Jump to content

[FIXED] Cockpit/Windscreen Bar


Veteran66

Recommended Posts

Hi NineLine

 

sorry for the two bug thread

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

 

Fw 190 A-8 Windscreen Bar

 

wrong sight through the Windscreen glass.

 

look this Video it show why the sight through the Windscreen glass is wrong:

 

thx I/JG27_ Nemesis for your experiment :)

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=211489&stc=1&d=1559973941

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=211487&stc=1&d=1559971561

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=211432&d=1559914004

 

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=211488&stc=1&d=1559973493

Fw190_1.jpg.08c8f40bdda5f502ef8e89956e006e08.jpg

Fw190_2.thumb.jpg.bb99e90d165e912b344c0a426b65d56f.jpg


Edited by Veteran66
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi NineLine

 

sorry for the two bug thread

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

 

Fw 190 A-8 Windscreen Bar

 

wrong sight through the Windscreen glass.

 

look this Video it show why the sight through the Windscreen glass is wrong:

 

thx I/JG27_ Nemesis for your experiment :)

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=211489&stc=1&d=1559973941

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=211487&stc=1&d=1559971561

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=211432&d=1559914004

 

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=211488&stc=1&d=1559973493

 

dont try ED will say that changes are to small to bother about it

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and i can bet that yo-yo is fully aware of this, but iirc he said something that supercomputer would be required to simulate this armor glass

at leas what they can do is just removing armor glass's bars but i dont know if they want it :P

especialy this bottom one this is geting in view hard

this armor glass is basicly moving pilot's eyes to the front edge of the glass its like having head where armor glass is so much bigger view range especialy view in down direction.

i got alwayes mixed thoughts when i want to hit plane it is gone from my view

and right now bottom bar is covering almost half of gun sight height :)


Edited by grafspee

System specs: I7 14700KF, Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite, 64GB DDR4 3600MHz, Gigabyte RTX 4090,Win 11, 48" OLED LG TV + 42" LG LED monitor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know if it will be rehashed in this thread but it has been acknowledged by Yo-Yo. Will it ever be implemented? I sure hope so!

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=227844&page=2 posts 12 and 14

"[...] because, basically, in this day and age, if you get to the merge and no one's died - it's not good for anybody." - Keith 'Okie' Nance
"Nun siegt mal schön!" - Theodor Heuss, September 1958

"Nobody has any intention of building a wall." - Walter Ulbricht, June 1961
"Russia has no plans to invade either Ukraine or any other country.
" - Vladimir Chizhov, Russia's ambassador to the EU, January 2022

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and i can bet that yo-yo is fully aware of this, but iirc he said something that supercomputer would be required to simulate this armor glass

at leas what they can do is just removing armor glass's bars but i dont know if they want it :P

especialy this bottom one this is geting in view hard

this armor glass is basicly moving pilot's eyes to the front edge of the glass its like having head where armor glass is so much bigger view range especialy view in down direction.

i got alwayes mixed thoughts when i want to hit plane it is gone from my view

and right now bottom bar is covering almost half of gun sight height :)

 

I realize that a real implementation is not working.

 

What we need is a real one / simulated compromise

 

maybe a narrower frame on the lower bar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is that there is no need to "simulate" it as such, why not just remove that bar from the cockpit textures and leave it in external view? There would be a slight shift from what we're supposed to have, but it'd still be much more accurate than seeing this huge bar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure most people here remember exactly the same discussion taking place when DCS Fw 190 D-9 appeared.

 

One of the developers posted a factory drawing of the windshield saying they used that for the model, and model is 100% accurate and everybody is wrong to criticize the now famous "cockpit bar".

 

What I find amazing is that developers really don't seem to understand that the forward-downward visibility angle through the gunsight reflector is INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. This angle is already pretty small for most WWII fighter aircraft. And the developers appear to think reducing the angle by 50% is really no big deal!!!

 

I have the Fw 190 D-9 module but I don't have (yet) the A-8. In the day it was released I was curious how the cockpit looks like and I searched youtube for videos. When I saw the "cockpit bar" blocking half of gunsight's reflector glass area below the central cross I was really shaking my head in disbelief! They did it again! And it appears that is actually worse than in D-9.

 

During the internal testing of the module nobody was bothered by this? Nobody noticed that you can't hope to shoot down anything except an aircraft in linear flight?

