PDA

View Full Version : Cocpits: P-47 Razorbacks and P-51B/C/Mustang Mk.III



Kocur_
02-14-2006, 11:42 AM
http://img418.imageshack.us/img418/66/socalledp47cocpit1lg.png (http://imageshack.us)

Aboce is in-game and below - real P-47 D Razorback cocpit. It is drastically different than in-game P-47 D-10 and D-22 cocpit.

http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/4259/p47drazorbackpit5ny.png (http://imageshack.us)

What is wrong? Is it refraction perhaps? No, it isnt luckily. The problem is of simple geometrical nature. In the game gunsight in Razorbacks cocpit is much lower than in cocpit of Bubbletops (D-27 and "D 1944"). One might think, that when RL cocpit was redesigned, they improved Jug visibility not only by 360deg canopy, but also by raising gunsight. So was it mounted low in real Razorbacks?

Lets take a look at some pics

Bubbletop

http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/8673/p47drbcocpit10btpic9ds.png (http://imageshack.us)

Note gunsight mounting.

And two RB's cocpits:

http://img395.imageshack.us/img395/767/p47drbcocpit6rbpic11fw.png (http://imageshack.us)

http://img395.imageshack.us/img395/999/p47drbcocpit7rbpic27qe.png (http://imageshack.us)

So how was RB cocpit arranged?

In BT like this:

http://img489.imageshack.us/img489/6817/p47drbcocpit2btsightpic9pl.png (http://imageshack.us)

And in RB...

http://img468.imageshack.us/img468/8079/p47drbcocpit1rbsightdrawning8u.png (http://imageshack.us)

or

http://img395.imageshack.us/img395/639/p47drbcocpit3rbsightdrawning24.png (http://imageshack.us).

As we can see gunsight in RB's was mounted quite high too! Not low, not at level of lower wind shield frame as it is modelled in the game!
Gunsight mounting, regardless of gunsight type was quite high!

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/3636/p47drbcocpit8jugsighttypes5qh.png (http://imageshack.us)

The only difference between RBs and BTs in frontal cocpit area was windshield. Arrangement of everything INSIDE cocpit was unchaged:

http://img429.imageshack.us/img429/8034/p47drbcocpit4rbvsbtwindshield4.png (http://imageshack.us)

In fact everything was in EXACTLY the same position in both RBs and BTs. Especially gunsight was mounted at THE SAME HEIGHT in relation to pilots position, which was unchanged too. Take a look: all lines marking fuselage longerons and positions of all elements of cocpit, including pilots seat are at exactly the same level both in BT and RB. And so is level of gunsight lense, i.e. entire gunsight:

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z237/Kotsoor/P47Drbcocpit9RBvsBTcocpits.png



In coclusion: in-game P-47 D-10 and P-47 D-22 cocpits are modelled in a wrong way. Position of gunsight, therefore view over nose should be THE SAME for P-47 D-10, P-47 D-22 AND D-27 with the difference in windshield of course. Despite fact that real Razorbacks had gunsights mounted at the same height as Bubbletops its not quite so in the game... Which renders both in-game Razorbacks nearly unusuable.

http://img450.imageshack.us/img450/305/p47d27ingame6gu.png (http://imageshack.us)
http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/2474/p47d22ingame4lb.png (http://imageshack.us)



P-51B/C

Current frontal view from cocpit of P-51B/C is:
http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/9972/p51ccocpitingame5ke.png (http://imageshack.us)

As we can see gunsight is mounted quite low: its lense is almost at level of anti glare panel. Is this correct? No, not really! Seems that whoever modelled this planes cocpit simply took P-51D frontal view and built P-51B/C frontal view around it, which resulted in another foulty cocpit.

http://img451.imageshack.us/img451/4593/p51dcocpitingame0vk.png (http://imageshack.us)

For IRL gunsight of P-51D indeed was mounted low on anti glare panel, i.e. gunsight lense was nearly at level of the panel:

http://img47.imageshack.us/img47/6337/p51bccocpit12n9ind5xl.png (http://imageshack.us)

http://img47.imageshack.us/img47/1994/p51bccocpit13n9indpic7hn.png (http://imageshack.us)

So frontal view over N9 gunsight used in P-51D is modelled correctly.

