Bf109 3D cockpit model not accured

[E69_geramos109]

Hi everyone

Here I bring you something i noticed after testing by myself the cockpit of a bf109 in contrast as well with some mates from Jg52 squad @III/JG52_Otto_-I- @III/JG52_Supongo

 

Problem is that on the game the armored frontal glass on the 109 has modelled wrong the angle of the bar that holds this glass. This has nothing to do with the refraction problems that the FW190 has because on this case we see the metalic part outside the glass, so no refraction involved, just 3D model. 

That bar looks modelled as  perpendicular as the frontal glass, but on the real bf109 it was not. Here you can see a drawing about that section

 

You can clearly see how that piece It is not perpendicular with the frotal panel of the plane. 

 

I took one photo from a G6 model 

 

Here you can see a comparation between a photo from the inside of the cockpit and the view from the game. I tried to take the most accured angle possible on the game to put toguether the photo. 

 

As you can see that bar is far less noticeable and is not disturbing that much the view of the pilot. As aditional info the position is a little high becase I am 1.83m so for someone smaller the bar is even less disturbing. 

 

Because there is allways people that is going to see that the angle can be different, that the eye of the human and all thar filosophy. I tried to take a screen shot from the game from a perspective where I can see the bar as I could see it on the real 109. At first I went with the less zoom posible and kind of low. Even with that the bar was still bigguer that the comparation with the real one so I took other angle just to confirm how the 3D model is not well represented. 

 

I will send the info as well to Devs 

Edited February 14, 2019 by E69_geramos109

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Good find! You can also notice how the refraction makes the side bars a biiit thinner, and the lower apparent thickness of the armored glass support plate as well.

I wish we could have more comparisons with all the planes that have armored glass so the devs can make small compromise adjustements like they did with the Fw 190 to most of them, for example in the upcoming P-51 it also helps with visibility, comparing the left frame looking from outside the armored glass, and the right frame looking through the thick glass:

 

Spoiler

 

Edited December 17, 2018 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[CountZero]

12 minutes ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Good find! You can also notice how the refraction makes the side bars a biiit thinner, and the lower apparent thickness of the armored glass support plate as well.

I wish we could have more comparisons with all the planes that have armored glass so the devs can make small compromise adjustements like they did with the Fw 190 to most of them, for example in the upcoming P-51 it also helps with visibility, comparing the left frame looking from outside the armored glass, and the right frame looking through the thick glass:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

refraction only exists on 190s, no other airplane was affected by it ?

 

[E69_geramos109]

Refraction is a very known topic. But here is not just afecting refraction because the upper frame has no glass between the pilot and the frame. So is not a refraction problem. Is a 3D modelling problem. I guess they just made the frame perpendicular with the angle of the frontal glass but it is not. The panzerglass  was not ortogonal on the upper cut so they just need to tune the 3d model without modelling refraction effect. 

 

Would be nice also if they model refraction at some point

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

The bulges of the g-6 also seem way less dominant 

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

3 minutes ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Refraction is a very known topic. But here is not just afecting refraction because the upper frame has no glass between the pilot and the frame. So is not a refraction problem. Is a 3D modelling problem. I guess they just made the frame perpendicular with the angle of the frontal glass but it is not. The panzerglass  was not ortogonal on the upper cut so they just need to tune the 3d model without modelling refraction effect.

 

 

Yep, and it's important since many variants have it (G-2, G-4, G-6, G-14 and K-4) so I hope we could have it corrected in the future

 

 

3 minutes ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Would be nice also if they model refraction at some point

Call this guy xP
 

Spoiler

 

[Talon_]

This is what I got from matching up a plane to a real photo.

 

I tried to use the supercharger intake and wing as additional reference to match the angle. 

 

 

[E69_geramos109]

39 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

This is what I got from matching up a plane to a real photo.

 

I tried to use the supercharger intake and wing as additional reference to match the angle. 

 

 

I think the angle is far different. You can see how the engine cover is pointing up on the real one with a lot more angle. That reflects that the photo on the real one is taken from a higher point of view. You can se as well that the bar is not there. You can just see the panzerglass WITHOUT the metalic top bar. Thats why it looks similar to the game 

[Talon_]

Done some further research.

