- Messages
- 18
- Country
Have you tried adjusting the World Scale on your VR config? If so, what value you find that accurately matches the size of the cockpit in VR?
-
Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:
- Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
- Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
- Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
- Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
- Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
- Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.
Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.
By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.
MSFS20 MV-22B Osprey Release 3.0
- Thread starter kalong
- Start date
- Messages
- 178
- Country
I know this option (I even fly with 106%) but the problem is that if you use it - you touch everything, the whole world, even buildings, trees, people, so not only the cockpit. For example, if you down it to -20%, you will have the size of the rest -20%. I also specially written that the impression is such in relation to other models. In MSFS you dont have a scale for specific model but for all or nothing. So if I give it 100% (as benchmark), the scale should be the same everywhere, and Osprey then vs other models looks like more 115%-120% inside keeping 100% level on the others. The difference is so large that MFDs look like large TVs, and the stick on one that holds with two hands. Even the buttons around the MFD look like large Lego blocks. Recently, I sat in the UH-60M CMFD and the impression is completely different (I have also MFD in my home cockpit). It spoils immersion a bit. I suspect that everything can be globally reduced with a slider in MSFS SDK/or 3D soft and then give to test, so it can be quite easy to improve I suppose, because the proportions are generally OK (so one global move only in VC). Generally, the 100% scale in MSFS is too small (there are several topics on the MSFS forum about it), better scale proportions are in DCS, but this shows that with 100% effect of impression in the cockpit MV-22 should be much smaller than we have Today on 100% with MV-22 (and yet the VC is too large, so I wrote that it should be smaller with a range of -15-20% because then it starts to look fairly good). If you would like to improve it, I will gladly take part in the test. For 2D users, this will not change, because they will not even notice it, but for VR users it will be a big plus. I only fly in VR for 4 years, mainly helicopters, also in DCS but MV-22, unfortunately, it looks too big here. Pls think about it
.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 18
- Country
Yeah I understand, just wanted to have an scaling factor to work with. We will look into this.I know this option (I even fly with 106%) but the problem is that if you use it - you touch everything, the whole world, even buildings, trees, people, so not only the cockpit. For example, if you down it to -20%, you will have the size of the rest -20%. I also specially written that the impression is such in relation to other models. In MSFS you dont have a scale for specific model but for all or nothing. So if I give it 100% (as benchmark), the scale should be the same everywhere, and Osprey then vs other models looks like more 115%-120% inside keeping 100% level on the others. The difference is so large that MFDs look like large TVs, and the stick on one that holds with two hands. Even the buttons around the MFD look like large Lego blocks. Recently, I sat in the UH-60M CMFD and the impression is completely different (I have also MFD in my home cockpit). It spoils immersion a bit. I suspect that everything can be globally reduced with a slider in MSFS SDK/or 3D soft and then give to test, so it can be quite easy to improve I suppose, because the proportions are generally OK (so one global move only in VC). Generally, the 100% scale in MSFS is too small (there are several topics on the MSFS forum about it), better scale proportions are in DCS, but this shows that with 100% effect of impression in the cockpit MV-22 should be much smaller than we have Today on 100% with MV-22 (and yet the VC is too large, so I wrote that it should be smaller with a range of -15-20% because then it starts to look fairly good). If you would like to improve it, I will gladly take part in the test. For 2D users, this will not change, because they will not even notice it, but for VR users it will be a big plus. I only fly in VR for 4 years, mainly helicopters, also in DCS but MV-22, unfortunately, it looks too big here. Pls think about it
- Messages
- 18
- Country
