MacThai_75

This report (which admittedly has the familiar confused facts that the media in known for in any of their reports) foretells of HMD's that will make you "feel" non-existent things like controls such as VR joysticks, pedals, throttles, switches and I assume 6DoF motion as well ... and you crash and/or get hit by enemy fire, I assume you'll feel that too ... all without the need for a motion rig nor an expensive haptic suit. Sort of an "If you see it, you will feel it" experience. In the meantime, I'm waiting on delivery of my motion rig and following the advances in SimTools, Xsim and etc. ... even if it all ends up in a trash bin before the kanye West administration. ;)

I don't typically have a significant issue, but my wife does ... especially when doing a banking turn or driving down the PCH in PJ Cars, which is what also affects me a bit. I have a motion rig coming and although I don't think it will be a panacea, I'm hoping it might help the brain to coordinate the movement with what the eyes see, and help somewhat. I've asked if there's any benifit like that with a motion rig, but didn't get any feedback from current users of motion rigs, neither here in the motion platform thread nor on other motion rig forums, so I suspect it won't be much help (if any at all) as the main issue seems to be frame rate and each persons susceptibility to "VR sickness". But if I do find it provides any relief at specific things, I'll post what I find.

I'm never going back to a monitor. That said ... if you can try before you buy, using DCS (and/or whatever other sims you use) and for an extended time ... I recommend doing that. I've seen people on these forums offer prospective VR'ers in their area the opportunity to try out their set up, so asking never hurts. ;) Depending on your eyesight and/or other factors, like maybe having something on your face that might be uncomfortable because you are a bit claustrophobic, live where it's hot and humid, or other things like that, which may make the experience uncomfortable and consequently just not very compatible for you, or you just don't feel the current resolution/screen door, motion sickness, etc. is worth it. I have no idea what % of people might fall into that category, but I suspect it is fairly small. It does have a given $ overhead, but if you find you don't have the above issues, it's totally worth the price of admission ... and then some! :) Also consider that with VR you save a lot of money and time Vrs a multi screen scale pit build, and can have an infinite number of different 'VR scale cockpits', that although are certainly not a scale build, IMHO are a good trade off with their own very significant set of advantages over a built scale cockpit. Like ... you can store a VR HMD (and consequently, a never ending fleet of scale VR aircraft/race cars) in a drawer. ;)

Glad to see you here Macka! :) Some of you might be interested to know that Macka was involved in the testing and development for converting Simtools for use with the simXperience scn 5 actuators, and I'm sure will be a large help to folks that want to get up and running with SimTools, having offered that help to us on the VR Forum. It's cool when you don't have to go it alone! :)

A hood and no outside references sounds like Gitmo! :smilewink: I'm thinking the G-Seat mounted on the 2DoF platform with the platform using the roll/pitch channels, and the G-Seat using the heave, +/-acceleration/G-force, Yaw and etc channels. It should be fairly easy to adapt a G-Seat to a 2DoF platform ... 'IF' SimTools and/or Xsim motion is capable of being ported and running like that. It would 'seem' doable, but :dunno: Although the G-Seat might be all that's needed to augment "VR's motion trickery" for flight, I wonder if for racing the larger movement of a motion platform might be needed. My motion rig will be like my stationary rig, and be dual purpose for both racing and flight, with both fixed and rotary wing A/C, making the G-seat's heave, yaw and etc. a very desirable addition to VR trickery.

Yeah, I really wish the F5 was on sale too. When I was in the USAF the T38 Talon version was called "The Sports Car of the Air Force" sort of like the OH-6 Cayuse being called the sports car of helis. I guess ED knew it's just too cool to put on sale yet, and it's temptation will whittle down any resistance. They should'a called it the Borg! :thumbup: Anyway, I just completed the order I listed above and will totally blame it on you guys when my better half questions the hit on the plastic. :smartass:

