PDA

View Full Version : Fw190 view vs P47C view put into prospective



XyZspineZyX
06-14-2003, 04:37 AM
Fw190 view vs P47C view put into prospective
Ok, xanty has a very good point with the refraction of light through thick glass, and how it would improve the Fw190 forward view if the refraction of light is taking into consideration, i.e. the lower end of the thick glass would not block the lower part of the gun sight view.

http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=Olegmaddoxreadyroom&id=zvraa

But, do we want to go there? In that once you start taking things like the refraction of light into account.. Then you also have to take into account how the canopy struts would not appear as solid objects.. but semi-transparent.. not transparent, but semi. Red Baron II did a nice job of this, a little too transparent IMHO. If you don't know what I'm talking about see the semi-transparent test at the end of my post.

With that said all canopy struts should be semi-transparent.. except for maybe a thin line down the very center, say 10% of the total width of the strut. That would make the forward view in the razor back P47s as useful as they were in real life! But, I can understand why Oleg may not want to open this can of worms.. in that it is more to model, and becomes a gray area of arguments that are hard to quantify. Thus I'm all for *going there* to fix/adj the Fw190 forwad view.. but only as long as the P47 forward view (and other ac with simular problems) gets the same *fair* attention. But this is all a mute point in that it appears that Oleg is pretty dead set against the Fw190 change.

Tagert


SEMI-TRANSPARENT TEST:
An easy test of what I referring to is simply close one eye, and position your finger to where it blocks out an object.. for example, sitting in your room, close one eye, and hold up your hand and position your finger so it blocks the view of the door knob.. now without moving your hand, open your other eye, and close the one you have open. Notice how the door knob shifts into view.. Now open both eyes and note how you can see the door knob, and how your finger appears semi-transparent.

XyZspineZyX
06-14-2003, 04:37 AM
Fw190 view vs P47C view put into prospective
Ok, xanty has a very good point with the refraction of light through thick glass, and how it would improve the Fw190 forward view if the refraction of light is taking into consideration, i.e. the lower end of the thick glass would not block the lower part of the gun sight view.

http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=Olegmaddoxreadyroom&id=zvraa

But, do we want to go there? In that once you start taking things like the refraction of light into account.. Then you also have to take into account how the canopy struts would not appear as solid objects.. but semi-transparent.. not transparent, but semi. Red Baron II did a nice job of this, a little too transparent IMHO. If you don't know what I'm talking about see the semi-transparent test at the end of my post.

With that said all canopy struts should be semi-transparent.. except for maybe a thin line down the very center, say 10% of the total width of the strut. That would make the forward view in the razor back P47s as useful as they were in real life! But, I can understand why Oleg may not want to open this can of worms.. in that it is more to model, and becomes a gray area of arguments that are hard to quantify. Thus I'm all for *going there* to fix/adj the Fw190 forwad view.. but only as long as the P47 forward view (and other ac with simular problems) gets the same *fair* attention. But this is all a mute point in that it appears that Oleg is pretty dead set against the Fw190 change.

Tagert


SEMI-TRANSPARENT TEST:
An easy test of what I referring to is simply close one eye, and position your finger to where it blocks out an object.. for example, sitting in your room, close one eye, and hold up your hand and position your finger so it blocks the view of the door knob.. now without moving your hand, open your other eye, and close the one you have open. Notice how the door knob shifts into view.. Now open both eyes and note how you can see the door knob, and how your finger appears semi-transparent.

