cockpit labels barely readably

[WinOrLose]

9 minutes ago, draconus said:

#2 is the same as #1 - it's realistic that some are not readable

Each to their own, it’s realistic depending on a point in time. If you like it as it is leave it, if someone wants readable buttons they can install a mod. Both people are happy without upsetting the other. I don’t see a problem. 

[draconus]

1 minute ago, WinOrLose said:

If you like it as it is leave it, if someone wants readable buttons they can install a mod.

This is exactly what I do - I have no problem with you using the mod.

[LowGlow]

I don't get all that fuss about alleged realism. As a new user you need to know which control is where, and therefore you need to be able to read the labels. Period.

It already starts with the first few seconds of the first Tomcat tutorial, which asks you to execute test functions which you have no clue in which position you have to rotate the test knob to. That's frustration right from the start.

No one asked Heatblur to redo the entire cockpit and making a shiny version of it, just to make some of those labels readable that are currently not. If really someone feels that a certain button should be that worn out to not be readable at all (for whatever reason), then Heatblur could do it like with the A10 where you can select between factory new / worn out.

I don't buy that it would be that much work to just fix some cockpit labels.

[Despayre]

On 4/16/2023 at 12:43 PM, LowGlow said:

I don't get all that fuss about alleged realism. As a new user you need to know which control is where, and therefore you need to be able to read the labels. Period.

Not true, because we have tool-tips, which don't exist IRL. If you don't have even a vague idea of where the button you're looking for is, maybe you need to slow down a little. 

On 4/16/2023 at 12:43 PM, LowGlow said:

It already starts with the first few seconds of the first Tomcat tutorial, which asks you to execute test functions which you have no clue in which position you have to rotate the test knob to. That's frustration right from the start.

One time, and never again... non-issue, or at least, a pretty minor one, and I believe if you had read the manual, it's very explicit about how to use that test knob.

On 4/16/2023 at 12:43 PM, LowGlow said:

No one asked Heatblur to redo the entire cockpit and making a shiny version of it, just to make some of those labels readable that are currently not. If really someone feels that a certain button should be that worn out to not be readable at all (for whatever reason), then Heatblur could do it like with the A10 where you can select between factory new / worn out.

I don't buy that it would be that much work to just fix some cockpit labels.

That's why there is a mod for exactly that purpose, everyone can have what they like, including the vocal minority that want more readable button labels.  

[Raisuli]

Does make wonder what the F4 cockpit will look like...

Otherwise I have a strong enough opinion about this it's best if I keep it to myself.

[Despayre]

15 hours ago, Raisuli said:

Does make wonder what the F4 cockpit will look like...

Otherwise I have a strong enough opinion about this it's best if I keep it to myself.

If some faded labels that you're gonna have to look around for a couple times before remembering where they are forever and then just using them as you need to, is a reason for you to consider not buying a module... well, we're not the same.

When's the last time you fumbled around looking for a common function in your most played jet? Now, if the buttons were randomly generated in different places every time you got in the cockpit, ok, you'd have a solid point.

[Raisuli]

1 hour ago, Despayre said:

If some faded labels that you're gonna have to look around for a couple times before remembering where they are forever and then just using them as you need to, is a reason for you to consider not buying a module... well, we're not the same.

When's the last time you fumbled around looking for a common function in your most played jet? Now, if the buttons were randomly generated in different places every time you got in the cockpit, ok, you'd have a solid point.

Well...actually I bought it on day one, and my opinion has nothing to do with fumbling for buttons. 

<edit>

Text.  What a terrible way to have a conversation.  Just added the smiley face because I couldn't add tone or intonation or the grin I wore when typing that out...

</edit>

Edited April 19, 2023 by Raisuli

[Alicatt]

On 4/9/2023 at 7:14 PM, draconus said:

Did you even read the replies? It doesn't matter how old the jet was. Even the new one was like that after a few months into tests, cquals and finally deployment - this is when we usually fly missions and this is the look which the devs and SMEs have choosen as most realistic and how average jet would look like on a mission, not a museum piece.

 

So you are saying at some point they were in better condition than what we got from Heatblur?

On 4/14/2023 at 2:34 PM, draconus said:

This is exactly what I do - I have no problem with you using the mod.

So you are saying that you are not happy with the state of the cockpit that you have to load a mod to get it to a state you are comfortable with?

[draconus]

2 hours ago, Alicatt said:

So you are saying at some point they were in better condition than what we got from Heatblur?