I just realized I made it sound like I have a spherical 4K projection system coming. That's not right, I have the DKP motion rig coming, and meant to say I would prefer my CV1 to a 4K projection rig, to use with the DKP motion rig I have coming in a couple of weeks. No matter how you increase the resolution or make a 2D screen completely encircle you, IMHO it just isn't close to 3D VR ... even with the warts and all. But yeah ... I'm overthinking the "what if" scenarios with respect future VR and what may or may not happen with the modules to keep pace. I've got until the 26th to take advantage of the sale, so no hurries ... other than missing out on the satisfaction of going to bed at night knowing that I have them out there in my virtual hanger! :smilewink: Yup ... thanks to things like DCS, VR and etc. I'm living my second childhood quite nicely, as I'm sure you will too! :thumbup:

Also, if concerned about the issues that may or may not be part and parcel of a motion rig, take a look at Frusheen's implementation of the G-Seat (linked under his sig). I have no idea of what it might entail, or if it's even possible, but a simple 2DoF with a G-Seat mounted on top of it might be a good marriage by sending certain channels to each to get the best of both worlds. The G-Seat IMHO has a lot of things going for it, and with VR's ability to trick you into feeling motion, it may be a DIY panacea for any motion rig VR ills. Somebody needs to offer a commercial version of the G-Seat! :)

Good questions, and ones I've asked about in this thread myself. I think that there would definitely be some difference between a 2 DoF and up to 6DoF motion cockpit. But from reading different reports of people using motion rigs with VR, both with 'on rig' and 'off rig' mounted sensors, it all appears to work for them ~equally well. So that's why I said until we have a good theory of operation on the HMD, it's a mystery (to me anyway) how that can be, and requires some speculation to answer, which may or may not be totally correct. I suspect that the reason you "feel" some of the movement/forces that a particular XDoF rig might produce, is partly as much a function of VR tricking your brain as actual rig movement. Like when just sitting/standing (not in/on a motion rig) and VR scene has you stepping off a cliff to hang glide, or in a roller-coaster, pitching boat and etc. or when in a diving turn on a stationary rig, you feel the non-existent movement. Your question of pitch once at stable alt and speed, should be similar to a vehicle at constant speed going up or down an incline, and I believe what you'll experience will be a mix of VR trickery as it is what rigs with various DoF motion are actually producing, and the rig's actual position obviously being whatever the program is telling it to be at the time, with both the sensor/camera and HMD sensors apparently working in concert enough to allow for either on or off rig mounting, for some unexplained but so far 'guessed at' (including myself) reason(s). :dunno: The problem for me with all this is, without an actual theory of operation for the HMD, it requires as much "I believe" as a revival meeting. :smilewink:

Thanks Rat, I appreciate the input. :) I'm really just trying to hedge my bet that if I get all the additional modules, I'll be proficient enough to use them reasonably well before they become VR obsolete as VR gets better, or hope that they get a work-over to meet the coming VR improvements ... which ( IMHO and as inferred in my post) will be fairly soon. I'm probably waffling too much, and at the savings ... should just get them. It's not like I'm spending my kids collage fund. I don't have kids, am retired, and so other than going through the motions ... not inclined to have any. :smilewink: I was using a 90" LED LCD TV as my monitor before I got my CV1, and even if I had 4K spherical projection system with the motion rig I have coming in a couple of weeks, I don't think I'd swap my CV1 experience for it. How well the CV1 and DKP motion rig will play together remains to be seen, and is the topic of another thread I stated here, but Yup! ... it's certainly a 'great' time to be simming! :)

See:https://www.google.com/search?q=CV1+tracking+wobbles&oq=CV1+tracking+wobbles&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61.5107j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 An initial quick review seems to indicate that most, if not all of these are with stationary rigs. Unfortunately it's another aspect that adds confusion as to exactly what does happen with motion rigs that's different than with stationary rigs and to what degree for each ... either with or without rig mounted sensors. A thorough theory of operation for the Cv1 from Oculus, and then some everyday controlled experimentation would probably yield some better and more in depth understanding of what should be in what bucket of suspected issues, and provide a proper path to things that might possibly be improved upon. But in the meantime, I'm actually pretty happy with what I see in the video, and I'm satisfied with the overall experience reports from people currently using VR with motion rigs. Although that might change dramatically once my motion rig gets here. :)