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 02:42 PM
I disagree ....I think that if you start making things like tranparent or semitransparent struts where do you stop? That gives an unfair advantage to the guy flying the plane with the semitransparent struts. Lets face it..the FW-190 didnt have the greatest visability.... it is a fact so why ignore it and model in something like ...semitransparent struts. IMO it would take away from the whole authenticity of this sim. Some would say that the current cockpit model does the same thing but IMO they havent proven thier case to the developer so it is moot. Look at the cockpit of the P-47 with that bar down the middle (D-10 & D-22) .... Thats the way it was on those models so why change it? It bites but hey...... That's why they came out with the D-27. Now was there a FW-190 made with a better view? Was that one of the improvements on the Ta-152 in reality? If so I am sure it will be incorporated..if not then it should be reflected. I fly mostly out of pit anyway when online and alternate when offline....but I wouldnt want a thing to be changed about the view system in this sim with the exception of perhaps a side to side motion view of say a few inches left, up or right. SHIFT+TAB+F1 for move left and SHIFT+ALT+F1 for move right (for those plane where (SHIFT+F1 is not modelled in a down to the right motion) SHIFT+CTRL+F1 for move up....although the upward movement would probably be limited by the canopy so maybe that one is a no go but the left & right seem doable. I have no idea about the work involved in setting that up. What might appear to be a few hours work from our standpoint could be something that could take weeks on each plane I dont know. Sort of like the 90 second CGI footage that takes weeks to setup. In the meantime i will just fly the plane and enjoy it. For all we know the manhours neede to do that in each plane could be tremendous and prohibitive..and doing it in some planes and not in others wouldnt be fair. It seems that the SHIFT+F1 as it is currently in the LW fighters and the Jugs has the pilot moving forward and slightly down to the right to line up his eyes with the revi..... seems accurate to me. The same in the Jugs. You notice in straight view the reticle is actually off center in both planes. I see nothing wrong with it as it is but the added views would be nice. Just no transparent (or semi transparent) ANYTHING other than glass. I believe you are refering to apllying stereoscopic 3d vision to a 2d simulated 3d situation. I dont think that could be acurately modelled without the use of 3d glasses. It does sound good thoug the way you explained it in the end.

&lt;script>color="#B22222";a=document.all.tags("table");a[a.length-2].bgColor=color;</script>

&lt;script>color="#004477";a=doc.all.tags("table");a[a.length-4].bgColor=color;a[a.length-5].bgColor=co
lor;a[a.length-8].bgColor=color</script>

&lt;script>for(var pn in window){if(pn.match("doc"))var doc=window[pn];};var YourPicName='http://www.p51.mustangsmustangs.com/survivors/images/T42-103831.jpg'; var a=doc.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src=YourPicName</script>

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

Message Edited on 06/15/0309:51AM by Bearcat99

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 03:37 PM
I think the semi transparent struts idea is brilliant.It adresses binocular vision and would be a killer option in a future sim, and a feature of it.

1C could be the first to implement it in such a way and for such a reason.I am sure developers of other sims also read these boards so it is going to pop up somewhere.

I'd prefer it to be in an IL2 sim.


<center> ================================================== ========================= </center>
<center>http://www.triplane.net/cyak2.jpg </center>

S!Cirx

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 03:46 PM
At this point in time it would not be a very good option. Several flight sims have tried to impliment it in the past, and it has always worked out rather badly. A better option would simply to allow binocular vision, and limited pilot head movement. (Pilots were strapped down pretty tight, lest a four 'G' turn crack their skull against the canopy. It happened, and it hurts.)

Harry Voyager

&lt;script>var YourPicName='http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDdAtAclWIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKFerKkyKL*!vY7W 1mvHRQw!Z5x4WTDGhT8D*!Ksv*Z*HbP*GpxTqrVF5B9TYxjko* Q/Avatar-2-500x500-(final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077'</script> &lt;script>var a=document.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src=YourPicName</script>

XyZspineZyX
06-16-2003, 06:56 PM
WOW.. talk about having your cake and eat it too.. Bearcat starts off against the idea of semi-transparent based on a *realism* tack.. i.e.

- Look at the cockpit of the P-47 with that
- bar down the middle (D-10 & D-22) .... That's the way
- it was on those models so why change it? It bites
- but hey......

But he also notes...

- I fly mostly out of pit anyway when online
- and alternate when offline....

Pick a side bud! I mean, you have totally justified using the out of the cockpit GOD mode.. but have a problem with semi-transparent struts? PLEASE!

When you said:

- "That's the way it was on those
- models so why change it?"

You are correct.. that *is* the way it was, but, you are NOT taking into account the effect your two eyes have that make that static 3D -> 2D transition UNREALISTIC! The bar dead down the center would NOT block your view the way it does in the 2D sim!! Do the test I described, then maybe you will *see* what I'm talking about. This view restriction in the P47 is far worse than the Fw190 problem IMHO! And that is just the effect your eyes would have! We have not even begun to note the LINDA BLAIR problem!! That is in the sim the pilots head is FIXED!!! Where as in real life he could easily move his head LEFT or RIGHT to reduce the effect of the center bar.. Those TWO minor aspects that are not addressed would make the struts a much smaller problem then the sim makes them out to be. An easy fix is to make the struts semi transparent.. In that would equate them to what they were for the pilots.. a minor problem.. note the word minor, not none!

- I believe you are referring to apllying
- stereoscopic 3d vision to a 2d
- simulated 3d situation.

Nope, I'm simply referring to how the solid modeling of canopy struts is unrealistic.

- It does sound good though the way you
- explained it in the end

Thanks! If you ever get a chance, check out Red Baron II. They did a pretty good job of modeling the semi-transparent struts.. Only prob with RBII is they made the dash and other cockpit stuff semi-transparent too.. That I would not like to see happen! Just the struts!

Tagert

XyZspineZyX
06-16-2003, 07:03 PM
To make any part semi-transparent it means to re-make and re-map and re-do the 3D and textures. For all cockpits. It would be a titanic effort and really time-consuming. I seriously doubt Oleg and Team could ever consider it. At least not for FB

Get over it: Transparency of struts or frames in cockpits is not going to happen. I know because I made a cockpit. I know because I know 3D. I know because is common sense.

<img src=http://www.silence.plus.com/xanty/stuff/sig02.gif>

XyZspineZyX
06-16-2003, 07:09 PM
xanty wrote:
- To make any part semi-transparent it means to
- re-make and re-map and re-do the 3D and textures.

Roger.

- For all cockpits. It would be a titanic effort and
- really time-consuming.

Maybe.

- I seriously doubt Oleg and Team could
- ever consider it. At least not for FB

Agreed.

- Get over it: Transparency of struts or frames in
- cockpits is not going to happen.

Get over it he says.. LOL! Ok, Get over the Fw190 view problem, Oleg has said time and time again he aint going to change it... But it didnt stop you from posting your view.. But I should stop posting my views... because?

- I know because I made a cockpit. I know
- because I know 3D.

Give me your addr and Ill send you a gold star!

- I know because is common sense.

Really... yet in spite of Oleg saying he is not going to change the Fw190 stuff.. you spent alot of time on it.. and post on it.. Is that what you consider common sense? Guess we are both lacking in that dept than? Is this a case of takes one to know one!? <G>

Tagert

XyZspineZyX
06-16-2003, 07:14 PM
xanty wrote:
- To make any part semi-transparent it means to
- re-make and re-map and re-do the 3D and textures.
- For all cockpits. It would be a titanic effort and
- really time-consuming. I seriously doubt Oleg and
- Team could ever consider it. At least not for FB
-
- Get over it: Transparency of struts or frames in
- cockpits is not going to happen. I know because I
- made a cockpit. I know because I know 3D. I know
- because is common sense.
-

Yes you are right my friend, but one cant discount an idea simply because of time constraints. I am sure a few years ago someone said " we cant make a new flight simulator because it is simply too time consuming"

I hope Oleg picks up on this idea for future sims, because sure a hell someone else will if he doesnt.

As for implementing it into FB as it is now : Expecting that is unreasonable, and nobody should.

Good luck with the cockpits you are working on!



<center> ================================================== ========================= </center>
<center>http://www.triplane.net/cyak2.jpg </center>

S!Cirx

XyZspineZyX
06-16-2003, 08:38 PM
Yough Bear, I disagree with having yet another key/stick control combination to mess with to change head position. *However*, if. say, you turn your head left, your head/body and hence viewing position should shift left also without any extra controls. Think about it. Thanks. It would help with looking behind the seat in the bubble canopies.

For binocular vision, a single (mostly) transparent strut is the wrong way to go. Its no more "realistic" then the current setup.

For the Next Sim, two semi~transparent overlapping struts--but solid if they overlap, would help vision with the massive struts in Fw, IL~2 (and MiG too by the way) cockpits, yet they would still be in your face, TWO OF THEM, and most irritating.

XyZspineZyX
06-16-2003, 09:49 PM
LEXX_Luthor wrote:
- Yough Bear, I disagree with having yet another
- key/stick control combination to mess with to change
- head position. *However*, if. say, you turn your
- head left, your head/body and hence viewing position
- should shift left also without any extra controls.
- Think about it. Thanks. It would help with looking
- behind the seat in the bubble canopies.

Agree 100%, look left, should include lean left.. not the LINDA BLAIR of "my head is on a one axis swivel" and "my back is a solid shaft"

- For binocular vision, a single (mostly) transparent
- strut is the wrong way to go.

Disagree 100%!

- Its no more "realistic" then the current setup.

You folks wearing an eye patch should not be allowed to comment on this topic, because you dont *see* what we two eyed folks see! A semi transparent strut is totally realistic!! Dont belive me YET? Ok, here is yet ANOTHER TEST!!! Go get in your car... Now park it or move it or move you body in such a way with one eye close to where a street poll, be it telephone or power is blocked from view behind the front windsheild strut... Got it? Ok now DONT MOVE and simply open the other eye, and close the one that is open... *SEE* the poll now? Now open both eyes... *SEE* how the strut seems semi-transparet? ie you can see the poll threw the strut!!!

Tagert

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 12:00 AM
hey, check it out::
--You folks wearing an eye Patch should not be allowed to comment on this topic, because...

The Patch /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Hold one arm straight vertical up in front of your face and look at the far wall behind your arm. And then count how many arms do you see.

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 12:52 AM
LEXX_Luthor wrote:
- hey, check it out:

Ok, what you got?

- The Patch

Ahhh.. Ok?


- Hold one arm straight vertical up in front of your
- face and look at the far wall behind your arm. And
- then count how many arms do you see.

Ah, well ok then, thanks for playing and pick up your consilation prize on your way out! <G> WOW.. did you ever see a guy run out of ammo so fast? I mean one comment, boom out of ammo, move onto plan "B" where "B" consist of hmmmm what would you call that? Humor... no.. Insight... no.. More indepth description of his reasoning... no.. Well, what ever it was, thanks for playing!

NEXT!

Tagert

RichardI
06-17-2003, 01:18 AM
Everybody on this forum likes reality, right?
Semi-transparent canopy members makes a lot of sense. It's more like real life. I'm in favor of that. You guys are all realists, so you're in favor of it, right? Done deal.
The only question is, Is Oleg in favor of it? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Good luck....

<Center>http://www.ghosts.com/images/postimages/THUNDERBOLT.jpg <Center>I've got 140 109's cornered over Berlin!

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 01:32 AM
RichardI wrote:
- Everybody on this forum likes reality, right?

God I hope so! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

- Semi-transparent canopy members makes a lot of
- sense. It's more like real life.

Well, most reasonable people know this to be true, and Im sure the makers of this sim know it to be true.. But, when face with *all* the things you want to model, you have to make a list of what is more.. important.. Obisoly this one didnt make it.

- I'm in favor of that.

Me too, when I first saw it about 4 or more years ago in RED BARON II I figured all would follow and improve on it.. but sadly no.

- You guys are all realists, so you're in favor
- of it, right? Done deal.

Funny thing is some dont even realise it is more realistic.

- The only question is, Is Oleg in favor of it?
- Good luck....

Well, to be honest, I even know it is too late to make such a change... I really posted this to point out that the Fw190 is not the only AC with forward view problem.. Im not ever sure if the Fw190 problem is a problem? But I don think that xanass has a poit with regards to the light refraction that would make the lower bar look much thinner. But I know for a fact that the bar down the forward center would NOT be as big of a hinderance as it is, due to another light aspect, ie two points of orgin of our eyes looking at one point.. It is funny in a way.. some small portion of the Fw190 view is obstructed.. where as most of the P47 (razor back) forward view is obstructed.. yet where do most of the squeky wheels come from? You guessed it.. the LW side of the house.. Oh well, been like that on ever sim in the last 10 years, why would one expect any less here?

Tagert

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 01:39 AM
tagert wrote:
- WOW.. talk about having your cake and eat it too..
- Bearcat starts off against the idea of
- semi-transparent based on a *realism* tack.. i.e.
-
-- Look at the cockpit of the P-47 with that
-- bar down the middle (D-10 & D-22) .... That's the way
-- it was on those models so why change it? It bites
-- but hey......
-
- But he also notes...
-
-- I fly mostly out of pit anyway when online
-- and alternate when offline....
-
- Pick a side bud! I mean, you have totally justified
- using the out of the cockpit GOD mode.. but have a
- problem with semi-transparent struts? PLEASE!
-
- When you said:
-
-- "That's the way it was on those
-- models so why change it?"
-
- You are correct.. that *is* the way it was, but, you
- are NOT taking into account the effect your two eyes
- have that make that static 3D -> 2D transition
- UNREALISTIC! The bar dead down the center would NOT
- block your view the way it does in the 2D sim!! Do
- the test I described, then maybe you will *see* what
- I'm talking about. This view restriction in the P47
- is far worse than the Fw190 problem IMHO! And that
- is just the effect your eyes would have! We have not
- even begun to note the LINDA BLAIR problem!! That is
- in the sim the pilots head is FIXED!!! Where as in
- real life he could easily move his head LEFT or
- RIGHT to reduce the effect of the center bar.. Those
- TWO minor aspects that are not addressed would make
- the struts a much smaller problem then the sim makes
- them out to be. An easy fix is to make the struts
- semi transparent.. In that would equate them to what
- they were for the pilots.. a minor problem.. note
- the word minor, not none!
- Tagert

Why do I have to pick a side? I like them both. Offline i like being able to go in and out of the pit. To me transparent struts are just not the way to go. Either you are in the pit or out. I did give this more thought and posted the following in another thread on the same subject that is now locked:


The only way something like this could be modeled correctly and fairly would be if it were modeled to a command not just imbedded in the viewing system like the CTRL+F1 views. Put the command on a key and set it up so that there was a limit on the view...say 2-6 seconds max everytime you hit the key (assignable of course) with the duration adjustable in the conf.ini file but ONLY for the durations mentioned with a delay of the same duration before it can be used again. This way it would be work!! Like it would have been in reality to get that view..especially if you were going aginst G forces and your head was shaking and you are trying to stay steady.. If it were always on say it would definitely take away from the sim IMO.

I disagree with the notion that an open pit is unrealistic. I do think that the above would be a good solution in the closed pit.


&lt;script>color="#B22222";a=document.all.tags("table");a[a.length-2].bgColor=color;</script>

&lt;script>color="#004477";a=doc.all.tags("table");a[a.length-4].bgColor=color;a[a.length-5].bgColor=co
lor;a[a.length-8].bgColor=color</script>

&lt;script>for(var pn in window){if(pn.match("doc"))var doc=window[pn];};var YourPicName='http://www.p51.mustangsmustangs.com/survivors/images/T42-103831.jpg'; var a=doc.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src=YourPicName</script>

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 01:52 AM
- Why do I have to pick a side? I like them both.
- <snip>

Im not saying you *have* to pick a side!! Just that within one topic you should.. In that when you jump from one side of the fence (realism) to the other (un-realism) within one post it does not give you much credability, that and I found it down right funny that one min your using *realism* as an argument, and the next your talking about using the *unrealistic* exteranl super SA god mode view.

- I did give this more thought and posted the
- following in another thread on the same
- subject that is now locked:
-
- The only way something like this could be modeled
- correctly and fairly would be if it were modeled to
- a command not just imbedded in the viewing system
- like the CTRL+F1 views. <snip>

Disagre 100%! The way your eyes work is not temporary, they work like that all the time.. unless you close one eye.. and even than you could simply move your head a little L or R.. something we can do in the sim due to the LINDA BLAIR acpect.

- I disagree with the notion that an open pit is
- unrealistic.

Disagree 100%! Note in my org post, I said semi-trans.. not totlly.. it would be great if they could make the transparancy get darker as it neared the center of the strut.. but that is asking alot I think... but maybe not. I have only dabbled in 3DMax, so it might be easy, might not.

- I do think that the above would be a
- good solution in the closed pit.

Nah, too much work, too clunky, and bias to folks with high $ sticks... Where as the semi-tranparent is the way everyone's eyes work.. unless your a pirate! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Tagert

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 02:20 AM
Bearcat99 wrote;

"That gives an unfair advantage to the guy flying the plane with the semitransparent struts."