Problem is that in P-51B/C gunsight was of different type, N3B or N3C (or even earlier) and was mounted differently! Whatever type was used, it always had high mounting, which resulted in gunsight's position quite high OVER anti glare panel!

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z237/Kotsoor/P51BCcocpit11N3C.png


http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/6587/p51bccocpit10n3b3kr.png (http://imageshack.us)

http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/6549/p51bccocpit9bcocpitpic0tz.png (http://imageshack.us)

Such high over anti glare panel gunsight mountings are present in all P-51B/C pic I see:

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z237/Kotsoor/P51BCcocpit7BCwindshieldcloseup.png

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z237/Kotsoor/P51BCcocpit4Ccocpitpic.png

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z237/Kotsoor/P51BCcocpit6BCHorbaczewskipics.png

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z237/Kotsoor/P51BCcocpit2USAAFP51B.png

http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/5863/p51bccocpit5bcinnormandy5mg.png

So current faulty modelling of P-51B/C cocpit restricts forward vision of that fighter. It is modelled to have gunsight lense at level about of red line, while it should be higher, i.e. where green line goes:
http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/8847/p51bccocpit8bcsidedrawning4ym.png



And so all great E fighters of 1943 have their cocpits modelled wrongly, in a way which restricts considerably frontal, sighting view from their cocpits. Unlike in case of Fw-190 it is not about refraction or any other phenomenon universally not modelled in the game. In case of P-47 D-10, P-47 D-22, P-51B/C and Mustang Mk. III it is simply wrong position of gunsight in respect to other parts. Gunsights of those Jugs and Mustangs are "mounted" far too low. It needs fixing baaad in this sim.

p1ngu666
02-14-2006, 11:54 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Texan...
02-14-2006, 12:10 PM
Wow, what a nice presentation you have put together here. Like the Fw190, I doubt the Razorback P47s will ever be fixed.

1943 planesets with the D10/22 against the LW would have been fun over the past few years, but as you point out, the Razorbacks are basically "unsuable."

lrrp22
02-14-2006, 12:13 PM
Don't forget a Mk IIC gyro gunsight for the Mustang III, and a K-14 for the 150 grade P-47D! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

LRRP

TheGozr
02-14-2006, 12:14 PM
With all my respects to the 3D designers, many planes are wrong ..many!.. not only the above mentioned.
I wish some time that they would of make more researches to their works mostly when this requier a wide amount of working hours. doing something right the first time it is always better that re-do it many times or just leave it wrong through the whole series of the sim.

This is when quantity goes over quality. More and more aircrafts are wanted, more and more Boosted aircraft are wanted , If only the work spend would of been made into already existing models of aircrafts or cockpits, the quality would of been way higher and enjoyable. I hope that for BOB that will not be the case.

chris455
02-14-2006, 02:32 PM
I love the Razorback and fly it 90% of the time.
Unusable?
I wouldn't say so.

JG4_Helofly
02-14-2006, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by TheGozr:
With all my respects to the 3D designers, many planes are wrong ..many!.. not only the above mentioned.
I wish some time that they would of make more researches to their works mostly when this requier a wide amount of working hours. doing something right the first time it is always better that re-do it many times or just leave it wrong through the whole series of the sim.

This is when quantity goes over quality. More and more aircrafts are wanted, more and more Boosted aircraft are wanted , If only the work spend would of been made into already existing models of aircrafts or cockpits, the quality would of been way higher and enjoyable. I hope that for BOB that will not be the case.

I agree 100%
In german you say: "Masse statt Klasse" = quantity goes over quality
I also hope that in TBob we will not have again 100 flyable aircrafts which are made more or less good.
If we get, let's say... 10 aircrafts maximum for tbob at the beginning it would be great. So it will be possible to consentrate on these "few" aircrafts and make great quality in FM, Graphic ...

DaimonSyrius
02-14-2006, 05:19 PM
An excellent presentation indeed, Kocur, good job http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I think you might have a point about the way the gunsight appears in the pilot's field of vision, particularly in the case of the razorback P47s.

However, I see a few points that are worth considering, as you know from the other thread about the same issue (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1401045114/r/1401045114#1401045114) that you started yesterday in this same forum. Now, the additional info that you're providing here makes your view a well argued one indeed. Nevertheless, I still want to point out a couple of considerations about the new documentation provided, and append here the main points I was making in your other thread, so that people who may be interested don't need to be jumping from thread to thread.

