That's right. When the three screens are first activated, with FS9
running, it comes in at a default z=1.0. It will then come down to 0.5
and 0.31. I'd guess 0.5 is possibly the most realistic, as judged when
sitting at takeoff point. Once airborne then 0.32 gives you more for the
Drive over and take a look sometime.
I presume you have set the zoom to 0.31 for realistic viewing thorough all three monitors? That setting on one screen would be almost fish-eye.
-----Original Message----- From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill Sent: 23 September 2006 20:31 To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: Perception of Server Lag
I've just done a rough check, focussing on Hawarden, at a distance of 7 nm. Zoom was at 0.31, which most users think looks natural. It's also the minimum zoom value. Turning to bring the field to the right edge of the centre panel produce a bearing of 279 (from FSNav), against n aircraft heading of 256. Turning until the field is at the right extremity of the right screen leaves it bearing 281, against the aircraft heading of 228. That seems to indicate an arc of view of about 106 degrees, compared to about 46 deg for the single screen. i'm probably wildly out but it gives some idea of the differnce.
Only within 30 degrees either side of dead ahead though. Having said that I know if you zoom out the angle of view increases - but I'm not sure how much by. Maybe its an idea to create a compass turning circle in some scenery and measure angles.
I must admit that it is tempting to try the TrackIR for formation work.
-----Original Message----- From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Winskill Sent: 23 September 2006 19:34 To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: Perception of Server Lag
If Smithy ever unwelds his wallet, and invests in TripleHead to go, I'll give it a try. The forward view is probably wide enough to allow formatin on a reasonably close aircraft.
That's the standard procedure for any aircraft but it requires the formating pilot(s) to permanently focus on the other aircraft - which is why a whole formation tends to fly into the ground if the lead aircraft gets it wrong.
To watch the other aircraft in FS would require you using the side (or forward side) view all the time. This can be done but it's a lot harder than in a real aircraft. The problem lies in the fact that when you bank an FS aircraft the whole outside view moves up or down. In real life your eyepoint stay fixed on the other aircraft with bank not being a consideration. The "fixed eyepoint" effect in FS can be very disorientating especially if you alter bank a lot - as you certainly would for formation work.
-----Original Message----- From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of franklyn fisher Sent: 23 September 2006 15:40 To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: Perception of Server Lag
The Red Arrows managed it by formating at a trianglated position
ie the second craft hangs back a bit and below or the same level.
Then by looking at the lead ac lines up an agreed triangle
eg wing tip in line with leader tail plane and leaders wingtip lined up with
the nose pitot, as a rough example.
This puts the following ac in an exact position. The pilot then just has to maintain the correct altitude.