That was one of my questions too. After doing a lot of reading about VR motion rigs, it seems that both methods of mounting the sensor have been successful, requiring maybe slightly more recentering of the view on a motion rig than is due to the normal tracking errors on a stationary VR rig. But there is some confusion amoungst the reports, and IMHO that's due to various different things that can affect tracking/view, incorrectly being assigned as cause and effect. Like for example the sensor for the CV1 actually changing it's pointing when rig mounted because of the rigs movement bouncing it about and causing it to move and point in a slightly different direction than it was at start-up. Some people have gone to using a dual axis camera gimbal (like those used for a camera drone) to mount their sensor in order to eliminate that, and some have tried ways to immobilize the sensor with things like duct tape. Although the reports of tracking errors caused by that are certainly valid, IMHO that type of tracking error is sort of self induced, and should be taken out of the equation. Also, the question I asked Oculus (which I've posted in this thread along with the answer) about some things that might affect tracking/view, and the answer they gave ... that can also add to errors should be removed from the mounting method question, because what they said would also affect a stationary rig as well, but it's something that can also add to the uncertainty of 'which is the proper/best way to mount the sensor on a VR movement rig' if not set aside from that question. In some cases there has been postulation that VR on a moving rig can't be done without "movement correction software" or just turning off the HMD sensors altogether. And for optimum performance that may very well be correct. But on rigs that have the sensor mounted either on or off the rig, there have been reports of success, albeit that do require a recentering of the view ... but only slightly more than on a normal non-moving cockpit. This thread has examples of both ways of sensor mounting, and both seem to work about equally well as reported from guys with hands on, both here and on other forums that I've visited to get an answer. I posted my theory as to why I think an off rig mounting might actually be best, but it's admittedly speculation on my part as to how Oculus is using the HMD's on board sensors and IMU to augment the tracking of the sensor to HMD IR LEDs. I'll mount my camera both on and off the rig, and do as Macka has done ... just map a recenter button. If I see a difference I'll post what I find. If you do find other answers to the question please also post it here.

Well, that certainly helps make the decision easier! :) I currently have the: Black Shark F-86F Sabre UH-1H Huey A-10C 16-2 Red Flag Campaign A-10C Warthog SA342 Gazelle NEVADA Test and Training Range Map And Flaming Cliffs 3 And am looking at saving $104 during the 40% off sale, with these sitting in my shopping cart: Combined Arms Fw 190 D-9 Dora P-51D Mustang Mi-8MTV2 Magnificent Eight M-2000C And the MiG-15bis So, if I don't see any negatives, I'll go ahead and complete the order before the 9-26 deadline. Thanks for the positive replies guys, I sincerely appreciate it! :thumbup:

Not sure if that's the right way to ask this, but since there is such a good sale on right now, I'm wondering if I should take advantage and buy more of them. I'm new to DCS and have been climbing the learning curve at a reasonable pace, helped to some degree by having an older working service/repair/calibration/installing background in avionics from the USAF, and then working for Brackett Field Avionics during the 70's. My concern is that if I take advantage of the sale and load up on A/C modules, by the time I am reasonably proficient with them, will they still be at a level of ... say a 4K Rift or etc? I'm thinking they will because the A/C themselves, especially the cockpits look better than the scenery/terrain, but I'm not sure if expecting updates to the A/C themselves will keep pace with the fast track I expect to see with HMDs' image quality over the near future. Once again ... I'm really not sure if my question is or isn't misdirected, but am interested in some feedback from you guys that are more "graphics savvy"(???) than I am.

@Frunsheen That's one reason I started this thread ... to find out what people that are actually using them are experiencing. So far it appears that the view movement concern is largely comprised of theories that postulate it being much worse than it really is, or the results of rig mounted sensors changing the view being caused by the rig's movements changing the sensor's actual pointing, by bouncing it about, and etc. But overall ... from the reports of the actual hands on experiences that I've read, it's at most a minor issue, both with the sensor either mounted on the moving rig, or off the rig. But it's a main reason I ordered the 2DoF Dynamic Kit Pro at the entry level price. My intentions are to give the 2DoF a chance for a dual purpose rig and if all goes well, and I decide I want more axis ... and assuming the control package for both are not mutually exclusive ..I'll add a G-Seat to it (basically set a G-Seat on a 2DoF motion platform). Not sure if that will/can work, but if it can, it'll keep the cost for a sort of pseudo-6Dof at a reasonable price. @DBO, evidently it's something called Bespoke Projects. Not sure what it is beyond the viddy and the single image that I see on their web site. It appears to be the A3 base with a special adapter that allows you to lay on it to sim skydiving or one of those small gas turbine powered human flight suits. :dunno: Good question for Rage to ask about .... :detective:

Yeah, no shame in doing it right at all! :) Although I think I'll be happy with the DKP I ordered, it I'm impressed with the paper and YouTube info on the A3 .. especially this one that also shows it in sky diving mode ... even if ya have to buy your own fan! :D Looking forward to what both Rage and mrsparks think about it after some hands on.

