General Category > Unofficial F/A-18 Acceleration Pack board
Collimated HUD
Sludge:
Virtuali...
OK, thanks for clarifying. Will keep this route in mind. I think we (myself and Scott Printz) are gonna keep down the path of attaching the HUD on the model, either until it works or we fail. If it fails (could happen, I dont know), I know Im open to trying your method and using a C++ gauge or .xml that could monitor the actual sim-eyepoint.
That being said, just because myself and Scott are going ONE POSSIBLE ROUTE of HUD collimation, PLEASE do not let that stop anyone else from trying this route. Virtuali seems pretty confident that it could work, so please, if you have the desire, follow up on it and proceed as he is discussing in this thread.
Later
Sludge
Paddles:
virtuali
Many thanks for very useful info. When developing an XML gauge I'd like to have some L: variables to get access to the aircraft's data, definately. BTW, when using your Addon Manager is it posiible to tell the current point of view? I mean is it a VC, or a tower view, or a spot view... I badly needed this info when developing my voice announcing gauge.
Sludge
I do believe that a collimated HUD could be made 'non-model tied'. That delta eyepoint is all that we need, and the Addon Manager can provide it. The rest is a matter of time )))
Sludge:
FSXNP...
Cool. Give it a whirl. The more people we have working, the better chance we have of someone actually succeeding. And, if you need any input from me, feel free to ask... there's no competition on my end. If you end up getting us a collimated HUD, then thats how it is, Im all for it.
And, Im definately on-board with your ideas about the Approach Lights assembly being part of the model instead of the "workaround" gauge that you did earlier. Not that it wasnt good, but it un-enables some of the VC light switches themselves (ie. cant shut off certain lights because the gauge needs it to display red/amber/green light). Personally, I dont use it anymore, but if you can get that modelled inside the Hornet, that would be another great addition.
Definately liking the momentum we got going this week!! 3rd wind in the sails for the default and Sludge Hornet!
Later
Sludge
virtuali:
--- Quote from: fsxnavypilot on May 14, 2010, 08:00:37 pm ---BTW, when using your Addon Manager is it posiible to tell the current point of view? I mean is it a VC, or a tower view, or a spot view... I badly needed this info when developing my voice announcing gauge.
--- End quote ---
Yes, of course...we had this feature for ages, since the Cloud9 MB339/Phantom. We needed it to fix a problem of gauges update routines that were called twice by flightsim, if the same gauge appeared both the 2D and the VC panel so, with this detection in place, we save a lot of calls and fps...and yes, we also used so our sounds (the custom DirectSound calls) could be programmed differently or even being shut down, in case the view was inside or outside the cockpit.
Note that, this was relatively tricky to do in FS9, because it required in-memory access, but it's easier in FSX, since Simconnect does provide with that info. Of course, the Addon Manager could make it easier for XML developers, since it could publish it as an L: Variable.
saprintz:
I think that there are going to be problems if trying to do a standalone, C++ HUD, one not integrated with the model. Before lots of fiddling, I thought that having current eyepoint in hand meant that collimation was right around the corner... just add a bunch more trigonometry to make the symbology appear to be fixed, and then bingo, home free. But there are some issues with the "independent dll" method, at least as far as I can tell. Theoretically and mathematically it seems like such a straight and obvious shot, but the practical doesn't always comply, and for me at least, a barrier pops up that is (or was to me) a little surprising. You can get some of it done properly this way, but there are probably going to always be some circumstances where the HUD detail gets pretty ugly. Just my few cents...
On the OTHER hand... there are some VERY talented people out there, certainly many with more experience than me, so who knows? I agree that everything possible should be tried! My gut and experience just lead me down the model-integrated route, so that's where my personal efforts will be focused. But it would be GREAT if someone came up with a reliable way to do a non-model-dependent HUD. I think we all just want to have fun flying an F/A-18 with a great HUD, as soon as we can, right? So who cares how we get there. I'm just looking forward to the arrival.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version