Sign in to follow this  
Guest thx1137

Am I the only one who flies mostly from external views?

Recommended Posts

Seems like most fly exlcusively from the VC, and I've even recieved the impression some look down on those who don't fly "by the rules" as if they were an actual pilot. For me the VC is very immersive, but I normally have a lot more fun in external views, and most of the time fly in spot or my custom fixed tail view. I just fly for fun, and I make no attempt to fly according any real life aviation rules or standards, as you can noramlly find me weaving between trees or doing fancy terrain masking moves and aerobatics. I simply love the new fixed views, as it finally lets me fly from a fixed tail cam, which I add to neary every aircraft, so thanks to the ACES team for finally adding them!If anybody wants to try it here's my tail cam that I add to nearly everything. Its a ton of fun to buzz trees and stuff from this view, and it looks pretty sweet when you zoom out quite a bit. http://sio.midco.net/FTP4/posterstock1a.jpghttp://sio.midco.net/FTP4/posterstock2.jpg[CameraDefinition.0]Title = "Tail"Guid = {5c1df273-034b-4e7f-953a-9d5e26f1646c}Description = Looking forward from behind the aircraftOrigin = CenterSnapPbhAdjust = SwivelSnapPbhReturn = FALSEPanPbhAdjust = SwivelPanPbhReturn = FALSETrack = NoneShowAxis = FALSEAllowZoom = TRUEInitialZoom = .75ShowWeather = YesInitialXyz = 0, 3.5, -18.0InitialPbh = 10, 0, 0XyzAdjust = TRUECategory=AircraftMomentumEffect=TRUEClipMode=Minimum

Share this post


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

I love external views and find myself, once in the air, spending more time out than in. I'm obviously no purest and don't care if it's 'looked down on' to be honest. It's the best way to explore some of the stunning scenery available, so each to their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya, I have to agree. There's absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying the world in Flight Simulator this way (for myself, I tend to be a VC-only kind of guy, but mainly because I want that practice.)The FSX world created by ACES is stunning compared to previous versions. With add-ons like Ground Environment X, enhanced terrain mesh and a FEX-type addon, it's even more beautiful. And ACES has spent a lot of time making sure you have a lot of ways in which to view that world.One of the things I like about the approach to Flight Simulator that is taken by the folks at ACES Studios is that they truly, I think, believe that they should not "dictate" how people use the simulator.They've also created it in such a way that it can be extended both horizontally (GEX) and vertically (LevelD).I've been amazed at what can be done with it given this philosophy. Some very creative people do things I bet even ACES didn't imagine when they released FSX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, love the sandbox elements of the sim, especially the view systems in FSX. Here's an example of a pretty common 'view' situation for me when making one of my fsx films:Flying in multiplayer, with no aircraft model at all (thanks missing W key function! :)), no effects, no lights, no gauges, or engine sounds, in formation with a couple of friends, looking backwards filming them beneath and behind me, in cloud, and waiting for them to tell me I'm going to fly into a mountain. That warning always comes a second too late of course, much to their pleasure. ;)Let me tell you, after a few days of that stuff, an actual VC seems like a nice relaxing vacation!-mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet ACES didn't anticipate anyone would ever want to do that, Hal, but the important thing for the developers to keep in mind is that they cannot predict how we will utilize this sim, and we will invent ways to use it that they can't ever dream of."Nobody would ever want to do that" should be a huge red flag comment for all developers. Because not only will someone want to do it, somebody else will absolutely NEED to do it to get their job done.The folks who think FSX is a game are not paying attention to how the sim is used in real life, and in ways ACES never dreamed of (but are now thinking of, as evidenced by the new platform version.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Seems like most fly exlcusively from the VC, and I've even>recieved the impression some look down on those who don't fly>"by the rules" as if they were an actual pilot. >VC's and 2D cockpits are still limited as to the complete field of vision in real life anyway....Therefore, I probably use external views at least half the time; and VC's the other 49.5%.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use spot view for Taxi and sight-seeing and it is the ONLY way to demonstrate flt sim to friends. We may enjoy staring at an instrument panel for a few hours but most people find it as exciting as watching golf on TV.R-PS -- I love watching golf on TV too. R-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solar, I'm curious if have you ever experienced TrackIR?It removes most of the limitations of the VC, making viewing the area around you very natural and immersive. Not trying to sway you, just curious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only use spot view to admire the a/c, or on taxi, or to line up at a gate. It's not that I haven't tried to fly externally...In fact I can't even fly an aircraft properly in spot view. I have trouble controlling it that way. !!RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and I am one who rarely if ever uses the outside view-and wish the inside view was done to the same accuracy/beauty/detail as the outside.However just goes to show-we all use the sim differently-and quite wonderful that this sim can be made to be just about everything to everyone! :-)http://www.mediafire.com/imgbnc.php/1b5baf...b9f427f694g.jpgMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>"Nobody would ever want to do that" should be a huge red flag>comment for all developers. Because not only will someone want>to do it, somebody else will absolutely NEED to do it to get>their job done.>LOL!*Many* years ago I wrote a DOS version of Lunar Lander. Checked it out six ways from Sunday and it worked like a champ. Was very tough and if you ran out of fuel, you died.Worked fine until some bozo input a negative fuel burn and it added back the fuel!Didn't think anyone would do that so I never checked the effect in the program logic.Y'live and learn. NEVER made that mistake again in any program I wrote. Had a friend who was my destructive tester - if there was a way to screw up a computer program, he'd find it.VicQ6600 G0 CPU 2.4 o/c 3.65Evga 680i A1 with P31 BIOS 2G XP2-8500 DDR2 1066FSB Mushkin 996535 RAM 5-5-4-12-2T320G 7200 HD partitioned for XP/Vista/Programs 2 - 74G Raptors in RAID0 500G 7200 HD for backup SATA DVD burner Evga 8800GTS 640 PCIx 169.13 betaKandalf LCS case w/ built in liquid cooling 850W Thermaltake power supplyVisit the Virtual Pilot's Centerwww.flightadventures.comhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-supporter-sigbanner.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that was YOU!I have to tell you, one of my former employers is STILL trying to figure out who stole all those manhours lost to Lunar Lander.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though the scenery is the main reason why I sim (hey, it's a living...) I almost always use the VC, and sometimes the 2D cockpit. This really goes back to car racing games (which I play now and then) on the Xbox -- they normally have a couple of outside views and a couple of 'cockpit' views. I've never been able to get used to the idea of steering my car from a floating viewpoint behind -- it is like controlling the car in front of you. However choosing the right cockpit view gives you the same precise control you have in real driving.However my kids, who don't drive for real, always use external views. I'm forever having the switch it back at the beginning of a race.One thing which helps immensely is TrackIR -- in the sim, not the Xbox, although I could certainly see the benefit of using it in racing games.-RobinGodzone Virtual Flight, for 'Real New Zealand' sceneryhttp://www.windowlight.co.nz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, yeah, TrackIR for racing games totally rules! You can make those quick shoulder checks and it's easier to guage the distance between your fender and your next collision.I used to be an avowed 2D panel guy, but with the TrackIR, I prefer the VC. I do like looking at external views, but I will usually pause the sim to do so unless there's an animation on the aircraft I want to see. TrackIR gives you Z-axis tilt, which can make for more dramatic screenshots in external view.Of course, there's mostly nothing wrong with flying FSX the way you want to. I guess I do draw the line at using Flight Sim to try to model crashes, things like suicide runs, or use mods that add detailed crash effects. I find that kind of stuff distasteful. Even then, though, I don't think I would go (far) out of my way to say, "you shouldn't be doing that!" I've flown my share of jumbo jets inverted underneath bridges.Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>In fact I can't even fly an aircraft properly in spot view. I>have trouble controlling it that way. !!