Are TV's the way?

[rhysb]

Maurice is right and have to agree with him. I probably only spend 30% of the time on a flight looking out the window at the view and with the point on the visuals within the level-d sims again I would say less than 20% of the time I'm looking out the window!

Just speaking from experience

I still think multiple TV's is the way even though people like Scott and nat who are using the multiple computer and projector route make it look so good.

I also visited an office today that had smaller 27" monitors with no bezels (1mm) mounted together in a quartet showing one large image (4 TV's in a rectangle so effectively 1 tv made of 4 quarters. Make sense?) this is a great idea as you can use smaller TV's but then these will give a more effective 'curve' round the cockpit!

[HondaCop]

LOL So now we should use 4 smaller TVs to make up the same size as that of 1 larger TV, ending up with more than 12+ monitors for a nice wide view?

Sometimes I think people just like to argue or contradict just for shits and giggles. LMAO :-)

If looking out the window makes up for less than 30% of our flying, why do we even try to make full size cockpits in the first place? Let's just slap a 19" LCD for landing and takeoff.

[XOrionFE]

LOL So now we should use 4 smaller TVs to make up the same size as that of 1 larger TV, ending up with more than 12+ monitors for a nice wide view?

Sometimes I think people just like to argue or contradict just for shits and giggles. LMAO :-)

If looking out the window makes up for less than 30% of our flying, why do we even try to make full size cockpits in the first place? Let's just slap a 19" LCD for landing and takeoff.

Efrain, you seem to be pretty abrasive in your comments.    Everyone is entitled to an opinion aren't they?   I have the full screen and I must say I am just as happy with three 22" lcds if not happier.   There are pluses and minus to every setup.   Look at Angus's setup with old style CRTs and wideview wraparound on 19" crts.   It is about as immersive as I have ever seen.     Anyway, just pointing out that many of us have experienced both or all of these possible setups and again, there are pluses and minuses to each setup.   Lets all just be informative about it and not rip into other people for sharing their thoughts one way or the other.

Scott

[HondaCop]

LOL So now we should use 4 smaller TVs to make up the same size as that of 1 larger TV, ending up with more than 12+ monitors for a nice wide view?

Sometimes I think people just like to argue or contradict just for shits and giggles. LMAO :-)

If looking out the window makes up for less than 30% of our flying, why do we even try to make full size cockpits in the first place? Let's just slap a 19" LCD for landing and takeoff.

Efrain, you seem to be pretty abrasive in your comments.    Everyone is entitled to an opinion aren't they?   I have the full screen and I must say I am just as happy with three 22" lcds if not happier.   There are pluses and minus to every setup.   Look at Angus's setup with old style CRTs and wideview wraparound on 19" crts.   It is about as immersive as I have ever seen.     Anyway, just pointing out that many of us have experienced both or all of these possible setups and again, there are pluses and minuses to each setup.   Lets all just be informative about it and not rip into other people for sharing their thoughts one way or the other.

Scott

How am I being abrasive? Of course everyone is entitled to their opinions and I agree 1,000% with you. What I just can't comprehend is how can we say wide, wraparound displays aren't really necessary because we spend 30% of the time or less looking at our instruments.

It's all about immersion and the feeling of really being at the controls of a B737-800NG jetliner. Why do you think some people have linked controls, dual CDUs, dual seating, etc, when in reality, they fly 99% of time ALONE? Like I said, it's all about inmersion and for someone to say here it's not needed, it simply doesn't make sense and it's contradictory to what they have been doing all along.

As for thinking I'm being abrasive, that's just the way I am. I'm in no way trying to disrespect anyone but at the same time, I'm not here to win popularity points. I just say things the way I see them as I think we all are adults here and shouldn't get easily offended over disagreeing point of views.

