iPad Tethered App

[qwzcl]

I love DCS Black Shark, and I'm currently downloading my new copy of DCS A-10, but there's one thing that I can't stand about either: the user interface.

 

Basically, all flight sims have one thing in common. They're trying to model an aircraft cockpit, something that has awesome ergonomics and is well thought out, but they're doing it with a relatively tiny computer screen and a clickable mouse.

 

The usual solution is that you memorize a ton of keyboard commands, and this is fine, but wouldn't it be cool if you could get something a bit more like the real thing?

 

What I propose is an iPad app that tethers to the DCS game itself. At the top you would have a menu that would let you select various control panels, MFDs, etc. Once you selected the panel you wanted, it would appear on the iPad screen with touchable working buttons. No more looking around the cockpit trying to find the right button, now it's right there on your iPad.

 

Thoughts?

[Eddie]

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=70489

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=82690

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=71068

[cichlidfan]

Helios (no iPad required):D

[qwzcl]

Wow, that is impressive. Working on installing it now.

 

Request number two: make the goddamn sim more user friendly. I fly 737s for an unnamed Western military and I don't have a f*ing clue what I'm doing so far. I played Black Shark for a couple hundred hours and I still never figured out half of that thing.

 

Just getting my X52 to work has been a nightmare, I still can't figure out how to make my throttle work (it uses the thumb-slider for thrust settings and ignores the main throttle body, I have no idea which of the 20 non-functional slider names represents what I want).

 

Not complaining, just saying, I'm the nerdiest pilot I know, all my friends see A-10 and they go from "oh cool" to "f* this" within 5 minutes. And these are qualified fighter pilots. Make it easier to use and you'd ship a lot more units.

[159th_Viper]

Don't know exactly what you are having issues with, apart from the throttle-issue, that is. For the X52 assignment, just highlight the 'Thrust' assignment and clear current input. Thereafter click 'add' and move your throttle through it's entire range of movement once or twice. The SIM will pick up and assign the axis automatically for you. As simple as that. Same goes for all other axis assignments.

 

Are your friends A-10 pilots?

[qwzcl]

I'll give that a go, thanks

 

Nope, Hawk pilots

[qwzcl]

Yeah, still can't figure out the joystick thing...

 

What you guys probably don't realize is that military aviation is easy compared to DCS. Military pilots are dumb as shit, football players do well at our job. We're flying these things with years of training, awesome ergonomics (actually having all those switches around you is really nice), seat-of-the-pants feedback, procedures coming out our ears. I jumped out of a level 5 737 sim worth a few tens of millions today and into this and I'm just like, whaaaaa? This is really hard! Why is my screen so small? What are these tiny, unclickable, ergonomically useless switches with unreadable writing?

 

iControl DCS is a start, but it's not very user friendly either.

 

Aviation invented the science of human-computer interfaces because pilots are dumb and crash planes given half a chance. By copying all the complexity with none of the UI you've invented someone waaaay harder than a real A-10.

 

I'll get there eventually...

[jiblet]

Give it a couple of weeks, figure out SPI, SOI, TMS, DMS, Slew, Coolie, China Hat and maybe boat switch and CMS, then come back here, reread your thread and wonder what the fuss was about! ;)

 

 

If you want awesome ergonomics, stop using the toy X52 and get a Thrustmaster Warthog ;)

[agrasyuk]

...

Military pilots are dumb as shit

...

somehow i highly doubt it

 

as for your troubles i find it very strange. and how can a real thing be easier then sim?

Edited April 13, 2012 by agrasyuk

[qwzcl]

No, seriously. Smart people can do complex stuff, but they're slow. I'm way smarter than most military pilots, but I get bogged down in details, the ex-football player types stay way ahead of the aircraft compared to me. There's a reason I didn't make fast jets.

 

90% of learning aircraft procedures in a real jet is knowing where your hands need to go to do certain things. When you're stuck staring down a 24" drinking straw / computer screen at a flat 3d render of a cockpit you lose that kinesthetic memory, and the whole thing gets painfully slow. I mean, sure, you can learn endless keyboard shortcuts, and I did that with DCS Blackshark, but it's not the same.