 

Of course the real aircraft was designed so that the ENTIRE gunsight reflector glass is unobstructed. It's common sense. I see there is even video proof of this, posted somewhere else on the forum.

 

I hear that simulating refraction in the simulator is not an option because it would hurt performance. The developer's solution? They decided there is no solution!

 

The solution was really obvious but nobody bothered. When designing the cockpit model they should have DEVIATED from factory drawings of the real aircraft. Make the cockpit bar lower/thinner, or move the instrument panel sun shield together with the gunsight higher, or a combination of both. I don't know exactly how it should have been done, I am no 3D modeller and I don't know in detail the geometry of the problem. But definitely the geometry could have been modified in a graceful way so it appears like a close replica of the real one and the gunsight is unobstructed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is really annoying and one might think that developers would take this point into consideration after it already came up so many times.

 

I just hope that there will be something done about it because even though refraction itself isn't really an option there are compromises which can be reached modeling wise.

 

Gesendet von meinem ONEPLUS A6013 mit Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that seems to be a real show-stopper.

 

there are however some things that could be done to the 3d-model as a workaround.

the easiest thing would be to make the frame party transparent and adjust the the non transparent texture to give the effect of being optically compressed.

 

a more complex solution would be to additionally lower the engine and cowling, while keeping everything that is viewable through the other windscreen at the same height: this would however mess up the model and would look bad, if you - f.e. in VR - would stick your head out to the side when taxiing with open canopy for examle.

 

therefore i think a good compromise would be to just adjust the texture of the frame as described.

you would then still have an incorrect view of the cowling (too low) but the sim pilot could compensate a little bit by adjusting his virtual seat height.

 

adjusting the whole geometry would come with so many drawbacks (if you think VR f.e.), that i would not recommend it (it's also much work, while the texturing solution is not!).

 

thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what kind engine DCS really uses, but it seems to have many many limitations compared to many other 3D games engines that use this kind technology:

 

 

I might first time seen in the "Prey" from 2006, as many other games from a Quake and Quake II had not the "see through" capability.

And then came the Valve's "Portal" etc.

 

After all ED are using mirrors as one technology, but they really are using it similar way as the ARMA series has Picture-In-Picture. While these other games (like Portal) use something far faster and better where you can literally look through the "window" and see view from some other part of the map.

 

So what they would need to do is to get this "window" to exist in surface of the windshield on pilot side, and reflect what the view would show at the outer surface. That would make it work just like it would.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that seems to be a real show-stopper.

 

there are however some things that could be done to the 3d-model as a workaround.

the easiest thing would be to make the frame party transparent and adjust the the non transparent texture to give the effect of being optically compressed.

 

a more complex solution would be to additionally lower the engine and cowling, while keeping everything that is viewable through the other windscreen at the same height: this would however mess up the model and would look bad, if you - f.e. in VR - would stick your head out to the side when taxiing with open canopy for examle.

 

therefore i think a good compromise would be to just adjust the texture of the frame as described.

you would then still have an incorrect view of the cowling (too low) but the sim pilot could compensate a little bit by adjusting his virtual seat height.

 

adjusting the whole geometry would come with so many drawbacks (if you think VR f.e.), that i would not recommend it (it's also much work, while the texturing solution is not!).

 

thanks!

 

I just thought of another idea. This would however need to be supported in the DCS engine:

Since this could be a recuring problem, it might still be worthwile to explore this.

 

I know that f.e. unreal engine supports this. I don't know the technical name, but it works like portals, where you render different geometry depending on through which "portal" you see it.

This not rendering a second viewport, it is just different geometry intelligently swapped.

 

There is a contemporal story-driven psychological mistery game in unreal engine that uses this portals quite a lot for puzzles. if you look through a defined "portal" the game renders another inctance of geometry within the border of the portal. This is not a second viewport, since the perspective stays the same!!! Only the geometry gets swapped...

 

Since we however would need a different perspective, we would just swap the geometry to a lowered external aircraft geometry, but only when viewed through the portal of the front glass.

 

So the outside model (from cockpit view) would exist in two instances. One normal and one lowered and when looking through the front portal, the normal model gets substituted with the lowered model.

