TrackIR Behavior with 1.5.4 Release

[Dun_Aenghus]

I tried a smooth level of 10, 20 and 35 but no difference. It is happening in certain aircraft only. L-39 is completely free from the problem while A-10C, F-15C and SU-27 are causing problems.

 

UPDATE: I finally found out the slider on my throttle was interfering with the TrackIR zoom. Edited that and now all's working well again.

Edited July 12, 2016 by Dun_Aenghus

[GurbY]

I made both versions JSGME compatible, and tried them both ofcourse. However, apart from the missing downwards view from the "new" setup, I really can't detect any difference between both, or it must be a slightly slower/less sensitive setup. (I must say, I really, really hate the "only-HUD-view" and do want to keep an eye on the instruments while my TrackIR is centered, but that's personal).

Anyone who can tell me the (big) difference between both old and new?

[FastForward]

I made both versions JSGME compatible...

 

Could you share them please ? I think many people would be interested :thumbup:

[escaner]

Have you tried putting in the /Saved Games Folder? Therefore be untouched by updater and override default settings.

 

ie:

Take:

return {
axisCommands = {
-- TrackIR axes
{combos = {{key = 'TRACKIR_PITCH'}},    action = iCommandViewVerticalAbs    , name = _('Absolute Camera Vertical View')},
{combos = {{key = 'TRACKIR_YAW'}},      action = iCommandViewHorizontalAbs        , name = _('Absolute Camera Horizontal View')},
{combos = {{key = 'TRACKIR_ROLL'}},     action = iCommandViewRollAbs        , name = _('Absolute Roll Shift Camera View')},

{combos = {{key = 'TRACKIR_X'}},         action = iCommandViewHorTransAbs        , name = _('Absolute Horizontal Shift Camera View')},
{combos = {{key = 'TRACKIR_Y'}},         action = iCommandViewVertTransAbs        , name = _('Absolute Vertical Shift Camera View')},
{combos = {{key = 'TRACKIR_Z'}},         action = iCommandViewLongitudeTransAbs        , name = _('Absolute Longitude Shift Camera View')},
{combos = nil,     action = iCommandViewZoomAbs            , name = _('Zoom View')},
},
}

Paste into Notepad++,

 

Save as:

C:/Users/<UserName>/Saved Games/<DCS.Install>/Config/Input/default/trackir/default.lua

 

Then the Updater Wont Change it, and You can use the old controller until whenever time it's removed from the code.

 

This is not working for me. There was not even a "default" folder in my local configuration, and doing it for every aircraft is nonsense, therefore I set it up with JSGME.

[Majesco]

I sometimes fly Su-25 Frogfoot and now really difficult to zoom in & lock ground vehicles using TrackIR because of small targets view after updated to 1.5.4

[SkateZilla]

This is not working for me. There was not even a "default" folder in my local configuration, and doing it for every aircraft is nonsense, therefore I set it up with JSGME.

 

yeah it didnt work for me when I tried, will maybe work if you put in the aircraft controller folder, not sure.

/Saved games/<dcs install>/Config/Input/<aircraft>/ with the KB joystick folders, create a trackir folder, place in there.

 

I thought i updated my post with a line stating /saved games/ folder didnt work, my fault.

Edited July 13, 2016 by SkateZilla

[SharpeXB]

Doing a quick bit of research shows that the current 1.5.4 implementation is simply incorrect in terms of human factors as far as I can tell. Every worthwhile diagram I could find of normal field of view/line of sight (see 1, 2, 3, 4) indicates that the normal seated line of sight is 15 degrees below horizontal. This agrees with the way the eye works as seen in this diagram depicting the line of sight angled below horizontal. Furthermore, the field of view is wider below (70-80 degrees) horizontal than it is above (50-55 degrees). The previous implementation of centering the view 27 degrees below horizontal seems to be a more valid approximation of the natural line of sight plus some fudging to account for the wider natural field of view below horizontal.

 

Centering the line of sight at horizontal as in 1.5.4 does not seem to reflect the way line of sight actually works. It certainly does not match my experiences in light aircraft being able to both easily see outside and scan the instruments, and I doubt that it matches the A-10 either. Note that in this diagram, the 20 degree field of view below horizontal is specifically emphasized to show the view over the nose. Assuming the 15 degree natural line of sight, it is obvious that the high seating position in the A-10 is optimized to maximize view of the ground, not to have the pilot stare straight out at the top edge of the HUD.