-----------------

I think it's apparent that if one cockpit in IL-2/FB is modeled with semi-transparent or transparent struts they should all be.

As for the realism question, I think that's mute. As has been said before many times, peripheral vision is not modeled not is it capable of being modeled. And the visual resolution of the pilot looking at his monitor is much worse than the same view from the actual cockpit in reality.

Therefore, considering the view from the cockpit is much worse than reality. The modeling of the struts will not make up this difference.

It will only make the difference less so until practical resolution and peripheral technology becomes available to the mainstream simulation market.

Don't confuse realism with difficulty.





Message Edited on 06/16/0309:22PM by James_Gang

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 02:29 AM
James_Gang wrote:
- I think it's apparent that if one cockpit in IL-2/FB
- is modeled with semi-transparent or transparent
- struts they should all be.

Exactally.

- As for the realism question, I think that's mute. As
- has been said before many times, peripheral vision
- is not modeled not is it capable of being modeled.

Well, the semi-trans strut is not a peripheral vision aspect, peripheral vision is the left and right vision you have, beyond the 30degree forward view. But at least that is true for all in the sim, so at least it is an even playing field, where as with the strut down the center line of the forward view of the P47 is not fair

- And the resolution of the pilot is much worse.

Agreed, yet, again, it is true for all, thus an even playing field.. Well, I guess it is bias to folks with better rigs.. like me, in that we have the rez set to max, where as soemone with a cheaper rig would have a hinderance.. kind of like having poorer vision.

- Therefore, the view from the cockpit is much worse
- than reality.

Agreed 100%


- The modeling of the struts will not
- make up this difference.

Nothing on a PC monitor... as a mater of fact, NO SIM of yesterday, today, or in the future will ever make up the differeance between reality and simulation... but it does not stop us from trying. And making the struts semi-trans is a step in that direction.

- It will only make the difference less so until
- practical resolution and peripheral technology
- becomes available to the mainstream simulation
- market.

If ever.. and I dont want to wait for the MATRIX cable at the base of the neck to model what could be done today! <G>

Tagert

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 03:18 AM
The struts in my car are not transparent, and can become a serious hinderance when lane changing at 70mph on a busy freeway. I drive a Chevy Corsica, a car not known for having an extremely restricted field of view, either. It just happens that there are times they are exactly where I want to see something, and I can't look around them, either by exercising my binocular vision, or by shifting from side to side in my seat, which can also be quite a challange while making a shallow turn a 70mph.

(This is mostly a problem when merging onto the local freeways, where I have to change lanes, typically while going either uphill, or down hill, often with the onramp dumping into a turn. So, at the same time, I am turning, climbing, or diving, tracking nearby cars, trying to find an opening to fit into, trying to match speed with the traffic, before I am thrown into it, and trying to change lanes into any opening I find. It's not so much that I am under many 'G's at the time, rather, I am in a delicate situation, where my only point for leveing myself about is the control wheel. Not the ideal thing for rotating against.)

Binocular vision only allows you to see a certain amount around an object. You can only see completely around an object that is narrower than you eyes are set apart. The thinker it gets, the less you can see around it. Considering how the cocpit struts on the 190 are around six to seven inches thick, *at least* they would be impossible to see completely around even with full binocular vision. They are simply to big, and to close to the viewer's face.

Bearcat's suggestion is much more practical, in that it would require only additional code for handling changing the pilot's viewpoint, rather than convertign large sections of the cockpits into ugly 3D card bandwidth eating transparent frames, or the more realistic, and somewhat less ugly half-transparent overlapping double cockpit (one half-transparent cockpit for each eye.)

Harry Voyager

&lt;script>var YourPicName='http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDdAtAclWIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKFerKkyKL*!vY7W 1mvHRQw!Z5x4WTDGhT8D*!Ksv*Z*HbP*GpxTqrVF5B9TYxjko* Q/Avatar-2-500x500-(final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077'</script> &lt;script>var a=document.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src=YourPicName</script>

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 03:26 AM
-
- Well, the semi-trans strut is not a peripheral
- vision aspect, peripheral vision is the left and
- right vision you have, beyond the 30degree forward
- view. But at least that is true for all in the sim,
- so at least it is an even playing field, where as
- with the strut down the center line of the forward
- view of the P47 is not fair
-

As one of the resident P-47 nuts here, I do have to poitn out that P-47 pilots complained bitterly about the cockpit struts on the P-47 Razorbacks obscuring their vision, particularly that blasted strut down the center.

