Panel depiction in FSX ?

[Guest Bell206freak]

I would love to see the 2D panel dissapear in Flight Simulator, mainly because it's not very realistic and doesn't truly give the feel of the aircraft.I used to use the 2D panel all the time, but that was at the time when there were no VCs to begin with or when the VC's weren't dynamic.I could be flying the most complex jumbo jet add-on there is (which is rare given the fact that I am mainly a GA/rotary-wing guy) and I still would refuse to use the 2D panel, because IMO it's more realistic to pan around the VC, look for the gauge or switch, and then look forward outside the windshield. Real pilots fly with the added challenge of not only looking forward, but to both their left, right, and directly overhead to access a certain switch or read a gauge. Doing this in a 2D panel environment isn't very accurate.There's no sense of 3D immersion of flying when flying from a bitmap.In addition, I think the 2D panel became obsolete and outdated when dynamic virtual cockpits came about.

[Murmur 3,941]

>I could be flying the most complex jumbo jet add-on there is>(which is rare given the fact that I am mainly a>GA/rotary-wing guy) and I still would refuse to use the 2D>panel,And have you ACTUALLY tried to fly e.g. the PMDG-747 or LDS-767 from the ramp to the parking gate, using only the VC?>because IMO it's more realistic to pan around the VC,>look for the gauge or switch, and then look forward outside>the windshield. Real pilots fly with the added challenge of>not only looking forward, but to both their left, right, and>directly overhead to access a certain switch or read a gauge.>Doing this in a 2D panel environment isn't very accurate.You can't compare panning with hatswitch, and moving your head and arms in a real cockpit. Indeed, one could say that, in a heavy, 2D panel is more realistic from the operational point of view since it's faster (as it is in real life).Marco

[Guest]

VR displays have little use in the main market for computers: office applications.Then there's the little thing of the massive cost involved, the technological problems.Also, the usability factor is a major problem.I wouldn't want to have a helmet on my head constantly when I use a computer, and have to wear special gloves and boots (among other things).Unless technology advances to the point where such are no longer needed AND can be produced to sell at the price of current computer screens there is no future in it except for specialty applications.

[rich135 0]

<>It is clear from this post that some favor VC and some favor 2D. But nobody has explained why 2D has to to dissapear in order for VC to improve. I have built my own panels (like Magenta) using WideFS, so personally I do not care as long as FSUIPC still works. But I am sure many who favor 2D would be very unhappy if 2D was removed from the core.

[Guest tdragger]

No. Something else.

[Guest GabrielR]

Nobody seemed to pay attention to the guy that suggested an "Active camera" like effect.For me this is the best way to go.Active Camera lets you save those views that you need most, and makes a nice smooth transition from one view to the other, zomming over instruments that are otherwise dificult to reach in VC.I have been using this stuff since PMDG released their 737, and I have a view for TO, approach, and Cruise, and single designated views for the overhead, throtle and the rest of flight controls, in my 737 I have 9 different views with their appropriate zoom established, it is easy, intuitive and immersive.I dont think we are going to get this Out of the Box by the end of this year, so a 3rd party dev surely will come up with something similar.In regards to the 2D, for me they are a thing of the past, I dont use them, I considered the view totally out of perspective, and I think that they defeat the single most important principle of a Simulation: that we live in a 3D environment.There seems to be a missunderstading in the minds of people that do not like the VCs, they think that VCs are for Star wars gamers, and that serious stuff should be done on 2Ds, let me tell you, whoever thinks that way is wrong. The sense of speed, turns, and the orientation is completely lost using 2ds, as far as I know the professional simulators do not cram all the instruments in a cardboard just because you can reach them more easily, for me, one of the basic experiences of flying in FS is to be able not only to navigate in the simulated world, but also to be able to navigate inside yor virtual simulated cockpit. That is what makes the experience complete. and I gues after those years knowing any single knob depicted in the PMDG737, If I had the golden opportunity to seat in the real deal I would be able to lean to the side and find what I am looking for in the place that it should be.Now the question: Should MS dump the old anacronic and ugly 2D? No, if there is base market for it, which I think it is. My dream wish is that MS would give us the ability to choose what we want to see, and for US VC lovers, not to have to see those cardboards during flight would be great. Same I guess for the 2D lovers.

[Geofa 108]

"But nobody has explained why 2D has to to dissapear in order for VC to improve."Excellent post-and to the point.Despite trying Vc's-I just don't like them and always go back to 2D(FS9). I also didn't like the sliding cockpits of Fly-and I tend to not like high wing airplanes in real life-I may not even agree with some folks religion or politics. Doesn't mean my view should be exclusive over the others-people like different things-period.For improvements to occur, is it necessary for existing features and customizing that users may use to vanish? Maybe FSX will make me a VC convert, and maybe not. I'd like the choice! As it has been pointed out-to make a VC-a 2d version has to be made first.Why forbid it?MSFS remains powerful because it can pretty much be made to be all things to all simmers. Please continue to improve VC's-but why lose/forbid a feature (2D) that may continue be valuable to some users? http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[mgh 89]

I agree exactly. Those who don't like the 2D panel don't have to use it. Why are they selfishly asking for it to be removed?

[Avcomware 1]

Hi, Gabriel and everyone.>Nobody seemed to pay attention to the guy that suggested an "Active camera" like effect.For me this is the best way to go.Active Camera lets you save those views that you need most, and makes a nice smooth transition from one view to the other, zomming over instruments that are otherwise dificult to reach in VC.

[Avcomware 1]

Hi Geof.>As it has been pointed out-to make a VC-a 2d version has to be made first.

[Avcomware 1]

Hi, Daniel and everyone.>You might dislike 2D and sub-panels but I personally hate to pan around in a VC looking for a miniatuare gauge I cannot read because of its size

[Noel 4,499]

I don't thing you can do away with 2D panels until everyone is viewing on a 24" or wider screen. You just can't see enough detail due to the considerable reduction in actual view size involved on anything smaller.

[Guest Pabra]

Not really true; with track-ir you can lean forward, effectively looking closer at the display you want to get a closer look at. This is not zooming in; just looking closer at; no buttons pressed. Believe me, with this very small gadget vc's become the logic thing to work in and they're getting better still..Paul@ehgg

[MD83 1]

The FS Team caters for the average user, and not someone with a 4.0GHz PC, 21" screen, 1Mb GPU, 2Gb of memory, Track-IR, Active Camera etc :). You are not an average user if you have these things! Your average user will never buy Active Camera and Track-IR. In fact, your average user of FSX will stick with the default aircraft. These planes have a reasonable amount of detail, plus READABLE VC gauges. I don't see why MS should push things any further.2D panels will be a feature in FSX, for sure. The VC isn't sufficient for an average user with average hardware at their disposal ;)

[Guest allcott]

Erm, surely the solution is obvious (although after five pages of threads, maybe it isn't):Selectable FS menu option for 2d and 3d/VC panels! Maybe for each aircraft in the folder? Aircraft.cfg (not FSX.cfg) option:SHOW_2D_PANEL=0SHOW_VC_PANEL=1If it isn't checked then the panel doesn't show. No system resource constraints, user choice - and no blank screen when the option is deselected like we have now. Everyone's happy!!Allcott