello MichaelYou will love the TrackIR and Vector attachmentI wont fly without it nowI thought the video link posted yesterday was quiteconvincing! I'll repost it, in case anyone missed it.http://www.mikejgolfdesign.com/KSFOfun.wmvThanks guys, but actually the video at eDimensional was what sold me since you see the TrackIR at work, pretty cool stuff.http://www.edimensional.com/category_info.php?cPath=24Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/mcdcvabanner.jpgCalVirAir International

[LAdamson 240]

TV,Good idea. I have the un-used Z-axis rocker switch on my Saitek X-45 throttle, that's replaced with the rudder pedals. Got it assigned, and took a few try's with the sensitivity and null settings, but works great.L.Adamson

[Guest william273]

thanks for your replies. i'm still experimenting and find the default lear 45, king air and the cessnas have very nice virtual cockpits. my computer is fast enough to fly with the VC in hi quality mode with no stuttering and the instruments are pretty clear. yea, the immersion factor has gone straight up. landings are much more dramtic and i get a REAL sensation with a crosswind blowing during an approach. i may easily become a convert. william

[LAdamson 240]

I'd be tempted to go with Dreamfleet, Flight1, or RealAir Simulations, for much better gauge clarity, as well as much nicer cocpits........And there are others too!

[Guest william273]

thanks for the suggestions. william

[Guest jgreth123]

I never fly from anywhere but the VC. I got the TrackIR 3 Pro w/ vector when it was brand new (the vector part) and I haven't ever looked back.Now I will only purchase planes that have smooth gauges.That being said, if you're into general aviation, the Dreamfleet Baron 58, the Dreamfleet Bonanza A36, the RealAir Simulations SIAI-Marchetti SF260 [ newer one ], the RealAir Simulations Supermarine Spitfire Mk XIV [ sorta General Aviation :( -- old WWII Fighter ], and the Carenado Cessna 182 II Skylane. The Flight1 Cessna 152/172R aren't bad either.Those will amaze you.As for commercial airliners, only 3 fit my criteria:PMDG 737-600/700/800/900PMDG 747-400 [ best yet]Level-D Simulations 767-300That's not to say there aren't a host of others that aren't great planes, but if I can't fly them soley from the VC, I don't want them.

[Forkboy2 27]

From a practical standpoint, the VC with Track IR can be used pretty much 100% of the time for most general aviation aircraft and anytime except landing and taking off with complex jet aircraft such as PMDG 737. There is just too much going on during take off and landing with the complex aircraft to use VC.By the way, I've tried what you are planning on doing (ie flying from take off to landing in VC only), and it is a totally different experience. I normally am constantly switching back and forth between spot view, 2D and 3D cockpit views. Using VC 100% of the flight almost makes me feel claustrophobic and really makes one understand how difficult it must be for pilots only being able to see a small part of the outside world.Matt Fox

[Guest jgreth123]

>From a practical standpoint, the VC with Track IR can be used>pretty much 100% of the time for most general aviation>aircraft and anytime except landing and taking off with>complex jet aircraft such as PMDG 737. There is just too much>going on during take off and landing with the complex aircraft>to use VC.>>By the way, I've tried what you are planning on doing (ie>flying from take off to landing in VC only), and it is a>totally different experience. I normally am constantly>switching back and forth between spot view, 2D and 3D cockpit>views. Using VC 100% of the flight almost makes me feel>claustrophobic and really makes one understand how difficult>it must be for pilots only being able to see a small part of>the outside world.>>Matt Fox>>It's not too complex, you just have to adjust is all. While I fly, I keep my mouse on my lap so everything is close by. My head does all the movements. Once you get used to TrackIR in the complex airliners, it really becomes second nature. I can snap my head to any position without really thinking about it anymore, much like you would in the real aircraft. Need packs off on takeoff / final approach? I can snap it up and right to the pneumatic panel, switch them off, then I'm right back on view with very little time lost.As I said, it's a matter of practice. Once you can do that, you'll hate 2D cockpits, like I do now ;)