10 minutes ago, Ohmsquare said:

That sounds about right to me. Carenado chose a different FoV value for its default camera view than Cows. Hence you need different zoom value to reach the same desired FoV in both aircraft. You can see that yourself in the camera blend tool, at 50% default zoom value each aircraft base FoV should be different.

That's crazy, because it means we are all seeing a different outside view in different aircraft!  So glad you chimed in with this method of setting the correct FOV, so exactly the same view is seen in all aircraft!

8 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I am not convinced that an accurate FOV is required in a flight simulator. As Farlis has pointed out, this results in an extremely narrow field of view that (IMO) is not really practical on my 24" monitor. I can understand this in a car simulator, but even there I do not use it because of that same narrow field of view. It just feels wrong. A single monitor does not simulate the wide field of view of the human eyes, so it is not a "like for like" comparison.

My zoom level is at the default setting of 50, but that FOV calculator for my setup suggests a figure of 90-95! That is never going to happen on my watch.

This is probably why default was set to 50 by MS/A and P3D before it, to give a decent sense of scope, breadth on a small screen. A 24", or 32" or my 34" display is vastly different than sitting the cockpit of a RW airplane especially bigger airliners. The A320 is 13 feet wide in the cockpit.  And, this is critical:  our PERIPHERAL vision in that 13' wide cockpit exists and it flatly does not on a typical PC screen.

Edited April 20, 20251 yr by Noel

6 minutes ago, Noel said:

our PERIPHERAL vision in that 13' wide cockpit exists and it flatly does not on a typical PC screen.

Precisely, so there is a choice to be made. 

Set zoom so you see the same peripheral vision on a monitor, which will make everything smaller, look further away and increase perceived speed.  Or one can set the FOV accurately, to what you would actually see through a rectangle the same size of your monitor.  In this case, peripheral vision can be replaced by something like TrackIR that allows the simulated head to move that monitor rectangle around the cockpit.

Obviously personal choice, but personally it would drive me crazy to have an approach/take-off speed look way higher than it actually is in reality, objects look too far away and object size smaller.

8 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I am not convinced that an accurate FOV is required in a flight simulator.

Depending what you use it for.  If using it to practice for real training or practicing a real flight, it would better to have the same FOV you would see in the real aircraft.  Simmers like me that want as much accuracy as possible in the sim also want accurate FOV

 

8 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

A single monitor does not simulate the wide field of view of the human eyes

Correct, so one decides if an accurate FOV is wanted or a distorted view of the world.

31 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Precisely, so there is a choice to be made. 

Set zoom so you see the same peripheral vision on a monitor, which will make everything smaller, look further away and increase perceived speed.  Or one can set the FOV accurately, to what you would actually see through a rectangle the same size of your monitor.  In this case, peripheral vision can be replaced by something like TrackIR that allows the simulated head to move that monitor rectangle around the cockpit.

Obviously personal choice, but personally it would drive me crazy to have an approach/take-off speed look way higher than it actually is in reality, objects look too far away and object size smaller.

My take off and approach speeds look totally normal to me. In fact, I would argue that a narrow field of view makes the speed look too low. Have you ever seen those cockpit videos where someone has zoomed in to provide an unobstructed forward view of the touchdown and rollout? Narrow field of view, and a rollout speed that looks hardly faster than walking pace!

3 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

I would argue that a narrow field of view makes the speed look too low

By 'narrow' you are describing a FOV that is too narrow for the monitor size and seating position.  An accurate FOV for the monitor size and seating position will have the same perceived speed regardless of monitor size.

 

4 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

Have you ever seen those cockpit videos where someone has zoomed in to provide an unobstructed forward view of the touchdown and rollout?

Yes.

 

6 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

Narrow field of view, and a rollout speed that looks hardly faster than walking pace!

The camera has been zoomed in, thus making perceived speed lower than reality. The same effect can be achieved by having a FOV too small for the monitor size and seating position.

1 hour ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

If using it to practice for real training or practicing a real flight, it would better to have the same FOV you would see in the real aircraft. 

No question, in your mind.  Real training happens in real aircraft where one has the full sense of motion, speed.   98% of all 'training' done in desktop sims has to do with understanding and using avionics fully, ATC, work flows, etc.  Within a matter of seconds in a real aircraft one would quickly appreciate the dynamics involved.   Again, that FOV you describe completely dismisses peripheral vision one experience in the RW.

1 hour ago, Noel said:

Again, that FOV you describe completely dismisses peripheral vision

No, I addressed the value in something like a TrackIR to mitigate loss of peripheral vision when using an accurate FOV.

Oh, so just buy and use TrackIR.  Oh, okay...

1 hour ago, Noel said:

No question, in your mind.  Real training happens in real aircraft

Of course it does and I personally really appreciated an accurate FOV to practice approaches, the circuit and cross country flights.   Again, I appreciate why you have chosen an inaccurate FOV, but I certainly couldn't live with a perceived approach speed way above reality, a distorted view of the runway on approach or object displayed further away and smaller than reality.

Those reading about FOV will decide what is more important to them, no argument with that.

3 minutes ago, Noel said:

Oh, so just buy and use TrackIR.  Oh, okay...

I didn't suggest that is all one needs to do.  Loss of peripheral vision on a monitor is real and that is why you have chosen an inaccurate FOV.  I only suggest something like a TrackIR can help mitigate this loss, by allowing easy scanning of the cockpit.

Edited April 20, 20251 yr by MrBitstFlyer

On 4/18/2025 at 8:57 AM, Noel said:

Anecdote, and/or substantiated with something like CapFrameX?

Using CapFrameX and Intel Present Mon - ALL measures (Wait, Busy, Service, Latency) are absolutely straight lines on my system.  

Just flew my test mission from KSJC Rwy 30L N to SAU/VOR S to OSI VOR E to KSJC Rwy 12R ILS approach - the times were never varied more than 1% - something that never happened before with any combination of frame limits, FG, MSFSAutoFPS etc

I am very impressed and happy

8 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Of course it does and I personally really appreciated an accurate FOV to practice approaches, the circuit and cross country flights. 

How many hours do you have now flying in the RW?

On 4/18/2025 at 5:47 AM, Farlis said:

He calls that a find?

It has always been this way. Limit your frames to half your monitor's refresh rate and let FG take care of bringing it up to it back again. Where is the find?

The find is the setting in the config file, that wasn't there before.

3 minutes ago, Noel said:

How many hours do you have now flying in the RW?

Not many at all.  I have completed 25 hours of the PPL at Elstree airport in the UK in a C172.  Being able to set a realistic view in sim is a great aid to get an accurate depiction of distance/speed/size.  I would have found it less useful to get in the sim and have a completely different picture from the real C172.

I am not suggesting anyone is wrong by using the sim in anyway they see fit.  Human perception gets used to senses after a while, so using a zoomed out view of the world will distort anybody's sense of distance/speed/size.  It will take a little while to get used to a realistic FOV again.

I saw this when teaching advanced driving techniques.  Drivers who consistently drove way above the speed limit became used to the sense of speed.  When they were asked to drive at the speed limit, they would invariably say it was too slow.  when they got used to it, their speed perception adjusted to where it no longer felt slow.