Fw190 windscreen bar

[SCG_PeeGee 20]

S!

Tonight I sat in the IWM Fw190 A8 at RAF Gosford.

Sadly the cockpit combing and gunsight were missing, as were some instruments and the bits from the cockpit.

However here's the cockpit view through the screen. Make your own conclusions.

Edited May 19, 2017 by 2./JG51_PeeGee

[Inkoslav 202]

Conclusions about what? That we don't have refraction through the glass in any simulator in existence, thus causing poorer visibility than IRL?

[Rjel 1434]

This might be, just maybe, the longest running and most argued of all the IL-2 series "discussions" going back well over a dozen years now.

[216th_Jordan 1154]

Refraction ain't modelled. It would take a bigger hit on performance than mirrors, it's fine without it and the 190 does not really suffer from it as devs have already lowered the bar.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf 2584]

Yawn

[heltaskelter 95]

Why oh why won't someone think for the lufties?

[JG13_opcode 406]

Why oh why won't someone think for the lufties?

 

Yeah didn't you know that only Allied pilots are allowed to be dissatisfied?

[LukeFF 5441]

[Wulf 512]

Refraction ain't modelled. It would take a bigger hit on performance than mirrors, it's fine without it and the 190 does not really suffer from it as devs have already lowered the bar.

 

You're entitled to your opinion but it's certainly not one that I share.  In short what we have in the game is a poor or failed implementation of a very well known feature.  As others have mentioned, the 'bar issue' has been known for a decade or more.  I think most 190 enthusiasts had assumed the 'IL-2 Sturmovik' 190 would have fixed this problem one way or another.  Unfortunately that wasn't to be.  On the up side it serves to remind the overly enthusiastic among us that this is a game that roughly approximates aspects of the RW- nothing more. 

Edited May 20, 2017 by Wulf

[Gambit21 4578]

Yawn

 

Pretty much this.

[Feathered_IV 6153]

Refraction ain't modelled. It would take a bigger hit on performance than mirrors, it's fine without it and the 190 does not really suffer from it as devs have already lowered the bar.

 

 

Luftwhiners ~ always lowering the bar.

 

[Riderocket 151]

i am confused, what am i missing? all i see is glass? o.o

 

 

are you hinting that the bar above the gauges shouldnt be there?

becuase im pretty sureeee it should

Edited May 20, 2017 by Riderocket

[II/JG17_HerrMurf 2584]

For Il2 series four, I propose the first stickies post after a Dev welcome is a "bar" post so we don't have to rehash this every nine months since, oh, 2002.

[Inkoslav 202]

i am confused, what am i missing? all i see is glass? o.o

 

Considering the OP's cockpit is clean I don't think he's meaning any in-cockpit equipment. Rather that the frame for the armoured glass appears to be very thin at the bottom, not at all obscuring the view from the cockpit. That happens thanks to the optical phenomenon called refraction, which means that the angle and thickness of the glass bends the light passing through the window (from the outside) downwards before it reaches the pilot's eyes. This obscures part of the armoured glass frame and effectively makes it seem like the pilot sits a little higher in his seat than he actually is.

 

However accurate refraction can't be modelled in any "cheap" way (speaking of GPU/CPU load), thus no single flight sim ever has done it. Why the Fw 190 usually is the target of this discussion is because it has an extraordinarily high angle on its armoured glass, which makes the effect a fair bit stronger than in most other planes.

[JtD 2346]

Thanks for the picture, PeeGee! Always nice to see some first hand info.

[JG27_Steini 50]

For all who wants to understand this problem better:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCGsyjt5ANU

[gnomechompsky 16]

Ah so this explains why the A5 is not the best fighter in the game.

[gnomechompsky 16]

You're entitled to your opinion but it's certainly not one that I share. In short what we have in the game is a poor or failed implementation of a very well known feature. As others have mentioned, the 'bar issue' has been known for a decade or more. I think most 190 enthusiasts had assumed the 'IL-2 Sturmovik' 190 would have fixed this problem one way or another. Unfortunately that wasn't to be. On the up side it serves to remind the overly enthusiastic among us that this is a game that roughly approximates aspects of the RW- nothing more.

I dont think anyone in the community disagrees with you last sentence. This game differs a lot from resl life, for example you can't even feel G forces on your body. Some how we find ways to get by and carry on.

Edited May 20, 2017 by gnomechompsky

[HagarTheHorrible 1078]

Refraction ain't modelled. It would take a bigger hit on performance than mirrors

Then do it like mirrors ?

 

The most obvious route isn't always the one directly in front.

Edited May 20, 2017 by HagarTheHorrible

[Uufflakke 1311]

Instead of again an endless discussion about the 'Oleg bar'  this article about the FW-190 refraction explains it all:

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/9152-ultimate-fw190-photo-evidence-thread/

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi 1153]

Yeah didn't you know that only Allied pilots are allowed to be dissatisfied?

The amount of dissatisfaction and repeated complains pouring from Luftwaffe pilots is unparalleled by any other group in flight sim history.

 

Raising concerns and opinions, negative or positive, is a natural and understandable but what is happening on this board and what was happening on other boards in the past in terms of Luftwaffe fans complaining is a different story. Please, do not pretend like Axis pilots are oppressed and stripped of their right to express their views, its not true and every damn thread like this proves that. In some way it resembles to me some vocal feminist groups that feel so much oppressed but the fact is that they are only oppressed in their own minds. 

[Stig 87]

 

 

it resembles to me some vocal feminist groups that feel so much oppressed but the fact is that they are only oppressed in their own minds. 

 

Not many women here, otherwise you would ducking for cover now   

 

I do agree with you as to the freedom of speech issue; seems the last decade or so that basic right seems to have been equated with a right to be taken seriously. 

[Caudron431Rafale 219]

You're entitled to your opinion but it's certainly not one that I share.  In short what we have in the game is a poor or failed implementation of a very well known feature.  As others have mentioned, the 'bar issue' has been known for a decade or more.  I think most 190 enthusiasts had assumed the 'IL-2 Sturmovik' 190 would have fixed this problem one way or another.  Unfortunately that wasn't to be.  On the up side it serves to remind the overly enthusiastic among us that this is a game that roughly approximates aspects of the RW- nothing more. 

Yeah, this "issue" isn't so important because as you said "this is a game that roughly approximates aspects of the RW- nothing more."

 

BTW it doesn't affect only the Fw190 but all AC with armored glass parts (windshield and protection), where the view would be even better....So you see it is not only a FW190 enthusiasts (that i also am) issue, even if some of them are louder on the forums.

 

Well this sim may appear to you as "a game that roughly approximates aspects of the RW- nothing more." doesn't mean it is not the best attempt at simulating RW in its category...Please show us something better. If you can't  it could be that you yourself are wrong with this statement.

Edited May 20, 2017 by Caudron431Micha

[Blutaar 196]

The thing is that its mostly a 190 issue because of the angle and thickness in combination.

 

Are there any other planes from that period with such an angled Windshield, most if not all armored Windshields have a flat angle so the effect is much less notable?

[HagarTheHorrible 1078]

What's the Hs 129 windscreen like ?

[Caudron431Rafale 219]

I was thinking about P40 frontal area and 109 rearside glass armour. They seem  to be put at some angle too. Maybe there is some effect from flat angle in relation to the heads position.

[Finkeren 6000]

[bzc3lk 297]

[DD_Arthur 2320]

ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz................................

 

[Wulf 512]

Yeah, this "issue" isn't so important because as you said "this is a game that roughly approximates aspects of the RW- nothing more."

 

BTW it doesn't affect only the Fw190 but all AC with armored glass parts (windshield and protection), where the view would be even better....So you see it is not only a FW190 enthusiasts (that i also am) issue, even if some of them are louder on the forums.

 

Well this sim may appear to you as "a game that roughly approximates aspects of the RW- nothing more." doesn't mean it is not the best attempt at simulating RW in its category...Please show us something better. If you can't  it could be that you yourself are wrong with this statement.

 

 

Why you LW haters even read these threads I'll never understand?  

 

The simple truth is that what we have in the game i.e. in respect to 'the bar', is incorrect, or are you disputing that?   But then, as I said, this is a video game, despite what you may think so in that sense it's to be expected.  So, again, just so we're clear; there are video games and then there's reality.  This is a video game.  

[Holtzauge 773]

Great with some new input on this. Of course it has been discussed at some length before but if PeeGee can get access to the plane again I think we have the opportunity to get some good solid data on this:

 

Unfortunately I think the picture is inconclusive since it’s not clear at what height it was taken. To see how much/if the cowling is visible I think the picture has to be taken at the correct height, i.e. the best option would have been to have the Revi lit and the sight picture showing. Obviously that ain't gonna happen (at least not for a while by the looks of it!) but maybe it would be possible to build a jig? One idea could be to simply use the canopy upper rim as reference and tape a ruler from there and take picture from the eye line height. Maybe others can come up with better ideas or a more accurate method but it’s a start anyway…..

 

As far as I can tell from scaling, the distance from the upper edge of the forward canopy rim (slide canopy removed) to the eye line height is approximately 182.5 mm. (See attached picture).

 

How about it PeeGee? Think this is something you could do? I for one would be very interested in the results!

[Blutaar 196]

May be it is possible to make the windshield framing textures transparent where it is to thick?

 

I dont know if it is possible to make textures transparent from one side and normal on the outside, this would be a good compromise, of course it would not simulate the downward viewange from refraction but it would be better then now, what do you think?

[Holtzauge 773]

May be it is possible to make the windshield framing textures transparent where it is to thick?

 

I dont know if it is possible to make textures transparent from one side and normal on the outside, this would be a good compromise, of course it would not simulate the downward viewange from refraction but it would be better then now, what do you think?

 

To begin with I guess we need the picture to see how much view should be there over the nose. But IF it turns out to be more than we have today, maybe a solution could be to move the Revi up in the BoX model so that when you align your eye in the sight in-game you get the correct IRL view over the nose?

Edited May 20, 2017 by Holtzauge

[Caudron431Rafale 219]

May be it is possible to make the windshield framing textures transparent where it is to thick?

 

I dont know if it is possible to make textures transparent from one side and normal on the outside, this would be a good compromise, of course it would not simulate the downward viewange from refraction but it would be better then now, what do you think?

That's actually a good idea!

[Caudron431Rafale 219]

Why you LW haters even read these threads I'll never understand?  

 

The simple truth is that what we have in the game i.e. in respect to 'the bar', is incorrect, or are you disputing that?   But then, as I said, this is a video game, despite what you may think so in that sense it's to be expected.  So, again, just so we're clear; there are video games and then there's reality.  This is a video game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 I just posted that i believed refraction could also benefit to other types like the 109, lol, and that makes me a LW hater for sure lol. Do you actually know that the Messerschmitt Bf 109 was the main fighter type used by the Luftwaffe?

 

Wow your post, it actually looks like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecutory_delusion

 

I dared to read this topic to suggest  that edit:lack of light refraction was perhaps not only disadvantaging the Fw190, but also the Bf109, and the P40. So you perhaps want to deny me the right to express my concern over a possible issue in the modelling of a VVS/ USAAF type with your post? My question: according to your logic now are you a VVS USAAF hater lol

 

Requested Precision.

 

You answer : "The simple truth is that what we have in the game i.e. in respect to 'the bar', is incorrect, or are you disputing that?"

 

to my statement : "BTW it doesn't affect only the Fw190 but all AC with armored glass parts (windshield and protection), where the view would be even better....So you see it is not only a FW190 enthusiasts (that i also am) issue, even if some of them are louder on the forums."

 

Question to you: what is that you don't understand in the sentence "it doesn't affect only the Fw190" ? (tip keyword undelined)

 

There's reality and this is a video game. You really noticed this too? Not sure where you want to go with this, i don't care much to tell the truth, but by putting things like you do you take the risk to fail to recognize differences in qualities between games. Eventually i fear this point of view will make you blind to all the good things and improvements this "game" has to offer. Even if so far, you're still around here (which is a good thing by the way)

Edited May 20, 2017 by Caudron431Micha

[Holtzauge 773]

That's actually a good idea!

 

Yup, that would be even better since it would fix the side bars as well which of course simply raising the sight would not capture.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf 2584]

The amount of dissatisfaction and repeated complains pouring from Luftwaffe pilots is unparalleled by any other group in flight sim history.

 

Raising concerns and opinions, negative or positive, is a natural and understandable but what is happening on this board and what was happening on other boards in the past in terms of Luftwaffe fans complaining is a different story. Please, do not pretend like Axis pilots are oppressed and stripped of their right to express their views, its not true and every damn thread like this proves that. In some way it resembles to me some vocal feminist groups that feel so much oppressed but the fact is that they are only oppressed in their own minds.

Just wait til the Mustang boys take up residence for Okinawa!

[seafireliv 358]

This might be, just maybe, the longest running and most argued of all the IL-2 series "discussions" going back well over a dozen years now.

Yep, this brought all the old nightmares back the moment I saw "FW190" and "bar" in the title....

 

Why, why? Will I never have rest from this thing?

 

 

 

=LD=Hiromachi

 

The amount of dissatisfaction and repeated complains pouring from Luftwaffe pilots is unparalleled by any other group in flight sim history.

 

Raising concerns and opinions, negative or positive, is a natural and understandable but what is happening on this board and what was happening on other boards in the past in terms of Luftwaffe fans complaining is a different story. Please, do not pretend like Axis pilots are oppressed and stripped of their right to express their views, its not true and every damn thread like this proves that. In some way it resembles to me some vocal feminist groups that feel so much oppressed but the fact is that they are only oppressed in their own minds. 

 

 

 

 

Well said. However, I would rather have this fw190 whine than the feminist whining that permeates everything. That`s the real nightmare, no joke.

Edited May 20, 2017 by seafireliv

[AndyJWest 1932]

Some people are only happy when they've got something to complain about...

[Danziger 2381]

Awww

 

I thought this was another surprise giveaway.