Posts by Spit40

    My experience is mainly Cessna. No problems there. TBH though in VR i tend to use the mouse for nav setting. Panel does work OK, but because I can't see the selector I don't know easily if I'm changing Nav, CRS, Hdg etc. I do use the panel regularly for: Trim & flaps and the AP buttons.

    Presumably the panel is less reliable in other aircraft

    Oh no! Too slow! I saw the revised download was available and was looking forward to attempting a landing on the carrier - even with the odd mystery pothole. I'm back at the PC but Rodeo's link is gone again for more tweaking. Maybe you could share again... with big caveats?

    Absolutely. Much more sensitivity. I'm still not happy with the yoke overall though. Can't resolve the detent around pitch centre. I've taken out the springs, switched to elastic bands (actually my own bungee cord version) and sprayed it with every type of lube Amazon sells. What I'm often left with is something that has two centre points at best trim - one pitches just down a bit, one pitches just up a bit. If you're happy with the detent and just want better proportionate sensitivity the 12bit LB card does the job though.

    Rodeo, carriers are fully functional airports, you got that right.

    ipacs would need to define your given coordinates as such, and add some nav, tac, atc, rwy stuff.

    implementing a 3D-model is considered an obstacle only. What you are looking into, is how the user should interact with it.

    Ideally yes, but if I can safely land on roads, grass and even water (and take off again) perhaps the carrier doesn't need to be a special class of object.

    A useful test would be to try and land on the roof of a large building. I've tried that a couple of times and failed, but only (it seemed) because the roof had obstacles on it.

    2018 i'd say for a CV2, but pimax may upgrade their 4k headset this year with vive's lighthouse tracking. If they did that well and it was genuine 4k, not upsampled 2k which i think it is now then it would be very interesting. I think current pc's should be ok with the power to run it as you wouldn't need supersampling enabled (or you'd need less)

    What's FS2 like in VR?

    I wrote some stuff for Ray's Avsim review of FS2 focussing on the VR aspect as he doesn't have VR. A short version was used. Here's the full one.
    ===
    AeroFly FS2 has 3 launch modes: normal screen mode and two virtual reality (VR) modes. One is for the Oculus Rift and one for Steam VR (i.e. the Vive although plugins for other VR headsets exist). This is a first for any flight simulator (FlyInside will be mentioned later). If you already have an Oculus Rift or HTC Vive, then the decision about whether or not to buy this sim is very simple. Just buy it. It is one of the most impressive Virtual Reality experiences available and just as importantly, if you don’t think it worth continuing with then, within a period of 14 days and 2 hours playing time, Steam will give you a full refund. Just Google “how to get a refund off steam”.

    What it feels like
    If VR is something completely new to you, you may be wondering what all the fuss is about. Firstly flight simming in VR is a very different experience and one which is difficult to convey in words. Videos don’t help either. When you put the headset on, all you can see is the 3 dimensional world of the cockpit, landscape or whatever your point of view is. It comes with a very welcome sense of scale too - the sheer size of a 747 for example. With modern 64 bit design optimised for current technology, FS2 has no problem running at the 90+ frames per second needed to ensure that head movements instantly update the image you see. You no longer “think” about changing your point of view, you just behave naturally and instinctively, glancing at your feet if you suspect you’ve left a little right rudder down or grabbing a glimpse at the runway to check you are abeam the numbers. I mentioned FlyInside earlier, as this add-on for FSX (and now X-Plane) has been available for quite a while, but as it runs on top of the ageing FSX code, sadly there just isn’t enough CPU & GPU horsepower left over to achieve the same instant and fluid experience. The experience can even be quite visceral. I installed the cold and dark mod for the Cessna C172 and, out of curiosity, opened the pilot’s door at 5,000ft and looked down. A wave of genuine vertigo hit me.

    Downsides
    Are there any downsides, apart from the $600 price tag of a Rift (Vives are more) and the fact you need a fairly high powered PC? Well the current early access mode means a lot of functionality is still yet to come, but that’s been covered by this review already. Screen resolution is also something to consider. With current technology they just can’t squeeze as many pixels into the 110 degree field of view as you’d need to match the resolution you’re used to with a decent monitor. As a result some instrument readings are a little fuzzy. This isn’t an issue with simple aircraft and large instruments, such as the Cessna, but as you progress to more complex aircraft with busier panels and smaller readouts it can detract. Remember also that all you can see is the screen in front of your eyes. With your hand on the yoke/stick and a throttle quadrant adjacent you can get to most primary controls easily, but if you have say the Saitek panel attached to the yoke you have to memorise the position of any buttons you use as you can’t see your fingers pressing them. This issue extends to the fact you can’t see any notes you might have written or approach plates you’d like to refer to. The developers have so far resisted quick fixes to this such as putting a notepad overlay on the screen. Having discussed this on the forum, their preference is to develop new innovative solutions which feel more realistic. I suspect for example that the iPad currently lying on the co-pilots seat might feature in the solution. There are quite a few new problems like this which haven’t existed pre-VR and I’m personally very pleased that the developers are prioritising realism in their pursuit of the solutions. Do I still prefer VR to a 2D screen, even with all these shortcomings? Yes absolutely. It is sheer magic.

    Going Forward
    Virtual reality is certainly a leading edge technology, and I’d decided a long time ago to be an early adopter, putting my Oculus Rift pre-order in within hours of it first becoming available. The risk though with leading edge technology is that it can in hindsight be seen as bleeding edge – technology that isn’t quite mature and stable enough for mainstream use, and is replaced by new entrants who learn from the mistakes of those who stumbled in early. I am certainly looking forward to the next generation of headsets which take the current 2K screens (1K per eye) up to 4K (2K per eye). There’s even a Chinese manufacturer offering 8K, however there’s a lot more than pixels needed to make an experience that feels natural and real, so I’ll be cautious on those. It will probably be at least another year before a well designed 4K headset emerges.

    For now though, in terms of pixels, AeroFly FS2 does an amazing job with the current screens and achieved another level of sharpness and clarity after introducing built in super-sampling around October last year. Super sampling is a method of rendering to a much higher resolution than is physically available, so that when it is mapped to the lower resolution the image appears sharper. It requires more processor effort of course, which again is an area where FS2’s efficient code leaves spare capacity to do this extra work. I’ve tried FlyInside in FSX and also in the X-Plane 11 Beta, as well as games like DCS and I was disappointed by the detail compared to FS2. There is of course the question of whether to go Vive or Rift. I have the Rift and for a time the Rift was ahead after introducing a technology which used some clever tricks to render frames with almost half the CPU/GPU effort. At present I don’t think either of them have a real edge in performance though and engineers at both companies are working hard to squeeze more and more out of their equipment. It is in areas like this that other headset manufacturers may struggle to keep up. The Vive seems to have been the most dynamic in terms of innovation and has certainly taken a more open approach to their technology. Fast and accurate tracking of head movement is critical and there is a likelihood that other makers of headset equipment will be able to use Vive’s tracking system. This may give more and potentially cheaper upgrade options.

    The final area of compromise for early adopters is around haptics – the ability to touch and sense your virtual cockpit. As I explained you are blind to the physical world, limiting the usability of existing hardware, and no good options yet exist to replace that. The hand controllers made by Vive and Oculus are no use, certainly in my opinion. They are no substitute for a HOTAS or yoke and you can’t switch between. This is in fact one area where FlyInside is currently ahead, as they support a product called Leap Motion which clips onto the headset and tracks hand movement, displaying it in cockpit as disconnected floating hands that can interact with the cockpit. AeroFly FS2 have not yet added this support. My guess is that they are trying to do something more complex than FlyInside. All aircraft in AeroFly come with an avatar – a modelled person who flies the aircraft and mirrors all your movements. If you switch seats in the Cessna for example, and turn the yoke or apply some right rudder, you will see a blond lady in the pilot’s seat performing exactly those actions as you do. They currently disable the avatar when you are in the pilot’s seat, though it can be switched on by tweaking configuration files. I expect when FS2 introduces Leap Motion support you will see “your own” arms and hands from your own avatar reaching out to the panel. It may sound gimmicky but I have experienced a simple version of this in War Thunder and for me it added to the immersive experience. I said there were, as yet, “no good options” because the accessory a lot of people are waiting for is the haptic glove, such as the GloveOne due out in the next month or two. It works with Leap Motion and claims to offer not only hand tracking but a sense of touch, with the ability to differentiate textures and even give a sense of weight. To feel that something is made of plastic verses metal and to have a sense of resistance to a toggle switch would be the ideal.

    You will have to make your own mind up whether AeroFly FS2 provides the impetus to jump in to the world of virtual reality flight simulation. It will certainly get a lot better than it is right now, but it is already amazing, and for my part I have no regrets at all.

    Is there some sort of obstacle on the deck? Twice I've come in nice and slow in the Cessna but seem to catch something on the deck and keel over to the left. Still trying to manage my first landing.

    My guess is that the painted lines are not on the same z-level as the deck and acting like ridges. Also at one point I seemed to come to a halt halfway through the deck - though possibly I made contact with the wheels below deck level.

    Good fun though !

    Can't wait to try this ! I've been checking this thread every hour or so... paint-jobs are nice enough, but for me this is the start of the many exciting things to come.
    P.S. And I hope you follow this up with a super detailed version - I'd happily pay for something like that