We are indeed the ‘yolk’ of the FS community here in the A2A-forum. The discussion always zooms in on the details, the heart, the crux, the nucleus, of the matter.
I feel right at home!
how do you like your Yolk?
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
Erik Haugan Aasland,
Arendal, Norway
(Homebase: Kristiansand Lufthavn, Kjevik (ENCN)
All the Accusim-planes are in my hangar, but they aren't sitting long enough for their engines to cool much before next flight!
Arendal, Norway
(Homebase: Kristiansand Lufthavn, Kjevik (ENCN)
All the Accusim-planes are in my hangar, but they aren't sitting long enough for their engines to cool much before next flight!
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
Thanks for your precise contribution and I'm very glad your enjoying this one Erik! Of course we all are the Yolk (and not the joke).This topic has really taken off 1500+ ft/min, though not quite how I predicted. That doesn't matter. I've been particularly inspired and educated by Dudley's and Alan's pieces.
In an unintended way, I think what I was suggesting (re BOOSTING THE (PSYCHOLOGICAL) IMPRESSION OF MY HANDS actually flying the A2A plane on your monitor, is not a contradiction to what most people have offered.
I was suggesting that if you fly with most of your panel in front of you, IN PARTICULAR WITH FULL SIGHT OF YOLK AND WHOLE GRIP HANDLES, then, for me, it NEGATES the perception that it is ME flying the plane. Looking upwards RESTORES the fantasy that it is MY HANDS (on the actual airplanes yolk) that are flying this plane. For me, the nature of the peripheral devices (old school or odd school or hi-tech) is irrelevant. (Just for me, it seems, this fantasy is strongest when I can see just TOP of the grip handles moving from side to side).
Dudley grasped this immediately and, as a real world pilot, he must set the monitor to view above the panel to match how it is when he is really flying.
"Look up to the skies and see!" so sang Freddie Mercury
***Though I'd still like to ask Dudley and real world pilots "Although your head is still and view is up and out, can you still see your hands moving on the yolk i.e. by down-peripheral vision?***
Rod (just keeping busy till the Spi***** and/or Aeros*** come)
Birmingham, UK
In an unintended way, I think what I was suggesting (re BOOSTING THE (PSYCHOLOGICAL) IMPRESSION OF MY HANDS actually flying the A2A plane on your monitor, is not a contradiction to what most people have offered.
I was suggesting that if you fly with most of your panel in front of you, IN PARTICULAR WITH FULL SIGHT OF YOLK AND WHOLE GRIP HANDLES, then, for me, it NEGATES the perception that it is ME flying the plane. Looking upwards RESTORES the fantasy that it is MY HANDS (on the actual airplanes yolk) that are flying this plane. For me, the nature of the peripheral devices (old school or odd school or hi-tech) is irrelevant. (Just for me, it seems, this fantasy is strongest when I can see just TOP of the grip handles moving from side to side).
Dudley grasped this immediately and, as a real world pilot, he must set the monitor to view above the panel to match how it is when he is really flying.
"Look up to the skies and see!" so sang Freddie Mercury
***Though I'd still like to ask Dudley and real world pilots "Although your head is still and view is up and out, can you still see your hands moving on the yolk i.e. by down-peripheral vision?***
Rod (just keeping busy till the Spi***** and/or Aeros*** come)
Birmingham, UK
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
No I cant say I noticed my hands holding the yoke when I am flying unless I look down. I can be seen in my peripheral vision but it most certainly out of mind.
Flight Simmer since 1983. PP ASEL IR Tailwheel
N28021 1979 Super Viking 17-30A
N28021 1979 Super Viking 17-30A
- DHenriques_
- A2A Chief Pilot
- Posts: 5711
- Joined: 27 Mar 2009, 08:31
- Location: East Coast United States
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
rod321 wrote:Thanks for your precise contribution and I'm very glad your enjoying this one Erik! Of course we all are the Yolk (and not the joke).This topic has really taken off 1500+ ft/min, though not quite how I predicted. That doesn't matter. I've been particularly inspired and educated by Dudley's and Alan's pieces.