 

easy, right?!:megalol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Bar" is actually a mere lip. The coaming top actually comes almost to the very top of the Armour glass upper edge. All you see from the pilots perspective is a small lip. No massive bar. Seems to me all the various FS developers are using the same drawings that contain the same mythical alignment of the top forward edge of the Armour glass that is meant to "jut" up into the pilots line of sight. Its BS almost this entire lower forward edge lies below the coaming line... you just cant see it from the pilots view point. There are countless images and videos that show the pilots perspective ... but yet few Sims depict it correctly all slavishly display the Bar... then the inevitable argument about refraction is presented ... makes no difference if the bar is behind metal !!fwbarglass.jpgiwma81.jpgfw190lipcomposite.jpgiwma82.jpg

 

 

Go on Devs go find yourself an FW190 and go and sit it one rather than slavishly rely on drawings. There is a A5 in Seattle, An A8 at Cosford, An A8 in Germany and France. The rebuild FW190A8N's (ASH82) have a slightly different arrangement with the coaming than the WWII originals. They lack the additional finishing strip with attached lip that can be seen in the A8 images and A5 coaming close ups above. But even the new build FW190A8N's don't have this huge Bar. Here is an A8N I sat in recently:

 

 

 

 

And if you want more proof the video from the the A5 at Seattle. What the pilot really sees.....not what we see in the A8 or D9!

 


Edited by IvanK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we see from the F1 view is very different from what we see in F2 view.

 

In F2 view the windscreen model seems perfectly fine, with upper part of glass' low frame at the good position relatively to the hood hinges.

That would conduct in a small windscreen bar exceeding the Hood top, from pilot's view.

 

But in F1 view the external model of windscreen is different, upper part of glass' low frame at wrong position relatively to hood hinges (too much high and rear from hood hinges), and the frame is very different.

That conducts to a big bar exceeding the hood from pilot's view.

 

I think it's still a WIP part of 3d model. It should be fine (small bar) from pilot's view without implement any real, but hardware heavy, "refraction" effect due to windscreen thickness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In F1 view you aren't supposed to look "behind the curtains"… that's the cockpit model, not the external 3D model.

 

 

 

S!

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we see from the F1 view is very different from what we see in F2 view.

 

In F1 view you aren't supposed to look "behind the curtains"… that's the cockpit model, not the external 3D model.

[...]

He still has a valid point. Sure, F1 view is not supposed to show a complete model when positioning the camera in unexpected positions, however the relative geometry should still be correct.

Toutenglisse's post does suggest that the cockpit geometry is indeed wrong. However it is difficult for me to verify, because the picture of the true external model is way too small and i'm not on open beta, so no way to check.

 

Maybe someone could upload some bigger pictures of the external models canopy/cowing area.

As i said, i think toutenglisse might be correct, that the position of the front glass is different in the cockpit model. Of course you have to take into account that on F1 view the metal frame gets not rendered, making it harder to truly compare...


Edited by twistking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

… however the relative geometry should still be correct. …
And I believe from his screenshots it is correct, just you don't see those external cover frames of the windscreen in the cockpit view as you do in the external 3D model for obvious reasons. Should they fake the cockpit view in order to mimic to some extent what glass refraction would show then you would actually see a "wrong" shape there to get a better cockpit view, although actual "measures" wouldn't fit any more with the real thing.

 

 

S!

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[...]

Sure, i understand you. And you may be right. I don't own the module yet, so i can't see for myself.

Just wanted to say, that the method of comparing is valid - but it might be misleading because of the missing cover frames on F1 view (as you also noted)...

 

The F1 view still demonstrates that the glass frame sits way above the cowling, so "faking" the better view by making the frame smaller might indeed be enough to get decent view from the cockpit: Not perfect, but a good compromise maybe...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better close views from F1 and F2

Yes, those are better. And i agree, that it looks a little bit off.

It seemes that on F1 view the glass frame is indeed higher. I'm very careful, because perspective can be very missleading when dealing with geometrical details, but it does indeed look like there was a difference between F1 and F2.

 

This is really strange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still believe those show the very same, just lacking frame in F1.

 

 

Anyway, the problem with the bar is not it exists, the problem is the lack of refraction, but the bar is there as it's been proven with many pics of the real thing before, the bar there, the refraction making it somewhat "invisible" from cockpit.

 

 

 

S!

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...