Notice to developers: no 2D cockpit - no sale to me...

[robert young 2,897]

>>But what you can't do with your camera view is to drag it to a second monitor so that you may fly the ac with the main 3D view and the camera view visible at the same time.<

[N400QW 205]

Hi Rob,We have always had the greatest admiration for what Real Air has accomplished in terms of 3D modeled gauges in your products. That said, it is no secret amongst fellow developers that the CFS series was the basis for the technique while Real Air has taken it to a very high level.After our many conversations it is quite easy for me to understand that nothing in your post could be considered a gauntlet thrown.:-)By the way, we do need to have another of those conversations soon.I wasn't asked directly, but in general terms, "glass gauges" would be on the order of our Avidynes or FSX G1000 along with a lot of corporate/commercial aviation Full EFIS systems.If you, or others, can 3D model all the parts in such panels without loss of fidelity and visual appeal then I will be first in line to acknowledge that you've accomplished a great thing.Meantime, for us the debate is silly because we are not of the either/or mindset. We would prefer to include both 2D and 3D panel types and thereby offer the best of both worlds:-) :-)

[Gypsy Baron 10]

>>>But what you can't do with your camera view is to drag it>to a second monitor so that you may fly the ac with the main>3D view and the camera view visible at the same time.<<>>Ulf B<<>>>I wasn't aware that this was not possible so thank you for>highlighting it. The horrible reality of development is that>one develops for the majority, and that means that those with>multi monitors can be ignored. I wish there was an easy way to>solve what you are explaining and perhaps we should learn more>about multi monitor possibilities.>>Rob Young>Just another note vis-a-vis VC camera capability...Here's a screen shot in the Beech Barron VC showing twoof my camera views in two undocked windows that werecreated with the left-square-bracket key.The camera views were defined in my aircraft.cfg fileand called up by my #2 hat switch. So the argument that you can't undock camera views seems to be disproved by this.( I'm not going to try to check this on a 2 monitor setup as that tends to screw up my 'very clutteredbut organized to me' desktop! ) Paulhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/191356.jpg

[Guest UlfB]

>Just another note vis-a-vis VC camera capability...>>Here's a screen shot in the Beech Barron VC showing two>of my camera views in two undocked windows that were>created with the left-square-bracket key.>>The camera views were defined in my aircraft.cfg file>and called up by my #2 hat switch. >>So the argument that you can't undock camera views >seems to be disproved by this.>>( I'm not going to try to check this on a 2 monitor >setup as that tends to screw up my 'very cluttered>but organized to me' desktop! )>> Paul>Paul,I guess that you haven't tested your proposed solution in actual flight :-( Let me explain why the proposed solution isn't practical, and it's all about fps.If I use my method and open up a 2D panel with the radiostack and moves it to my second monitor i experience a decrease of fps from 50 to 48.If I use the proposed method and create a new VC view my fps drops from 50 to 25. If I create yet another VC view, the fps drops to 18.Note that this test was done in the default C172. Imagine using the proposed method in an advanced airliner (PMDG 744X or LevelD 767) where I really need popup panels. I guess I would get 2-3 fps flying over dense urban areas.Conclusion: The method proposed by Paul do work, but can't be used in FSX on the hardware available today. Maybe hardware released during 2010 will be able to handle it with acceptable frame rate.Ulf BCore2Duo X6800 3.3GHz4GB RAM Corsair XMS2-8500C5BFG 8800GTX, Creative SB X-FiFSX Acc/SP2, Vista 32

[rhodges 6]

Thank you Ron!I am not so set in my ways that I guess I would adjust to 3d if that is all that I could get, but still rely mostly on the conventional 2d displays. I appreciate your trying to please those that prefer both worlds and wish all developers had your view (and your quality for that matter).Ummmmm, Still anxiously awaiting that new "X"! I hope it hasn't died on the vine.Respectfully:RTH

[Guest UlfB]