>I flew R/C for years, and may again. It's only natural to fly from spot view! :-hah L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only fly airplanes inverted under bridges for the reviews! Really!!! I mean, I don't want to get scores of e-mails asking me why I didn't check to see if the airplane would fit under the bridge as its being flown upside-down! Really!!!!1!Well, not really at all. But on the other hand, invitations for me to fly in Level III full-motion flight simulators have totalled exactly zero in my tenure with AVSIM, so maybe there's some cause-and-effect going on here. Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well my 2 cents is I normally fly exclusively in the VC, but I also record my flights in FS Recorder. After the flight is over, I often go back and playback and that's when I go exploring with the different views and see all the scenery I missed flying in the VC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My specs are at the bottom.However when FSX was installed (and still with FS9) I (a lot of the time ) place a spot view on the main monitor, the panel/guages on second and the FSNav or Gps (aka FSX) on the third monitor. I really like the views but really take a FPM hit and a way big hit in FSX.Thus I am trying to figure out a set up that allows the ability to have good FPM with the config of monitors mentioned above or a more standard set up in FSX without the hit on the frame rates.I suspect the days of the 3 monitor set up are going out of popularity as it seems the really big wide screen monitors running off of two (my lack of terms) tied together viedo cards may be the new way of simming.I need to appologize in advance as I have for the last few months undergone a lenght og re-hab for CHF, thus playing catch up.I do want to let you guys know the screen shoots you posted were really nice looking. I guess it makes me think there is a chance that one day I will get it close. P.S. I have started shopping for a new PC as to allow for Dir X 10 (I hope I got thie correct). As much slack as FSX seems to tke on the forums it dose seem to be the way of the future. I hope I can keep up.Last, I was simming when FS went from the 2000 version to 2002 (I think) but it seemed to be a big booost then the smaller step to FS9. I wonder if the others here seem to think the FSX is like the step was from FS2000 to the FS 2002 versions. Best of simming, Thank you.Mark.OS:MS Windows XP Professional, Ver 2002 Service Pack 2 Hardware:Intel Pentium® 4 CPU 2.802.84 GHz, 2.00 GB of RAM GeForce 7800GS 256 MB w/ DDR3 running a 21/19.6 Sony Flat Screen Tubed Monitorand a,GeForce FX 5200 128MB 17/16 NEC/Mitsubishi Tubed MonitorGeForce FX 5200 128MB NEC/Mitsubishi 18 Flat Panel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Mark, I hope you are getting some fun in with FSX.Most people shorten "DirectX 10" to DX10, which as you know needs both Windows Vista and DX10 hardware to run.That being said, FSX runs well in DX9. I'm not really all that good with multi-monitor setups, so you might want to ask about that in the Hardware Forum. That being said, a lot of people do use multiple monitors, and it looks great. You just need a lot of graphics card power.One way to do it is with multiple cards, and another is to take the feed from one card and split it to up to 3 monitors using a device called "TripleHead 2 Go". Either way, though, you have to have a lot of power to run multiple monitors. Again, I am not an expert on the video cards, but out of the ones that you mention, I would guess that your 7800 would allow you to run FSX reasonably well on one screen. I used to have a 7600GT, which is similar, and I ran FSX at medium settings on one monitor. As for FSX being a big leap forward... well, I would say it was more of a leap into uncharted space. If FSX were not linked with the delayed and flawed releases of both Vista and DX10, then maybe things would be different. That being said, FSX does a lot of great things, and shows some maturity in design philosphy that the other versions of MSFS never had. Certainly, FSX has a tremendous potential for the future, even it it grows into FS11. I would suggest that FSX was something of a learning experience for Microsoft as well as third-party developers. The recent Service Packs would indicate to me that there was a lot of work done for FSX that wasn't complete by the release date. Unfortunately, those Service Packs made life difficult for some third-party developers. Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually love going crazy in FS and flying from the outside views. This might sound like it contradicts something I said in a previous post, where I talked about making FS as real as you possibly can, by planning out the flight and flying it as you would do in real life. In that post, I was responding to the concept of using FS as a training aid, in which case you should be careful. As much as I love keeping things "real", I'll often just load up an external view and start spinning around and doing all sorts of crazy things. I'll think to myself how amazed I am how much FS actually simulates and recreates. Then, out of nowhere, I'll switch to a helicopter and dive down and start weaving through trees or mountains and just start playing around. I'll wind up going into Instant Replay and watch everything I've done from the outside views.One big complaint I have with FSX is that not all buildings are "solid". I was really disappointed the other day when I tried landing the helicopter in a baseball stadium, only to find that I sunk down through the turf into the ground below the stadium. That ruins some of the fun :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff,Yea, I guess I will re-install FSX on my second harddrive and keep experimenting with it. I guess there in comfort hearing I am not out here alone with FSX issues. I called Dell and asked about the hardware needed (in relation to purchasing a new PC which I hope to do by April) and they shared information that was not consistant with the DX10 info sharred here in the forums and as you mentioned. If you have the time what is the required hardware needed along with which Vista version you would recommend, please? Agian the purchase will be specific to having good results with FSX and hope for future FS versions (as far as predictable, LOL) as well.Thank you.Mark.OS:MS Windows XP Professional, Ver 2002 Service Pack 2 Hardware:Intel Pentium® 4 CPU 2.802.84 GHz, 2.00 GB of RAM GeForce 7800GS 256 MB w/ DDR3 running a 21/19.6 Sony Flat Screen Tubed Monitorand a,GeForce FX 5200 128MB 17/16 NEC/Mitsubishi Tubed MonitorGeForce FX 5200 128MB NEC/Mitsubishi 18 Flat Panel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a reason why they're not solid ... it's related somehow to performance (I have zero clue why, but there it is.) It's the one part of the "physics engine" in FSX that I don't care for.Solid objects are more CPU-intensive to draw ... or something. (Maybe ACES can shed some light here.)As a dedicated rotorhead myself, I often try to land on just about everything in the game that looks interesting, and am pleasantly surprised to find some objects that have solidity to them. I've discovered that any building that you can cast a shadow on is landable.Almost every one of the bridges is not, however, and that's quite a disappointment.With so few helipads in the game, us prop-on-tops need all the solid structures we can find.Cheers,Kevin :-rotor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Solid objects are more CPU-intensive to draw ... or something.>(Maybe ACES can shed some light here.)For every solid object, physics engine needs to calculate and detect collision between the object and the aircraft. That's the reason it impacts performance.Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this