It's just a re-download, I only had to change a 0.5 to a 0.Originally Posted by modelr
I'm now working on the default DC-3 which I use with the Got Friends mods but not the Duckworks mod.
It's just a re-download, I only had to change a 0.5 to a 0.
I'm now working on the default DC-3 which I use with the Got Friends mods but not the Duckworks mod.
Been reading and thinking about this thread since it got started.
In my simming lifetime there have been certain airplanes released that I have thought of as bar-raisers that really opened my eyes as to what was possible on a given platform. The MAAM B-25 Briefing time for FS9 was one. So was the A2A P-40B for P3D, although it could just as easily have been any of the Accu-Sim planes, the P-40 was just the one I happened to try first. There has not yet been such a plane in MSFS for me. My fave planes, like the A2A Comanche and Milviz 310, really just bring Accu-Sim quality to the new platform.
As far as flight model fidelity, I guess I agree with Mach3DS's ranking of DCS, P3D, X-Plane, then MSFS. However, if we are going to allow limited-map, combat-focused sims into the discussion, those of us who fly a lot of warbirds would talk about the IL2 products. Those may not have the systems depth, at least in ways that are manipulable by the user, of DCS and the other sims, but in terms of flight behavior, the warbirds in the Great Battles and Cliffs of Dover sims are at least as convincing as those of DCS or P3D. IL2 and DCS also don't have the weird quirks that seem to plague all of the general purpose flight sims. In P3D, for example, the poor ground friction modeling that enabled you to Tokyo drift almost anything down the runway sideways always irritated me. With MSFS it is the excessive longitudinal instability, which has to be countered by excessive rudder authority in most airplanes, making many takeoffs a rodeo even in planes that are supposed to be docile, which has existed since Day 1. MS/Asobo's constant pursuit of more eye candy and advanced aerodynamics while leaving these basic issues uncorrected is my single biggest issue with the sim.
I am coming around to the view that for all the talk of fluid dynamics and whatnot, such things are mostly overkill for a PC-based consumer flight sim and that the old-school FS table-lookup flight model is more than adequate IF you get all the parameters correct. In a shooter game, you don't need to model every character's entire skeletal, muscular, circulatory, respiratory, and nervous systems for the game to decide how fast they can run or what damage a bullet causes. That type of modeling just exponentially increases computational overhead and usually reduces accuracy because the values of so many of those fancy new parameters are just not known. In flight modeling, it just creates more and more opportunities for garbage in, garbage out. Even in P3D flight modeling, designers were guessing half the time when they entered propeller efficiency tables or whatever. Maybe the virtual wind tunnel approach will be better at some future date when all of us are running PCs that would nowadays be considered mainframe supercomputers. At present, though, I feel like I can feel an artificial flight model working in MSFS to an extent that I never could in the other sims we have mentioned.
Javis asked about all-time best flight sim experiences in post #1 and, to my surprise, I wasn't able to think of many. I guess my first online Simventure approach into Oshkosh being guided by live real-world controllers was special. I can't even recall what I was flying, but experiencing something that I had watched and listened to from the ground so many times was amazing. Everything else just kind of blends together into a contented sort of haze. I can't even remember what or where I was flying during my first VR trip. It's funny because in other games, I can recall great snipes I made in RPGs, or nice goals I scored in sports games. Even in combat sims, I can still remember making difficult deflection shots to take down an ace in Dynamix Red Baron in the 1990s. Civilian flights sims are not like that for me. I'm pleased when the scenery or sky looks unexpectedly nice, or when I make a decent landing, or don't upset a controller on Vatsim, but it doesn't go into a hall of fame, it's just part of the general nice experience I keep coming back for. I think this lack of focus on dramatic Events is characteristic of simulator-style "games" and is really what makes it a niche that the majority of gamers aren't into. They want big hits of dopamine, not a steady drip.
I had a really nice flight in the DC-3 last night in VR despite you guys' efforts to ruin it for me. Yes, the cockpit is small. This to me is only partially an issue with flight sim addon designers not being used to designing for VR. I don't really believe that the DC-3 cockpit is undersized relative to the external model or to the sim world. It's more of a "world scale" issue which can only be addressed to a limited extent through headset settings. In other environments I use VR for, they have a setting that makes a huge difference in how large the environment is perceived. The first time we get a flight sim that is built for VR - and it won't be FS 2024 - it will have such a setting.