 

Anyways, real aircraft need to be easier. Easy means fast and efficient. It also means safe. I could fly a 737 all day without automation, and it'd be a helluva lot of fun, especially with a good HUD, but LNAV/VNAV means the jet flies itself and I can sit back and monitor systems. In real life the penalties for ****ing up are much greater.

 

No, tethered iPad is the way to go, but good UI is a tricky thing to get right. iControl is cool but its got a looooong way to go before it feels like a jet should in terms of ease of use. But if user interface was easy everybody would already be doing it: why do you think Apple is so successful?

Edited April 13, 2012 by qwzcl

[nemises]

Trackir goes a long way towards bringing the logic back to a cockpit in DCS though

[cichlidfan]

Trackir goes a long way towards bringing the logic back to a cockpit in DCS though

 

Very true. It restores a lot of the 3D spatial orientation feel that I think the OP is talking about.:thumbup:

[jiblet]

I mean, sure, you can learn endless keyboard shortcuts, and I did that with DCS Blackshark, but it's not the same.

 

I fully agree with that, so get a TM Warthog and a couple of cougar MFD surrounds and go nuts (add a trackIR too).

Yes you have to use a keyboard and mouse for some stuff still, but the vast majority of actions can be untertaken with HOTAS.

[hassata]

Sort of unrelated but iWarthog looks amazing, especially considering the developer has a RL app for the Global Express on sale for $199. Now if only I had an iPad :).

[qwzcl]

Yeah, for sure. I don't disagree, there's some good stuff out there - the whole thing would be impossible without trackir, which I have.

 

Still, I genuinely believe that ED can do better. Cockpits are laid out according to careful design, figuring out what data to present where in order to maximize data flow with the pilot. To simply present a 3d model of the original through a computer screen is kinda missing the point.

 

Put it this way - if you asked the original interface engineers who designed the original A-10 to create a new cockpit that utilized only a computer screen, a joystick and maybe an iPad as well, what would it look like? Answer that question, and you've got a system that mimics the actual performance of using the original cockpit. Blindly copy the look of that cockpit in miniature and you're more like a cargo cult of military aviation.

[cichlidfan]

Put it this way - if you asked the original interface engineers who designed the original A-10 to create a new cockpit that utilized only a computer screen, a joystick and maybe an iPad as well, what would it look like? Answer that question, and you've got a system that mimics the actual performance of using the original cockpit. Blindly copy the look of that cockpit in miniature and you're more like a cargo cult of military aviation.

 

But then you would not have an A-10 sim. You'd have a well designed interface for "remotely" operating an A-10. I believe I see your point regarding the ergonimics of the simulation but I don't think it applies to what ED, and other sim companies, are trying to do.

[qwzcl]

Yeah, that's true. The underlying problem is that in both cases you don't have an A-10 sim. Unless you've got a spare 20-million for a level 5 sim you'll either have surface accuracy without functional accuracy, or functional accuracy with a lack of surface fidelity.

 

Falcon 4.0's dogfighting situational awareness mode is probably the best example of doing the functional side right. Doing combat formation flying on pilots course all I could think was "where is my padlock view? Trying to look behind me at 4g f&$&ing sucks". Sure, in a real F-16 you don't have a computer keeping your view slaved to the enemy fighters behind you, but you've got your neck and associated reflexes, so it's a different sort of problem. Unless you're gonna load up your head with 60lb weights and surround yourself with screens while you sit in your 1g armchair, AGSMing like a retard, you'll never get the real experience.

 

Incidentally I never realized how underpowered the A-10 is in real life. A PC-21 has better performance, and it's a turboprop. Very eye-opening, I underestimated how hard it must have been to cram in all that armor and weaponry. No wonder fighter pilots looked down on it until desert storm, it's a heap of s&$& till it starts blowing up stuff.