Doing some research online - this seems a common issue among different aircraft, and personal preferences. I've found multiple articles regarding this issue on the forums. It has to do with interpupillary distance, as this is what really determines the perspective and scale of things: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/...-school-children-classroom-seats-etc/563763/3I know this option (I even fly with 106%) but the problem is that if you use it - you touch everything, the whole world, even buildings, trees, people, so not only the cockpit. For example, if you down it to -20%, you will have the size of the rest -20%. I also specially written that the impression is such in relation to other models. In MSFS you dont have a scale for specific model but for all or nothing. So if I give it 100% (as benchmark), the scale should be the same everywhere, and Osprey then vs other models looks like more 115%-120% inside keeping 100% level on the others. The difference is so large that MFDs look like large TVs, and the stick on one that holds with two hands. Even the buttons around the MFD look like large Lego blocks. Recently, I sat in the UH-60M CMFD and the impression is completely different (I have also MFD in my home cockpit). It spoils immersion a bit. I suspect that everything can be globally reduced with a slider in MSFS SDK/or 3D soft and then give to test, so it can be quite easy to improve I suppose, because the proportions are generally OK (so one global move only in VC). Generally, the 100% scale in MSFS is too small (there are several topics on the MSFS forum about it), better scale proportions are in DCS, but this shows that with 100% effect of impression in the cockpit MV-22 should be much smaller than we have Today on 100% with MV-22 (and yet the VC is too large, so I wrote that it should be smaller with a range of -15-20% because then it starts to look fairly good). If you would like to improve it, I will gladly take part in the test. For 2D users, this will not change, because they will not even notice it, but for VR users it will be a big plus. I only fly in VR for 4 years, mainly helicopters, also in DCS but MV-22, unfortunately, it looks too big here. Pls think about it
And it also seems to vary significantly from aircraft to aircraft, I guess it would be related to the position of the camera: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/cockpit-size-and-world-scale-in-vr/338584/179
The model is, as far as I can determine given the available data, to scale:
I'll continue doing some research. We could share with you a scaled-down version of the cockpit, but that won't make it to a production update since all other customers would have out-of-scale cockpits.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 178
- Country
IPD I have a very standard something around 64-65, just the spacing is something else. Im convinced that the problem applies to all people, it's not exactly IPD. In fact, it can be regulated by googles (I have such kind of possibility (HP Reverb G2), but let's say on this scale, 100% in MSFS and IPD 65 should be a benchmark for +/- IPD. I don't think many people are fully aware of this, because only few people fly in VR, and next few Osprey too. I may raise a question like this on the MSFS Forum if anyone noticed something similar to mine. If you do something I can test .
.
- Messages
- 178
- Country
Btw. see this: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/the-v-22-osprey-from-miltech-simulations-announced/553259/188
"I agree. At 100% world scale the throttle and stick look massive. Like you couldn’t get you hands around them. I run most other aircraft around 115%"
So the same feelings from the other user. I'll wait for more feedback, but I think its good idea to add it to the official patch later.
"I agree. At 100% world scale the throttle and stick look massive. Like you couldn’t get you hands around them. I run most other aircraft around 115%"
So the same feelings from the other user. I'll wait for more feedback, but I think its good idea to add it to the official patch later.
- Messages
- 178
- Country
I saw that 1.1.3 version incoming, thanks!
Im still thinking about VR scale problem, which basically does not allow me to use the Osprey model in VR, and I only fly like this and every day in MSFS. My MV-22 sits in a hangar and collects dust only.
I think that may be one of the reasons:
1/ as it was mentionet before by you - external of model looks ok and it has good scale and dimetions. If its ok go 2.
2/ as I know the interior can have different model (maybe something is here with different dimensions than external model)? If its ok go 3.
3/ it could be (I noticed it in the one answer in the net), that it could be worong default zoom / FOV for VR view or something else here. Normally in cameras.cfg the model should have entry "PilotVR" https://docs.flightsimulator.com/html/Content_Configuration/Cameras/Cameras_CFG/camera_cfg.htm (SubCategoryItem) so yes, maybe here is something wrong and we feel like a baby in an adult chair? I'm going to try and experiment with some of these entries.
I have no other ideas at the moment.
Edit. btw. I see no any entry in your cameras.cfg for PilotVR view.
Im still thinking about VR scale problem, which basically does not allow me to use the Osprey model in VR, and I only fly like this and every day in MSFS. My MV-22 sits in a hangar and collects dust only.
I think that may be one of the reasons:
1/ as it was mentionet before by you - external of model looks ok and it has good scale and dimetions. If its ok go 2.
2/ as I know the interior can have different model (maybe something is here with different dimensions than external model)? If its ok go 3.