In an unintended way, I think what I was suggesting (re BOOSTING THE (PSYCHOLOGICAL) IMPRESSION OF MY HANDS actually flying the A2A plane on your monitor, is not a contradiction to what most people have offered.
I was suggesting that if you fly with most of your panel in front of you, IN PARTICULAR WITH FULL SIGHT OF YOLK AND WHOLE GRIP HANDLES, then, for me, it NEGATES the perception that it is ME flying the plane. Looking upwards RESTORES the fantasy that it is MY HANDS (on the actual airplanes yolk) that are flying this plane. For me, the nature of the peripheral devices (old school or odd school or hi-tech) is irrelevant. (Just for me, it seems, this fantasy is strongest when I can see just TOP of the grip handles moving from side to side).
Dudley grasped this immediately and, as a real world pilot, he must set the monitor to view above the panel to match how it is when he is really flying.
"Look up to the skies and see!" so sang Freddie Mercury
***Though I'd still like to ask Dudley and real world pilots "Although your head is still and view is up and out, can you still see your hands moving on the yolk i.e. by down-peripheral vision?***
Rod (just keeping busy till the Spi***** and/or Aeros*** come)
Birmingham, UK
I just realized I didn't actually comment on exactly WHERE I put my eye point and distance so I'll comment on that here.
Naturally each aircraft and it's cockpit and panel design is different so what I do is make finite adjustments to my initial view as I bring up the plane.
Fortunately I've actually flown many of the planes I use in FSX and remember first hand what feels comfortable to me as I view the monitor. Using the Mustang for example, My natural view when sitting in the seat looking forward has my direct straight ahead eye point looking right into the gun sight area. I adjust my seat height to reflect that. This puts my peripherals on both sides just about where they would be were I sitting in the real bucket seat on either a seat chute or the special seat cushion I had made for me. (I used a 4 pin 28 ft canopy military back pack when I flew the Mustang).
I adjust my distance back from the panel to what would be about 3.5 feet which would be about right were I sitting in the seat of the actual plane. This gives me almost the exact peripherals to both sides I'm used to using when landing a Mustang.
All this is fine except for one final adjustment I have to make every time I use the centering feature (assigned to a button on the Warthog) that snaps the view back forward after using the hat to pan sideways such as a look to the left before my base turn.
After the snap back to forward I have to use the hat to pan the view downward to regain my "setup" once more. For this I use the bottom of the panel edge in the Mustang. When I can see that edge I stop the "adjustment" and I'm back to my setup once more.
This is a minor thing and no trouble at all.
Of course I could FINALLY get a Track IR and avoid all this. I'll probably do that one of these days. I tried it once before I couldn't get it set up properly so gave up on it. Perhaps I'll try again.
Anyway, all the above only takes a few seconds to set up and works for me in all the aircraft I use in the sim.
Dudley Henriques
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
What's interesting about the way you do it is that it's actually a pretty good ballpark solution to the problem we've been talking about, which is getting a normal perspective on your monitor. Think about it - at the bottom of the screen, you see the top of the yoke's horns. And right below it, in the lower part of your peripheral field of view, you've got a sense/perception of your hands on the rest of the yoke. So in effect, you're matching your overall, at-the-desk perspective to what you see on the screen. I think if we measured it, we'd find out that the result is pretty close to what Esa and I were describing as a normal field of view - and pretty close to what Dudley does to get the right visual cues in the cockpit.rod321 wrote:
In an unintended way, I think what I was suggesting (re BOOSTING THE (PSYCHOLOGICAL) IMPRESSION OF MY HANDS actually flying the A2A plane on your monitor, is not a contradiction to what most people have offered.