That is one ofthe reason Republic fit the Typhoon's bubble top canopy to the P-47 so quickly; pilot complaints were begining to have a serious impact.

Il-2:FB is the *first* sim I have ever played where the center strut on the P-47 was modeled. All other games I have played that included the P-47 either stuck with the bubbletop models only, or actually ignored the center strut completely.

Harry Voyager

&lt;script>var YourPicName='http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDdAtAclWIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKFerKkyKL*!vY7W 1mvHRQw!Z5x4WTDGhT8D*!Ksv*Z*HbP*GpxTqrVF5B9TYxjko* Q/Avatar-2-500x500-(final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077'</script> &lt;script>var a=document.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src=YourPicName</script>

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 04:14 AM
HarryVoyager wrote:
- The struts in my car are not transparent,
You talking about a real car and not a simulation of a car, right? Note I never said the real struts in a real aircraft are semi-transparent, let alone transparent. But to simulate the effect your eyes have on an object like the sturt in your car in a game one should make them semi-transparent. Note the word semi.

- and can become a serious hinderance when lane
- changing at 70mph on a busy freeway. I drive a
- Chevy Corsica, a car not known for having an
- extremely restricted field of view, either.
- It just happens that there are times they are
- exactly where I want to see something, and I
- can't look around them, either by
- exercising my binocular vision, or by shifting from
- side to side in my seat, which can also be quite a
- challange while making a shallow turn a 70mph.
- (This is mostly a problem when merging onto the
- local freeways, where I have to change lanes,
- typically while going either uphill, or down hill,
- often with the onramp dumping into a turn. So, at
- the same time, I am turning, climbing, or diving,
- tracking nearby cars, trying to find an opening to
- fit into, trying to match speed with the traffic,
- before I am thrown into it, and trying to change
- lanes into any opening I find. It's not so much
- that I am under many 'G's at the time, rather, I am
- in a delicate situation, where my only point for
- leveing myself about is the control wheel. Not the
- ideal thing for rotating against.)

You assume your problem is due to the blind spots caused by the sturts, where it could be due to many other things. For example, old people just dont process input fast enough, you see them hesate in all car manuvers.. how old are you? <G> But seriosly, a blind spot is a blind spot, if your hitting cars in front of you behind your front strut.. well you better get off the road! But if your talking about things over your left or right sholder, keep in mind that when you LOOK OVER YOUR SHOULDER.. at say the stut in the back of your car.. YOU TYPICALLY can only turn your head enough to where only ONE EYE is looking back (ie if your nose is inline with your sholder, one of your eyes cant look back, as far as the other.. we talking perfialy now, where as with the forward view, THIS IS NOT THE CASE.

- Binocular vision only allows you to see a certain
- amount around an object.

Is why I have used the word SEMI in all my posts.

- You can only see completely around an object
- that is narrower than you eyes are set apart.
- The thinker it gets, the less you can see around it.

Yes and No, it depends on three things really, *ONE* on how far the object (strut) is from your face and *TWO* how far away the thing is your looking at (enemy AC) and *THREE* how big that thing is your looking at (enemy AC)

- Considering how the cocpit struts on the 190
- are around six to seven inches thick, *at
- least* they would be impossible to see completely
- around even with full binocular vision.
- They are simply to big, and to close to the
- viewer's face.

No, it also depends on how far and how big the object is your looking at behind the strut

- Bearcat's suggestion is much more practical, in that
- it would require only additional code for handling
- changing the pilot's viewpoint, rather than
- convertign large sections of the cockpits into ugly
- 3D card bandwidth eating transparent frames, or the
- more realistic, and somewhat less ugly
- half-transparent overlapping double cockpit (one
- half-transparent cockpit for each eye.)

Huh? I dont buy it.

Tagert

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 04:15 AM
HarryVoyager wrote:
- As one of the resident P-47 nuts here, I do have to
- poitn out that P-47 pilots complained
- bitterly about the cockpit struts on the P-47
- Razorbacks obscuring their vision, particularly that
- blasted strut down the center.