Paul,Continued test with your proposed method creating new views of the VC.Aircraft: PMDG 744X, at ESMS rw35, standing still on runway with engines running. No AI-traffic.Fps with 2D panel and Pedestal and FMC 2D popup panels on second monitor: 20 fpsFps with VC and two VC windows opened, one for the FMC and the other for the pedestal: 11 fps.Seems that you aprox will experience a 50% fps decrease with your method. And using this method on an approach in a dense urban area with 25% AI traffic, would make the aircraft unflyable.Ulf B

[FalconAF 213]

>>Takes a>>whole 2 seconds at most. OK, 5 seconds if you are entering>>something in your FMC pages. Doesn't get any simpler than>>that.>>You make my day ;-) To move my eyeballs slightly to the right>and look on the second monitor takes me 0.4 seconds and I>don't have to press any button on my yoke. Doesn't get any>simpler than that. >>Ulf B Dear Ulf,OK...I give up. It's obvious you enjoy spending more time criticizing people's attempts at giving you alternative solutions that you don't agree with, than READING the darn posts they make and using common sense before you lash out with your replies.It takes me NO MORE TIME THAN YOU to just LOOK at something on the panel with the Track IR. I can move my eyes and head as fast as you can. Your "0.4 second" comparison is rediculous.It WILL take you JUST AS MUCH TIME AFTER MOVING YOUR EYES to ADJUST anything on the panel/gauge on your second monitor as it does me. I'm certain that NOTHING on your second monitor (OBS setting, FMC entries, etc) just magically adjust themselves by you LOOKING at them.Your comparisons are rediculous.Do it whatever way you want. It's almost a waste of time trying to give you alternatives. FalconAF

[Guest UlfB]

>OK...I give up. It's obvious you enjoy spending more time>criticizing people's attempts at giving you alternative>solutions that you don't agree with, than READING the darn>posts they make and using common sense before you lash out>with your replies.>>It takes me NO MORE TIME THAN YOU to just LOOK at something on>the panel with the Track IR. I can move my eyes and head as>fast as you can. Your "0.4 second" comparison is rediculous.>>It WILL take you JUST AS MUCH TIME AFTER MOVING YOUR EYES to>ADJUST anything on the panel/gauge on your second monitor as>it does me. I'm certain that NOTHING on your second monitor>(OBS setting, FMC entries, etc) just magically adjust>themselves by you LOOKING at them.>>Your comparisons are rediculous.>>Do it whatever way you want. It's almost a waste of time>trying to give you alternatives. >>FalconAF >FalconAF,I NEVER asked anybody for any advice. NOT FROM YOU or anyone else. I posted a response to OP (Dave :( where I agreed to his post. You don't agree. That's OK for me as your'e entitled to that. But please, don't act as victim in this discussion. I never asked for your advice or help.If you disagree, please point to my post where I asked for your or anybodys help regarding the use of VC in this thread.Ulf B

[FalconAF 213]

OK, you got me there. My apologies. I confused you with the original poster who did ask for the advice.But that doesn't explain why YOU are so darn critical of anybody ELSE'S advice. 1. You accused me of never using more than one monitor. Wrong.2. You accuse my advice of "2 or 5 seconds" taking too long to "look" at something using the TrackIR, because it only takes you "0.4 seconds" to look at something on your second monitor. It takes me the same amount of time to only "look" using the TrackIR. You gain NO advantage in the time it takes to make an ADJUSTMENT to something displayed on your second monitor. Wrong again.I'm not trying to make any enemies here. Just READ the posts other people are making and quit criticizing them for things they AREN'T saying. Or things you ASSUME about them (like #1 above), but don't really KNOW.PeaceFalconAF

[Guest UlfB]