I see mrsparks is in San Francisco, and is expecting "delivery at the end of Sept." Hmmmm, I'm up in the central Sierras ... I wonder if I can make a football move and come down off the mountain to attempt an end-of-month interception. :smilewink: How exactly 'does' one find out what deliveries are coming in from the UK at any given time? :music_whistling:

This 'should' answer about any questions you might have ... http://www.atomicmotionsystems.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Atomic-A3-technical-specification.pdf Also take a look at both http://www.nextstepsolutions.co.uk/atomicmotionsystems.com/?page_id=10244 and http://www.atomicmotionsystems.com/?page_id=10798 If I had the $ for one, and the short drive you have, I'd definitely go to to their showroom for a peek ... and have a plan to to buy my better half some flowers. :smilewink: This looks to be the perfect rig for most homes.

You and me both DBO! The Atomic A3 looks to be an awesome rig, with amazing spec's and some very clever engineering that has resulted in outstanding features for operation, storage and reconfigurability ... as well as looks to match! :thumbup: Looking forward to mrsparks' review once he has time to wring it out. :book:

PM reply sent. :)

@misoswan Thank you for the informative link, it looks like 'great' info, and I've bookmarked it to have as a reference. As the OP of this thread I personally and most certainly have no problem with SimTools being discussed here, but I do totally agree that more people with an interest in using a motion rig would be better served with a thread dedicated to the discussion of SimTools, in the Home Cockpits forum. To that end I have created a thread for the discussion of SimTools there and added some links to hopefully get it started off on the right foot. It's located here https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2899305#post2899305 It's also fortunate that we have a resident SimTools guru in Macka, that has offered to provide us with help should we need it. Ya gotta love the 'net!! :)

Although I have seen some threads that have mentioned the use of SimTools (for cockpit motion control rigs) I didn't see a specific thread for the discussion of SimTools, so I've taken the liberty and started one to centralize discussion of it. Please feel free to add anything you might feel is of interest WRT SimTools. Here are some links to SimTools to help get the topic started. General SimTools Info https://www.xsimulator.net/category/simtools/ SimTools download page and list of sims/games plugins https://www.xsimulator.net/simtools-motion-simulator-software/ SimTools Documentation https://www.xsimulator.net/simtools-complete-documentation/ The next two are for DIY guys that want to build a rig yourself https://www.xsimulator.net/connect-simtools-sketchup/ A tutorial discussion of how to build a motion rig and the parts list and diagrams needed to do it https://www.xsimulator.net/community/threads/smc3-arduino-3dof-motor-driver-and-windows-utilities.4957/

My DKP should be in the States in ~10 to 14 days and then sit in customs for some unknown time, but as soon as it gets here I'll start keeping notes and take pictures of the assembly. I'm not 100% exactly sure about the initial tests, but from what read about SimTools ... it appears that I can do the initial functional tests via a mouse, then I can use the included plugin for 'Live For Speed' by downloading the demo version of Live For Speed, and I assume make the different adjustments for the motion response I want. (???) I'll DL and print the SimTools docs, and study them over the next couple of weeks. It all looks pretty straight forward in a skim read on-line. But understand in no uncertain terms ... I'm keeping your info in case I need to exercise your very gracious offer for set-up help. ;)