:thumbup:

[Barao]

I sometimes fly Su-25 Frogfoot and now really difficult to zoom in & lock ground vehicles using TrackIR because of small targets view after updated to 1.5.4

 

 

Yes, I noticed this small targets view too :(

[vicx]

There a lot of technical reasons for requiring a completely neutral non-arbitrary orientation zeroing command that is more for utility use (interfacing with external software and displays and sensors) than it is for humans looking to zero their TrackIR. VR users and some of the more exotic cockpit developers need this kind of command in order to do their thing.

 

BUT

 

there should also be a command to reset the view to an "opinionated" orientation that is unique to each airframe but also able be customised by the user. I thought saving Snapviews had this covered.

 

So with this latest change we NOW have both of those uses covered by commands that can be used by anyone. Wheres the beef?

Edited July 13, 2016 by vicx

[Gliptal]

Snapviews don't seem to work for everyone.

[MagnumHB]

There a lot of technical reasons for requiring a completely neutral non-arbitrary orientation zeroing command that is more for utility use (interfacing with external software and displays and sensors) than it is for humans looking to zero their TrackIR. VR users and some of the more exotic cockpit developers need this kind of command in order to do their thing.

 

BUT

 

there should also be a command to reset the view to an "opinionated" orientation that is unique to each airframe but also able be customised by the user. I thought saving Snapviews had this covered.

 

So with this latest change we NOW have both of those uses covered by commands that can be used by anyone. Wheres the beef?

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I completely understand that there are likely very good technical reasons for a centered VR neutral point. The issue is that the centered VR neutral point should go away as soon as the "use VR" option is deselected, as it does not apply to TrackIR, and in fact makes it wrong. Given that this seems to be an unintended side effect of implementing a new feature, this issue should be classified as a bug. The correct solution to resolving a bug is to have the developers fix it, not to force users to edit config files or alter snapviews for something that worked just fine previously.

[Gliptal]

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I completely understand that there are likely very good technical reasons for a centered VR neutral point. The issue is that the centered VR neutral point should go away as soon as the "use VR" option is deselected, as it does not apply to TrackIR, and in fact makes it wrong. Given that this seems to be an unintended side effect of implementing a new feature, this issue should be classified as a bug. The correct solution to resolving a bug is to have the developers fix it, not to force users to edit config files or alter snapviews for something that worked just fine previously.

Unfortunately ED's stance until now has been that this new POV is the correct one, and the old one the wrong one.

[MagnumHB]

Unfortunately ED's stance until now has been that this new POV is the correct one, and the old one the wrong one.

Hence, the beef, as vicx put it. I would love to know if they honestly believe that, or if they just don't want to worry about splitting up the functionality for various reasons.

 

To follow up on what Barao said before, even more evidence that the new way is wrong comes from aircraft attitude. With the A-10 in landing attitude, and a natural line of sight of 15 degrees down, the view will be roughly horizontally down the runway, which is correct. With a completely horizontal zeroed line of sight, the view is actually looking up away from the runway, which is just wrong. The A-10 also cruises in a slightly nose up attitude, and again instead of looking where the plane is actually going, the view would be unnaturally centered above the flight path.

[Snoopy]

Unfortunately ED's stance until now has been that this new POV is the correct one, and the old one the wrong one.

 

Speaking strictly for the A-10C, and having spend lots of time in the cockpit of a real A-10C, it is not correct.

[MagnumHB]

Speaking strictly for the A-10C, and having spend lots of time in the cockpit of a real A-10C, it is not correct.

Thanks for the input on that. The best I can come up with personally is a small selection of light GA aircraft. For what it's worth, the experiences match up.

 

After rereading some earlier posts in the thread, it's clear that the premise behind the change is just plain flawed. See:

Track IR Tracks relative to head position in sensor and not relative to default View angle.

This is simply wrong. Head position in TrackIR does not correspond with the actual field of view of the eyes the way it does with a VR headset. The default view angle as it was before is a reasonable estimation of what you would actually see while sitting in the cockpit with your head level. Particularly when curves are taken into effect, the only possible function of TrackIR can be to alter the view relative to the default angle. That is its express purpose, and changing that behavior is fundamentally incorrect.

[Gliptal]

Which begs the question, did nobody at ED or their testers do some reaserch?