August
Recently upgraded computer equipment and controls. I purchased the PMDG 737-900 and their DC6. Both excellent products though I am not enthused with the landing of the 737 in flare, but tuning my controls may help. In past eras I did the flight dynamics for numerous Corsairs in including the Milviz FSX and P3D versions. I don't know what is different but the new Milviz for 2020 I can't fly! Takeoffs are just about impossible, landings at least doable. I thought the ones that I had done win the past were quite flyable if not easy and pretty close to reality.
OK, so the first part of this will sound like blowing my own trumpet, it is not meant to be, it is the truth.
The biggest impact on me in FS was when I was hacking the heck out of hex codes in FS4 to discover how to change the straight line between the 2d panel and the outside view. It took months and months, changing one digit at a time in a hex editor, then re-loading FS, seeing if there was any difference, and then trying another number. The day I first saw one tiny difference, and started to make the panel drop down in a curve at the left side, that was the day I felt incredible satisfaction. It took another few weeks, but the result was a modified Cessna panel which no longer had a straight edge across the screen. More research allowed me extend the "invisible mask" to build window frames across the outside view, a first in the FS world if I remember rightly, and that led to the the DC-3 panel which was released in time for the DC-3 in aircraft studio. These were the early days of the VIP experience... my god, 30 years ago. Nothing in my decades of FS since gave me such an emotional buzz.
Now to MSFS. What do I want to see changed most? The behavior on the runway. I hated it the first flight I did on the day MSFS was launched three years ago, and I hate it today. Very few aircraft track correctly, and I never fly with crosswinds because of that. The entire concept of friction and resistance of wheels on tarmac seems to be lost to Asobo. If I had ever steered a real aircraft down a runway like this, like some kind of drunken idiot, my instructors would never have let me go solo. It's disgraceful that this basic error continues. And as if to make the point, about six months ago I loaded up "an earlier version" of FS, and was shocked at how the aircraft stayed on the centerline so easily. Maybe too easy granted, but it was far more pleasurable. I sure hope this gets fixed sometime, because it has always been a right royal pain in the bahoochie - if you get my drift!
- Kenneth
Well, (1) the Milviz Corsair was one of the best warbirds for P3D so thank you for some nice experiences and drinks are on me if we ever meet, and (2) that, coming from you, is quite an indictment of the flight model in the new sim.
Some of us have learned how to manage takeoffs in the taildragger warbirds in MSFS, but I, at least, know that when I do so, I have figured out how to win a boss battle in a video game, not how to fly an airplane.
August
Sorry
IndeedYes, the cockpit is small.
Honestly, I think there is no such thing as "designing for VR". None of the aircrafts I have ever used in VR until now, may it be in P3Dv4, XPlane 11/12 or MSFS, were designed for VR, and they were all perfectly functional.This to me is only partially an issue with flight sim addon designers not being used to designing for VR.
When you model a 3D object that should be X feet large, you should make it X feet large. That is all.
The incorrect size of the DC-3 cockpit is probably the consequence of nobody checking it, or nobody from the test team using it in VR. Maybe they will update it in future, if we are lucky.
No, your world scale is fine, everything around your plane is correct size. It's just the cockpit that is undersized.I don't really believe that the DC-3 cockpit is undersized relative to the external model or to the sim world. It's more of a "world scale" issue which can only be addressed to a limited extent through headset settings.
Good thing you brought that back up, Daube. I'm still 'on the move' so kinda forgat about it a little.... Barry (AH) contacted me about it. He doesn't frequent SOH fora anymore. Same reason as some other devs (too much critique..). But still wants us here to know his thoughts about the scale of AH's C-47/DC-3 VC. So without further ado here is Barry's comment :
Quote :
What people need to know is that Microsoft, when they contracted us to build the DC-3, supplied 3d scans of the real aircraft, (they do this for everything we build, like the Stratoliner, the Trimotor and the others) exterior and interior. We built the cockpit using these as templates. So the cockpit, I can assure you a) is accurate and b) fits the scans exactly.
The other thing people never think about is this. If the cockpit were the wrong size or shape, it would not fit into the exterior model. In MSFS the interior model is displayed whenever the exterior is displayed. The DC-3 cockpit fits EXACTLY into the exterior model. So if anyone has a problem with the interior model they must have a problem with the exterior also.
