dali

Gospadin means Gentleman, and he truly was a Gentleman with captial G.

we are getting Mig-19, already have Mig-21 Bis, Phantom is coming - only logical conclusion - Vietnam is coming :)

Oleg Maddox is now making the airsoft guns :)

we can rase that 150$, can't we? ;)

nice find, thanks

at the beginning of the video I was not sure...but as it progressed, I was more and more convinced that this is indeed good thing! thanks for heads up!

in DCS? between 80-90 deg. I know that you can't fit world on flat screen without distortion. What would solve this would be adding a feature, which would introduce motion blur at the edges of the smaller FOV (60 deg for instance). But I think that performance impact would be too great to be feasable. Maybe in few years? :) Chaning FOV is not zoom in/out per se, as human eye is very adaptable organ and it doesn't operate simply like camera zoom. FOV of the human eye is constant, because we have stereoscopic sight with eyes that turn simultaneously in same direction. As far as I understand how view is done in DCS now is that view centrepoint is fixed where head of the pilot would be and normal view (default one) is actualy zoom in, for purpose of course, so one can read the HUD and instruments. In real life eye is capable of focusing in infinity in order to see through HUD and in the same time forcus on the display itself, and then quickly glancing in the cockpit, focusing on one instrument and quickly back into infity looking outside. Bottom line of my original post in this matter is, that because of how view is done in DCS, I have problems with perception of the speed by judging how fast the world is moving beneith the airplane. When in airplane, It is easy to judge speed by looking out :)

as if there is not enough junk in orbit...

yep

@SiThSpAwN: since guys have done some tests and confirmed that speeds are OK (of which I had no doubts, just my measuring was a bit sloppy), but there is definitely a problem with rendering...or better to say with how "view" in the cockpit works. Human eye has constant FOV, it is "changing" only by focusing on particular details, but the camera view and FOV is just zoom in/out. Eye retains the FOV, only the details are blurred (like when you look at instrument, FOV is still the same, but as focus is narrowed, there is more of the blur area left and right of each eye. I think developers should have a more look into it, as default view (and FOV) are causing the feeling of lethargic flight. Current view from the cockpit is rendering the terrain as if it seen from above, not from the forward moving object (planet). I think here lays the foundation of the problem (unless somebody from ED proves me wrong).

funny, after I read your post, I went and tried it out. I don't know if I'm imagining, but it realy seems that Normandy moves faster under my plane :)

bbrz, thanks, in my case it also seems that round 90 deg view is closest to real life, as you correctly mention, peripheral vision can't be simulated just by setting the FOV to 120 deg. Thanks for your speed test, I guess my timing was off, it was just a quick test. I was 99% sure, that they got the physical part correct (ie moving of objects in space).

I know that FOV increases the perception, but FOV is, as I see it in DCS, just a zoom in/out. So it mimics the camera FOV, not the eye. Its just a discussion from my side, I hope it is not perceived as trolling or something.

@bbrz, please do, I would like to be wrong in this case

hi, there is something strange here. I did a quick test - I was flying with 1000 km/h over runway 3700 m long. It should take me at least 13 seconds to fly from one end to the other. It took me 7-8 but the sensation of the speed was at least two times too slow. Mind you, I was flying military jets in my life and I'm aware that human eye and camera are not comparable in this regard. This is video of the aircraft I used to fly... The speed at the beginning of the ruwnay is 450-500 km/h (I forgot to ask my brother, who is in this shot about the exact speed), the runway is 3300 m long. Note how quickly the ground is moving relative to the aircraft (note also that the camera is facing backwards, making the effect more dramatic). The GOPRO camera has different viewing angle, because of which the angular speed looks a bit more dramatic, but even when everything is taken into account the perception of the moving terrain is about right, making the perception of the speed in DCS 2.5 wrong. I don't know if this is the limiation of the graphical engine, or something else. But this is the DCS problem from Flanker 1.0 days onward..... I have no idea if this is due to rendering techniques, or scaling of the objects or something third. What I know from my flying experience (low level at speeds 500 km/h plus) is that ground does move fast beneith your plane and the dramatics is of course increasing with lowering the altitude. When flying low in DCS I have the perception of flying from much higher alititude even when flying extremely low. As if the rendering engine (camera) is rendering (regardless if the actual actual proximity to the ground is less than that) some 100 m or more above the GND upwards... I would like ED to prove me wrong.... ;) jump to for low level speed over runway in thex shot is 450 km/h and the camera is facing foward. As you can see, the effect of moving ground is less emphesised, but is much more dramatic as in DCS (taking into account the speed!)

one word: KOREA

hurricane in a glass.....

wow man, talk about dedication!

wow!

you are all wrong...

this film is gloryfying british nationalism and is utterly chauvinistic. Nolan had all the chances of making realy good film, but he rather made a visualy pleasing but crappy fake account of historical events...

hi, sorry if I've missed the official info. But, was it? thx

me dreams