I got an answer from Oculus (yeah .. on a Sunday!) that kind'a opens up a new door that might be an issue for some. Not so much with the magnetometer or EMF as I speculated, but certainly much easier to deal with by just covering any IR reflective surfaces with something non-reflective to IR. Here's what they said .. Thanks for reaching out to us about this issue. Metal and reflective surfaces can interfere with the tracking. The Rift has IR tracking dots all over the headset too that are unseen to human eyes so it may be reflecting that signal from the back of the headrest or something and causing issues. Using a different material may help resolve the issue. Currently it is not possible to disable hardware components within the Rift individually, but you may find useful info on the developer forums. I hope you have a nice day, take care! Thanks, George Oculus Support So a better answer than I expected and if anyone had tracking issues that cause you to need to recenter, make sure you don't have IR reflective surfaces in the proximity of the HMD that might reflect the IR LEDs as he said, or actually from any part of the HMD as you turn your head. It all might be just that simple, and would help explain the difference between my experience with no issues at my wooden desk, while having some in my metal framed high seatback cockpit. Anyway ... easy to eliminate.

I believe I understand what you are saying. First ... a system with the sensor mounted on a motion cockpit. WRT: How the sensor to HMD sees movement, it starts with the platform and it moving in sync. So far no problems ... As the HMD moves so does the sensor, and to 'that part' of the equation it's just the same as being mounted on a fixed cockpit. But ... the HMD itself senses movement via 3 different sources. One is linear acceleration (displacement per time interval) from the accelerometer. One is rotational acceleration in degrees per time interval via the gyro. And the last is compass heading via the magnetometer. All signals are fed to the IMU (inertial measurement unit) and it develops it's own reference point in 3D space that should roughly agree with the sensor to HMD data. That point is used to augment the sensor to HMD tracking by creating an error (adjustment) signal for the CV1's tracking. So what you theorize happens, IMHO will happen because the two sets of sensors will not agree with what's happening, and the CV1 will look at the HMD IMU signal as a legitimate tracking error signal and change the view to compensate. But I don't think you will need necessarily to block the sensor to HMD path for it to happen, because the confusion between what the sensor to HMD sees as a pseudo-stationary system (even though it's moving it's doing it sync) and the moving HMD sensors sees, will send a confused message causing a tracking error that ultimately results in you needing to reset the view .... I think. ;) Second scenario ... If you place the sensor off the moving platform, it sees the HMD in the cockpit. As you move the platform via a joystick input, the 'sensor to HMD' will see that movement the same as if you had moved your head about in a fixed pit. In other words, it will move your view to the right side if you roll right, down it you pitch down, and etc. ... as opposed to holding a center view. BUT ... (if I understand you correctly) ... because the IMU is sending it's own inertial data that counters the data that is generated via the sensor to HMD, the Oculus sees that as a normal and proper error signal, and uses it to compensate and holds the view center cockpit unless you move your head about, which it tracks properly, and returns to the normal view when at rest ... only needing recentering at times that it burps. If this is correct I would assume that the error signal has limits that are within the design expectations for the CV1, and if the error signal is beyond the expected limits it might cause a signal too large to be accurately compensated for, and you ultimately end up with an intermittent/inconsistent view drift that needs to be corrected by your mapped button. It might also explain why some guys don't have a problem, and some do ... as the tolerance for exceeding anticipated and designed limits of the error signal might differ slightly from one individual CV1 to another. If that's what you and the others that don't mount the sensor on the moving rig experience, I think I'll buy that too. :) There are some folks that feel they have fixed the sinking view with a 2 axis gimbal to mount the sensor to a moving rig. I'm suspect that what they are fixing is not a CV1 sensor/HMD internal sensors thing, but actually a physical issue of the rig movement causing the sensor to move it's pointing, as the rig jostles it about. But because they post to the "moving view issue" that particular fix it gets confused with the original issue that just requires a periodic recenter due the nature of the beast. But the mixed reports of success both "on rig and Off Rig" would seem to indicate that 'overall' CV1 and motion works. When I get my rig I'll try both mounting methods, but after your post I'm inclined to think that off rig mounting will result in the better tracking. It makes more sense to me now. Until (of course) a new theory on gets posted on why 'only' a motion cancellation plugin will cure it, and shoots it all out of the water. I'm hoping Oculus will shed some light on exactly what's going on, but I sort of expect a "yeah, don't do that " answer from them. Because all I'm finding (and offering myself) is pure speculation based on enough knowledge to be dangerous. ;) P.S. Yeah ... "burps" is the official scientific term for it.. ;)