In VR the field of vision and depth of that field is totally different to that of a monitor. To provide a cockpit to suit VR one has to cheat the dimensions by using a tunnel effect which distorts the depth of field visible to the naked eye. That is why many developers do not like VR. To provide what is being asked would require a completely different cockpit model that would not match a 3D scan or any plans or drawings. Not only that, the time required to build such a beast is totally unacceptable.
Unquote.
What i noticed just the other day at the great freeware Fightertown USA Miramar add-on, the parked F-14's and other aircraft there are about half the size of my own F-14 i am trying to park...
Some years ago I had a flight in the PH-PBA of the Dutch Dakato Association for EHAM, runway 22. I was in the cockpit for some time and yes the cockpit is really small and cramped. The pilots are very close to the instrument panel. To me the cockpit in the AH DC3 is spot on.
I was thinking something like what Barry says above. I don't see how the cockpit would fit with the external model if it were scaled down. And I can't imagine any dev taking the trouble to scale down every gauge, switch, and other off-the-shelf component they use in their cockpits to fit the scaled down cockpit. That is a convincing argument to me. Barry's argument about what it takes to design a cockpit for VR makes rather less sense, and conflicts with the experience we all have that many, perhaps most, flight sim cockpits designed before consumer VR existed look spatially fine in VR, but that is irrelevant to the DC-3.
On the other hand, Daube provides no evidence for his position other than that the cockpit seems subjectively small to him. I'll agree that it does to me, too. Then again, lately I watch video of Dan Gryder in his DC-3 and the cockpit indeed looks none too large, just as ftl818 says, with the pilots up close to the panel and Dan bumping elbows with his co-pilot if that is another big guy. It ain't a 737 or even a Stratoliner, for sure. So maybe AH has something to teach us about DC-3 cockpits rather than being wrong because it wasn't what we expected. I will say that the default VR eyepoint in the DC-3 might be set a bit high, that could contribute to the sense of smallness but is easily enough corrected.
August
Same here, I'll often park my Corsair or Mustang in a line of jet fighters or next to a bizjet and notice that my warbird is as large as those planes. Scales of static and AI planes seem to be all over the place, and were in FSX/P3D too.
August
In the still '2D panel only' FS era we did the DDA's DC-3 PH-DDZ for FS2K complete with exact replica of its instrument panel.
That's why we had access to the real DDZ as much as we wanted. That's great of course but also had a downside : i was completely fed up with 2D panels in FS because it had inevitably absolutely nothing to do with what the real DC-3 cockpit looked and felt like. Almost killed my enthusiasm for FS. Luckily not long after that depressive observation Bill Lyons came to the rescue with the first ever Virtual Cockpit ! Hurray ! Bill Lyons for President !!
Last edited by Javis; February 14th, 2024 at 09:00.
I'm glad Barry took the time to answer this, although I'm really surprised by his answer, and kind of disagree with his reply regarding the perspectives stuff. I'd simply like to point out the fact that the DC3 is currently the only model in my hangar that suffers from this problem ? I have plenty of planes, all of them look right in their dimensions. Why would the DC3 be the only one providing a "way too small" impression ?
And even if we take the proportions out of the way, just look at the yoke body vs. the seat, where your knees would be... Do you see any space for even a single knee in there ? The yoke body is touching the seat !
Or is it the Duckworld mod that is altering some parameters which make the 3D model wrong ?
I'll try to post some screenshots tonight to illustrate. I'll also try to remove Duckworld's mod.
But IMHO that's exactly what Barry is trying to convey, August : there is no need for a specifically designed VC for VR because 'normally' designed VC's look fine in VR even if, depending on the size of the VC and the helmet brand, gauges may start looking unsharp or blurry.
The thing that surprised me most when for the first time entering the cockpit of the DDZ DC-3 is how relatively 'far away' the instrument panel was situated underneath the anti-glare panel. At this first time the DC-3 was parked in the hangar and with no cockpit lighting whatsoever instruments were very hard to read (could also have been caused by my farsightedness..;-) I later realised also that my 'far away' perception of the instrument panel of a real DC-3 clearly may have been caused by the fact that i had been looking at my precious flight simulator 2D panels smack dab in front of my nose for years and years. Wrong perception ??.... Absolutely !!On the other hand, Daube provides no evidence for his position other than that the cockpit seems subjectively small to him. I'll agree that it does to me, too. Then again, lately I watch video of Dan Gryder in his DC-3 and the cockpit indeed looks none too large, just as ftl818 says, with the pilots up close to the panel and Dan bumping elbows with his co-pilot if that is another big guy. It ain't a 737 or even a Stratoliner, for sure. So maybe AH has something to teach us about DC-3 cockpits rather than being wrong because it wasn't what we expected. I will say that the default VR eyepoint in the DC-3 might be set a bit high, that could contribute to the sense of smallness but is easily enough corrected.
