Stereoscopic HMD systems are currently still used mostly in experimental systems and cockpit ergonomics R&D due to limited resolution, extreme expense, and the fact that it is more difficult to interact with a fully-functional, full-mockup cockpit (one of the major reasons to simulate in the military) when your vision is obstructed. However, there is a military sim in use for the Tornado that uses an HMD by CAE. Professional civilian aircraft simulators are poor candidates for HMD's because full-freedom situational awareness is less important than in military applications.

There are spatial cues and depth-of-field with the eMagin. If you turn your head to the right to look at your wingman and a AAA starts firing at you from the front, you hear the bullets coming from the left. Looking back to the front you will see a AAA in the distance in stereo and tracers racing at you. If your wingman says he's been hit, turning your head back right will bring him into view, and as he enters the right side of your field of view you will naturally follow with your eyes as you move your head further until he is fully visible in the center. This happens naturally in the blink of an eye. He will be out there at a distance, and as he loses altitude he will get further away below you. That is natural use of both audio and visual spatial cues and 3D stereo depth for your situational awareness.

Arneh, sounds like you might be interested in such a project? You might look into the FlightGear open source simulator code for inspiration, they have got something similar for enabling multimonitor/view over network..

Hi guys, I thought I would put my two cents in on this little debate. My father spent most of his career with CAE, retiring finally from a senior position. Professional and pc simulators and the history of simulation are a regular topic of conversation with us. I've flown a number of CAE simulators, both as a passenger (in an observer's seat) and as an amateur pilot (I don't have a pilot's licence).

Yes. Limited resolution is also a serious drawback of the emagin sytem when compared with a normal monitor display. Another problem with the emagin sytem is its exremely limited field of view: 'a 105 inch screen, viewed from 12 feet' is I believe how it is described. According to my rough calculations that would be the equivalent of viewing my 19" monitor from a distance of 27". In fact the emagin display at best would fill only half of my total field of vision: hence the absolute requirement to use it only in a very dark room.

No. Relative to the total cost of a commercial or military simulator the cost of even the most expensive HMD is insignificant. If HMDs were the way to go, cost would not be an impediment to their use.

But surely that is exactly what the pit builders here are after: a functional cockpit. So for the same reason, the emagin visor is impractical for them.

I'm not familiar with the details of the Tornado sim: years ago, after just having had a ride on a commercial sim I asked if I could have a peek at one. Heh, not a chance: not even a look at the cockpit! But I think it is instructive to note that that simulator is coming up on thirty years of age and as far as I know HMDs haven't been used since.

Yeah, I would agree with that to an extent, though civilian simulators still have about 180 degrees of horizontal view from their pits, which must be visually simulated at any given moment. Believe me, the peripheral vision and the ability to look anywhere without moving your head just by glancing with your eyes provide much greater immersion than any HMD ever could.

I must admit the head tracking combined with the audio sounds great. However you must have the 3d separation cranked to an unrealistic level. In real life the farther one is from an object and the larger the object is, the less 3d perception there is. For instance, there is virtually no 3d perception of an aircraft viewed from say 10 meters. (Obviously, an easy way to test 3d perception is to look at an object with one eye, then another: the more the object "jumps", the greater the 3d perception.)In day to day life we use 3d perception much more for "close-in" work. For instance if someone is standing in front of us and asks us to hand them a baseball. Whereas, if you are in the outfield and need to throw to the catcher at homeplate the calculation of direction will be made visually, but the calculation of distance is based on vision and experience, not 3d visual perception. Another way to think of this is by imagining a 2d cardboard cutout of the catcher. If the cutout is right in front of you, you will immediately perceive it as two dimensional. Whereas, from the outfield, the only way that you could discern a cardboard cutout of the catcher was two dimensional would be from its lack of movement.
So in EECH, or any other simulator, the only objects which, realistically, should have significant stereo separation are, say, the back of your copilot's head or the canopy struts, or knobs in the virtual cockpit. (This is why professional simulators don't bother attempting 3d displays. A true field of view and fully functional cockpit are much more important.) Now, the nvidia stereo drivers can be adjusted to increase the stereo perception of more distant objects, but the downside of this is the sense that one is looking at a small object up close (for instance, a toy plane)rather than a large object from a distance. (BTW, if anybody is considering the emagin, I believe only nvidia cards can deliver true 3d at this time.) So 3d stereo might be extremely cool for an FPS or tactical shooter (I imagine it could be very effective in the SWAT series). Since I only run simulators, and since I would set the drivers for realistic separation, 3d would be almost completely wasted, for me.

I don't have the time and talent neccessary to build my own pit, but kudos to those here who are doing it. Some of the components may be sourced second-hand or ingeniously improvised. However, the results seem to me to be much more impressive than just the sum of those parts might suggest.

As I said, just my 2c: as Kimchoc put it to each his own. Let's keep it friendly and fun guys!

I totally agree dar!
Although, to be fair, you weren't one of the people he was directly insulting. Not to mention, KC is a friend of mine. So, I took it a little personal when he kept referring to his stuff as junk.

Reticuli - I 'll promise to lay off the sarcasm, as long as you keep your opinions from becoming personal assaults. Deal???

Now, to clarify a few things....
Dar has already provided an expert (even if by proxy ) response to your first paragraph.
You'll have to admit, there ARE solid reasons for going with a working cockpit type of simpit, too.

As for the second paragraph, I'm not sure we are talking about the same things.
When I refer to "spatial" cues, I'm talking about your immediate surroundings. The type of seat, the "tightness" of the enclosure, the location of the panels, etc....the perception that you are physically occupying the "space". While the HMD does allow you to easily view your surroundings, it does not allow you to interact with them. This ties into tactile cues, too. Which is kinda my point....The experience will seem more immersive, as you tie more of these various cues together.

The "depth of field" cues that I'm referring to are along the lines of dar's baseball analogy. In real life, when you look out the glareshield, you are focusing off into the distance. When you switch your focus to your instruments, you have to re-focus to right in front of you. The way your eyes react to the differences between the cockpit being up close and the outside view being at a distance are the DOF cues I'm referring to. Only with a fresnel (or a projector) and a pit can you accomplish this. With a HMD (As with a standard monitor) your focus is always fixed to the screen in front of you.

HMDs do have alot of potential. The realistic head movements are (by far) the nicest feature and much better implemented, than in ANY other solution. And let's face it....We've all been drooling at the concept of VR, for a long time now. When HMDs catch up, I'm there! Until then, I'm happy with the direction I'm taking and proud to be part of this small community of fellow builders.

To carry on with the battle cry... "To each his own!!!"

Definitely! I would have too!
I'm glad you added that "proxy" bit. I was actually going to qualify my post with, "I'm not an expert..." (But I do have access to one. ) I'm sure there are lots of people around here with way more time on simulators than me. For instance, BeachAV8R, to name only one.

Yup, me too. Until then, the solution for me will probably be a Triplehead2Go (as soon as I'm sure my rig will be able to handle it). But enough about that: back to pit building, right?

I think that TrpHead2Go is going to be the real deal. Just a few more bugs to get out especially with ATI cards. We need to get a few games tweaked for it but it looks really good. The expanse of a view that wide is awesome IMH.
I studied these simpits for several years before starting my own. There are guys that are perfect with their attention to reality, like over on viperpits, then there are generic simpits that do double duty for all kinds of flying and racing sims. They are simply a work of art. With art being interpreted by the user. Who would want a clone of every simpit out there? What fun would that be?
Its all about creative with what you can afford and what you have to work with. And what your building skill level is. And how much your spouse will put up with.
And they are never finished. We are always looking for something new to do to it.
I have GOT to get a switch stater panel built. The new start-up procedures for EECH are way to cool. I've got them assigned to a Nostromo right now but that procedure cries out for an overhead panel. Its just way to easy for anyone to get going with switches. Less than $100 will get you around 70 switch capabilities.

Just yesterday I forgot what the key commands are and that happens alot if I dont play for awhile. I need a switch panel so I can look at the damn thing and hit the right button.
Yesterday I shot down Mapi becaue in the heat of battle, I didnt have the enemy switch on the radar. Hellfires were flying at anything on the screen. It was rather embarassing.

Lets see some more pics !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kim> according to reviews the ATI bug is certainly only of software/driver origin since Apple Ibooks with 9550 Radeon are working fine with TripleHead2Go on the max "3200x1080" setting..

In terms of switches you can go immediately the LPTswitch route (links on sw&hw were posted) which is 40x buttons per one LPT port and it's virtualy for free. You have to buy only few diodes/resistors and vandalize old printer cable to do it! Now, with additional PCI expansion LPT card you can have up to 40x3 LPTs per PC = 120 buttons for your pleasures..

Lets leave the IO cards/opencockpits/SIOC to the more advanced stuff like for displays such as counter meassures/ammo remaining/warning lights etc.. This will need some eechcommserver support to be coded anyway and I'm of the opinion lets firstly discuss and agreen upon one EECH standard, preferably opencockpits. While buttons via LPTswitch are keyboard driven so this step is immediately available and we can proceed with pit building..

ok I wanted to accumulate more info before posting here but some "moderator" immediately deleted my post over the official Lockon/BlackShark forum perhaps for some weird "marketing" reasons uh ah..
Now they locked my 2nd thread on the topic, wtf?

the resurrected thread on Lockon forum:
http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=18066

--
edit:

"Lets try. Some letters was russian, and need to set Win-1251 to see it correctly.

Two big buttons under the master arm, marked as "ПУСК-АВАР-СБРОС" is emergency jettison buttons. Right is emergence drop button for all under the wings payloads except "Vikhr" missiles. Left - for continues emergence Vikhr launches. Next switch "ВЗР-НЕВЗР" - armed or disarmed Vikhr warhead when emergency launches it.
Red square marked switch - "Ускор Разгруз" - make fast, continues and full rockets launches. Single pass fire-and-death rain :-)

Leftmost button switch "АВТ-РУЧН" is a automatic(predefined)/manual weapon control mode.

When it set down - automatic mode on. Cannon fires 10 rounds at a row with "low rate". When it up (manual ) - the mode selected by next switches. Rockets mode is simular.

Next switch initially has three positions. "ДЛ-СР-КОР" and set up a burst "long-middle-short". For cannon it is 20-20-10 rounds, for rockets pair-pair-single launch. I.e. side position "middle" is a historical appendix.

next switch - cannon round selector. All right with identification

and rightmost switch is a rate selector, but with fault identification. Up position is a low rate, down is a full rate. "

-
thanks to LazyCamel from forum.sukhoi.ru we now have to whole WCS panel info available.
http://forum.sukhoi.ru/showpost.php?p=817599&postcount=5

--

I know that the majority of EECH pit people are on the blue side, nevertheless the red side people might be interested that the Weapons Control System (WCS) panel in Ka-52 (in EECH) is using the same system as Ka-50 in BS so we can get some details on its functions. Buttons and display of this panel could be made in two stages: LPTswitch for buttons and eechcommserver<>opencockpits_SIOC for the green displays:


http://img150.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ka50startup1tn5.jpg

=


http://img150.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ka52cockpitwcshighlightedlv5.jpg


http://img246.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wrpsu25gx9.jpg


!real world Ka-52 cockpits photos:
(notice the yellow panel in center and 2 MFD off = must be Shkval TV and its contrast, brightness panel


Full here plus euro and some blue birds:
http://avia.russian.ee/cockpits/index.html

Some early Ka-50 prototype:
http://www.myaviation.net/search/photo_search.php?id=00026642 http://www.myaviation.net/search/photo_search.php?id=00026641

!k-37 helicopter extraction/ejection system in Hokum:
http://www.ejectionsite.com/k37seat.htm

More Ka-50 only cockpit pics at this thread:
http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=192878&postcount=43

Now for the different weapon modes selected in KA-50/52's WCS:
(screenshots taken from Startup&ABRIS videos - so you know where to look for the action which took place)


-First pic is [master arm=off], second pic shows cannon burts switch set to low and AP (Armour Pearsing) is set on, cartridge is still full (take off)..


-First pic is [Master arm=on, Shkval TV=on, Vikhr missile just launched, 11remaining]
-Second pic is [after 5 Vikhr missiles launched, 7remaining]
-The display is showing "MC" in type of weapon = abreviation for missile



-First pic [unguided missiles full, 40 remaining]
-Second pic [after all unguided missiles launched in three separe bursts, 0 remaining]
-"HP" in the type display stands for unguided rockets
-What is apparent that after some further surface airfare action and by that time the cannon ammo is down from "24" to "20" rds which stands for cca 200rounds..
-Also left-bottom of the pic show the laser standby on/off switch which might be added to all EECH major helos, perhaps someday. This is very realistic feature since lasers have to cool down etc..

---

Currently supported WCS panel switches in EECH>>

[master arm off] = ctrl backspace
[AP/HE ArmourPearsing/High Explosive ammo for cannon] = look it up in your setup gun1/gun2 (alt backspace for turret gun?)
[rocket salvo burst] = increse/decrease/all via S or shift S

----

So these major WCS switch functions are already covered in EECH - no coding needed.

And as mentioned the more advanced functions such as ammo/missiles remaining digits or types of rockets in those green displays could be added in later stage via opencockpits IO board/SIOC soft which need a little bit of coding, basically only passing on dynamic data for ammo/missiles via eechcommserver or similar..