15 hours ago, Ron Lefebvre said:

I probably sit about half way from what most would consider real life position.

It is just to hard to view the gages otherwise without giving me whiplash.

Big difference between a real airplane and looking at a monitor. 

So about 57 % to 60% in the height box of Msfs.

Realistic for me would be closer to 65%

Or if you prefer just a tiny bit lower then Ryan's position in his screenshots

 

that is what head/eye trackers are for when viewing the world through a monitor at the correct field of view.  

3 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

that is what head/eye trackers are for when viewing the world through a monitor at the correct field of view.  

Not for me. I get sea sick or car sick or this case plane sick.

Its great for looking left or right but not good for looking at the gages.

Same reason I cant play first person games for more then 5 minutes without wanting to throw up.

Sadly

 

As someone who's never sat in a real cockpit (they tell me I need training and a license or something), I imagine it is a lot easier to see in real life than on a monitor.  VR makes me ill and I don't even like head tracking.  

Of course many of us started back in the 2d cockpit days where everything kind of had to be not realistic.  

The funny thing I notice is that I can read steam gauges better than the fancy modern stuff in flight sim.  I'm guessing that's not the same in the real world.  

As monitors and resolution get better, I try and have a more realistic eye point.  

All my RW flying days were with steam gauges.  I've enjoyed learning all of the capabilities of modern glass panels and the accompanying systems while simming - the modern systems are certainly amazing (and would have made my early cross-country flights a lot easier)!

However, what I recall about analog gauges is that they worked well with my analog brain.  During my constant instrument scan I could tell instantly where I was in altitude, speed and climb rate simply by the position of the needles - I didn't have to read any numbers or process the information.  This meant that I could get most info I needed from the entire panel within a few seconds.

The modern systems are amazing and give a wealth of information, but I believe they actually take more time to process.

20 hours ago, reecemj said:

Thanks Peter this is one of the best advice I've got being a sim pilot. Always wonder how I should be sitting in the left seat.

its only non pilots and the old 2d cockpits that are the reason for all this error in seat height. You will not see the PFD in a real plane unless you glance down which only VR pilots can do but I don't use VR only chase plane to bop up and down

Thx PETER ! Great points and hints !!!

7 hours ago, kerosene31 said:

The funny thing I notice is that I can read steam gauges better than the fancy modern stuff in flight sim.

Maybe your field of view is incorrect?  

8 hours ago, Ron Lefebvre said:

Its great for looking left or right but not good for looking at the gages.

Not sure I understand this - a head tracker allows left/right/up/down/roll/forward/backward motion. So looking at the gauges will be as intuitive as looking at them in the real aircraft (if the field of view is correct)

2 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Not sure I understand this - a head tracker allows left/right/up/down/roll/forward/backward motion. So looking at the gauges will be as intuitive as looking at them in the real aircraft (if the field of view is correct)

A tracker and your monitor is not a subtitute for human eyes. 

Lots of people get dizzy playing computer games with lots of movement.

I dont spend that much time looking left to right with the tracker so I dont feel it as much

I often look up and down 2 to 3 times with quick motion to verify the instruments and that@sets it off.

I basically only use the tracker when I am taxing for the rest I use custom views

 

 

All this talk about sitting position has me wondering about rudder pedals.

I know the yoke is no more then 6 inches from your belly at least in a 172 Cessna. Freaking close. I cant remember about the pedals its been so long.

I am 5'8. Would the pedals have your legs at a 90 degree position, 45 . Is it pretty standard or does it depends on the plane

1 hour ago, Ron Lefebvre said:

All this talk about sitting position has me wondering about rudder pedals.

I know the yoke is no more then 6 inches from your belly at least in a 172 Cessna. Freaking close. I cant remember about the pedals its been so long.

I am 5'8. Would the pedals have your legs at a 90 degree position, 45 . Is it pretty standard or does it depends on the plane

Whenever I jumped into a Cessna 152, 172, 182RG I sat where I was comfortable, didn't pay any mind to my knee position.

This is really a personal preference thing.  The only time seat height genuinely matters is in an aircraft with a HUD, where proper alignment with the combiner will dictate height.

But otherwise, it's just preference.  Everyone can learn to correctly process whatever visual cues are available from whatever sight picture you've got, and make smooth landings.  What's more important is consistency - pick one seat position and stick with it.  Constantly changing your sight picture will make life harder. 

Example: I've flown Stearman biplanes for years.  There is literally zero forward visibility in the landing flare no matter where you put you seat, and on a runway narrower than 60ft, you cannot see any part of the runway at all as you're landing.  But it's fine, everyone still learns to make smooth landings with peripheral vision.  

You can learn to make do with any sight picture.

I raised my default view to 60% but if i hit shift keypad 0 it resets to 50%, shift spacebar to 60%. There are some planes where the top of the hud gets cutoff if not. Helpful when im using hotkeys to shift around the cockpit