That's obvious.

2 hours ago, Alicatt said:

So you are saying that you are not happy with the state of the cockpit that you have to load a mod to get it to a state you are comfortable with?

No, you misunderstood. I don't use any mods and I'm happy with current cockpit state.

[markturner1960]

On 4/9/2023 at 6:14 PM, draconus said:

Did you even read the replies? It doesn't matter how old the jet was. Even the new one was like that after a few months into tests, cquals and finally deployment - this is when we usually fly missions and this is the look which the devs and SMEs have choosen as most realistic and how average jet would look like on a mission, not a museum piece.

 

I think that i snot entirely fair.......the F14 ( and I love it and its weathered look, but it is hard to read, especially when first learning the jet) is the ONLY jet in DCS that has this degree of weathering and illegibility in the cockpit. What makes this "right" and all the other jets in DCS wrong? They are all old jets and have been in service just a slong as the Tomcat for example......The issue here is not, anyway if its correct or not, we simply have a very well weathered and used F14 as presented by Heatblur and we need to deal with it. If you dont like it, then use a mod, but I do think its wrong to state that its " correct" and they all looked like that. I dont see you in threads for the other jets complaining they are not right as they look too new and they should all look like the F14 after a few months use!! 

Not getting in a beef BTW, just being pedantic! 

Edited April 28, 2023 by markturner1960

[draconus]

8 minutes ago, markturner1960 said:

I dont see you in threads for the other jets complaining they are not right as they look too new and they should all look like the F14 after a few months use!

If you read other replies from SMEs and devs (which I respect and trust in their knowledge) it's clear that such looks apply mostly to the state of USN aircraft on deployment. That would leave us with comparison to the Hornet, which I don't own and have not read about its weathering. If there was some doubt that other modules are not realistic I would probably vote to make them more realistic, whichever state that would mean. I'm one of those that prefer realistic over easier, clearer or more usable in simulator.

[markturner1960]

I agree, I prefer the weathered realistic look as well......I am NOT disputing the SME's etc.....just pointing out the inconsistencies with this module and all the others. 

[Raisuli]

What's a little sad about this whole topic is nobody bothers to point out the artists who did that weathering are geniuses.  Like it, don't like it, the work is amazing.  Dymo tape and scratches and pure wear and dirt and grime...incredible.  Whoever they are deserve accolades for the obvious care and pride they have in their work.

It's unfortunate all that effort has become such a point of contention.  Almost makes me wonder if the 'factory new' option on the A-10C-II wasn't somehow a result of this debate.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled subjective discourse.

<edit>

While plotting out some changes to the simpit I opened Chuck's Guide to get switch names right, and I really paid attention to the images.  When I was in the Navy many, many years ago I lived in front of control panels, and I have to admit they weren't in better shape than the panels I see in that aircraft.  White on black engraved labels (ours were grey, mostly), the illuminated annunciators, bezels on steam gauges, condition of paint on the panels, places where countless people have left fingerprints here and there, wear on the switch handles.  Yeah.  Been a 'minute', as Tom would say, but it's all very familiar.

Doesn't change my opinion, just reminds me the SMEs are probably right and any errors are incremental, not orders of magnitude. 

Not really important, just an observation.

</edit>

Edited April 28, 2023 by Raisuli

[markturner1960]

Here are some pictures from my Willy Peters aircraft photo file book.......It's a fleet B model, and you can see the labels are way easier to read......

The source images are much clearer, apologies.......

Edited May 1, 2023 by markturner1960

[lunaticfringe]

You can also see its on the beach.  

[LanceCriminal86]

The photos are from Saratoga's 1992 cruise during an airshow visit in Belgium or the Netherlands. The jets are still fairly new though post-Gulf War and most scans of the book out there are not of the most amazing quality where you'd pick up imperfections. The cockpits as-is are going to align more with the timeframes modeled in the late 90s when LANTIRN was being added, and most of those Bs had about 10 years of heavy use, and the As just as many years if not more.

[WarthogOsl]

On 5/1/2023 at 10:05 AM, markturner1960 said:

Here are some pictures from my Willy Peters aircraft photo file book.......It's a fleet B model, and you can see the labels are way easier to read......

The source images are much clearer, apologies.......

 

 

 

Uh, oh...you just gave them more lock wire ideas!

Wish there was a pic of the left side panel.  I wonder if it got more wear and tear from folks stepping on it accidentally?