1. About perspective: the way the gunsight appears in our virtual pilots' field of view, relative to the canopy frame and engine cowling, can vary with:
-Position of the gunsight itself.
-Position of the pilot's point-of-view (POV), that is, where our 'virtual eye' actually is.

So an apparent low position of the gunsight may be due to the gunsight being lower or to the POV being higher, and it's very tricky to tell which is the case just by looking at flat, 2D pictures of the 3D elements that are at different positions in 3D space.

However, we have to live with the fact that we are looking at everything on our monitors, and those are 2D. At this point, the line drawings you have provided may help, since they are made using standard projections, and the perspective in them appears to be less tricky:

http://www.infonegocio.com/daimon/img/p47-GS01.jpg

It would seem that, when looked at using the same perspective, the gunsight appears to be, quite approximately, in the right place (except maybe a bit forward), and at the right height. Are the external views in IL2 rendered using the same 3D model of the aircraft? I don't know, my guess would be they are, but that's only my guess.


Originally posted by Kocur_:
The only difference between RBs and BTs in frontal cocpit area was windshield. Arrangement of everything INSIDE cocpit was unchaged:

But the windshield position, and especially the lower windshield frame is what seems to be obstructing the gunsight in the razorbacks, so the difference is relevant. Let's have a look at what this difference may be:

http://www.infonegocio.com/daimon/img/p47-measure02.jpg

Since I don't know exactly where where the POV is for our virtual pilot, I have just checked the position of the gunsight relative to the windshield frame at the point where it appears to obstruct the view. Distance and angles are indicated. The angles (from the horizontal) won't be the same as they would be from the pilot's POV, but their proportions should be the same, and the angle for the razorback is less than half of the angle for the bubbletop. Similarly, the distance (in image pixels) is considerably larger for the razorback. Both factors should make that windshield frame to appear 'higher' in the razorback pilot's field of view.

2. About the functional relevance: By 'functional relevance' I mean, how much does this issue actually affect our ability to use (hence 'functional') the gunsight? This was the point we were discussing in the other thread you started yesterday, until you suddenly chose to start a new thread and move the discussion here. Since I had already made my point there, I hope you won't mind if I just copy here the relevant posts that I had made there. This way, the whole discussion will be kept in one single place. Thus, the following comes from the Cocpit riddle thread (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/1401045114/r/1401045114#1401045114)


Originally posted by DaimonSyrius:
There is no doubt that the "pyramid" -as horseback has designated it- is in the wrong place, or has the wrong shape/size, or both.

However, is the pilot's free view really that different?

http://www.infonegocio.com/daimon/img/p47d-razorback-view-5.jpg http://www.infonegocio.com/daimon/img/P47-razor-IL2-5.jpg

(I have put a sky-blue mask on the unobstructed area, covering the prop too. The mask I've used can be checked in my paintshop-pro file (http://www.infonegocio.com/daimon/img/p47d-razorback-view.pspimage), the mask is in a separate layer and also in the alpha channel) **Edit* I've reduced the size of the pictures, reload the page if they don't show OK**

This is similar to the argument that pops up when discussing the FW bar, where some people say that even if the bar wasn't there, the nose cowling would still obstruct the view in very much the same way.

This is more apparent in the case of the razorback P47. Still, I'd like everything, bars and pyramids and cowlings, to be just like they should be.

Also the point-of-view seems to not be precisely the same in the 'real' picture (a bit higher) and the in-game picture (bit lower), as shown by the positions of the horizontal canopy frame and the top of the armoured glass frame. I guess all this just shows how 6DoF is a necessity.


Originally posted by DaimonSyrius:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
On gunsights:

RL gunsigh is clearly mounted far higher than in game.
.../...
No I dont think RL frontal view of P-47D10/22 or Fw-190 was ever remotely as BAD as is in the game.
.../...
as far as RL pilots experience replication

OK, let's go back to square one. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I'm assuming that the razorback's picture you posted shows what the RL pilots experience of the frontal view was, according to you. Also, as you said, let's not get into the "where-camera-was positioned" issue.

On Gunsights:

The esthetical qualities of the P47 (all of them) cockpits in IL2 are... nil, they're UGLY. Besides, parts of the frames are in the wrong positions. I'm confident that we'll agree on that, and I'll state again that I wish it wouldn't be so ugly and that every single frame and bolt was just as it should be.