[ETomlin]

Efrain, the point I think myself, Scott, and Maurice are trying to make is that we have discovered first-hand that better quality visuals in the direction that you're looking most is more desirable than a huge (and admittedly awesome) wraparound visual that to some folks is more trouble than the effort to build, setup, and maintain considering the amount of VFR ops you fly in a sim. If I had a sailing sim or a C172, etc, then I would hands down go with a wraparound system. Would it be nice? Yes. Is it neccesary for myself? No.

[jackpilot]

Guys

I've flown Mau's undocked 180 visual (BTW not 800X600 at all!) Immersion and sense of motion unparalled in a fixed base sim. FSX,  High res and very smooth ...yes very smooth.

This being said, I flew big screen TV too. All good also, crisp but not fooling your senses as much as 3 proj do.

Just to say that "immersion" is also between your ears, a combo of sounds, instrumentation, ATC rushing instructions, feel/look of credible hardware, weather, and God knows what...not only visuals.

I'll stick to what I said above, better spend your money and energy on the inside of the sim to make  it as "real as it gets" before investing in a visual because on heavy jets the fun is inside!

Some of you my age will remember IFR training in sims without ANY visual NOR sounds... sweating on the steam gauges  as you had to get to cruising altitude ,transitioning to a bumpy approach, lining up the ILS, slowing down , fighting the glide, etc etc, The idea was to master scanning , reacting with small inputs, flying in front not behind the machine...

So today we are spoiled brats, building what would have been a dream then....
Maybe this is why I like my 8 feet single proj front view...for now

Jack

[HondaCop]

Efrain, the point I think myself, Scott, and Maurice are trying to make is that we have discovered first-hand that better quality visuals in the direction that you're looking most is more desirable than a huge (and admittedly awesome) wraparound visual that to some folks is more trouble than the effort to build, setup, and maintain considering the amount of VFR ops you fly in a sim. If I had a sailing sim or a C172, etc, then I would hands down go with a wraparound system. Would it be nice? Yes. Is it neccesary for myself? No.

See, now THAT makes complete sense! lol  It's all about compromises and how each person uses the simulator. I am a good personal friend of Jose "Joe" Maldonado (Project 727) and have been to his home in Puerto Rico several times. Even helped him a few times with his Project 727 build and I can tell you that he is one of those that loves to FLY the aircraft and not just program a flight into the FMC and watch it from the sidelines. And this is on a real, 727 flightdeck with most instruments completely wired!

Personally, if I am spending so much money on building a full-size cockpit, I want to fly it, manually, as much as I can. Yea, it's awesome to fly by instruments and the sense of accomplishment is terrific when you can fly from point A to point B in complete IMC conditions and still be able to land that sucker, but I leave that to the big boys who do this for real. Me, I want to enjoy the view outside the cockpit as much as I can.

What I'm trying to say is just because we are simulating a very complex aircraft such as a B737NG, doesn't mean we have to fly it by instruments only. Doesn't mean that good, wraparound visuals should be limited to just gliders or single engine, GA planes.

Heck, this topic has been dragged along too long and we can agree to disagree till we are blue in the face!!! At the end of the day, we all can do whatever we please with our sims. LMAO =)

[Maurice]

Of course, if you are running projectors on 640x480 or even 800x600, going with a higher resolution LCD will make a world of difference in making out details such as small aircrafts on the runway while you are on approach or taking off. If you can have wraparound visuals using 1080p LCDs for at least a 180 degree view, then we arw talking. lol

My projectors actually run at 1280x800 and that is nowhere near enough resolution for a sharp image when using wide throw projectors. I used to have just one projector (not wide throw) on a much smaller flat screen and the resolution was quite good then I thought.

Maurice

[Maurice]

Hey Maurice, the next time the real pilots visit, setup just one large view and see what they think? Not to make a point or side one way or the other, but just to see what they like or dislike about it. Next time I fly I will do the same. Actually, I was flying like that at first and had no real problems with it...really loved the 50-100fps everywhere.

John

I will do that John but I am 100% sure they will prefer the wraparound visuals even though they seldom look out (it's just more impressive).

