MA_Goblin Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 (edited) Hi mates, Sorry to lift the matter of refraction again but this german guy has made a fantastic video to demonstrate this effect and it's simply a must see video. For some reason I cannot post the video so if some one could please do. Edited August 27, 2014 by hakjar [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] _____________Semper paratus, In hoc signo vinces________________ PC: Intel i7-8700K (4.9 GHz), Aorus Ultra Gaming Z370 MB, Gigabyte RTX 3080, 32 GB DDR3 (3,2 GHz), Samsung EVO 860 M.2 500 GB SSD + Samsung 960 M.2 250 GB SSD Gaming: Virpil T-50 CM2, TM WH Throttle, Crosswind pedals, HP Reverb
Narushima Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Nice. Pretty much undinable proof that the bar shouldn't be there. FW 190 Dora performance charts: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=128354
Sceptre Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 thank you for sharing, this is definitely a must see RTX 2070 8GB | 32GB DDR4 2666 RAM | AMD Ryzen 5 3600 4.2Ghz | Asrock X570 | CH Fighterstick/Pro Throttle | TM MFDs | TrackIR 5
MFG62 Joker Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 finaly there is proof: Oleg: you is wrong! :book: :doh: :megalol: :pilotfly:
VIMANAMAN Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Great video 1/JG27_Nemesis! Cheers for posting Hakjar! Nice find... says it all.
Random Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 We can't allow the legendary bar debate to end! This is clearly an edited video. It's propaganda from those baby eating no-bar-ists:lol: Seriously though does anyone have any idea if it would be possible to impkement defraction into DCS?
Fox One Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Awesome video!!!!!! WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!! My DCS videos
MFG62 Joker Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 you would need a special shader for that, will most probably lead to pfs performance issues. Maybe an adjustment of Cockpit frame and line of sight would do. Not the same effect, but maybe a similar result.
Fox One Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 My fear is that this problem can't be resolved properly without implementing refraction. Let’s say they simply make the cockpit bar 2-3 times narrower. That’s great, now the lowest part of sight’s reflector plate won’t be obscured anymore. The problem is that now the plane’s nose starts to be visible a lot more than it should. IMO that’s precisely why even when raising a bit the cockpit view for landing until the nose is visible, the visibility forward-downward is so poor, complicating landing approach. Because without refraction the plane’s nose appears in the windshield higher than it should. Because of refraction, probably in reality MG 131 guns cowling “bumps” were barely visible from the cockpit, if at all. My DCS videos
JG4_Sputnik Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 (edited) FW190 Cockpit Bar once and for all solved! Very good video from I/JG27_ Nemesis which explains the cockpit bar once and for all. If someone has contact to the devs pleas show them this video! Edited August 27, 2014 by JG4_Sputnik 1
MA_Goblin Posted August 27, 2014 Author Posted August 27, 2014 It will just be moved, I posted the same and it disappeared to another forum. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] _____________Semper paratus, In hoc signo vinces________________ PC: Intel i7-8700K (4.9 GHz), Aorus Ultra Gaming Z370 MB, Gigabyte RTX 3080, 32 GB DDR3 (3,2 GHz), Samsung EVO 860 M.2 500 GB SSD + Samsung 960 M.2 250 GB SSD Gaming: Virpil T-50 CM2, TM WH Throttle, Crosswind pedals, HP Reverb
rrohde Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 (edited) Scientific experiment for the win. :) I have to say that until this video explained the situation, I was not really aware of what the fuzz was all about, neither did I care; but this explanation changed my mind. Edited August 27, 2014 by rrohde PC: AMD Ryzen 9 5950X | MSI Suprim GeForce 3090 TI | ASUS Prime X570-P | 128GB DDR4 3600 RAM | 2TB Samsung 870 EVO SSD | Win10 Pro 64bit Gear: HP Reverb G2 | JetPad FSE | VKB Gunfighter Pro Mk.III w/ MCG Ultimate VKBcontrollers.com
wasserfall Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Great vid, now it is clear as glass to me:) Intel Core i5-9600K, Gigabyte Z390 AORUS PRO, 16GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro, Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2080 WINDFORCE 8G
VIMANAMAN Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 (edited) Yeah I was the same - knew roughly what people were concerned about, but couldn't see it as a big deal, for me anyway. This is a really interesting demonstration of a surprisingly strong optical characteristic. It seems to me the enemy disappear behind the engine cowl rather than the bar anyway for long range shots whilst pulling. EDIT : I take back my last sentence - just looked at a track - yeah the bar is in the way of a critical part of the guns cone, which I'm guessing the original designers, designed out being fully aware of the refractive properties of the armoured windscreen. I didn't follow the original 'Bar' thread, but I know it was a 'runner' :) still can't quite understand why this needs to be 'hidden away'? Edited August 27, 2014 by VIMANAMAN
ED Team NineLine Posted August 27, 2014 ED Team Posted August 27, 2014 It will just be moved, I posted the same and it disappeared to another forum. Because the devs know of the issue, they know why its an issue and its been reported. Feel free to discuss here, but no more cockpit bar threads are needed. Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**
Godzila Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 If I know correctly 3d model can be made visible only from one side and transparent from other. So there can be another smaller 3d model of problematic areas seen from inside of the cockpit and regular 3d model from outside. I made once a 3d model for a game and this phenomenon was a bug for me. In this case it could be a feature :lol: Don't know if this is possible in DCS, or even if I am correct, because that was 10 years ago and that was my first and last try at modeling.