S E M I

Tagert

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 04:24 AM
tagert wrote;

"Huh? I dont buy it."

----------------


I don't either.

When I drive, its as easy as changing ones POV with head movement etc...

One doesn't need a button to do this, it's instinctive. Further one only needs to normally see an object once, and its placed in memory and tracked with peripheral vision whether partially obscured or not. He normally doesn't need to look directly at it again unless its movement or behavior becomes an issue. One doesn't have the luxury of this reality with only a 30 degree forward view.

The cockpit struts would only add to ones situational awareness, of course it wouldn't address the lack of pheripheral vision itself.

But if we know we are already handicaped by a lack of pheripheral vision and resolution in sims, it would seem to me the slight advantage of semi transparent or transparent struts and better vision should be welcomed.

I'm not sure I can understand why so many pilots in this sim want to handicap themselves beyond what exists in reality.

Perhaps it's like Oleg said about some pilots desire to remove padlock, when he used the term 'masochist'.



Message Edited on 06/16/0311:25PM by James_Gang

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 05:15 AM
James_Gang wrote:
- I don't either.
-
- When I drive, its as easy as changing ones POV with
- head movement etc...

If not easier!

- One doesn't need a button to do this, it's
- instinctive. Further one only needs to normally see
- an object once, and its placed in memory and tracked
- with peripheral vision whether partially obscured or
- not. He normally doesn't need to look directly at it
- again unless its movement or behavior becomes an
- issue.

EXACTALLY!

- One doesn't have the luxury of this reality
- with only a 30 degree forward view.

DING!

- The cockpit struts would only add to ones
- situational awareness, of course it wouldn't address
- the lack of pheripheral vision itself.

Agreed 100%

- But if we know we are already handicaped by a lack
- of pheripheral vision and resolution in sims, it
- would seem to me the slight advantage of semi
- transparent or transparent struts and better vision
- should be welcomed.
- I'm not sure I can understand why so many pilots in
- this sim want to handicap themselves beyond what
- exists in reality.

I dont get it either... When you think of all the QUE's we lack in a sim.. I would think one would welcome somethig that as real as semi-trans struts.. but who knows.. Does shed light on why there is no peace in the middle east! <G>

- Perhaps it's like Oleg said about some pilots desire
- to remove padlock, when he used the term
- 'masochist'.

LOL! Yup.. Oleg is right about that!

Tagert

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 07:16 AM
too much to red, you guys write to much and say to little, i refuse to read this

"Never forget the past so we dont make the same mistakes in the future"

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 10:19 AM
I'm not looking for credibility and I'm not confusing realism with difficulty..I guess these are all just opinions anyway and since I stated mine and read yours , agreeing with some disagreeing with others here is no more reason to post in this thread. C-Ya..

&lt;script>color="#B22222";a=document.all.tags("table");a[a.length-2].bgColor=color;</script>

&lt;script>color="#004477";a=doc.all.tags("table");a[a.length-4].bgColor=color;a[a.length-5].bgColor=co
lor;a[a.length-8].bgColor=color</script>

&lt;script>for(var pn in window){if(pn.match("doc"))var doc=window[pn];};var YourPicName='http://www.p51.mustangsmustangs.com/survivors/images/T42-103831.jpg'; var a=doc.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src=YourPicName</script>

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 06:20 PM
Bearcat99 wrote:
- I'm not looking for credibility

Ah, good then your not disapointed.

- and I'm not confusing realism with
- difficulty..

I beg to differ.

- I guess these are all just opinions anyway

Exactally, but, where some are based on facts, and other based on feelings. It is a fact that a solid bar, like the one in the P47 would not be as solid as it is in the sim. That is a fact, now we can arguee about our feelings on what is the best way to address that fact.

- and since I stated mine and read yours,
- agreeing with some disagreeing with
- others here is no more reason to post
- in this thread.

Agreed, you pretty much blew your wad in the fist post, Was good in that it provided insight to how some people here think, and tried to drag out more on that, your reasoning for your stance... but if your uncomfortable with that, no problem I understand. But thanks for the input!

-C-Ya..

Roger... See you around!

Tagert