In fact, the reason Angus brought the 2 pilots here is because he likes my visuals better that his and yet, I like his better than mine because I was shocked at the level of details I could see on his small screens. Angus does not care about the lack of details, he prefers the immersion factor which is undeniably better with a wraparound screen.

Like I said, there really is no right or wrong here & unless you can afford  CAE type visuals, you will have to compromise one way or another depending on your finances, space and/or whatever else is important to you.

Maurice

[HondaCop]

Hey Maurice, the next time the real pilots visit, setup just one large view and see what they think? Not to make a point or side one way or the other, but just to see what they like or dislike about it. Next time I fly I will do the same. Actually, I was flying like that at first and had no real problems with it...really loved the 50-100fps everywhere.

John

I will do that John but I am 100% sure they will prefer the wraparound visuals even though they seldom look out (it's just more impressive).

In fact, the reason Angus brought the 2 pilots here is because he likes my visuals better that his and yet, I like his better than mine because I was shocked at the level of details I could see on his small screens. Angus does not care about the lack of details, he prefers the immersion factor which is undeniably better with a wraparound screen.

Like I said, there really is no right or wrong here & unless you can afford  CAE type visuals, you will have to compromise one way or another depending on your finances, space and/or whatever else is important to you.

Maurice

Good post, Maurice! And I sure am glad you did not take offense to my prior post as someone seems to have, because I definitely did not mean any disrespect to you or anyone. I simply post what I think and don't have time to look up a thesaurus to make sure I say things eloquently or to sound nice. hahaha I guess 15 years of law enforcement will do that to anyone. Like I said, didn't mean any disrespect to anyone.

Since you have already ventured on the projector side of things, what's the highest we should aim for when setting up the screens? What I mean is, the top edge of the image, how high should it be from the top of the windshields, so that you don't see them when looking at them?

[XOrionFE]

And I sure am glad you did not take offense to my prior post as someone seems to have,

No need to keep dragging it on there Efrain.   Maybe I am a little more sensitive to others feelings when I post and was merely pointing out that when you use words like "nonsense" and "lmao" and such in response to people's ideas it may come off wrong.   Eric didn't seem to mind your response and neither did Maurice so perhaps I shouldn't have spoken for them but if you responded to me the way you did I would not care for it much.    Take it how you want.....I won't say anything more and don't want to be in a flame war with you.   You are right, we are all adults so lets move on.....peace.

This is a good thread....

I still want 5 50 inch monitors so if anyone loves projection that much I have a great deal on 3 lightly used Mitsubishi Short throw DLPs.....just sayin...

Scott

[Maurice]

Since you have already ventured on the projector side of things, what's the highest we should aim for when setting up the screens? What I mean is, the top edge of the image, how high should it be from the top of the windshields, so that you don't see them when looking at them?

That's a hard question to answer because it very much depends on the type of projector and how far the screen is from the windows. All I can tell you is that you will always be able to see the top or bottom of the screen if you lean over and look up or down. If you just swing your head, you don't see the edges & obviously, the farther the screen is, the higher you have to go so as not to see the top edge. In my case here, the screen is just over 4 ft from the left window and the top projected image is 78" from the floor

But don't lose sleep over this :-). I was a bit disappointed at first because I could still see 'the room' if I really tried. But trust me, before long, you will not care anymore

Maurice

[Boeing Skunk Works]

See, now THAT makes complete sense! lol  It's all about compromises and how each person uses the simulator. I am a good personal friend of Jose "Joe" Maldonado (Project 727) and have been to his home in Puerto Rico several times. Even helped him a few times with his Project 727 build and I can tell you that he is one of those that loves to FLY the aircraft and not just program a flight into the FMC and watch it from the sidelines. And this is on a real, 727 flightdeck with most instruments completely wired!
[/quote]

Where did you get the idea that Joe is using instruments in the MIP? His instruments are represented on monitors same as mine. His SP-50 wasn't even wired last time I spoke to him.

[nicd]

Immersion.. ah the golden egg of sim building. I'm with Jack on this.. it's very much about what's between your ears.. the human brain has an amazing ability to "meet" the simulation somewhere in the middle and create reality. When that happens, the user is immersed. And to get there, yes good visuals are important, but equally so are sounds, vibrations, air movement, beeps, tactile things, even smells (no.. not those smells!), and keeping the outside real world "out".

Have had 1000s (literally) of people fly my sim, including many pilots. Nothing better than seeing them get immersed and lost in the environment.. sweat on the brow, white knuckles on the yoke, wide-open eyes and even swaying into the turns (and it's a fixed base sim!). I encourage all builders to get people in their sim and see what works.. what immerses people / what doesn't. When you've built something yourself it's difficult to have an objective perspective of how you're going immersion wise.

Somebody a posts back mentioned just using 1 wide view and not undocked windows. Yeah FSX does that smooth and nice, but as far as I can remember the perspective is all wrong. The one continuous view continues at a 180 degree flat plane to the eyepoint into infinity. Wrap that view around the eyepoint in any way and the world goes crazy.. objects that should be left and right in the far distance become up close and warped. Wish it wasn't true but.

Personally I think good visuals are an important part of why I want to fly a sim. If I really was all heads down like commercial pilots in the real sims then yeah - that wouldn't be the case. But then why build a sim?.. may as well build a sophisticated desktop sim - more like a procedural trainer. But it's easy to get absorbed in FMCs and high-end procedures. We found that with our world flight crews and so brought in the rule "all flight below 10,000 feet is hand-flown". This keeps the pilot engaged at a greater level and keeps hand flying skills sharp. And good visuals are then both important and appreciated, not just something you look up and see when you disengage the autobrakes! Mind you, this is with  a well trained crew of 2.. it's not so easy to keep your hand off the AP engage when flying all on your own!

[ETomlin]

Nice perspective Nic. As always, great to see you around.

[sluyt050]

Inspired by what I've read so far, I would go for the best of both worlds (quality TV and immersive projection) for my sim. That means a 210 deg. wrap around screen composed of 3 home-made flat 90" (diagonal) projection screens. The outer screens are angled 110 deg. with respect to the centre screen. They are "powered" by 3 Optoma HD87 home cinema full-HD 1080p projectors. Besides the standard lens (Throw Ratio = 1.54- 1.93), an optional short throw lens (TR = 0.77) is available!!!
Ref. http://www.optomaeurope.com/projectordetailshe.aspx?PTypedb=High%20Definition%20Home%20Cinema&PC=HD87
These animals are not cheap but neither is a 90" full HD LED TV.

So I like to keep it relatively simple: no different sizes TV's, no bezels, just 1 scenery PC, no warping needed (so no vertical resolution loss) and just 3 x 70 deg. "undocked" views (FSX - Prepar3D 2.0....).

I tested this setup with 3 x 27" 1920x1080 (scenery only) displays (FSX, PMDG 737NGX, AS2012) and for me it was satifying (besides the hot ears after a while). Frame rates at this resolution are still a bit low sometimes but that should improve with Intel Haswell and once Prepar3D 2.0 is there.

As an alternative I consider to start with 3 (cheaper) BenQ MW851UST 1280x800 projectors (Throw Ratio = 0.36!) and go for the higher resolution when the prices come down. So for the time being, TV's are not my first choice.

[phil744]

heheeh could you imagine using these? http://www.eyevis.de/index.php?article_id=200&clang=1

[rhysb]

Phil,

That's exactly what I saw and referred too in the earlier post, looks awesome doesn't it! You should be able to create quite a cool curve too!

[MLeavy737]

Hi all,
  Well I'm finally coming back around again into building after a short break.  I had my sim check and I always take a few weeks and do nothing else but CBT's and review for the check-ride.  All turned out great and as usual I leave the sim building wondering why I felt like I didn't know anything and wasn't ready when I went in.

Anyhow,  I was thinking after I read these posts about visual systems and had to laugh.  I just flew a checkride in a brand new CAE Electric motion state of the art visual system sim and I barely remember what any of the scenery looks like.  First off we started the checkride in 500 RVR, then anytime we were flying we were on top of a low level layer of clouds. Any landing made when we actually landed and didn't go around, the weather was 600 RVR. Point is we didn't see any scenery except for a short time for a few maneuvers.

I guess my opinion on visual systems is that is really depends on what you the builder consider important in your sim and how you fly it.  Sounds a bit obvious I know however I think what would help is if you ask yourself what kind of pilot you are? Do you enjoy real world procedures? do you get a kick out of flying as precise as you can?  Where's you mind when your flying? Is it on the procedures and techniques or is it on the pretty visuals outside?  I do know for a fact that if we all had a 6+ million dollar CAE visual setup with their scenery there would be builders here who would would not be satisfied! Lol it's just the way we are!

Anyhow setup wise I must say I was very impressed with Scott's (XOrionFE) visual setup! I really think the seamless wrap around system is the way to go over seeing a bunch of borders on TV's that wrap around the pit. regardless of resolution. To me seeing those borders would just kill it.  Would feel like in standing in a Walmart TV section picking out my next home TV   also it's easier to pretend you have a $6+ mill setup with projectors.  Just put the RVR down to 500 or so and fly around.  Will look just like a CAE setup.. Believe me!

Good luck everyone!

Mike L

[sluyt050]

.... I really think the seamless wrap around system is the way to go over seeing a bunch of borders on TV's that wrap around the pit. regardless of resolution. ....... Just put the RVR down to 500 or so and fly around. Good luck everyone!

Mike L

I fully agree. No matter how bad the visibility is, on TV's the bezels stay clear for sure.

[jackpilot]

Mike, I'm with you on that.
Periph vision is important because if you have it you do not notice it (proof that it is OK)
With a 120° you feel someting is missing and it is annoying and distracting.
Hi definition seems  less important and more eyecandy, (especially over the top.)
Just to say that  180° is the way to go, wether TV or Proj.
HD may not be a real necessity if $$$$
And with a ¼ mile vis. fluidity improves considerably 

Just talking about trade-offs if you cant have it all
Jack

[Joe Lavery]

I think this forum is great for getting different viewpoints on any aviation related subject. For me personally the visuals are important, I love the approach to one of these highly detailed airports; where all sorts of things are going on around you. But I fully accept and respect that this is not important to everyone.

Incidentally just adding some more fuel to the fire. Have you all seen the new Samsung range of HD TVs, they don't have a border at all....    But they are expensive at the moment. 

Joe

[XOrionFE]

Inspired by what I've read so far, I would go for the best of both worlds (quality TV and immersive projection) for my sim. That means a 210 deg. wrap around screen composed of 3 home-made flat 90" (diagonal) projection screens. The outer screens are angled 110 deg. with respect to the centre screen.

This is an idea that we talked about in the past which I still want to try.   I am not convinced that the screens need to be curved.   As long as the three flat surfaces can make it around nose and the projectors chosen can fill them properly I think the view will still be great and believable.  And as mentioned by Maurice in the past, if the warping neccesity is removed then the images should be a lot better with the warping software only really used to fine tune the edges.  This may in fact represent the best of both worlds right now as Edward pointed out.    I think I need to try this once and for all so I can see for my own eyes how this would look.   Sounds like a trip to home depot is in order to pickup some sheet goods :-).

Scott

[tennyson]

Joe,
That's what I'm running in my cockpit.
I have two Samsung Smart TV's @1920 x 1080p running off a GTX680 via a matrox Dual Head2 go. My side windows will be 46" LCD's @1920 x 1080p as well.

I'm still building, but have the forward two screens operational at the moment.
Will post a few screeny's soon.

Frank Cooper

[sluyt050]

I think I need to try this once and for all so I can see for my own eyes how this would look.
Scott

Good to read Scott that you are thinking in the same direction. I'm anxiously awaiting your experience and opinion with a flat screen approach. I plan to start building second half of 2013.