[DSplayer]

On 5/1/2023 at 10:05 AM, markturner1960 said:

 

 

On an unrelated note, interesting that this F-14B has the HSD mode switches reduced to no longer have the ECM override switch and the ECM position. Pretty cool image.

[draconus]

On 5/1/2023 at 7:05 PM, markturner1960 said:

Here are some pictures from my Willy Peters aircraft photo file book.......It's a fleet B model, and you can see the labels are way easier to read......

The source images are much clearer, apologies.......

 

Yet another proof that our Tomcat altimeter drum is wrong - smaller and grey digits.

[Temetre]

Tbh I dont really see why some points here are so hotly contested?

1. Okay, theres an argument in service that an aircraft can look like this. Point taken.

2. But that doesnt defeat the point that this doesnt mean every F-14 looks like this. That in every scenario its realistic for the plane to look like this.

3. And theres a pretty big disconnect between this every other aircraft in the game. It doesnt seem that convincing that the F-14 is just by default the worst maintained fighter aircraft simulated in DCS. Ive seen pics of naval phantoms in museums have much clearer text.

 

Obviously that doesnt mean that the aircraft textures are badly done, in contrary, they are extremely detailed. Nor does it mean it has to change, weve got more than enough free additional features that Heatblur just added. But its still an interesting discussion imo, and it does feel like some people just dont wanna accept point 2+3 though? Those are almost self-evident arguments.

edit: Just to note on the latter point, someone posted this wonderfull site:

 https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Virtual-Tour/Cockpit360/

Doesnt have a Naval Phantom, but how about an A-1 Skyraider, look how wonderfully clean the lettering is on this ancient carrier plane:

http://www.nmusafvirtualtour.com/cockpits/SEAW_tour/SEAW-1.html

And here a A-7 Corsair. The only thing that doesnt look post-apocalyptic is, in fact, the text:

http://www.nmusafvirtualtour.com/cockpits/SEAW_tour/SEAW-2.html

Like, its legit difficult to find any example of a plane that looks as rough as the text in our F-14. This is a pretty interesting rabbithole to be honest.

edit: Also why not a random video from youtube from a museum F-14. Its actually an A apparently, 3:40 is cockpit:

 

Edited May 3, 2023 by Temetre

[eatthis]

On 3/31/2023 at 8:28 PM, draconus said:

No, it's realistic and it's readable.

 

i can believe its realistic and it may well be perfectly readable for you, i struggle with some of them and i think it just comes down to settings and the physical limitations of vr compared to real life, its more awkward to move freely in my seat with vr and the mouse is a pita to use while turning more than 90 deg off straight

[lunaticfringe]

5 hours ago, Temetre said:

Like, its legit difficult to find any example of a plane that looks as rough as the text in our F-14. This is a pretty interesting rabbithole to be honest.

Who can detail the difference between the operational handling and working environment of a USAF aircraft versus a US Navy one?  Anyone?  Anyone? 

Similarly, the USAF Museum collection is a rather poor starting point of comparison, given the material access they grant themselves to NOS in the supply network, as well as material from off of other aircraft at other museums.  If Dayton wants a replacement panel to a better standard and another museum has it, they're going to get it, per the service artifact loan terms.

By the same token, many of the last jets off cruise that were saved from the jaws at AMARC were getting the best gear to put on display.  The jet formerly at the QAM, that a couple years back was moved down to the US Naval Academy, had a stunning cockpit based around a number of donor jets, and had the benefit of being with the Reapers for years leading up to it- thus not dealing with the day to day environment at sea.  Meanwhile, get jets that come off cruise and go right to the museum, such as the B at Akron-Canton, and it was even rougher than what we have exampled in the HB model when it arrived, pre-demil.

 

[Whistler_RIO]

On 9/1/2022 at 9:35 AM, IronMike said:

It could, potentially, vaguely, maybe, happen on the 14th of the last month before the previous one, but it will definitely be after yesterday's tomorrow, supposing that now will be still now when then will not be then anymore.

Its not about US aircraft, and its not about Navy, its about Grumman.  take a look at any aircraft built by them (we still have some in active service today) and you will see the switches and the readability issue.

[DSplayer]

I would like to point out that the current F-14 panels are legit taken from a real jet. They aren't fictionally weathered artificially, they were weathered like that through natural means. 

[draconus]

9 hours ago, eatthis said:

it may well be perfectly readable for you

I already answered and agreed that not all is readable.

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/310857-cockpit-labels-barely-readably/?do=findComment&comment=5191716