3/ it could be (I noticed it in the one answer in the net), that it could be worong default zoom / FOV for VR view or something else here. Normally in cameras.cfg the model should have entry "PilotVR" https://docs.flightsimulator.com/html/Content_Configuration/Cameras/Cameras_CFG/camera_cfg.htm (SubCategoryItem) so yes, maybe here is something wrong and we feel like a baby in an adult chair?
I'm going to try and experiment with some of these entries.I have no other ideas at the moment.
Edit. btw. I see no any entry in your cameras.cfg for PilotVR view.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 178
- Country
I created entry for PilotVR, if you want you can use it (it works in VR view, I checked it).
I was thinking that InitalZoom do something with this but looks it doesnt have any influence for VR. All in all, I haven't flown the MV-22 for a long time, I have version 1.1.3 now and it seems to me a bit more to swallow than it was (it's probably due to exaggerated memories, as always ). Personally, I would take 10% off the scale and it would be ok. I also have a slightly different theory that the scale is ok (dimensions) but the main screen in the middle as well as the throttle and stick seem disproportionately large. Maybe it creates the impression that everything is too big. Maybe it would be enough to change the proportions of these three things and it would be ok.
As you can see, these elements are not that massive. However, changing this,would involve more work. What's interesting, for example, overhead, all the knobs there look very good so perhaps easy method is down scale of whole interior by 10% and it could be a compromise.
I was thinking that InitalZoom do something with this but looks it doesnt have any influence for VR. All in all, I haven't flown the MV-22 for a long time, I have version 1.1.3 now and it seems to me a bit more to swallow than it was (it's probably due to exaggerated memories, as always
). Personally, I would take 10% off the scale and it would be ok. I also have a slightly different theory that the scale is ok (dimensions) but the main screen in the middle as well as the throttle and stick seem disproportionately large. Maybe it creates the impression that everything is too big. Maybe it would be enough to change the proportions of these three things and it would be ok.As you can see, these elements are not that massive. However, changing this,would involve more work. What's interesting, for example, overhead, all the knobs there look very good so perhaps easy method is down scale of whole interior by 10% and it could be a compromise.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 18
- Country
Thanks for pointing that out, i'll take a lookBtw. The windshield was touched in 1.1.3? Looks like it losts reflections:
- Messages
- 265
- Country
No progress on making the FMC work to enter a flightplan or change waypoints, navigation, etc? I thought that was going to be updated in the Osprey at some point so that it would be able to navigate through the FMC?
- Messages
- 265
- Country
Thanks for the explanation. I understand the on going learning part. I think we are all doing that! Good luck with your learning and bringing that knowledge into the Osprey in the future. It will be a great addition to your excellent aircraft. I am not an aircraft developer so I don't understand how any of that works but have you looked into the Working Title avionics framework to see if that will help you? It may not be compatible with what you are doing to make a system for the Osprey but just an uneducated thought in case it is helpful. Otherwise I definitely do not have any knowledge to impart for you on that! Ha Ha. Thanks for your hard work!
- Messages
- 94
- Country
hey Maryadi! long time no see! After about a year, I finally have my computer back and I have purchased the osprey! A lot of the stuff I noticed during beta testing have been fixed and the thing flies awesomely!
I currently do a lot of VATSIM flights, utilizing COMMS, Navigation aids, ILS and other features you have implemented in the osprey, it actually works pretty well.
However, as I continue doing these flights, I do start to notice new bugs. Here are some bugs in questions listed below:
Radio/Nav:
- Will COMM2 be implemented? If it already has, it is not properly picked up by the VPILOT client like COMM1 is.
- HSI compass does not always properly align to the heading shown.
- NAV2 ILS does not work, only NAV1 Tested further, works properly.
- Glide Slope and centerline diamonds do not properly display Tested further, works properly.
Flight model:
- In full ARPLNE MODE, it is very difficult to hold a consistent airspeed. Below a certain throttle threshold, the engine RPM spools down and the airspeed drops dramatically. Extremely fine input hardly makes a difference as when the RPM spools back up, the airspeed then increases dramatically, making it difficult to maintain an airspeed that ATC may assign.
1. Note that Autopilot SPEEDHOLD is also affected by this. It cannot properly hold speed, due to the RPM increasing and decreasing at certain points.
