Its string is too weak, and there is stiction issue. These cause problem for smooth operation even on simple taxi. My old Saitek Combat Rudder worked better. Now I use Baur BRD MS3, but for lower end rudder, which is enough for F-16, I would go for Saitek.
Latest posts made by sanpats
-
RE: Is the Thrustmaster T-Flight a good "default" rudder pedal?
-
RE: Update 5 High Speed Issue
Can you post you spec, so we can get a general idea which cpu got affected?
-
RE: About SmartScaling and future high-res monitors
not movement but view, yea same thing different words.
set g_fViewlimitPitchDown 90.0But not the same as vFOV. If you think it’s vFOV, you are mistaken. That setting is to limit how far you can change pitch axis of pilot head movement before its stop. Trackir and opentrack can send pitch value of 180 degree up and down. In Arma 3, if you pitch down far enough you can look directly behind you upside down. Not humanly possible irl.
FOV is an angular limit of a virtual pilot eyes without any movement.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_of_view_in_video_games -
RE: About SmartScaling and future high-res monitors
in the past it was 70 and now it’s 90 iirc thus 30+% more, ain’t that significant? on the same resolution and same size of monitor.
I didn’t notice any distortion though.That’s not vertical fov. That’s head movement angle limit for things such as trackir.
Vertical FOV can’t be set directly. It’s linked to hFOV and your monitor aspect ratio. On 16:9 aspect monitor with 60hFOV its just about 33.75 vFOV. Your triple screen with hFOV110 has even less vFOV than that (20.625).
-
RE: About SmartScaling and future high-res monitors
Sure distinguish when or where it starts is not that easy with naked eye. But another member posted that in the center it’s ok the effect is only on the edges.
From what I see I feel the same. Also seems it’s only on the x axis not on y axis. Like stretched horizontally.Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
The vertical fov never got high enough for the distortion to be really perceivable (but it’s there) on a normal 3 monitor setup. But try set really high fov on one screen 16:9 or 4:3 setup and you will see vertical distortion as well.
-
RE: About SmartScaling and future high-res monitors
Oh, I also came to notice an important point when we calculate SmartScaling pixel size estimation while describing lens distortion.
Let’s describe how did I estimate pixel size estimation for our formula. I should have this earlier…
I did this a year ago at EDforum so reference image is DCS and the plane is F-15 but this method should be applied to any 3D graphics game or sim including Falcon BMS.
I first calculated real life angular mil size from aircraft length and distance, this will show how much angular size will the plane abreast can be seen in RL.
19.43m(Length of F-15) / 5.56km(3.0nm) = 3.50mil(2π/6400 rad)
3.50mil * 3.375 = 11.8 minutes of degree (as 1 degree is π/180 rad)I calculated How much pixel size would F-15 line abreast at each distance would be seen in a certain FOV and a resolution.
X = expected pixel size in the 3D image;
if for 3.0nm / 60hFOV / 1920 Resolution then
*60(deg)60=3600(minutes)
1920:X=3600:11.8
X=6.29(px)The overall result was like this.
The pink curve shows aircraft length size in pixels.This was the result of DCS image.
In the DCS image, the result was…
1.0nm : 17.0px
2.0nm : 9.0px
3.0nm : 6.0pxAs DCS label only can define 0.1nm, I may have taken the screenshot at 1.0nm to 1.09nm, 2.0nm to 2.09nm and 3.0 to 3.09nm.
On the graph, it is showing…
1.0-1.1nm : 19.0-16.0px
2.0-2.1nm : 9.5-8.5px
3.0-3.1nm : 6.5-6.0pxIt almost matches my calculation.
I then applied Serfoss and Sanpats Factor at each distance for the pink curve.
This time with F-16 and with several hFOV-hResolution combinations.However, My pixel size estimation is based on the calculation assuming the screen is equally divided by distance from the center to the edge, so this can be used for the center of the image, but as the FOV become wider and as plane places further distant from the center of the image, their image stretches and pixel size becomes larger than the estimation.
Perspective distortion at the high-FOV image can stretch pixel size more than this estimation at the edges of the image. Which was also observed in Why485’s Unity Demo using my old formula for SmartScaling.
https://mega.nz/#!phwSVAzK!N83gjJnn-9TRnSMcbP_S1_et6N9WN1Uzl0EjLA9vvmA
To compensate this perspective distortion, fisheye might be useful.
Most fisheye lenses adopt an equidistant projection method ( Equidistance Projection ) in which the distance from the center of the screen and the angle are proportional.
Fisheye effect based on equidistant projection method should bring an equal result for any area of the image of any FOV.
Again I am no expert.
My take on this is, there is no easy way to solve it on a flat screen or a curve screen that got crammed into it more FOV than it actual physical FOV. The perspective distortion gave us the “correct” angular size, because in BMS, each pixel represent equal angular size. It is just that at certain angle, an object identical size will have different angular size. This can be easily illustrated by a simple trigonometric example. Put a triangle with 30, 60, 90 angle. Draw a line that divide that 30 degree angle by half to form another triangle inside that first one. While the angle is exactly half, the side that this new line separates will have a different size. Thus distortion.
That is why professional simulator use curve or dome screen projector with 1:1 scale FOV.
-
RE: About SmartScaling and future high-res monitors
you can call it “alien view”….no matter how u call it - its there.
Alien view would be better than fisheye, because technically fisheye means a different thing and cause confusion that this is a lens or focal point problem. It is actually caused by portraying angular/curve world on a flat plane such as screen or photo. If you read chihiro’s wiki link, it is clearly stated that it is different than fisheye, and that it is influenced by distance and angular relation, not lens and focal length.
-
RE: About SmartScaling and future high-res monitors
FYI, There is no fisheye effect in BMS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distortion_(optics)
Barrel distortion can fix stretch at the edges of a high-FOV image, which is the Fisheye effect.
http://www.decarpentier.nl/lens-distortion
RESIDENT EVIL VII is implementing barrel distortion effect, so you will see the image fisheye when increased FOV.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C4jIskGVcAQ8Nxn.jpg
These videos also will describe what the fish eye is.
What we have in BMS, or any other flight sims or FPS is Perspective Distortion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)
Like this.
Correct, that’s why I use the word “so-called” fisheye effect.
-
RE: About SmartScaling and future high-res monitors
it does fisheye on the edges not in the center.
Technically it always happen everywhere, just more noticeable at the extreme angle. It’s caused by converting angular size and project on a flat screen.
-
RE: About SmartScaling and future high-res monitors
Currently using a 40" 3840x2160 4K monitor. I can see that the models at 1nm to 3nm are roughly about the same, but the detail of the lines are much better. Was using 90 FOV (3D pit) with my old monitor. I have to adjust that setting now as the scale in 3D pit is too large in reference to screen size. If you guys want me to test different FOV on a large 4K monitor, let me know. I will find the time to do so.
Sharing experience comparison on bandit detection and dogfighting on the following cases would be nice:
FOV 64 no smart scaling (theoretically optimal)
FOV 64 smart scaling (not optimal)
FOV 128 smart scaling (optimal, but high FOV may cause the so-called fisheye effect)
FOV 128 no smart scaling (not optimal)