I was suggesting that if you fly with most of your panel in front of you, IN PARTICULAR WITH FULL SIGHT OF YOLK AND WHOLE GRIP HANDLES, then, for me, it NEGATES the perception that it is ME flying the plane. Looking upwards RESTORES the fantasy that it is MY HANDS (on the actual airplanes yolk) that are flying this plane. For me, the nature of the peripheral devices (old school or odd school or hi-tech) is irrelevant. (Just for me, it seems, this fantasy is strongest when I can see just TOP of the grip handles moving from side to side).
Dudley grasped this immediately and, as a real world pilot, he must set the monitor to view above the panel to match how it is when he is really flying.
Side note, but this is always a reminder why it looks so odd when a developer decides to put the pilot's hands or feet (or both) into the on-screen picture. It's disconcerting because you have a sense (and can peripherally see) where your own hands and feet are, and they're in very different places than the ones on the screen. So there's a disconnect and it completely breaks the immersion. That's in addition to the fact that if you can see the full control column or the rudder pedals on your monitor, you're probably zoomed out too far. So there are two issues - too much zoom, and phantom hands and feet. It never works.
@Dudley - you should definitely give TrackIR another shot. It's strange at first and takes some getting used to, but I found it became second nature pretty quickly. I don't think I could ever go back to panning now.
EDIT: One more thing... an advantage X-Plane has over FSX or P3D is that instead of a zoom figure, it uses field of view to set the viewing angle. Doesn't totally answer the question of normal perspective, but it enables you to get a lot closer with less confusion.
"Ah, Paula, they are firing at me!" -- Saint-Exupery
- DHenriques_
- A2A Chief Pilot
- Posts: 5711
- Joined: 27 Mar 2009, 08:31
- Location: East Coast United States
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
I agree with most everything you said here.Alan_A wrote:What's interesting about the way you do it is that it's actually a pretty good ballpark solution to the problem we've been talking about, which is getting a normal perspective on your monitor. Think about it - at the bottom of the screen, you see the top of the yoke's horns. And right below it, in the lower part of your peripheral field of view, you've got a sense/perception of your hands on the rest of the yoke. So in effect, you're matching your overall, at-the-desk perspective to what you see on the screen. I think if we measured it, we'd find out that the result is pretty close to what Esa and I were describing as a normal field of view - and pretty close to what Dudley does to get the right visual cues in the cockpit.rod321 wrote:
In an unintended way, I think what I was suggesting (re BOOSTING THE (PSYCHOLOGICAL) IMPRESSION OF MY HANDS actually flying the A2A plane on your monitor, is not a contradiction to what most people have offered.
I was suggesting that if you fly with most of your panel in front of you, IN PARTICULAR WITH FULL SIGHT OF YOLK AND WHOLE GRIP HANDLES, then, for me, it NEGATES the perception that it is ME flying the plane. Looking upwards RESTORES the fantasy that it is MY HANDS (on the actual airplanes yolk) that are flying this plane. For me, the nature of the peripheral devices (old school or odd school or hi-tech) is irrelevant. (Just for me, it seems, this fantasy is strongest when I can see just TOP of the grip handles moving from side to side).
Dudley grasped this immediately and, as a real world pilot, he must set the monitor to view above the panel to match how it is when he is really flying.
Side note, but this is always a reminder why it looks so odd when a developer decides to put the pilot's hands or feet (or both) into the on-screen picture. It's disconcerting because you have a sense (and can peripherally see) where your own hands and feet are, and they're in very different places than the ones on the screen. So there's a disconnect and it completely breaks the immersion. That's in addition to the fact that if you can see the full control column or the rudder pedals on your monitor, you're probably zoomed out too far. So there are two issues - too much zoom, and phantom hands and feet. It never works.
@Dudley - you should definitely give TrackIR another shot. It's strange at first and takes some getting used to, but I found it became second nature pretty quickly. I don't think I could ever go back to panning now.
EDIT: One more thing... an advantage X-Plane has over FSX or P3D is that instead of a zoom figure, it uses field of view to set the viewing angle. Doesn't totally answer the question of normal perspective, but it enables you to get a lot closer with less confusion.
I would add that for a pilot and for those seeking to use the sim accurately as an aviation education tool, immersion and accuracy of view is CRITICAL. Everything possible should be done to have what is appearing on the monitor appear as close to what the viewer would be seeing in real life as humanly and virtually possible. I actually cringe when I see a simmer or a developer who from their dialog puts them into the knowledgeable area flying wise put up a screenshot with something way out of proportion to a natural view. Aircraft with extended wings and cockpit views taken with the camera distance set way back to include more of the cockpit are examples. THIS is a "gaming" look and I have been encouraging developers to avoid this for years.
It's ok to use a hat to pan around the cockpit and a mouse as a hand on a switch as that compromise is acceptable without breaking the immersion, but to look out the canopy or cockpit window at a long out of proportion wing is a deal breaker for immersion. The brain simply won't accept an out of proportion view of ANY KIND as natural. So if a simmer is accepting that as normal, in my opinion they might just as well go play Monopoly. )
Immersion is CRITICAL in a flight simulator. Just like I told Microsoft during the Beta for FSX, "The instant the brain is tasked to accept as normal what the eye is sending it to deal with as an image the brain deems abnormal, immersion is lost."
Dudley Henriques
- Ron Attwood
- Chief Master Sergeant
- Posts: 3225
- Joined: 30 Nov 2010, 10:07
- Location: Chelmsford, Essex, UK
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
I second that with bells on. If TrackIR is off for any reason it's like having your head in a vice! Check out the sim video differences between hat switch and the smooth look around of a TIR user. As a rule of thumb, whenever I get a new aircraft I'll look at it from outside and check where the pilot's head is. Then I'll reproduce that in the cockpit.@Dudley - you should definitely give TrackIR another shot. It's strange at first and takes some getting used to, but I found it became second nature pretty quickly. I don't think I could ever go back to panning now.
2c
Eva Vlaardingerbroek, an inspiratiom.
-
- Staff Sergeant
- Posts: 331
- Joined: 30 Sep 2013, 06:53
- Location: Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
I use Trackir for departure and arrival only, and ChasePlane for all other phases of flight.
Zoom has a far different effect than positioning your seat fore and aft, so what are the fundamentl differences ?
For example, if i use zoom to set my primary cockpit view, it also changes my depth of perception outside the cockpit ? If i use ChasePlane to set my primary cockpit view, by positioning the seat fore and aft (not zoom), it does not change my depth of perception outside the cockpit, please explain ?
Zoom has a far different effect than positioning your seat fore and aft, so what are the fundamentl differences ?
For example, if i use zoom to set my primary cockpit view, it also changes my depth of perception outside the cockpit ? If i use ChasePlane to set my primary cockpit view, by positioning the seat fore and aft (not zoom), it does not change my depth of perception outside the cockpit, please explain ?
-
- Staff Sergeant
- Posts: 331
- Joined: 30 Sep 2013, 06:53
- Location: Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
Ok, this video explains things pretty well, I believe I think I presumed that most people use trackir/ChasePlane or EZCA ? Sorry !
https://youtu.be/qjbCFNSofpk
I would recomend ChasePlane as an initial investment and then Trackir, but, your gonna have to learn to kiss them numbers all over again
One thing i forgot to mention, i gain 2-3 fps at zoom level 1.0 (1:1)
https://youtu.be/qjbCFNSofpk
I would recomend ChasePlane as an initial investment and then Trackir, but, your gonna have to learn to kiss them numbers all over again
One thing i forgot to mention, i gain 2-3 fps at zoom level 1.0 (1:1)
- Nick - A2A
- A2A Captain
- Posts: 13734
- Joined: 06 Jun 2014, 13:06
- Location: UK
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
Very interesting discussion! It's indeed important to remember that so long as we're viewing our flight sim world on a PC monitor rather than in VR or with some fantastic full-cockpit sim, it's always going to be a compromise between a realistic perception of the angular diameter of each object that we see, and our overall field of vision. Esa's post shows this rather well. Being a lazy chap, I'm going to simply repost a couple of images where I attempted to demonstrate this in a previous topic.
Cheers,
Nick
P.S. I can't read this topic title without hearing Dean Martin and Helen O'Connell.
There was another rather good discussion of the same matter as related to the P-51 cockpit here.Nick M wrote:Yes, as Lewis says, the viewpoint/perspective question is largely a subjective thing: 'ideal' settings will depend very much on how big your monitor is and how far you sit from it, as well as your personal preference. It's also generally necessary to make a compromise.
For instance, I've found that on my 24" 16:10 monitor (and using the "WideViewAspect=True" setting) a zoom setting of around 1.20 most closely reflects 'real' perspective. By that, I mean that the angular diameter of objects are about right. For instance, a 3-1/8" gauge would be rendered on my screen at about its actual size. (My screen, I should add, is about as far away from my eyes as the instrument panel would be.) Similarly, distant objects would appear at roughly the right angle...
However, as you can probably imagine, such a 'zoomed-in' perspective is hardly practical for most flying. I'd end up viewing things at the correct angular diameter but because I'm peering at the world through a rather small 20" × 13" 'window' (my monitor), my field-of-view would be very restricted. This lack of peripheral vision would seriously hinder my ability to see things outside the cockpit (and inside too) and my perception of speed would suffer.
As a result, I've settled on a rather wider viewpoint of 0.78. This means that objects in the cockpit are a bit smaller and angular spacing of objects is 'compressed' but the field-of-view is sufficient for visual circuits and so on with a bit of panning...
From looking at videos, many simmers seem to prefer an even more 'zoomed-out' perspective so that they can see nearly all of the instrument panel without panning their view direction at all.
Ultimately, as Lewis says, you just need to experiment to find the setting that suits you best. Unfortunately with just a single PC monitor, distance and speed perception will probably never really be "correct" as such; you just need to find the compromise that works best for you.
Cheers,
Nick
P.S. I can't read this topic title without hearing Dean Martin and Helen O'Connell.
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
aaaahhhhhhggggg Nick has sussed me!!
Thanks RotorWash for the You Tube link.
All of this has got me thinking and learning; very enjoyable!
Rod
Thanks RotorWash for the You Tube link.
All of this has got me thinking and learning; very enjoyable!
Rod
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
Nick,
Do you use TrackIR ? One of the advantages for me is beside the obvious ability to look around without using a hat switch as I can change my eye point by moving my head closer or farther from the monitor and press the reset key. Changing the viewpoint only changes your view of the panel/cockpit where zoom changes your perspective outside. Pushing the scenery in or out for me at least is unrealistic. Just like a photo using a telephoto or wide angle lens the perspective is unnatural. Everything is a compromise no matter how big or how many monitors you have. I still prefer keeping my views inside and out as close to what you would see in the real world and adapt to that and that makes things more difficult in many cases as in taking off in the P-47 on a narrow runway but I need and enjoy the challenge (been simming a very long time). For me simming is for fun not for training for real world flying (questionable in my experience but that is another discussion). The bottom line is do whatever you like as long as your are having fun. As I often say "whatever blows your skirt up".
Do you use TrackIR ? One of the advantages for me is beside the obvious ability to look around without using a hat switch as I can change my eye point by moving my head closer or farther from the monitor and press the reset key. Changing the viewpoint only changes your view of the panel/cockpit where zoom changes your perspective outside. Pushing the scenery in or out for me at least is unrealistic. Just like a photo using a telephoto or wide angle lens the perspective is unnatural. Everything is a compromise no matter how big or how many monitors you have. I still prefer keeping my views inside and out as close to what you would see in the real world and adapt to that and that makes things more difficult in many cases as in taking off in the P-47 on a narrow runway but I need and enjoy the challenge (been simming a very long time). For me simming is for fun not for training for real world flying (questionable in my experience but that is another discussion). The bottom line is do whatever you like as long as your are having fun. As I often say "whatever blows your skirt up".