>1. You accused me of never using more than one monitor. >Wrong.I assumed that you didn't use a second monitor in FSX. That was wrong. I apologise for that.>2. You accuse my advice of "2 or 5 seconds" taking too long>to "look" at something using the TrackIR, because it only>takes you "0.4 seconds" to look at something on your second>monitor. It takes me the same amount of time to only "look">using the TrackIR. You gain NO advantage in the time it takes>to make an ADJUSTMENT to something displayed on your second>monitor. Wrong again.Well I you fly a big airliner that doesn't have predefined cameraviews, how do you do to have a quick look on the pedestal, fmc or some readout on the FO's panel? With TrackIR4 Pro and my settings for FSX, I won't be able move my head that much without TIR loosing track of my head. If I adjust the settings to be more aggressive I might do that, but on the other hand the normal use of TIR wouldn't be as smooth with such aggressive settings. IMO TIR work very well with general aircraft, but not with big airliners. This is not mean to be critical against your advice or what you prefer. It's only my opinion and I hope that you may accept that.>I'm not trying to make any enemies here. Just READ the posts>other people are making and quit criticizing them for things>they AREN'T saying. Or things you ASSUME about them (like #1>above), but don't really KNOW.Me neither. I only responded to your posts giving my opinion. Sorry if this offended you, but it wasn't my intention. I guess that not everybody may be as smart as you to know when to post and not. Sorry.Ulf BCore2Duo X6800 3.3GHz4GB RAM Corsair XMS2-8500C5BFG 8800GTX, Creative SB X-FiFSX Acc/SP2, Vista 32

[Gypsy Baron 10]

-SNIP-In response to Ulf....>>Well I you fly a big airliner that doesn't have predefined>cameraviews, how do you do to have a quick look on the>pedestal, fmc or some readout on the FO's panel?Simple....you DEFINE the required camera views...it's rather a simpleprocedure. And the assignement of hotkeys makes switching betweencamera views instantaneous...>With TrackIR4>Pro and my settings for FSX, I won't be able move my head that>much without TIR loosing track of my head. If I adjust the>settings to be more aggressive I might do that, but on the>other hand the normal use of TIR wouldn't be as smooth with>such aggressive settings. IMO TIR work very well with general>aircraft, but not with big airliners. This is not mean to be>critical against your advice or what you prefer. It's only my>opinion and I hope that you may accept that.>TRackIR4 works wonderfully with the A2A B-377, which I would classifyas a 'big' airliner. I can look over my right shoulder and have a look at the FE's station while on approach. From the co-pilots seat I can look over my left shoulder and click onthe navigator's map to call that up for a quick look.Likewise, with my hotkey assignments for thos positions I can just aseasily go to those positions and back to the left seat with a flick of my thumb.A very easy implementation.As to the 2D windows in the VC vs FPS, it would seem you are one ofthose that is, IMO, overly focused on and/or obsessed with FPS. This isn't a first-person-shooter'game and the need for high FPS isn't there...again, IMO.I fly all types of aircraft with my frame rate locked at 25.It occasionally falls to the low teens but even on approachthat is acceptable most of the time. Given the increase in 'immersion'that the VC gives to any situation, I'll take 10 FPS in a good VC over 60 FPS in a 2D cockpit any day... Paul

[Guest RonB49]

>The horrible reality of development is that one develops for the >majority, and that means that those with multi monitors can be >ignored.Rob, I think you'd be surprised at the number of us using multiple monitors but we are the minority nonetheless. We have been a silent minority in the past because previous versions of FS and previous add-on planes had 2D panels by default. As this changes some of us fear that our side of the hobby will be forgotten.As others say they'd never buy a plane without a VC, I feel the same about buying a plane that doesn't support multiple monitors by providing a 2D panel. So far, I've been able to build my own 2D panels but as gauges are being bundled together and stuffed into the VC in predefined locations it's getting harder and harder to do.R-

[Guest RonB49]

Thanks Ron. Those of us in the multi-mon camp appreciate the commitment. R-

[N400QW 205]

Thank you. We like the versatility of two panel types and it appears that a majority of users concur:-)

[Guest hmstiger]

This is why I agree with Dave (how are you, btw Dave - been a long time since we piloted that 777 simulator in Denver). This is my home rig and I want planes with 2d panels because trying to do this with 3d panels using FSXs view functions would bring my computer to its knees. Colin in Portland