News:

Precision Simulator update 10.173 (24 February 2024) is now available.
Navburo update 13 (23 November 2022) is now available.
NG FMC and More is released.

Main Menu

Raw PSX vs. Scenery Generator

Started by funkyhut, Thu, 31 Dec 2020 05:42

funkyhut

Happy 2021 to all.

Recently I've been using the PSX, WidePSX and MSFS 2020 combination to hand fly circuits per the guidance provided in Britjet's two Circuits videos. After literally countless attempts, I've now managed to make a reasonably good job of the exercise.
Then I thought I'd try with raw PSX and loaded up Will's 9 Pack, All goes well until trying to get lined up for landing and trying to keep the right "picture". It's a totally different ball game from doing it with the scenery generator; almost impossible (for me at least).
So my question is why should that be?
Many Thanks.
Greetings from the mountains of Northern Thailand (VTCC),
Chris Stanley.

Hardy Heinlin

QuoteAll goes well until trying to get lined up for landing ...

Which of your actions don't go well? Is it just your bank control, or the pitch control too? Do you use rudder pedals? If so, when? Do you expect the PSX scenery attitude and focal size to be equal to that of the the external MSFS you are used to? I don't know your MSFS settings, but compared to that, the PSX scenery probably has a smaller "wide angle" effect. Also the PSX view is slightly nose down, i.e. when level on the ground at zero slope, the scenery horizon is slightly above the windshield center.


Cheers,

|-|ardy

cagarini

Well,

I haven't yet try the MFS scenery generator solution. Of all the solutions I tried, since fs9 + ps1.3, the smoothest and more satisfying for me was still the PSX + XP11 one, but I have been watching videos of PSX + MFS, and ... Wow! they look gorgeous indeed ...

Problem is, whatever visuals generator I have used, and again and as I always say here at the forum, the tricky approaches are a lot more realistic for me to "vly" using PSX only, because maybe due to the sparse resources of my desktop, the speed at which the visuals are updated and synced with whatever is happening in PSX is never good enough for my sensorial reactions and control inputs resulting from those... It feels strange, and although I would love to get the chance to get inside one of those real size solutions some here have assembled, truth is I always revert back to standalone PSX, even not being able to see full runway lighting systems as I would like to ( ELITE uses 2d panels, rather outdated scenery graphics but has exact runway lighting for each airfield, and I like it that way :-) ). 

Yet another aspect I really miss in PSX is being able to look sideways. Yes I know I should use the ND, and  find there all I need, but, in my defense, just imagine a situation where the 2 NDs have become unavailable due to some malfunction ?  Not to mention that I do believe in RL pilots do glimpse sideways when entering their base legs ...

funkyhut

Greetings Hardy,
Thanks for the questions which in themselves point me to some issues I need to look at.
I have the rudder on a twist grip of the pitch and roll controls and don't use it until on the ground.
Specifically I am finding that as I get closer to the runway the sensitivity seems to magnify and it's as if I'm yawing out of alignment but the bar on the PFD remains coordinated.
What I'm thinking is that with PSX it just has to be perfect to look right and feel right but with MSFS there is maybe some "latitude" in the finessing. As you point out, the MSFS view setting are for sure not the same as PSX. I wonder if there is a way to match them up?
I fully intend to pursue the PSX only simulation and hope that my 73 year old mind and coordination, can get the scan to the point where it all comes together.
What I love about PSX is that it's just a click or two and 30 seconds later I'm set to go. No waiting ages for all the ancillary stuff to load and get coordinated.

Greetings jcomm,
On my YouTube page (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGU_0LT7TNDh6juxF_SI9FQ) I've got several setups I've been trying and find all have positives and negatives. With the setup 18hazelwood first introduced, there is full flexibility to look around and even have exterior shots. But the panel layout is in the wrong place and also not so immersive. The layout introduced by Steve Hose is as real as it gets and is what I have settled on for now. But there is no flexibility to either look left or right or to get an external view.
Will's 9 Pack is what I've been trying to grasp and in many ways, it's adding the need to be super precise because for sure, from a bit before minimums to touchdown, it has zero forgiveness.
And yes, for speed (fps) to get close to PSX, running MSFS you need a top end PC and even then you are only getting 40 - 50fps.
Actually, I've started to experiment with Will's 9 Pack on the right of the screen and MSFS on the left side (3440 x 1440 monitor). I'll try to make a recording but from what I've seen so far, they are perfectly coordinated.
Kindest,
Greetings from the mountains of Northern Thailand (VTCC),
Chris Stanley.

Will

What parts of the approach aren't going well? Is it lining up on final, or keeping the aircraft stable once you have the runway in sight?

I'd recommend you start at a runway with an ILS, and have your base-to-final turn end with capturing the localizer, and then fly the ILS down to landing. Do that a few times to get the feel for the aircraft, and then switch to practicing without the ILS.
Will /Chicago /USA

Steve Hose

Hi,

I have a layout that I find works well for PSX standalone at 3440x1440:

1. With MCP (automated flight regimes)



2. Close-up view for landing (manual flight regimes):



With these layouts the PFD is lined up perfectly with the centre of the exterior view for realism, but the view is slightly offset to the left, so you'll have to move your chair ;) This is no issue with an ultra-wide monitor and somewhat adds to a 'left-seat' feeling.

If you'd like a copy, please email me and I'll send you the layout file.

Regards, Steve.

Will

I recently updated my 9pack, because I got a new monitor with a different resolution. The new one is 3840 x 2160, so there's more real estate to show graphics on. The two most relevant screen shots are below:



(Takeoff, landing, hand-flying)




(Cruise)

Apologies for the low quality iPhone photographs of the displays.

The principles remain the same as in the original 9pack "Annotated Example" that I posted back in 2017. The main difference is that with the new 3840 x 2160 monitor, the display width of the PFD is now 8.5 inches (21.5 cm) on the actual monitor, meaning that the size of the display on the monitor is the actual size of the PFD in the real aircraft. What's more, my eyes are about as far from the monitor as a pilot's eyes would be from the real PFD in the real aircraft, so while most other realism is simulated, at least in this case I'm looking at a visual display that is the same size (and subtends the same amount of visual arc) as a pilot in a real 747 would get.

Updated 9pack available on request, in case anyone has a 3840 x 2160 monitor and wants to play with it.

Now, it's true that the center point of the PFD isn't directly below the center point of the runway. Honestly, it doesn't bother me. Once the PFD is actual size, the fact that its center point and the visual center point aren't equal is not something that I find bothersome. My landings are good enough, by all relevant metrics. I think, with practice, anyone else's would be too.

There are still limitations in the PSX visual system: for example, you can't know when to turn from base to final by looking at the outside visuals alone. This is where an immersive "world generator" like MSFS2020 might come in really handy.

But the displays above (and in the original 9pack I published in my tutorial) show that the standalone graphics of PSX are more than capable of letting you execute a good landing once you're established on the final approach course.

Any questions about technique or the new 9pack, please ask.
Will /Chicago /USA

funkyhut

#7
Hi Will & Steve,
Thanks for the tips.
I think it's a question of practice. It seems easier with MSFS but the more I do it raw, the better it becomes.
Take care.

EDIT
Just set up a full screen 3440 x 1440 layout per yours Steve and that makes all the difference.
Thank you both very much!
Greetings from the mountains of Northern Thailand (VTCC),
Chris Stanley.

cavaricooper

#8
On 4K I set it up like this-


I have other networked displays for the MIP, Pedestal, Overhead etc.

Hardy was insistent on lining up the PFD with the centerline for SA.  After a LOT of experimentation I arrived at the conclusion that he was right (yet again).

:)

C

PS- Ta Jeroen- Happy 2021


Hoppie added width=700 to the image tag
Carl Avari-Cooper, KTPA

Bluestar

Quote from: cavaricooper on Sun,  3 Jan 2021 13:30
On 4K I set it up like this-


I have other networked displays for the MIP, Pedestal, Overhead etc.

Hardy was insistent on lining up the PFD with the centerline for SA.  After a LOT of experimentation I arrived at the conclusion that he was right (yet again).

:)

C

PS- Ta Jeroen- Happy 2021


Hoppie added width=700 to the image tag

Carl,

What Zoom are you using in this picture?

The problem I'm currently having is PSX seems to steep and P3d seems to shallow. 

PSX external visuals remind me of a night-only B707 I trained on back in another life.  🤣

Bode
Grace and Peace,

Bode

cavaricooper

Bode- that was a while ago on P3D... and I "think" it was 0.9... now I am back in the land of beginners with MSFS as P3D is no longer on my system....
Carl Avari-Cooper, KTPA

Bluestar

Carl,

Good luck with MSFS.  I've still got a bad taste in my mouth from when MS shutdown FSX.  🤣

I'm trying to get the external views from PSX and P3d to match up.  To me the P3d is too shallow and PSX is a little steep. 

Bode
Grace and Peace,

Bode

cavaricooper

If you just use the out of the window view (no airframe in P3D you can get close to 1.0... and it seems to do ok there...
Carl Avari-Cooper, KTPA

Bluestar

Quote from: cavaricooper on Thu,  7 Jul 2022 23:56
Bode- that was a while ago on P3D... and I "think" it was 0.9... now I am back in the land of beginners with MSFS as P3D is no longer on my system....

I loaded the FSX B744 on my P3d system and have been happy with the virtual cockpit.  For me to get the runway width to match PSX I had to move the zoom to 1.50.   

Hardy, does PSX vary the runway width or is it a set width and only the length is changed?  Also what zoom factor does PSX use?

Bode
Grace and Peace,

Bode

Hardy Heinlin

Runway width is variable and is set by the nav database (see Instructor > Analysis > Airport for runway dimensions).

In PSX there is no zoom value referring to MSFS. PSX doesn't know what MSFS is. So I can't tell you any comparable value. I can't even tell you the focal length of the wide angle in the projection model (which also affects the perspective).


|-|ardy

Bluestar

Quote from: Hardy Heinlin on Mon, 25 Jul 2022 15:22
Runway width is variable and is set by the nav database (see Instructor > Analysis > Airport for runway dimensions).

In PSX there is no zoom value referring to MSFS. PSX doesn't know what MSFS is. So I can't tell you any comparable value. I can't even tell you the focal length of the wide angle in the projection model (which also affects the perspective).


|-|ardy

Thanks, the 1.5 zoom in P3d matches PSX on my system.  Just wanted to make sure I was comparing apples to apples.

Bode
Grace and Peace,

Bode