|
Post by walterleo on Dec 28, 2020 16:42:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Dec 28, 2020 18:12:09 GMT
That 2nd image represents how the "VC perspective" should best be set (IMHO) "from the left/CAPT side at least" .... all/most of the essential flight flight information being clearly visible The first image is "a jump seat view" .... hence its much wider perspective and from "behind" the left/CAPT seat position. The 2D view (3rd image) is "standard" for that panel of course and encompasses a bit more. I find DM's COMET 3/3V/4/4B/and 4C fly "b-e-a-u-t-i-f-u-l-l-y" (as does all of his stuff), so, you'll have a lot of fun with that simulation Walter .... "RECOMMENDED" Still don't recall experiencing any FPS related issues using DM'd or FM's VC's .... what I see/experience has always bee very "S-M-O-O-T-H". Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by Mike Monce - HJG on Dec 29, 2020 13:46:27 GMT
Walter,
I have the DM Comet, but haven't touched it in a LOOONG while. I'll pull it out and see what happens. The VC problem in FS2004 is the main reason I never use it to fly and only use the 2d cockpit. There are a few VCs that are well-done, but to really use them effectively would require TrackIR which I wasn't willing to invest in, or multiple monitors.
BTW, I spent over 2 hours in our recently installed Redbird C172 LevelD sim at the museum. It has 10 (!) monitors and really solves the whole VC vs 2d cockpit problem. It employs the 2d cockpit using 2 monitors on the panel, and 8 for the views. Peripheral vision is amazing and very realistic.
Mike
|
|
|
Post by Herman on Dec 29, 2020 14:06:16 GMT
Hmm, 10 Monitors. That is quite the setup. Herman
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Dec 29, 2020 15:16:00 GMT
Hi friends:
My system is a i7 but without a dedicted videocard. What I experience with VC is normaly a slow response to change between VC and 2D or outside views. In the case of the DM Comet i noticed also jumping engine rpm in only 100 rpm jumps, what in 2D it dont never happens.
So I use only the 2D panel.
The Yak 40 by Igor Suprunov is unflyable with the VC, so I did throw away the VC. AND as the Comet IV it flies very well with the 2D panel.
The PT Tu-154s are flyable in VC but I also prefere them in 2D.
Think from the point of "flying" the 2D panels present a more workable cockpit environment.
Kind regards
Walter
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Dec 30, 2020 23:00:39 GMT
"Just out of curiosity" .... I took the DMFS COMET 4 for a spin myself Walter .... primarily to check both the 2D and VC views for myself since I couldn't ever recall experiencing any difficulties with either. I can't replicate the VC issues you're apparently experiencing though .... and certainly experienced no 2D panel issues either Using the 2D panel the default panel view (panel to scenery horizon) was fine .... without any elevation adjustment/s adjustment/s at all .... as follows .... Using the VC panel .... all I did was hit keyboard command "S" to enter VC mode ..... then .'.. using the Hat Switch on my controller (nothing else) I adjusted the panel to scenery elevation in order get the instrument/panel/scenery view I like (and I could probably have reduced the scenery horizon a wee bit more) and was "well satisfied .... as follows .... No PANEL CFG adjustment was necessary at all in my case. I (myself) tend to not ever move my view around/within the VC upon having established the perspective I intend using. I also found both the 2D and VC panels to result in "very smooth" fluidity. I do note your comment re apparently lacking a graphics dedicated card .... so .... this may disadvantage you to some extent .... in regard to actual graphics fluidity at least. Just one query re the simulation/panel/gauge files you're using .... I presume you're using the currently downloadable files from the DMFS website .... and which were last updated around 2007 (or 9) I think it was .... and not any much earlier version or data obtained from elsewhere ? Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Dec 31, 2020 11:34:11 GMT
Hi Mark:
Thanks for your efforts:
My download is the last of 2007, but I think my problems are related to my videocard.
Kind regards
Walter
|
|
|
Post by Mike Monce - HJG on Dec 31, 2020 13:27:02 GMT
I can confirm Mark's observations; I have exactly the same views as he did in my Comet 4. My only complaint is that in the 2d panel the window post often obscures the view of the runway. I may adjust the eyepoint laterally to see if that helps. It will affect the VC view also, but I never fly the VC Mike
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Dec 31, 2020 17:22:25 GMT
Hi Mike:
David Maltby has given us a device to move the window post to the left, looks wired but helps.
Kind regards
Walter
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Dec 31, 2020 22:54:10 GMT
That same device (or similar among the panel view adjustment icons/toggles) also enables raising, and lowering the panel/scenery horizon line too .... but .... based on my experimentation yesterday it does so per quite large increments. DM also designed into this 2D panel (and that for his ONE-ELEVEN and VC-10 too) a "pilots eye view perspective" .... of the type that results in the overall 2D panel view/perspective being tapered/inclined/offset slightly toward the right and which can, if one doesn't correctly relate to this perspective, result in either a little difficulty correctly aligning the simulation with the RWY and/or the windshield support post then interfering with the actual view (an illusion created by the natural offset/perspective in this 2D panel .... is the best way I can describe it .... and probably slightly further complicated also by the very nature of the COMET windshield combings) .... hence the toggles to move the windshield support post/combing left or right. Once one becomes used to this type of 2D panel perspective it actually becomes less, and less, of an issue .... I've found Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by walterleo on Jan 1, 2021 11:52:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Jan 1, 2021 18:39:08 GMT
It does require some adapting to .... BUT .... flying panels with such a selection of period/older type instrumentation, and perhaps flying them in chronological succession too, really adds to the "FUN" .... I find .... as one then gets a basic impression of how aviation technology has advanced. Half the "FUN" (I find) is figuring it all out and then adapting to how everything works/needs to be configured. Each simulation thus becoming "a training exercise" of its very own Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|