[SharpeXB]

That diagram posted earlier about how your natural vision is angled downward is certainly correct. Look at the lenses of any eyeglasses. What do you notice? The lenses are not centered on the eye and most of the FOV is angled downward. This would make complete sense from an evolutionary perspective since our natural world is mostly at the horizon and lower.

[wilbur81]

That diagram posted earlier about how your natural vision is angled downward is certainly correct. Look at the lenses of any eyeglasses. What do you notice? The lenses are not centered on the eye and most of the FOV is angled downward. This would make complete sense from an evolutionary perspective since our natural world is mostly at the horizon and lower.

 

This is getting hilarious now! :-)

[jcbak]

Speaking strictly for the A-10C, and having spend lots of time in the cockpit of a real A-10C, it is not correct.

That's all I need to know. If it's not correct ED, please fix it.

[zerO_crash]

The new TIR "update" is terrible. Views are messed up. Good luck trying to get a proper view in e.g. Ka50 such that you can see the HUD info. ED this MUST be fixed ASAP. Some modules are simply not flyable for me atm!

[Lorenzo.D]

Must be the vr option selected or not with trackir?

 

Inviato dal mio LG-D331 utilizzando Tapatalk

[Enduro14]

Wow well way I see it ED is trying to enhance human head movement in the pit like it has been enhanced for VR. Having used both trac ir and VR extensively this enhancement is much better in my opinion. Guess it just works better for my setup compared to others

You guys can make quick simple adjustments to get it perfect. I never much enjoyed the face looking straight down at instruments approach. Having head up and in the fight is better especially Cas situations. This must really depend on people's setups as its perfect on mine with a few minor head elevation adjustments.

[MagnumHB]

Wow well way I see it ED is trying to enhance human head movement in the pit like it has been enhanced for VR. Having used both trac ir and VR extensively this enhancement is much better in my opinion. Guess it just works better for my setup compared to others

You guys can make quick simple adjustments to get it perfect. I never much enjoyed the face looking straight down at instruments approach. Having head up and in the fight is better especially Cas situations. This must really depend on people's setups as its perfect on mine with a few minor head elevation adjustments.

Human head movement (more accurately, camera position adjustment) for TrackIR was already fine (unless you want to get into that neck mod that someone created) and does not and should not correspond with the correct implementation of VR, which is based on a completely different view system paradigm.

 

What adjustments are you making? If you say you are lowering them in any way, you will negate your claim that you genuinely prefer the new way.

 

Also, as I have said before, with the new position, you don't have your head up in the fight, you actually have your head too far up and out of the fight. The line of sight angle is simply too high. You want to maximize your visibility for CAS? Compare the new view to the old. Which view gives you better coverage of the ground for CAS? The old, of course. Besides, CAS in the A-10C involves a lot of use of the TGP and TAD. With the old view, not only do you get a better view of the ground closer to you, but you can also see the MFCDs without moving your head. I just don't accept the idea that the new view is more effective, and if it is somehow your preference anyway, your reasoning is logically inconsistent with numerous facts that I and others have presented in this thread.

[zerO_crash]

Human head movement (more accurately, camera position adjustment) for TrackIR was already fine (unless you want to get into that neck mod that someone created) and does not and should not correspond with the correct implementation of VR, which is based on a completely different view system paradigm.

 

What adjustments are you making? If you say you are lowering them in any way, you will negate your claim that you genuinely prefer the new way.

 

Also, as I have said before, with the new position, you don't have your head up in the fight, you actually have your head too far up and out of the fight. The line of sight angle is simply too high. You want to maximize your visibility for CAS? Compare the new view to the old. Which view gives you better coverage of the ground for CAS? The old, of course. Besides, CAS in the A-10C involves a lot of use of the TGP and TAD. With the old view, not only do you get a better view of the ground closer to you, but you can also see the MFCDs without moving your head. I just don't accept the idea that the new view is more effective, and if it is somehow your preference anyway, your reasoning is logically inconsistent with numerous facts that I and others have presented in this thread.

 

Precisely :thumbup: Don`t fix stuff that ain`t broken.

[dburne]

Also, as I have said before, with the new position, you don't have your head up in the fight, you actually have your head too far up and out of the fight. The line of sight angle is simply too high.

 

Agreed. While I have adjusted in TIR somewhat to compensate, I still prefer the old method which worked just fine in my opinion...