- With external flight model (HOVERING), The rudder input seems finicky. The rudder has no response with small inputs, but as rudder differential increases, it suddenly becomes apparent with the aircraft yawing instantly. there is no slow acceleration to the rate of yaw. Letting go of rudder after spinning has a nice feature of it slowly decelerating the yaw rate.
- Last question, I saw someone briefly mention it. Since it may be difficult to add flight planning to the osprey until MSFS24, is it possible to add in a Garmin as a whole on one of the CDU pages in the meantime? This aircraft has great capability in real life, and it's bit of a bummer we have to resort to only radio navigation in these modern times with this add-on.
I currently do a lot of VATSIM flights, utilizing COMMS, Navigation aids, ILS and other features you have implemented in the osprey, it actually works pretty well.
However, as I continue doing these flights, I do start to notice new bugs. Here are some bugs in questions listed below:
Radio/Nav:
- Will COMM2 be implemented? If it already has, it is not properly picked up by the VPILOT client like COMM1 is.
- HSI compass does not always properly align to the heading shown.
Flight model:
- In full ARPLNE MODE, it is very difficult to hold a consistent airspeed. Below a certain throttle threshold, the engine RPM spools down and the airspeed drops dramatically. Extremely fine input hardly makes a difference as when the RPM spools back up, the airspeed then increases dramatically, making it difficult to maintain an airspeed that ATC may assign.
1. Note that Autopilot SPEEDHOLD is also affected by this. It cannot properly hold speed, due to the RPM increasing and decreasing at certain points.
- With external flight model (HOVERING), The rudder input seems finicky. The rudder has no response with small inputs, but as rudder differential increases, it suddenly becomes apparent with the aircraft yawing instantly. there is no slow acceleration to the rate of yaw. Letting go of rudder after spinning has a nice feature of it slowly decelerating the yaw rate.
- Last question, I saw someone briefly mention it. Since it may be difficult to add flight planning to the osprey until MSFS24, is it possible to add in a Garmin as a whole on one of the CDU pages in the meantime? This aircraft has great capability in real life, and it's bit of a bummer we have to resort to only radio navigation in these modern times with this add-on.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 932
- Country
Yes, Welcome back heater, thanks for the support. so you finished your "...". sorry I forgot the term in English.
radio/ Nav
- Comm2 not supported by it sim as last I checked. I checked my code. it still commanding to COMM2. if it still not work, then COMM 2 still not supported. if other software like VATSIM have a way to make COMM2 work, I will happy to add that support.
- let me check the HSI
-AP speed hold, let me re adjust it again
-yaw pedal, I must give space range due to some of pedal (physical) have jitter.
-ever try using stock FMS and it work good. unfortunately this FMS lock the navigation to GPS ONLY, so can't use VOR or TACAN. still find away for that.
let me try some other stock, maybe add a garmin GPS handheld.
blending touchscreen Garmin into CDU which not support touchscreen would be weird.
radio/ Nav
- Comm2 not supported by it sim as last I checked. I checked my code. it still commanding to COMM2. if it still not work, then COMM 2 still not supported. if other software like VATSIM have a way to make COMM2 work, I will happy to add that support.
- let me check the HSI
-AP speed hold, let me re adjust it again
-yaw pedal, I must give space range due to some of pedal (physical) have jitter.
-ever try using stock FMS and it work good. unfortunately this FMS lock the navigation to GPS ONLY, so can't use VOR or TACAN. still find away for that.
let me try some other stock, maybe add a garmin GPS handheld.
blending touchscreen Garmin into CDU which not support touchscreen would be weird.
- Messages
- 265
- Country
COM2 works in most aircraft but I don't know about VATSIM support. But you should be able to use COM2 to listen to a secondary frequency and/or talk to the in game ATC with it as that is available by default. Good use case would be to listen to ATIS on COM2 while still monitoring and using COM1. It would seem that would be possible in the MV-22 for sure but as of right now I don't believe it is. This would be a much welcomed addition.
I know there are many challenges with the FMS. Hopefully you will figure out a way that doesn't take much away from a realistic experience.