"OpenCockpit=TRUE" RUUULZZZ!

[Wrench 9,849]

Whilst fiddling with Spinners Falchion mod, and using Ordways' Mig15 pit, I wanted to see what could be done to enhance the look of the aircraft.

 

What I've found, in another yet-to-be-released mod, that certain parts of the aircraft don't quite work as advertiesed. Meaning, there's gapping holes when looking over your shoulder (like the entire fuselage ain't there)

 

Well, with the FE code added in the last patches for the OpenCockpit=, and turning on the various bits (in the case of the Fagot, the fuselage), and judicious editing of the pilot placement in the cockpit ini, you can have something like the screenies below.

Thanks must also go to Lexx_Luthor for his "Stargetic Cockpits" method as heavily outlined over on the 3rd Wire boards

 

screenie 1 - just a generic external view, to give a perspective of where the pilot sits, and what he might see

 

screenie 2 - the view out the front window.

 

screenie 3 - over towards the left. note the rear framing that's behind the seat

 

screenie 4 - right view. note the radio antenna

 

kinda cool, huh??!!!

 

Wrench

kevin stein

[+streakeagle 871]

While I agree with Lexx that having the 3d model provide the cockpit frame and view should be the better way to get the feeling of being inside the plane, I have some issues:

1) the low poly count of the cockpit frames as viewed from the inside in most 3d models is repulsive, especially when they are too thick.

2) the difference in the light and shadows creates a contrast that destroys the immersion this trick is supposed to provide. In the screenshot above, it looks like the instrument panel is real due to sharp colors and high polys while the canopy frame is projected onto a whitescreen due to washed out colors and different lighting/shadows.

 

I think the ultimate solution will be for the cockpit and aircraft to be one single ultra-high poly model with the usual lower detailed lods for distant viewing by external observers and some kind of clipping rule to reduce the poly count for the in-cockpit view. I presume that the hardware currently available is more than strong enough to handle such an approach, but I haven't ever coded 3d programs nor built 3d models, so I am just venturing a guess based on what I have already seen in current sims.

[zmatt 2]

^If done right that is possible, although I would say that in this case the engine would limit you. A look at some of the newer big budget pc titles will show the capabilities of the newest hardware and it can be pretty impressive.

 

At my university they are experimenting with GPGOU, or general purpose GPU. You can reprogram the video cards with an API like CAL or CUDA and use them are number crunching units. The newest cards such as the Radeon 48xx series are teraflop capable. Granted massively parallel gpus aren't suited to every task and there are some they would just falter at, it is still very impressive and promising.

Edited March 17, 2009 by zmatt

[Wrench 9,849]

While I agree with Lexx that having the 3d model provide the cockpit frame and view should be the better way to get the feeling of being inside the plane, I have some issues:

1) the low poly count of the cockpit frames as viewed from the inside in most 3d models is repulsive, especially when they are too thick.

 

AGREED!!! Having actually stuck me head into the pit of Mig15 (at the Chino airshow some years back), these most definately look a bit on the thick side. And a bit dull besides. Unfortunately, I don't think that even increasing the skin size to 4096 would help, porbably due to the low poly count of the windscreen framing (besided the fact I'm not quite sure where it resides on the body.bmp)

 

2) the difference in the light and shadows creates a contrast that destroys the immersion this trick is supposed to provide. In the screenshot above, it looks like the instrument panel is real due to sharp colors and high polys while the canopy frame is projected onto a whitescreen due to washed out colors and different lighting/shadows.

 

Again, very much argeed! I personally don't care if the pits framework is a Skyhawk or whatever the original was. It dosen't detract from my play experience. I just like have SOME kind of pit that close to reality. Personally, and this is probably from play soo much XvT and XWA, I mostly fly the pit turned off, only turning it on for the occasioanl instrument/radar check or for landing and such.

 

I think the ultimate solution will be for the cockpit and aircraft to be one single ultra-high poly model with the usual lower detailed lods for distant viewing by external observers and some kind of clipping rule to reduce the poly count for the in-cockpit view. I presume that the hardware currently available is more than strong enough to handle such an approach, but I haven't ever coded 3d programs nor built 3d models, so I am just venturing a guess based on what I have already seen in current sims.

 

We can only hope!

 

Basically, the point of this little experiment was to see if the 'missing bits' could be filled in. If you look at the stock Mig15 with Ordways, pit (or any other pit -cough- skyhawk -cough-), and mouse you view as far right/left as possible; given the pilot/cockpit position is at 98.6% it's correct position (as measured on the external model, based on pilot head and the wing root), one can look directly INSIDE of the wing, right to the zinc chromate colored spar, due to the non-visibility of the fuselage from the cockpt. The Ho-229 has this very same problem, and the only 'fix' is with the OpenCockpit=TRUE and the fuselage set to "ShowFromCockpit=TRUE". Of course, this trick ONLY works in the Post-Patch environment.

 

Does this (low rez framing, etc) take away from the player experience? I can't say ... but looking over your shoulder and seeing the internal structure of the aircraft sure does for me! Again, this was just an experiment and is easly reversed with a few comment-out slash marks //

 

Wrench

kevin stein

[column5 63]

I suppose its a matter of taste but I find it extremely...ugly...when the relatively low-def external model is mixed with the much higher-detail cockpit model. Not that that should deter anyone...I'm just talking to myself...out loud...on the Internet.

[kct 5]

Well, it happens. But on aircraft with better cockpit detail (like Veltro's Tu-95s), you would see a huge difference when using this method.

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

Wrench, your MiG-15 setup passes the Soviet Radio Mast Test:

 

Is the radio mast visible from the player's cockpit? Yes indeed! AwSim

 

Its can be more accurate simulation wise, but at a potential cost. Its can be ExtrEmE UGLY because the external models are not made for this, although some models have very beautiful crew comparment modelling -- Russo P-47, PASKO B-58, ANYTHING BY VELTRO2K, ATeam B-36, , Mirage Factory MiG-21F and MiG-23, Timmy J-32 (I need to get that out), etc.... One of my goals was to spark interest in this for long term, say next century or two, model makers would make a high polygon area around the crew compartment in an otherwise lower polygon model. Any higher LOD levels beyond of course would not need any of this extra crew compartment detailing. This would ease the workload of cockpit makers, although transfer some pain to airplane modellers.

 

Best part is if the external model has opening canopy, that like totally RUUULZZZ!

 

I don't have WW1 sim, but I think TK used the same basic idea in WW1 sim, and the WW1 sim modders. Ye Olde SF worked because the basic Thudwire models were all 1960s jets that shared a common feature of offering little to no visibility of the external airplane from the pilot's seat. So nothing hurts if you just turn OFF the airplane grafix cos you won't see it anyways when playing the game, and slap the player position with dedicated distinct cockpit anywhere. This won't work for prop planes of course, which need accurate player positioning. WW1 airplanes are even more needing of this method, as near abouts all the airplane is visible from the pilot seat.

[Lexx_Luthor 57]

Two of my faves are....RUSSO early F-84 heavy canopy framing -- it all slides back and forth with the opening/closing canopy, and PASKO F-94 twin seat canopy with nice crew compartment detailing.

 

F-84...

 

F-94B, pilot view.

 

F-94B, radar operator view (rear seat)...

[Wrench 9,849]

The "radio mast test" was actually what I had in mind!!

 

Important Advice: save your originals inis, back them up as a just in case!!! Allows for easy restoration!!!

 

Here's the data for the Mig-15, if anyone wants to try it

 

in the ]Fuselage[ section, add this line:

 

ShowFromCockpit=TRUE

 

in the MiG-15bis_Cockpit.ini (this is Ordway's unit), add the following:

 

OpenCockpit=TRUE

Offset=0.0,-0.08,-0.03

Position=0.0,0.15,0.80

 

you can copy/paste that right over the exisiting lines. Scroll on down further in the cockpit ini, and at the bottom of the instrumet listing add:

 

Instrument[054]=Move1

Instrument[055]=Move2

 

as there are already existing some 'moves', these continue the trend

 

at the very bottom of the cockpit ini, after all the other moved stuff, add:

 

[Move1]

Type=AIRSPEED_INDICATOR

NodeName=canopy frame

MovementType=POSITION_Z

Set[01].Position=-9

Set[01].Value=0.0

Set[02].Position=-9

Set[02].Value=1.0

 

[Move2]

Type=AIRSPEED_INDICATOR

NodeName=canopy frame rear

MovementType=POSITION_Z

Set[01].Position=9

Set[01].Value=0.0

Set[02].Position=9

Set[02].Value=1.0

 

and go from there!!

 

Again, if not liked it's easily reversable

 

Wrench

kevin stein

[FastCargo 412]

The 'cockpit within external model' thing I think has always been a matter of personal taste and abilities.

 

The essential problem is that cockpits are simply hard to do. Period. Ask anyone who has built them, especially excellent ones like TMF, Zur, Julhelm, Bobrock, bongodriver to name just a few, and I don't think anyone would disagree with that. Most other things on a model can reach a decent release level within a few weeks (note, not necessarily a real NICE level) for each item (model, skins, FM, etc). Enough detail is left out because of scaling issues (not replicating the springs on a landing gear for example) that work can proceed quickly.

 

A cockpit on the other hand, is the absolute pinnacle of detail. Knobs, switches, displays, bezels, dials, needles, triggers, petals, etc. The list goes on and on. In addition, say on the external model, you pull the stick back. All you see actually move on the model is the elevators, maybe some manuver flaps. But in the cockpit, you'll see several things move around and they all have to be detailed, not just in proper movement, but proper scale...VVI and altitude increase, ADI rotates, speed decreases, stick moves back, HUD slides down...you get the idea.

 

The textures also have to be accurate down to the smallest detail...like real life. Yep, you need to see those zippers on the G suit...etc.

 

It isn't hard really, but it's tedious. REALLY tedious. Mind crushingly tedious. So that's why you see so few.

 

So what if you want to fly aircraft that don't have a cockpit of their own. Well, we have to adapt one. And therein lies the rub.

 

Basically, it's a matter of what you consider more immersive...a absolutely proper cockpit with the totally wrong view outside...or a less proper cockpit, but the view outside is more accurate (although with lower polys).

 

Personally, for the models I've built or adapted, I always try to set it up that a cockpit can be put 'inside' with very little fuss using the 'OpenCockpit' method. The external model 'cockpit area' can be setup as not visible from the inside...so there is a nice closed mesh 'hole' that an cockpit can be put in, and yet still have the fuselage, wings, canopy surrounding the player. For me, I find that more immersive.

 

Also, to me, cockpits are simply an interface for getting the job done. If the cockpit can convey the relative difficulty or ease that the real pilot would have had to deal with, that's good enough without having the 10/10ths detail necessary (try flying the F-103 in cockpit view only...that job would have sucked...big time). I will never consider myself fully immersed in any sim...for the simple reason that I do this sort of thing in real life, so because I can live with that, I can live with a cockpit not being the real thing.

 

Not to say that a nice cockpit is worthless...hardly! I just don't have the patience to build one anymore...external models are fun...cockpit models are work.

 

 

FC

[+krizis 6]

Sorry, could not resist when I have seen that attempts to realize a MiG-15 pit are 'alive and well'...

Concerning my work (someone asked about the status) - it has already taken not weeks, but MONTHS - modelling (>35k of polys), skinning, reading tons of manuals... Is it worthless now?

here is the humble result:

[Caesar 305]

That looks friggin' great!

[Wrench 9,849]

To quote Gollum:

 

'we wants it!!'

 

Wrench

kevin stein

[Viggen 644]

That pit..... .......just......amazing

[+krizis 6]

I know. I'm doing all possible to bring it available to everybody. But the project (started more than a year ago just for fun, as always:)) turned out to be unexpectedly difficult.

[Fubar512 1,350]

Krizis,

 

That is a nicely detailed 'pit model....who am I kidding, that is true artistry!

[+GrinchWSLG 24]

While I think the usefulness of Wrench's findings are debatable with current models, as is already talked about in this thread, I think the real worth of his efforts lie in that fact that from now on modelers can work with this in mind. Whether or not they decide to use it is up to them.

 

This thread also brings something else to mind that has always bugged me. This community I think is in very desperate need of a quality pit modeling tutorial. One that not only covers the actual model itself, but setting up .ini's and all the bits and pieces necessary. I've never scene a well done graphic tutorial of the process, and I think it would benefit modders greatly. I think it would be great if TMF could find the time to put together a set of tutorials but that may be asking a bit much of an already bogged down modding group.

[+76.IAP-Blackbird 3,557]

@ Krizis, this is a masterpeace... together with the MiG-29,F3 and some other pits are those the best looking fps killer I`ve ever seen ;-)

[+krizis 6]

I have no fps problems while running this cockpit. The benefit is in that you can see only one cockpit (inner model) at the moment, but when you play with hipoly models of planes (external models), it becomes more annoying... cause dozens of them may appear in each frame.

[JediMaster 451]

I use the cockpits for certain periods of flight, but during others I also turn them off.

I always thought the cockpits should be on until I flew in my boss' Piper Aztec about 10 yrs ago. The front is dominated by the instrument panel, with the windows seemingly very small. Yet when you sit there and look out of it, it's like hitting the "cockpit off" switch...you don't see it all! I had the image of a wide-open expanse in front of me that seemed totally wrong if you actually looked at a pic of the way it was setup. I've not been able to find any exact pics of how his was after the GPS upgrade, but these give an idea: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/cockpits/pa23/

Of course, you don't really see how big the windows are in those either. Here's an external pic that's also misleading, but if you look closely you will see that the lower part of the window is actually blocked from the inside.

There is a lot of mental repositioning along with eyes/head to go "heads down" and look at it, and I think making cheap HUDs for GA would be a gold mine to anyone who could do it.

You're guaranteed to "lose sight" if you go heads down, and that leads to "lose the fight."

[column5 63]

I always thought the cockpits should be on until I flew in my boss' Piper Aztec about 10 yrs ago.

 

Agreed--I like to calibrate my TrackIR so I actually have to look down to see the instrument panel.

 

With regard to cockpits, I think a person should either build nice, detailed one or none at all. Use one of the stock pits. Otherwise its pretty nasty and drags down the quality of what might be an otherwise excellent plane.

[Silverbolt 104]

Did Stigl saw this "innacurate" cockpit?

[column5 63]

Did Stigl saw this "innacurate" cockpit?

 

Stiggle-Wiggle

[Rodent 0]

I imagine a big problem is getting a cockpit view that both shows all the instruments you need to see without blocking the view too much is that you only have the flat monitor to look at. Moving your head generally does not move your point of view, also there is the lack of depth perception and of course the scale. Most monitors are too small to show everyting at the size you would see it in real life without narrowing your field of view down so much its like wearing blinders.

 

I do love a great cockpit but I understand wanting the non cockpit view too. The monitor is just big enough to act as a forward window, and really you would need the space beneath the monitor to show the instruments. All that said about how bad the monitor is for showing a pit I still find myself using the pit all the time. I love the look of a good pit and I find myself missing the instruments if they aren't there.

[JediMaster 451]

Well like I said, I leave the cockpit on about 50% of the total time I'm in the cockpit of a given flight. I often find I have to turn it off if I want to land or taxi! I'll also turn it off in a dogfight or when attacking ground targets. For "cruising" I like it on so I can see all the instruments and things like fuel, RWR, mirrors, etc.

I also use external views from time to time, probably totaling about 10% of a given flight.