Edited April 14, 2012 by qwzcl

[EtherealN]

Well, regarding "padlocks", a lot of people consider padlocks to be a sort of "cheat" - at least in multiplayer. For singleplayer, you do have padlocking available to you in the game. I don't personally use it since it sort of relinquishes control to the computer and sort of forces me to become target-locked, which becomes a problem if I need to know what's going on elsewhere in the world around me - like when there's two bandits, or when I need to keep tally on both the bandit and my wing lead. (Yes, I keep tally on wing lead as well, it's usually me killing him anyway. :D) In fact, I can't remember a sim where I did use it - before I got my TrackIR around the Black Shakr 1 release I used a mouselook which after some practice becomes remarkably versatile too - the only things my left hand is good for is drilling into steel, typing on a keyboard, handling a throttle and precision-guiding a mouselook :P

 

And of course, the keyboard issues are something that completely went away when I got my TM HOTAS Warthog. I barely touch anything except my HOTAS when flying A-10C - the only exceptions are when entering data through UFC with the mouse and such things. When I used an X52 things were a bit more confusing, but that thing can still do a very fine job letting you stay HOTAS as long as you map an appropriate profile.

 

Regarding how underpowered the A-10 is, well, that's one thing a lot of sim pilots never quite realize - there's a lot to be gained in simply not loading ordnance until you strike MTOW. With less payload and having burned some fuel, you can throw an A-10 around quite a lot too. Not as much as you would an F-15 etcetera, of course, but still. :)

[qwzcl]

Yeah, just ordered a TM Warthog off amazon, should be good.

 

Padlock view isn't the be all and end all, but my point is that ED should be more willing to experiment with UI. There aren't that many people willing to drop $1000+ on sim gear - they'd reach a much bigger market if they took the time to find intelligent ways to get the full functionality of an A-10 onto less specialized equipment.

 

I do most of my 737 study by reading checklists and imagining how I would perform them in the jet. At our squadron, we have three levels of training: a piece of paper, a $50-million sim with full hydraulics, and the jet itself. There's a huge amount of space for something in between, something that still forces you to use the same procedures and mental processes but using general purpose computer gear.

 

DCS is no different - there needs to be a happy medium between track ir with custom joysticks and boring, dumbed-down arcade mode. I think the best way to make that happen is through intelligent use of available screen space and I would say, by coupling it with an iPad in a well-thought out, user friendly way.

Edited April 14, 2012 by qwzcl

[EtherealN]

Well, there's a couple issues with that, I think. First is the fact that screen space is, as you've said, limited. And there is no need to use keyboard for almost anything at all even without a HOTAS - you instead use the mouse to interact with the cockpit. This isn't always optimal, but I find it works fairly well. After all, if you're in a situation where you absolutely have to keep hands on, you probably have no business worrying about your cockpit anyhow. (And you don't need a HOTAS to go "HOTAS" either - Nate uses something like this: http://www.logitech.com/gaming/joysticks/devices/291 and still has everything the HOTAS offers except for the split throttle and throttle detents.)

 

Also, moving things to iPad's is NOT a solution to people not being willing to drop money on sim gear. If I were to get one, it would be for one purpose only*: DCS. If you have the money to get an iPad for this purpose, you have the money to get a HOTAS. You don't solve a perceived requirement for expensive equipment through requring a different piece of expensive equipment.

 

And besides, there is something "in between" those training scenarios:

 

;)

 

Anyways, if you want a "happy medium", the whole simulator/arcade step isn't one big leap. You can customize exactly which things you want help with through the options screen. And of course, you can fly whole missions with the full weapon profile without ever making use of the keyboard. Basically, I sort of feel that you are exhaggerating the problem a bit. Things can always be improved, but I'd prefer seeing something that is sure to improve it without threatening the "simulation" aspect. Aids that can be turned off are already there, but more can definitely be added, and those with iPads already have multiple venues to use them. Similarly, people with multiple screens or a laptop can use other pieces of software for similar duties.

 

* My general opinion of iOS are not fit for print. :P

[qwzcl]

lol iPads are awesome, Apple can do user interface. That and all the aviation apps are ios only, so we don't have much choice. I've got two: my personal one and a work-issued one.

 

Anyways, I mostly agree with you, but only up to a point. For people like us, DCS is fine. I got used to Blackshark, and even with an X52/Keyboard it was lots of fun. But there's a way bigger gaming market that's gonna get scared off by the user-unfriendliness of DCS. Watch a newbie try to get A10 installed, configured and flying without assistance and you'll see what I mean.