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
It is actually the opposite. Perspective change is caused by changing the camera position when adjusting the focal length. If you took a portion of Nick's picture and resized it to match the other one, you'll notice that they match exactly. Same applies to photographic lenses when one takes photos with multiple focal lengths but from the same position. The proportion of the distant objects to the closer ones is unaffected by the zoom alone, but will change if you move your camera.dvm wrote:Changing the viewpoint only changes your view of the panel/cockpit where zoom changes your perspective outside. Pushing the scenery in or out for me at least is unrealistic. Just like a photo using a telephoto or wide angle lens the perspective is unnatural.
-Esa
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
First let me say I was not being critical of Nick I was just sharing my experience and preferences in regards to eye point and zoom and in the sim there is a difference. If you look at the two screen shots of Nick's you will see the outside angle of views are different which I am calling perspective. As I said, in the sim changing your eye point does not change the angle of view outside the cockpit. Using zoom effects your entire view. For anyone who does not think this is true try it in FSX etc it very easy to see what I am referring to if you have TrackIR. If you move your head closer or farther from the sensor your eye point changes but the angle of view outside the cockpit does not change. I would supply examples but I am away from my sim for a few days. I am using the term perspective in regards to what you would normally see with your eye . If I may use the definition of a standard lens in photography so everyone knows what I am referring to. I may not be as knowledgeable or smart as some folks but I know what I have experienced. I did have some photography training at a couple of universities and the FBI academy many years ago as well as practical experience but I am not as sharp as I once was as I am old. If I wrote a book of what I know and a book of what I don't know there is no question which one would be larger.
"A standard lens, also known as a "normal lens", is one which produces an image that roughly matches what the human eye sees, and which looks natural to the viewer. It sits between the telephoto lens and the wide angle lens, which produce unnaturally zoomed-in and zoomed-out images respectively.
Standard lenses have an angle of view of around 50 to 55 degrees diagonally. This is roughly the same as the angle that the human eye can comfortably view, which is why it gives a natural-looking perspective."
http://www.photographymad.com/pages/vie ... ard-lenses
"A standard lens, also known as a "normal lens", is one which produces an image that roughly matches what the human eye sees, and which looks natural to the viewer. It sits between the telephoto lens and the wide angle lens, which produce unnaturally zoomed-in and zoomed-out images respectively.
Standard lenses have an angle of view of around 50 to 55 degrees diagonally. This is roughly the same as the angle that the human eye can comfortably view, which is why it gives a natural-looking perspective."
http://www.photographymad.com/pages/vie ... ard-lenses
- Nick - A2A
- A2A Captain
- Posts: 13734
- Joined: 06 Jun 2014, 13:06
- Location: UK
Re: how do you like your Yolk?
I don't think anyone though you were being critical Vince, it's just that "pushing the scenery in or out" (of our onscreen view of the virtual world) is what we do when we decide on our preferred zoom setting in the sim. As discussed, it's simply not possible to say there's one particular zoom setting which is 'correct'. When you say as you keep your view "as close to what you would see in the real world" how do you define what that is? Preserving the angular diameter and spacing of objects as they'd appear in real life, or representing on the screen your rough field of view when sat in the cockpit? The problem is that depending on monitor size and distance these two things can be very different, more so with smaller screens of course.
One thing I think we should avoid doing is using different zoom levels for different views and/or aircraft. I'd say pick a zoom setting and stick with it!
Cheers,
Nick
P.S. No I don't use TrackIR though I have experimented with ED tracker a bit.
One thing I think we should avoid doing is using different zoom levels for different views and/or aircraft. I'd say pick a zoom setting and stick with it!
Cheers,
Nick
P.S. No I don't use TrackIR though I have experimented with ED tracker a bit.
Last edited by Nick - A2A on 28 Jan 2018, 12:56, edited 1 time in total.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 33 guests