Looks like a lot of 109s simply didn't have glass extending to the frame:

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Though this one does:

 

Spoiler

 

 

Modernised planes do:

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

These planes have no armoured glass at all from what I can see:

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

[BubiHUN]

1 hour ago, Talon_ said:

Done some further research.

Looks like a lot of 109s simply didn't have glass extending to the frame:

  Hide contents

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Though this one does:

 

  Hide contents

 

 

Modernised planes do:

 

  Hide contents

 

 

 

These planes have no armoured glass at all from what I can see:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

You made a mistake during your research. Those pics that you posted here shows different variants of 109s. 

[E69_geramos109]

Nice photos there! Without the bar it looks even better for visivility. So we have the worst verssion on the game we can have regarding the bar

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

Our virtual squadron performed some cockpit tours to Spanish Messerschmitt in the Cuatro Vientos Air base Museum in 2014.

You can see the diferences in the video taken by III/JG52_Tuckie, in a original Ha-1109-J, (Named also Ha-1112-J1L with weapons installed)  a Spanish built version of the Bf-109G2, used in Sidi-Ifni war.

 

Edited December 17, 2018 by III/JG52_Otto_-I-

[Talon_]

2 hours ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

You made a mistake during your research. Those pics that you posted here shows different variants of 109s. 

 

Sadly there are not many surviving 109s so I had to use all the various G-series, however the windscreen panel seems to be of the same design between all of them.

[Sgt_Joch]

I took a look at this, but am not convinced there is anything wrong. I believe what you are seeing is a distortion caused by viewing the cockpit on a flat 2d screen.

 

When you view the actual 3d cockpit in VR, it seems fine. The front windshield is, as per the diagram posted, very thick glass encased in a frame. It comes out well in 3d.

[Panthera]

9 hours ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Hi everyone

Here I bring you something i noticed after testing by myself the cockpit of a bf109 in contras as weel with some mates from Jg52 squad @III/JG52_Otto_-I- @III/JG52_Supongo

 

Problem is that on the game the armored frontal glass on the 109 has modelled wrong the angle of the bar that holds this glass. This has nothing to do with the refraction problems that the FW190 has because on this case we se the metalic part outside the glass so no refraction involved, just 3D model. 

That bar looks modelled as  perpendicular as the frontal glass, but on the real bf1 09 it was not. Here you can see a drawing about that section

 

You can clearly see how that piece It is not perpendicular with the frotal panel of the plane. 

 

I took one photo from a G6 model 

 

Here you can see a comparation between a photo from the inside of the cockpit and the view from the game. I tried to take the most accured angle possible on the game to put toguether the photo. 

 

As you can see that bar is far less noticeable and is not disturbing that much the view of the pilot. As aditional info the position is a little high becase I am 1.83m so for someone smaller the bar is even less disturbing. 

 

Because there is allways people that is going to see that the angle can be different, that the eye of the human and all thar filosophy. I tried to take a screen shot from the game from a perspective where I can see the bar as I could see it on the real 109. At first I went with the less zoom posible and kind of low. Even with that the bar was still bigguer that the comparation with the real one so I took other angle just to confirm how the 3D model is not well represented. 

 

I will send the info as well to Devs 

 

The angle does indeed appear to be wrong, good catch.

[E69_geramos109]

5 hours ago, Sgt_Joch said:

I took a look at this, but am not convinced there is anything wrong. I believe what you are seeing is a distortion caused by viewing the cockpit on a flat 2d screen.

 

When you view the actual 3d cockpit in VR, it seems fine. The front windshield is, as per the diagram posted, very thick glass encased in a frame. It comes out well in 3d.

When I was there inside the cockpit there was no 3d distorsion and the frame was thiner. For me the angle is crearly not correct. You need to go very low and foward to obtain simiral aspect of the bar.

[BubiHUN]

8 hours ago, Talon_ said:

 

Sadly there are not many surviving 109s so I had to use all the various G-series, however the windscreen panel seems to be of the same design between all of them.

Not all of them are Gustavs. Some of them are F variant, so saying "this has that, bot that one don't" is useless.

Edited December 18, 2018 by -[HRAF]BubiHUN

[Talon_]

1 hour ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

Not all of them are Gustavs. Some of them are F variant, so saying "this has that, bot that one don't" is useless.

 

Which ones are Freidrichs? As far as I could discover they are all G-2, G-4, G-6 and G-14.

[E69_geramos109]

2 hours ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

Not all of them are Gustavs. Some of them are F variant, so saying "this has that, bot that one don't" is useless.

Every 109 of the photo are G models. 

[BubiHUN]

6 minutes ago, E69_geramos109 said:

Every 109 of the photo are G models. 

No, the "G-2" is just a F-4/trop wich was modified after the war(instruments, airfreame-bulges on the wings) and etc. Even the G-14 on the pic you posted were modified after the war, received a different engine(not DB), and a modified airframe to look like a G-14.
The only "original" 109 is the G-4(Rotte 7), original engine, original parts.
Of course, during the war there is a chance, pilot's wanted some modifications on their planes, but these planes arent. 

Edited December 18, 2018 by -[HRAF]BubiHUN

[FTC_ChilliBalls]

Could this partly be emphasised due to FOV and the virtual pilot´s head position?

IIRC when you move your head forwards this does change the angle at which you see this particular part of the cockpit.

Similarly, the BF 109 cockpit looks bigger in game than it´s actual model due to our natural FOV of 210° being crammed into a tiny 16:9 screen.

 

[Talon_]

1 hour ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

Even the G-14 on the pic you posted were modified after the war, received a different engine(not DB), and a modified airframe to look like a G-14.

 

It's actually G-10 Black 2 in Austria

 

[BubiHUN]

11 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

It's actually G-10 Black 2 in Austria

 

It's airfirame is G-6.
The 109 below is a standard G-10, some of had the taller tailwheel, and the bulges on the nose are the same as the K-4 have. 

Edited December 18, 2018 by -[HRAF]BubiHUN

[Talon_]

3 minutes ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

It's airfirame is G-6.

 

So the discussion about the windscreen is still relevant after all

[BubiHUN]

1 minute ago, Talon_ said:

 

So the discussion about the windscreen is still relevant after all

No, pilot's all had their own wants about minor midifications on their planes. Some of them survived the war. Those are really hard to prove wich one is original, or modified during the war, or after it. 

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

8 minutes ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

No, pilot's all had their own wants about minor midifications on their planes. Some of them survived the war. Those are really hard to prove wich one is original, or modified during the war, or after it. 

 

Your argumentation is flawed.

 

You are saying that we shouldn't trust the surviving G-models because they could have been modified. Yet you don't provide any source which justifies the ingame model we currently have. Especially when you consider that it is unlikely that the armored glass or the frame was modified. It was especially designed to replace a potentially damaged armored glass quickly and without much trouble. Having customization done to it would make it much more difficult. While this doesn't mean that it is completely unthinkable that someone still did a customization to it, the chances that exactly this aircraft survived is quite low.

 

As far as i can tell, everything indicates that the 3d model ingame is flawed currently.

[Talon_]

4 minutes ago, Operation_Ivy said:

As far as i can tell, everything indicates that the 3d model ingame is flawed currently.

 

I agree with everything in your post as far as this, and even then I partially agree with you here. I think further research is needed just based on the huge variance in panzerglass fittings I've found in my very lightweight search to determine what is proper - while the game version has incorrect geometry in my opinion, I'm not sure the forward view would be improved at all by using the trapezoidal-cut glass with a gap above that is present in many of the museum planes I've posted above.

 

Let's try to get a clearer picture of what was commonly installed in wartime 109s if we can - the drawings are one thing but drawings of the K-4 have spring tabs on all control surfaces which we know didn't make it to wartime planes!

[Sgt_Joch]

20 hours ago, E69_geramos109 said:

 

 

 

 

 

So I rechecked again the 3d cockpit of various G models in VR and am still not sure what the issue is. Looking at the diagram above, I would guess the upper frame is angled down about 30 degrees from horizontal? In the 3d cockpit, it seems to have that angle. Maybe someone else who has a VR headset could doublecheck.

 

You can't really judge from the 2d image on a monitor since it is distorted and gives the impression the frame is angled down more due to the viewing angle.

Edited December 18, 2018 by Sgt_Joch

[E69_geramos109]

5 hours ago, -[HRAF]BubiHUN said:

No, the "G-2" is just a F-4/trop wich was modified after the war(instruments, airfreame-bulges on the wings) and etc. Even the G-14 on the pic you posted were modified after the war, received a different engine(not DB), and a modified airframe to look like a G-14.
The only "original" 109 is the G-4(Rotte 7), original engine, original parts.
Of course, during the war there is a chance, pilot's wanted some modifications on their planes, but these planes arent. 

Mainly every 109 that is on good shape to fly comes from hispano buchones. Those planes were 109G airframe. Spanish made some changes to adapt merlin or other engines and after that they were redone again to 109s with DB engines. No ideia about if the one you are talking was an F4.

So there is any 109 we can see that has the bar as is modelled on the game but there are a lot or every singel one we found that has no bar or a thin bar on it so...

 

I dont know about VR because I hace no VR but as you can see i tried more than one angle to see if i can get the point of view that the pilot eye has on real about the frame and I needed a retarded angel to get the view from the bar that the models we found has. So for me is nothing with the perspective the game gives us. Of corse is fifferent but not that far if you see the angle i needed to get right the metalic bar. 

[LukeFF]

All of this talk is useless without knowing what drawings were used to create the 3D model. 

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

Is it though?

 

even if it only starts a discussion about it and provides awareness of the possible issue, i think it is far from useless...

[LukeFF]

14 minutes ago, Operation_Ivy said:

Is it though?

 

even if it only starts a discussion about it and provides awareness of the possible issue, i think it is far from useless...

 

Ok, mostly useless. ? I can't tell you how many times in beta testing someone (including myself) has said something isn't modelled right, only for the devs to produce their sources showing they got it right. 

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

interactive 3d view of Messerschmitt Bf 109G-6 cockpit

 

http://www.muzeumlotnictwa.pl/pano_zwiedzanie/eksponaty/20/messerschmitt_rendeready.php?w=p

[Talon_]

Hopefully I have now solved this through the power of virtual reality. As far as the drawing goes @E69_geramos109 is correct. The next thing in my opinion to establish is if the drawing is correct (only because we see so many 109s with a different arrangement).

 

[LizLemon]

From the G6. The highlighted line is the top of the armored glass

[E69_geramos109]

Image made by @III/JG52_Otto_-I- with the render from @LizLemon

 

 

 

Edited December 19, 2018 by E69_geramos109

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

10 hours ago, LizLemon said:

From the G6. The highlighted line is the top of the armored glass

 

Spoiler

 

 , @E69_geramos109 These are my conclusion after comparing @LizLemon picture, with the real G2 armoured windshield technical drawing.
I think that we have the blind angle of upper windshield bar, doubled by the wrong 3D modeling.
What do you think?

 

Spoiler

 

Edited December 19, 2018 by III/JG52_Otto_-I-

[FTC_ChilliBalls]

Anyone else notice how the side bars of the IL2 model also look  way thicker than IRL?

 

Would appreciate if you guys could check that one too, especially with the overlapping technical drawings

[[DBS]TH0R]

On an interesting note, and perhaps a dumb question, but one necessary to ask... How many posters here understand orthogonal projection (what you see on technical documentation and drawings)?

Edited December 22, 2018 by [DBS]TH0R
re-phrasing

[FTC_ChilliBalls]

Hey, I´ve got new pictures to share, from the original - ERSATZTEIL - LISTE BF 109G - spare part list.

Spoiler

 

 

 

The OP´s picture seems to be from the Spanish HA-1109 which were original BF 109G2 airframes with the HS-12Z engine.

 

While the pictures I post here don´t show the issue as detailed as OP´s, they confirm that the issues exists.

That´s most definitely not a 90° angle in picture 3. 

 

If OP could confirm where they got his picture from, we would have a solid argument to present to the devs.

Edited January 13, 2019 by So_ein_Feuerball