Edited April 14, 2012 by qwzcl

[EtherealN]

Apple can do user interfaces, yeah. They're awesome in the sense that the iPad was the first thing that made my father capable of checking and replying to his work e-mail unassisted. That's a major feat. But in the quest for this userfriendliness they also locked a lot of functions away. I've been in business meetings with the company iPad, and to get basic things working I ended up having to use my android phone instead - simply because the iPad hads the relevant functions disabled unless the entire office is equipped specifically with Apple-centric products. (What pisses me off with iOS is that the functions aren't absent - they're there - it's that they are disabled: the system is, in nerd-speak, "crippleware", and to get at them you need to void your warranty.)

 

Anyways, that's Apple. Told you I was annoyed at iOS. :P I suspect we shouldn't derail there except for where it is relevant:

 

Basically, the example there is that the userfriendliness was purchased at the price of blocking advanced users from functions they may want. That is, in my opinion, not the way to go. "Advanced users" is the core demographic that DCS caters to simply through the nature of the product. Now, I'm not saying that this is inherently better, it's just "different". For that reason, I don't think the example of what Apple did is applicable here. Getting a simplified interface isn't going ot make a HAWX customer buy DCS instead, because the games are fundamentally different, same way getting a clickable cockpit in HAWX isn't going to make DCS customers purchase it. (The HAWX guy might enjoy "game" mode though, but in that case there's a lot less interface problems due to the nature of game mode.)

 

I also don't quite understand what it is you specifically want done to improve the interface. There is already a tonne of simplifications you can activate through just ticking the relevant box in the options screen. It also does a fair job of autodetecting and autoassigning a lot of peripherals (not perfect though - for example the habit of assigning stick/cyclic/collective axes onto toebrakes is something that could use some work). And yes there's a LOT of keyboard commands, but the key point is that you don't really need them. (But them being there is an awesome thing for advanced users, for example people who build simpits through the use of keyboard emulation cards, or advanced HOTAS mapping profiles etcetera.) The only case where keyboard is absolutely needed for anything is if you don't have a HOTAS Warthog - at which point you'll need to press a key to start and turn off engines. That's a grand total of 4 keyboard commands. For everything else the "problem" is caused by the specific nature of what is being simulated - you can have an awesome interface, but it'll still take a LOT of work for a newbie to learn all the HOTAS commands. Even people with a TM HOTAS will have to spend a lot of time learning what everything does. The only option to make that simpler is to quite simply remove the need for the functions - which means you are "dumbing down" the simulator.

 

For example, having to learn what the DMS and TMS is something everyone will have to do no matter which controller they use. Learning how to handle DSMS profiles is the same. Simply through being a study sim, that problem will always be there. The simpler the bird being simulated is, the less of a problem it is. (And if you think A-10C is a pita, many other aircraft are even worse. Good luck with the F-15E and/or Su-27S, for example :P )

 

One thing where I could perhaps agree though is that there might be utility in having an optional "basic" system in the control setup, where everything that is non-essential is hidden. That way the users doesn't have to be intimidated by a "wall of text", so to speak. Sort of click options, click basic, and then have stick, throttle, pedals and pretty much nothing else appear on screen for you to assign. Enough to get you flying. (But as soon as we start including buttons and hats on the HOTAS to that list, which would be required to do anything worthwhile in "simulator" mode, we're back at the "wall of text" anyhow, so yeah... I'm not sure about what could be done about it.)

 

Oh, but for some comic relief:

yn3VOukLB4k

 

I love it. :D

 

TL;DR:

What are the specific improvements you'd propose that does not require additional hardware? That right there is the big issue as far as I can see, and I don't have any specific ideas beyond what's already offered through the clickable cockpit.

[Bushmanni]

I doubt a touch screen "pit" would lower the bar much for the newbies. I think the 3D pit is second only to the real pit in ease of learning. 3D pit changes the memorizing of a function from arbitrary keyboard command into visuospatial reference which is lot easier to do as that's what everyone does naturally. For more kinesthetic people not having a physical pit will be more of a problem but I still believe the current 3D pit is pretty nice thing to have.

 

When DCS BS came out I was first a bit intimidated with all the switchology based on my earlier experiences with sims as how long it's going to take to learn all of it. I like learning and I'm good at it but BS was a quantum leap in amount of stuff to learn. It was the first sim for me with fully clickable cockpit and to my surprise I could remember everything with relatively little effort as all the swithches are always visible and they have some text on them to aid memory even more. Finding the right switch from 3D pit compares to remembering a keyboard command like answering a multiple choice test instead of having to answer with your own words.

 

I recently got 3D to work in my display hardware. One cool thing I noticed while experimenting with the settings was that I had a real size pit in front of me seemingly within hands reach but fingers would just fall through the switch when trying to put my finger on it. While I knew that would happen I just had to try it to see how it would be if I were able to move the switches with my fingers. The front panel was just as easy to reach as it would have been in real life but side panels were harder as when you rotate it in front of you using head as pivot it gets farther away. Tweaking TrackIR might have solved the problem but I'm sure it's not a big deal. But it got me thinking if there was a way to make my left hand interact with the virtual pit. Basically you would need to have a 3D pointer which position could be controlled with your hand and make it "click" with some kind of finger gesture. That way you would have functionally the real thing without needing to have any kind of specialized controllers apart from head and hand tracking and HOTAS. Maybe this could be done with Kinect? Of course you can't use anything just by muscle memory and feel alone but that goes also for the "iPad pit".

[qwzcl]

Wow, that video is gold.

 

Okay, how's this for an idea. Again, I'm not really the person to figure out exactly how to build a user interface, but I'll have a crack. Normally, you would operate an A-10 according to a defined checklist. So as a training aid / operating aid, have an on screen checklist that can be exported to an iPad screen as well.

 

The difference is, the checklist is actionable just by clicking a button, either to cycle through the whole thing, or action it one item at a time. Which is to say, when you press the checklist button, or tap the line in you iPad, the model of the pilot on screen reaches out and performs the action on the checklist. You'd look through a menu for the thing that you want to do, open the checklist, then click through it. When you got to the end, it would suggest things that you might want to do next. Add in stuff like a button that explains what the step you just took actually does ("tell me more"), along with an optional reminder of how you can do the step yourself, and you've got yourself a great way to both learn DCS and to operate the aircraft if you're too lazy to do things properly.

 

Honestly, this isn't even that far from how I operate a 737. I've got this idiots checklist to startup, takeoff, cruise, etc. that fits on 3 A5 pages. A cheat sheet if you will. I keep it in the clip on the control yoke. Single pilot aircraft are operated according to memorized checklists (do-lists, really), and we train for single-pilot ops in our first two years of flying, so this is what I'm more familiar with. The last aircraft I flew had an 18 page checklist that you would say out loud as you did the items (get a word wrong and you're going job hunting). However in multi-crew operations you have a philosophy of flows (the doing part) followed by checks, where both pilots check that the correct actions have been taken, always done by reading off a paper checklist. My idiots guide then covers the flows, and a laminated page A4 kept in a slot on top of the glareshield contains the checklist. The only things you have to memorize (called memory items under the Boeing philosophy) are emergency actions (or "non-normals") for time critical events like cabin depressurization or engine fire/failure. Even then, the philosophy is that if you spilled your coffee you're rushing too much. Shutting down the wrong engine will kill you a lot quicker than letting it burn.

 

I've only got about 80 hours in 737s (300 hours total flying experience), so it's useful to have a prompt in case I forget what order to do things in. That's military aviation for ya! But no, we are very safe and competent, like actually, when I put it that way we sound like a bunch of retarded cowboys.

Edited April 15, 2012 by qwzcl

[EtherealN]

Hm. I like that one. Unfortunately I don't think a pilot reaching for the switch would be practical to implement under the current system, but it might be possible to use the highlight functions (the ones used in the interactive training missions).

 

Sort of like have the voice say: "Fuel boost pumps on"

Then highlight the boost pumps for a couple seconds.

Then either allow the player to action the item or do it automatically.

 

I believe it would require some further backend development (right now the highlights work as part of the mission LUA script) but it might be an idea worth looking into.

 

One further note: anything and everything can be exported to iPad screen already. You can actually even implement an application for the iPad that would have the checklists which would read the current game state (for example switch positions and such), give you the list, and clicking an associated button on the iPad can action the switch. That part of it doesn't require ED intervention (and I suspect there's highly dodgy economics in ED developing secondary applications for other platforms). But you could relatively easily do this for both iOS or Android. (In fact, since it doesn't require graphics export from MFD's etcetera, it would actually be a relatively easy application to write, I think.)

Edited April 15, 2012 by EtherealN