Maybe you're right. I wish he was still here to clarify. I thought he was conceding that correctly designed, scale cockpits look funny in VR and claimed that to look right in VR, they have to be specially distorted to accommodate the VR headset field of view (he wrote "depth of field," but clearly meant FOV). If I'm right about that, I'd say he was not correct, because headsets' FOV generally is well matched to the angular coverage of your eyes by the display, and if anything, it eliminates the problem we have in pancake/TrackIR of figuring out where to set the screen zoom. (There is an interesting YT vid about that by A330 Driver, i.e. the artist formerly known as 737NG Driver, just today.) So a properly scaled VC should feel fine in VR, as you say, and as we have all experienced. I'm just not sure that's what Barry was saying. In any event, I enjoyed the DC-3 cockpit until y'all drew my attention to how small it feels, and now that Barry has credibly argued that it really should feel that small, I'm sure I'll enjoy it again.
"World scale" in VR is definitely a thing, although I no longer think it is part of the DC-3 issue. World scale in MSFS almost invariably feels comfortably 1:1, whether you're in a cockpit, looking from the outside, or viewing the world with a drone. If all of the cockpits in a sim feel too small and toy-like in VR, as people often complain about with IL2, then this should be tried. Unfortunately, MSFS doesn't include a world scale adjustment in the game, and WMR doesn't include one for the headset. Supposedly it can be done with the OpenXR toolkit but it never worked well for me, and I have pretty much stopped using the toolkit. Steam VR does include a good world scale slider, useful for those who use VR in IL2, P3D, or FSX.
August
I'd put Xplane above P3D any day of the week...there have been a few very good FSX/P3D models from very talented developers but the building blocks in Xplane are superior.1. DCS
2. P3D
3. X-plane
4. MSFS
2 and 3 may be swapped...
From what I hear, I would probably agree, but I have never had X-plane. There is a limit to my flight sim insanity that stops short of buying yet another major sim and replicating my hangar full of planes in it.
August
Bill Lyons had the first VC? What was it?
I get that some of y'all like P3D for it matching the numbers and its system simulation. But when I went back and reinstalled it not too long ago to revisit some old favorite planes, it just felt like flying on rails compared to what I've gotten used to in MSFS/XP12.
"On rails" has always been the complaint about the pre-2020 Microsoft-based flight sims. Getting punted around the earth and sky by implausible forces in MSFS gave me a new appreciation for rails!
There are addons that import a little turbulence into FSX and P3D. I use Accu-Sim, but there's also RealTurb. I keep the slider pretty far down. A little turbulence goes a long way, realism-wise.
I find, and I'd be interested in others' experiences, that with VR, the stability of P3D bothers me a lot less. It's like I supply my own turbulence through random head movements. And turbulence supplied by the sim can be a bit vertigo inducing in VR.
August
Ok I did a bit more testing tonight.
In the past month I had tried to force the Asobo avatars to appear in the cockpit to check how they look inside (to compare their size with the general size of the cockpit).
With my lack of experience, I failed to make it work though...
Or so I thought.
Tonight, I took the DC3 out of the hangar for the first time in a while, and two things happened:
1- a missing texture issue... I blame it on my stupid edit attemps, I'll reinstall the plane anyways (delete + redownload)
2- pilot and copilot were in the cockpit.
So, the pilot and copilot looked good, at least same "scale ratio" as the rest of the cockpit, even thought the yoke body was still going through one of their legs. But size wise, it was looking alright.
I believe some addon, or an outdated version of some addon, might have created some interference here. I am now in the process of removing everything to come back to the vanilla version of the DC3 to test further. Apologies to AH, it seems the problem was indeed lying within my install of that bird. I'll update once more after the reinstall.
Reinstallation is in progress.
Before the reinstall, I could at least do a flight without the Duckworld mod, just for a quick check.
After I removed the mod, there were no more missing textures (and no more avatars unfortunately) and I could take a closer look.
This time, the cockpit scale looked much better indeed.
To clarify before I go further, the Duckworld mod is nowhere faulty. It's just that I had made my experiments to add the avatars (amongst other things) by altering the files in the Duckworld mod folder, causing it to be faulty so to say. I had also tried to modify some files in the "official" folder, but this was a total failure so I went on with modifying the files in the Duckworld mod folder instead.
The brief (before I deleted the mod) appearance of the avatars in the cockpit was an quite eye opener though. It was a confirmation that the cockpit was indeed in the correct scale
After thinking about it for a while, I realised the problem I describe, about the lack of space for the legs/knees between the seat surface and the yoke body, is probably a consequence of the fact that the cushion of the seat is not compressed at all by the presence of the avatar... leading the avatar to seat actually a bit too high, which could be an explanation for the seemingly missing space...
I took some time to look at the seat more closely in VR, after positioning my head more appropriately. It still looks a bit small, or more precisely "narrow", but at least now it seem my ass *could* fit in thereSo again, I apologize to AH for my previous comments regarding the cockpit scale. It was apparently the result of some bad edits from my side, which are being wiped out as I write this message. The reinstall is taking a bit longer than I hoped, so I won't be able to retest a "clean" DC-3 tonight it seems, but tomorrow should be fine.
Of the real life planes I've had control of in the air (in order, Mooney 231, Bonanza, Cessna 310, F-15D, T-34B), the only one that didn't feel like it was at minimum driving across a bumpy road with the constant little movements was the F-15D. That one is definitely on rails IRL.
Of course, all of the others were flown in the summer in the southeastern US, so it's not exactly cool, smooth air there.
Can't remember exactly but it was a four seated vintage single prop. Maybe a Waco, Stinson or Piper and it was during the glorious year of FS98. Yessir !
What i DO remember still vividly very well is the impact it had on me. Finally an end to these tired old 2D panels that had just about nothing to do with being in the cockpit of an aircraft. Amazing really how long we flightsimmers tolerated that ! (and then to think that some of these simmers *hated* the fact that something unholy was inbound to overclass their precious 2D panels ! Noooo !!!!!) Hehe..
Well, i am happy to hear that, Daube and i will certainly inform Barry about it too. Sometimes computers can play a dirty trick on you.... Tell me about it.. ;-)I believe some addon, or an outdated version of some addon, might have created some interference here. I am now in the process of removing everything to come back to the vanilla version of the DC3 to test further. Apologies to AH, it seems the problem was indeed lying within my install of that bird. I'll update once more after the reinstall.
Is it 'La ordinateur' or 'Le ordinateur' ?... I bet it is 'La' ...
Thank you for letting us know !
I Think it was the Stearman. I remember sitting in the cockpit and moving the view around, and seeing the ailerons move, without the view "snapping" back to default.
Also being able to scan the instruments individually, without snapping. I remember when someone did the "Cannibal Queen" I picked it up immediately, as I had just finished the book. (Big Stephen Coonts fan here.) I immediately set out to fly the route as flown in the book.
Don H
AMD Ryzen 5 7600X
MSI MAG B650 Tomahawk WIFI/BT
64GB Corsair Vengeance 6000MHz DDR5 C40 (4x16)
Sapphire Pulse AMD Radeon RX7900XT 20GB DDR6
Corsair 5000D Airflow Case
Corsair RM850x 80+ GOLD P/S
Liquid Freezer II 360 water cooling
C:/ WD Black 4TB SN770 Gen 4 NVMe M.2 SSD
D:/ Crucial P3 PLUS 4TB Gen 4 NVMe M.2 SSD
Samsung 32" Curved Monitor
Honeycomb and Saitek Flight Equipment
Unfortunately it's "Le"Well, i am happy to hear that, Daube and i will certainly inform Barry about it too. Sometimes computers can play a dirty trick on you.... Tell me about it.. ;-)
Is it 'La ordinateur' or 'Le ordinateur' ?... I bet it is 'La' ...
Thank you for letting us know !And since "ordinateur" starts with a vowel, it's going to the "L'ordinateur"
The reinstall has finished, and I will try the plane again tonight. If all is fine, I'll try reinstalling a clean version of the DuckWorld mod on top.
I'd really like to retry adding the copilot in the virtual cockpit though...
To come back on tracks with the flight models topic, I'm curious to see the improvements coming with the SU15. These multi-rotor aircrafts such as the Chinook will probably be evaluated closely by the community, so I'm looking forward to the feedbacks.
Members who have read this thread: 166
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks