bongodriver Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 (edited) It does slope away from the pit. Look at the pictures I inserted. Not much, Try drawing a line from the pilots view to the periphery of the cowling before it curves away, everything below that extended line is invisible to the pilot, for deflection shooting that's not great. Edited September 28, 2013 by bongodriver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyJWest Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 I'd bet that Germans being Germans, with the likes of Karl Zeiss et al on hand, that screen would've been optically almost perfect, with very little chromatic aberration or other distortions. I'd presume it would be laminated with some polymer or other though? That'd bring it's r.i. down significantly..... Poly methyl methacrylate (perspex) has a refractive index of 1.4914 at 587.6 nm, compared to glass at around 1.5 - 1.6. It isn't going to make a great deal of difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MA_Goblin Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 OK how about this one [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] _____________Semper paratus, In hoc signo vinces________________ PC: Intel i7-8700K (4.9 GHz), Aorus Ultra Gaming Z370 MB, Gigabyte RTX 3080, 32 GB DDR3 (3,2 GHz), Samsung EVO 860 M.2 500 GB SSD + Samsung 960 M.2 250 GB SSD Gaming: Virpil T-50 CM2, TM WH Throttle, Crosswind pedals, HP Reverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gooseneck Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 (edited) Poly methyl methacrylate (perspex) has a refractive index of 1.4914 at 587.6 nm, compared to glass at around 1.5 - 1.6. It isn't going to make a great deal of difference. In terms of the amount the image was displaced by refraction, that would depend on the thickness of the laminates. Your average high myope would probably tell you that the relative indices of polymers to glasses make a substantial difference in a number of ways. Optical crown glass being of r.i. 1.523, by the way, with higher densities available up to 1.8 or so. Not sure what the r.i. of thermally toughened glass is, it's been a while.........:) But anyway, for what it's worth, Krupi's initial vid showed a split second of a peculiarly angled view of the gunsight, and it was just a little black line across the bottom edge of the gunsight. Hardly worth this kind of lengthy debate I wouldn't have thought. :D Edited September 28, 2013 by Dooyar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krupi Posted September 28, 2013 Author Share Posted September 28, 2013 Couple things, you guys do notice that nothing is functioning in the cockpit right? Chances are these arent real, pilot in the seat vids, but just a rough "alpha" look at the cockpit view, so I dont know that I would judge too much on this. Its possible position of the pilot will still be adjusted and such... lets not burn the barn down just yet.... As for the bar discussion, real world, pilot view photos of what you are concerned with and I will inquire into it, otherwise its purely opinion based, your opinion against someone else. You cant bring other sim discussions into this because this is DCS not anything else. Hope this makes sense? We need hard facts to submit bugs, not opinion, no matter how well versed someones opinion is. Photos of the pilots view, in comparison with the view in game.... see the problem yet? We dont have a finalized view from the pilots seat in Sim yet. The gun sights, I believe they stated that they were going with this sight as it matched the one in the P-51D the closest, it was also discussed that the sight used on the 190 was in limited use and had dependability issues. That said, it was used in this aircraft, the devs have chosen this sight. Unless compelling evidence or information can be given as to why it should be changed, of which I cant imagine any... I would think that is the sight we are getting. Thanks for the reply Sith, as I stated if its proven that its modelled like that fine but all previous discussions have shed light on it not being the case. I thought that might be the case on the Revi, the D13 onwards was supposed to be having the gyro sight as standard I read somewhere. Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit Project IX Cockpit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nate--IRL-- Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 OK how about this one Got a better version of this? Nate Ka-50 AutoPilot/stabilisation system description and operation by IvanK- Essential Reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krupi Posted September 28, 2013 Author Share Posted September 28, 2013 (edited) I have a set of Fw 190 Blueprints, I will have a look. Damn I don't have the Dora versions on me :(, sorry But if you need any of the A series ;) Edited September 28, 2013 by Krupi Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit Project IX Cockpit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bongodriver Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 something with eye position would be handy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishtmail Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 I assume this is about the brown leather-padded bar which is in all the real-life cockpit pictures that people posted in this thread, and goes all around the top of the instruments panel, but is different in the FW-190D DCS model. Compare this FW-190D-9: with this DCS:FW-190D-9: Obviously a difference. But maybe this DCS model is historically correct and some models were done this way? DCS A10C Warthog, DCS Black Shark 2, DCS P51D Mustang, DCS UH-1H Huey, DCS Mi-8MTV2 Magnificent Eight, Flaming Cliffs 3, Combined Arms System: Intel i7 4770k @4,2GHz; MSI Z87-G65; 16GB DDR3 1600 MHz RAM; 128GB SSD SATA3 (system disk); 2TB HDD SATA3 (games disk); Sapphire Radeon R9 290 Tri-X; Windows 7 64bit Flight controls: Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog; Saitek Pro Flight Combat Rudder; TrackIR 5; Thrustmaster F16 MFDs; 2x 8'' LCD screens (VGA) for MFD display; 27'' LG LCD full HD main display Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyJWest Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 ...Hardly worth this kind of lengthy debate I wouldn't have thought. :D If you think this is a 'lengthy debate' you should probably look at the ones on the IL-2 forums. They went on for years. Hopefully someone can come up with some hard facts (i.e. a photograph showing the actual view through the windscreen) and avoid the same here. As to whether it actually matters, anything that allows you just a couple more degrees downward visibility may sometimes be significant - it can make the difference between getting a deflection shot in, and not actually being able to see the target. Anyway, the video was a brief alpha/beta shot, and as yet we don't even know if there is any real problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishtmail Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 *** sorry, I was replying to the first page of this thread, didn't notice there were actually nine pages already :) DCS A10C Warthog, DCS Black Shark 2, DCS P51D Mustang, DCS UH-1H Huey, DCS Mi-8MTV2 Magnificent Eight, Flaming Cliffs 3, Combined Arms System: Intel i7 4770k @4,2GHz; MSI Z87-G65; 16GB DDR3 1600 MHz RAM; 128GB SSD SATA3 (system disk); 2TB HDD SATA3 (games disk); Sapphire Radeon R9 290 Tri-X; Windows 7 64bit Flight controls: Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog; Saitek Pro Flight Combat Rudder; TrackIR 5; Thrustmaster F16 MFDs; 2x 8'' LCD screens (VGA) for MFD display; 27'' LG LCD full HD main display Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted September 28, 2013 ED Team Share Posted September 28, 2013 Thanks for the reply Sith, as I stated if its proven that its modelled like that fine but all previous discussions have shed light on it not being the case. I thought that might be the case on the Revi, the D13 onwards was supposed to be having the gyro sight as standard I read somewhere. There is a D-13 about 2 hours from me, wonder if they would let me sit in the cockpit :D Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bongodriver Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 There is a D-13 about 2 hours from me, wonder if they would let me sit in the cockpit :D I reckon yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gooseneck Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 If you think this is a 'lengthy debate' you should probably look at the ones on the IL-2 forums. Anyway, the video was a brief alpha/beta shot, and as yet we don't even know if there is any real problem. I know Andy, I was there too. I suppose my little posts in this thread have been a little 'tongue in cheek' shall we say? I agree wholeheartedly with your second point quoted. :D:thumbup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted September 28, 2013 ED Team Share Posted September 28, 2013 I reckon yes Looks like it doesnt have the same sight used in the DCS D-9 version... http://www.flyingheritage.com/TemplatePlane.aspx?contentId=17 Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krupi Posted September 28, 2013 Author Share Posted September 28, 2013 I assume this is about the brown leather-padded bar which is in all the real-life cockpit pictures that people posted in this thread, and goes all around the top of the instruments panel, but is different in the FW-190D DCS model. Compare this FW-190D-9: with this DCS:FW-190D-9: Obviously a difference. But maybe this DCS model is historically correct and some models were done this way? DCS are using the EZ42 Gyro Gunsight not the more common Revi 16B. Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit Project IX Cockpit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bongodriver Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Looks like it doesnt have the same sight used in the DCS D-9 version... http://www.flyingheritage.com/TemplatePlane.aspx?contentId=17 No but it's the only one in the world that has the long nose, a nice view from the pilots position will still answer a lot of questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
159th_Falcon Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Agree, we don't need the sight to see if the bar is represented correctly. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] The keeper of all mathematical knowledge and the oracle of flight modeling.:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bongodriver Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 (edited) Hilarious!......if you try a bit of internet research on this then every single interesting picture of relevance comes from the ubi discussion, all the same arguments and theories. interesting picture here though Edited September 28, 2013 by bongodriver image link seems to die Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bongodriver Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 a company regarded highly for their accuracy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kodoss Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 I have ordered the plans for the FW 190 from http://www.fighter-plane-blueprints-plans.co.uk/Sales-List-Inventory-Aircraft.php When they arive I will have a closer look...:book: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlipBall Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 (edited) Hilarious!......if you try a bit of internet research on this then every single interesting picture of relevance comes from the ubi discussion, all the same arguments and theories. interesting picture here though That's a good picture you got there...the date on it is also interesting, almost like advance preparation for any disputes :pilotfly: Edited September 28, 2013 by GT 5.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tone71 Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Hilarious!......if you try a bit of internet research on this then every single interesting picture of relevance comes from the ubi discussion, all the same arguments and theories. Ha, that's exactly what I found too! Cracked me up. Windows 10 Home, Intel Core i7-9700K @ 4.6GHz, Gigabyte GTX 1070 G1 Gaming (8GB VRAM) on 34" LG curved monitor @ 3440x1440, 32GB RAM, TrackIR 3 (with Vector Expansion), Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, Saitek Combat Pedals, Thrustmaster Cougar MFDs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horseback Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Are we at the point where somebody cites the Eric Brown book (or various magazine articles taken from it) when he describes flying the various types of 190 yet? According to CAPT Brown, The elevators proved to be moderately heavy at all speeds, particularly at above 350 mph (565 kph) when they became heavy enough to impose a tactical restriction with regard to pullout from low-level dives. This heaviness was accentuated because of the nose-down pitch that was evident at high speeds when trimmed for low speeds. The critical speed at which this change of trim happened was round 220 mph(355 kph), and it could easily be gauged in turns. Below that speed, the FW 190 had a tendency to tighten up in a turn, but above 220 mph, some backward stick pressure was required to hold the turn. (taken from Flight Journal Collector's Edition German Fighters, Winter 2011) At the higher speeds at which air combat generally took place, the FW 190 (at least the Antons) supposedly 'nosed down' a few critical degrees, which improved the forward view a good deal. If this was also true of the Dora versions and it is modeled in the DCS Dora, the bar controversy could turn out to be a tempest in a teapot. Personally, if there's going to be a bar in my DCS 190, it better serve Johnny Walker Black. cheers horseback [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]"Here's your new Mustangs boys--you can learn to fly 'em on the way to the target!" LTCOL Don Blakeslee, late February 1944 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bongodriver Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Are we at the point where somebody cites the Eric Brown book (or various magazine articles taken from it) when he describes flying the various types of 190 yet? According to CAPT Brown, At the higher speeds at which air combat generally took place, the FW 190 (at least the Antons) supposedly 'nosed down' a few critical degrees, which improved the forward view a good deal. If this was also true of the Dora versions and it is modeled in the DCS Dora, the bar controversy could turn out to be a tempest in a teapot. Personally, if there's going to be a bar in my DCS 190, it better serve Johnny Walker Black. cheers horseback Yeah but a pitch down like that isn't going to help a deflection shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts