Both before and after the update the default eyepoint looked as if I was sitting on a high chair with the panel almost to my knees. Before I go in and alter the CFG file I wondered if my experience was unique?

 

The eyepoint set at 1.9 feet above cog should give you a view where you don't quite see the nose cowling.  I have changed mine to 1.98 feet which shows the engine cowling just as in real life.

 

to change the value look for the viewpoint entries in the aircraft.cfg file in the A2A C172 folder.

 

If you're seeing that high viewpoint it's probably a badly saved flight, re-selecting the aircraft should fix the problem

At 1.9 vertical from center of gravity, and zoom=1.00, I see with a fresh load of the C172 at new airport. I can just see the underside of the left wing at this setting. A 1.9 I can't see the left wing.

 

 

This is a compromise.  The initial view, we lowered the forward view so we would be able to see better out the side view, but in v.2.0 we made the forward view proper.  In the real C172, when you look left, you duck.  Unfortunately, we can't simulate this ducking when looking left or right.  So we just made the forward view proper since it's the most important view.

 

Scott.

Can be easily corrected/adjusted with EZdok. For example, 3 forward views: left, front, and right. Each view's height can differ. Food for thought.

 

JJ

This is a compromise.  The initial view, we lowered the forward view so we would be able to see better out the side view, but in v.2.0 we made the forward view proper.  In the real C172, when you look left, you duck.  Unfortunately, we can't simulate this ducking when looking left or right.  So we just made the forward view proper since it's the most important view.

 

Scott.

 Good, I was looking for validation since my eyes see the panel to be quite low or "me" quite tall.

Some shift backspace makes it better. Perhaps you could twist Lockheed's arm to try to address this. 

 

I don't have EZ Dock

Ezdok - highly recommended.

Track IR is possibly the most realistic way to address it, as there you will be actually moving your head exactly as you would in the real aircraft to duck to see a decent view out the sides.

 

thanks,

Lewis

I agreed with Lewis but with the exception of the word 'possibly'. B)

 

 

I agreed with Lewis

 

Hope you and Jeff have the most realistic weather now, Ron.

 

btw... lol!

 

also btw... how could you not agree w/ such a nice guy like Lewis!