ED Team NineLine Posted August 27, 2014 ED Team Posted August 27, 2014 The only way to properly model this would be refraction. If you just cut the size of the bar, the fuselage will be in the way... Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**
VIMANAMAN Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 This is not a totally serious suggestion because I know it would have significant performance issues... But just thinking out load here a moment... The view through the front plate could... (if system resources, money and time were no obstacle, which of course they are...) ...but could be made a separate 'render' of DCSW - as the TGP display in the A10 is at the moment - like I said just thinking out loud :music_whistling: Difficult one sure enough!
Flagrum Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 This is not a totally serious suggestion because I know it would have significant performance issues... But just thinking out load here a moment... The view through the front plate could... (if system resources, money and time were no obstacle, which of course they are...) ...but could be made a separate 'render' of DCSW - as the TGP display in the A10 is at the moment - like I said just thinking out loud :music_whistling: Difficult one sure enough! Actually ... quite an interesting idea. Just shifting the image a bit. Hrm, but true refraction would depend on the view angle, right?
159th_Falcon Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Actually ... quite an interesting idea. Just shifting the image a bit. Hrm, but true refraction would depend on the view angle, right? Correct, could use tables whit pre calculated values though. increments of 0.5 degrees might do? In the end you need the result, there's no need to calculate it on the fly. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] The keeper of all mathematical knowledge and the oracle of flight modeling.:)
VIMANAMAN Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Yeah it would definitely be more much more complex than the TGP - as the view angle would absolutely still have to be controlled by the the players head position, which moves the FOV, massively more / quicker than the TGP. I haven't done the math :) and I don't think I could...:megalol: but it's existing know-how that just might be adaptable...? But if the TGP coding is nice then it could be scaled up and played with perhaps.... ?
Flagrum Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 (edited) Correct, could use tables whit pre calculated values though. increments of 0.5 degrees might do? In the end you need the result, there's no need to calculate it on the fly. Hrm, I am not so sure. A resolution 0.5 degrees would make an enemy aircraft probably skip up and down quite a bit if you move your head while aiming through the gun sight ... But, yeah, what do we know. Maybe something like this is really "cheap" as performance is concerned and the resolution could be made so fine that it really would not matter too much anymore. edit: skipping? err ... a more general question: if the amount of "view shifting" is depending on the view angle, why is that not a problem in the real aircraft when using the gun sight? The target would move optically, but the guns sight reticle would not as it is not refracted and instead projected to infinity? edit2: Perhaps because the FoV when looking through the gunsight glass is so narrow that the change of view angle would be in fact negligible? Edited August 27, 2014 by Flagrum
Dr_Arrow Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Yeah it would definitely be more much more complex than the TGP - as the view angle would absolutely still have to be controlled by the the players head position, which moves the FOV, massively more / quicker than the TGP. I haven't done the math :) and I don't think I could...:megalol: but it's existing know-how that just might be adaptable...? But if the TGP coding is nice then it could be scaled up and played with perhaps.... ? Just my thoughts -, TGP is running at lower resolution than the main render and by default doesn't compute every frame (unless you select it in options). So to render the front view with refraction, you would probably have to render the whole DCS second time (with another two renders for mirrors and TGP running separately). It is just my speculation, but it would be very hardware intense as many ppl have problems running DCS only with the main render (without mirrors/TGP).
VIMANAMAN Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Just my thoughts -, TGP is running at lower resolution than the main render and by default doesn't compute every frame (unless you select it in options). So to render the front view with refraction, you would probably have to render the whole DCS second time (with another two renders for mirrors and TGP running separately). It is just my speculation, but it would be very hardware intense as many ppl have problems running DCS only with the main render (without mirrors/TGP). Yeah realistically this is what I'm thinking... but you know, I was just thinking out load, just throwing it out there so to speak. I'd forgotten about the mirrors as well as the TGP! But yeah - You see a lot of people flying in vids with their mirrors off...
Recommended Posts