Now, about the functional aspects of using the frontal view and the reflector gunsight:
I asked, is the pilot's free (unobstructed) view really so very much different? Is the virtual gunsight so very much "OBVIOUSLY too low" that it will terribly impair the pilot's ability to track a target and aim at it?

Let's have a look at the gunsights again:

http://www.infonegocio.com/daimon/img/P47-razor-GS-comp.jpg

And now let's have a look at the real and virtual frontal views, superimposed and adjusted (quick&dirty) for size:

http://www.infonegocio.com/daimon/img/P47-razor-merged.jpg

Well... the P47 cockpit is ugly in IL2, but is this any big issue, other than esthetically?

IMO, it's not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now, everyone can have their opinion, or provide further information... And of course, I'm confident that Kocur will forward the extensive documentation he has compiled to 1C:Maddox. Feel free to use my images as well if they can help.

Cheers,
S.

P.S.: I was forgetting the Mustangs... Yes, maybe the B/C are off by a couple cm, but the difference is so small that is hard to tell. Again, IMO doesn't really affect the use of the gunsight. Still, it would be nice to have everything in the right place up to the last bolt.

Chuck_Older
02-14-2006, 05:28 PM
My dialup modem just handed me a note that read "Your Mother!" when I asked it to load all those pics

The P-47 cockpit was good enough for it's time. By comparison now...with ones like the J8A's and the M.205s and such...it's not so good.

But the mere fact that it HAS a cockpit means that somebody MODELLED it, which is more than I can manage. And who's going to model a new one?

Without that cockpit, it wouldn't be flyable. I say the cockpit's gorgeous if it means I can fly the Jug if I want to

Chuck_Older
02-14-2006, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by JG4_Helofly:
I also hope that in TBob we will not have again 100 flyable aircrafts which are made more or less good.
If we get, let's say... 10 aircrafts maximum for tbob at the beginning it would be great. So it will be possible to consentrate on these "few" aircrafts and make great quality in FM, Graphic ...

that's almost exactly what Oleg has posted concerning flyables in Battle of Britain:Cliffs of Dover. It's the plan http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

DaimonSyrius
02-14-2006, 05:34 PM
Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Without that cockpit, it wouldn't be flyable. I say the cockpit's gorgeous if it means I can fly the Jug if I want to

Indeed, my thoughts exactly.

BTW, my apologies to your foul-mouthed modem for my contribution to its hiccups, Chuck http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Grey_Mouser67
02-14-2006, 06:34 PM
Excellent post...and one last thing to consider when looking at gunsight views is the slope and attitude of the plane in level flight...

Some aircraft like the Fw had a "nose down" attitude in level flight which increased view...the P-47 picture, shows the nose in the picture but the plane is on the ground...it might disappear in flight...the Bf109K flew with a nose up attitude at high altitude, this would hamper forward view. That is something Oleg has not modelled, the nose popping into your view as the plane pulls g's etc...it is constant in game, but maybe in BoB he'll be able to replicate the movement of the nose as the pilot's head stays stationary.

I think the views of the aircraft aren't correct...would love to see a reworked P47 and even the B model, but first oleg would have to agree to change it and then a modeller would have to take his time...would be nice, but we're late into the evolution of the game unfortunately.

Kocur_
02-15-2006, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by chris455:
I love the Razorback and fly it 90% of the time.
Unusable?
I wouldn't say so.

A dedicated man! But I dont suppose you preffer current Razorbacks cocpit over proper one, i.e. one, that would offer D-27-like frontal view, i.e. with gunsight in proper, high position?

Kocur_
02-15-2006, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by lrrp22:
Don't forget a Mk IIC gyro gunsight for the Mustang III, and a K-14 for the 150 grade P-47D! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

LRRP

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/5335/p47dbtk145un.png (http://imageshack.us)

But frankly I would trade Bubbletops with K-14 for Razorbacks and P-51B/C with correct gunsight view...

Kocur_
02-15-2006, 01:05 PM
DaimonSyrius! Congrats on graphical abilities! But mixing those RL and in-game D-22 cocpit is not necessary to learn what in-game Razorbacks frontal view should be. Simply because we know that aleady, since we have D-27 modelled. And of course cowling is visible there - and should be. All it takes to make D-10/22 cocpit frontal view correct is take D-27 view, remove its windshield and put one from D-10/22. That is valid as we know that both Bubbletops and Razorbacks had gunsights mounted in the same position to cowling. Brief look at that RL Razorbacks cocpit pic reveals, that with gunsight in correct, i.e. high position no part of "pyramid" would be visible through gunsight.


On P-51B/C:

Few centimeters you say... Its not about centimeters but about angles. P-51B/C was E fighter, so often its pilots fired high angle lead/deflection shots - every degree and every minute counts there. Current, faulty modelling of those cocpits makes great deal of difference in shooting at high angle of lead/deflection.

Current P-51B/C/Mk.III sighting view is erroneusly restricted:

http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/882/p51bcbad5dd.png (http://imageshack.us)


While it should be like that:

http://img391.imageshack.us/img391/6769/p51bcgood8ze.png (http://imageshack.us)



And to make the problem more close: imagine you were forced to fly La-7 with cocpit always on and imagine you would never fire from dead six, but was able to fire only at high angles of lead/deflection. Would you prefer current La-7 cocpit:

http://img116.imageshack.us/img116/4051/la7good4je.png (http://imageshack.us)



Or something being analogy to current P-51B/C/Mk.III cocpit:

http://img470.imageshack.us/img470/9682/la7bad7zp.png (http://imageshack.us)


Minor corrections are needed to make P-47 Razorbacks and P-51B/C/Mk.III cocpits resemble RL.

Treetop64
02-15-2006, 01:06 PM
Originally posted by Kocur_:

...Which renders both in-game Razorbacks nearly unusuable.



Thourough post, lots of info, even if your text goes a bit on the subjective side at times...

The dimensions and geometry of the cockpits may not be exactly to real-life spec. Oh, well... I doubt if any of this renders the aircraft "nearly unusable", though! Certainly it detracts in no way the enjoyment had in this sim.

Maybe we'll see "Spot-on, deadly-accurate" renditions of cockpits in BoB?

danjama
02-15-2006, 02:05 PM
This is a very interesting and well put together thread, good job author with the presentation of all this. Intriguing!

DaimonSyrius
02-15-2006, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by Kocur_:
Current P-51B/C/Mk.III sighting view is erroneusly restricted:
I see, such a terrible restriction... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

My point was -is- that it's no biggie. Current P-51B/C/Mk.III sighting view isn't preventing P51 flyers to track targets and shoot at them. So, functionally, it's not such a big thing as you're trying to depict it is. IMO, of course. The 3D model may not be aesthetically perfect up to the last millimeter and the last nut&bolt, and I've said so from the start in the two threads that you seem to need to stir this pot. But it is, for those planes, mainly an aesthetic (http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/aesthetic.html) issue. This is my opinion and I've shown why I think so. If your ability to effectively use those planes is so terribly impaired by this issue, then, my condolences, Kocur.

Originally posted by Kocur_:
imagine you were forced to fly
Nobody is forcing me to fly anything, so I don't see the need to imagine that. I bought FB-AEP-PF by my own will. I install patches by my own will. I always fly with cockpit on, and I'm quite happy flying the P51, thanks. Even when I fly on cockpit-off servers, I have the cockpit on at all times. Because that's how I like it, and because nobody is forcing me to do anything. That's right, even that one (1) time that you shot me down on 334th or AFJ (I forget), I was flying La7-3B20 with cockpit on all the time. It was a good kill btw, your flying was better than mine that time, so you won, well done, S' http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif as I told you at that time. I fly the Mustang Mk III quite often, always with cockpit on, and I don't need to imagine being forced to do anything at all.

Now, about all this fuzz you're trying to make about those cockpits, in my opinion it's no big issue with regards to how it affects fighting performance. Although it would be nicer if everything was perfect and perfectly beautiful, I don't think it's so terribly terrible as you're purporting here. I have already explained why I think so. End of story.

If the terribleness is as terrible as you're saying it is, just send all this overwhelming evidence to 1C:Maddox and be done with it. Geez.

Cheers,
S.

Kocur_
02-15-2006, 04:00 PM
If the terribleness is as terrible as you're saying it is, just send all this overwhelming evidence to 1C:Maddox and be done with it.

Oh I did!

crazyivan1970
02-15-2006, 04:03 PM
Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If the terribleness is as terrible as you're saying it is, just send all this overwhelming evidence to 1C:Maddox and be done with it.

Oh I did! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And?

Kocur_
02-15-2006, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If the terribleness is as terrible as you're saying it is, just send all this overwhelming evidence to 1C:Maddox and be done with it.

Oh I did! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I did like an hour ago and time zone is about the same http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

DaimonSyrius
02-15-2006, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If the terribleness is as terrible as you're saying it is, just send all this overwhelming evidence to 1C:Maddox and be done with it.

Oh I did! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

*Edit* OK then, good luck.
S.

lrrp22
02-15-2006, 04:30 PM
Kocur,

Nice La-7/Mustang III illustration. No doubt about it- a raised sight would considerably imrove the Mk III's deflection shooting capabilitites.

Good work.

LRRP

BigKahuna_GS
06-15-2006, 08:43 AM
S!

Very nice presentation Kocur !

When the P47 & P51 razorback models came out I thought the gun sights were mounted too low. It makes it difficult to track targets and come up with the proper deflection firing solution. It would be great to see this fixed and you did a terrific job illustrating this point.
Top notch ! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Agree with Irrp it would be nice to see the K-14 gun sight in the late model Jugs. Doubt that will happen this late in the sim. The priority would be the proper gun sight height for improved gunnery.



__

danjama
06-15-2006, 09:26 AM
The Razorback cockpitsare fine, apart from when you shift-F1 and that middle pane goes right down the side of your gunsight. It makes it so hard to shoot.

BigKahuna_GS
06-15-2006, 10:00 AM
S!


danjama
The Razorback cockpitsare fine, apart from when you shift-F1 and that middle pane goes right down the side of your gunsight. It makes it so hard to shoot.


Apart from the middle strut blocking your view a good portion of the bottom of the gunsight is also blocked from view. This makes tracking and deflection shots very hard. I think thats Kocur's point and that in the non Shift-F1 mode the gunsight is still too low as to how it is mounted in the P47D.

http://img418.imageshack.us/img418/66/socalledp47cocpit1lg.png

danjama
06-15-2006, 10:13 AM
Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:
S!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">danjama
The Razorback cockpitsare fine, apart from when you shift-F1 and that middle pane goes right down the side of your gunsight. It makes it so hard to shoot.


Apart from the middle strut blocking your view a good portion of the bottom of the gunsight is also blocked from view. This makes tracking and deflection shots very hard. I think thats Kocur's point and that in the non Shift-F1 mode the gunsight is still too low as to how it is mounted in the P47D.

http://img418.imageshack.us/img418/66/socalledp47cocpit1lg.png </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

TheGozr
06-15-2006, 10:46 AM
Interesting stuff but nothing will change, same as many other cockpits that even much more unreal or generic that the P47's. To me this sim started as a game and touk a turn into the flight sim, lets just hope that the Wing of war or BOB what ever it will called do a better job.

Capt.LoneRanger
06-15-2006, 12:09 PM
Wonder where the FW190 pits are, if you checked all cockpits SOOOO detailed.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Nobody said FB is 100% real - it is just the most real thing on the market and there will be no changes on the cockpits. Not for the FW190 that is wrong in the game since '99 and not for you. Accept it and look forward to BoB.

Sorry, just more or less getting fed up with "change [insert planetype here] cockpit/headrest at once - I have hard evidence!" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

RCAF_Irish_403
06-15-2006, 02:53 PM
To the original poster: awesome job!...lets hope OM gets a look at this

VW-IceFire
06-15-2006, 03:05 PM
I always felt something wrong with the P-51 and P-47 cockpits but I figured it was more of a matter of pilot perspective in real life just not translating into the game and so I let it go. But it seems they are structurally wrong as well. That does indeed make it more difficult to lead fire in those planes...I'm almost always firing blind. Just like in the FW190 really...and the Yak cockpits are pretty screwed up too. Nothings perfect.

Kocur_
06-15-2006, 03:13 PM
Originally posted by RCAF_Irish_403:
To the original poster: awesome job!...lets hope OM gets a look at this

Thanks.
He got. Apart from no time for PF, it turned out, that those cocpits are just perfectly OK in terms of gunsight position, which was confirmed by RL pilots.