Discussion IMS: What panel design would you prefer?

[jedidia]

Word is of course about this project here.

I'll soon start doing the panels in earnest, what we have currently is just something more or less functional for debugging.

The original plan was a design with completely custom graphics in somewhat of a 60'ies retro style (mostly because I love it so much), bt I find myself more and more pressed for time and won't be able to pull it off appropriately.

Currently, I'm considering two solutions to that problem.
The first would be to make a panel that looks like a touchy screeny glass cockpit, probably not dissimilar in looks to the XR2 virtual cockpit (no, it won't be a virtual cockpit, it'sstill gonna be a 2-d panel). Those are much less work-intensive, indeed extremely so, but without lighting they can look somewhat dull and not really like glass.

The other option is to use the default Deltaglider panel elements, which seem to be free to use for anyone. The resulting panel will feel very similar to the DeltaGlider.

I can't really decide for either, so tell me what you'd prefer.

 

[Urwumpe]

I would prefer a full glass cockpit, simply since it would be more realistic considering the spacecraft that you develop: Even our current naval capital ships don't use dedicated instruments anymore, all is done with fairly generic, easily exchangeable workstations.

 

[Tommy]

I guess I'd prefer a DG style, or at least some form of 2d cockpit. Three-d virtual cockpits are a PITA - you always have to move the camera to hit buttons, and the buttons are always hard to hit for an old guy who doesn't see the best.

Then again, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "Glass Cockpit". If it's based on a 3d cockpit (like the XR-2's non-functional virtual cockpit) I wouldn't want it.

If it's a two-d cockpit that just uses different graphics than the DG, that would be fine.

Consider also that many people use alternative graphics clients - so using the sketchpad interface (like the DG) MAY be better for DX-9 or OGLA clients.



Just saw a mock-up of the panel on the other thread, that looks fine. Realistically, it's hard to see a ship of that future era that doesn't use some sort of touch-screen interface. The DG panel is sort of based on current airplane tech - which just doesn't make sense for a futuristic vessel with these features. I did sort of like the panels on the Hius, if that helps.

 

[jedidia]

If it's a two-d cockpit that just uses different graphics than the DG, that would be fine.

Yes, that's what I have in mind. God knows I don't have the time to model a virtual cockpit for every command module :lol:
The example of the XR2 was merely posted to give an impression of what I meant by glass cockpit, not to suggest that I'd make a virtual cockpit.

 

[Loru]

IMO "glass cockpit" can be done in 2d with a little effort - you can for example create it in 3d modelling program, render it that way that MFD's are facing screen, and then edit it in 2d painter of your choice creating texture for 2d panel.

I'm investigating that possibility at the moment for Vertigo and Prometheus spaceplanes but it's too early to post pics .

 

[jedidia]

IMO "glass cockpit" can be done in 2d with a little effort

It's ridiculously easy to do, that's why I'm considering it.

 

[Loru]

Not exactly glass cockpit but I managed to create pseudo 3d border for it:

 

[Urwumpe]

I would still say, that the main functions of the panel will be navigation and system management, not too much piloting at that size of a vessel. No need for many dedicated instruments for displaying lots of data at the same place and in a dedicated way, so they can be read faster.

So, a few MFDs in the center and two large screens at the sides might be better for displaying what you need, since you can then have more freedom in formating the data.

 

[jedidia]

Not exactly glass cockpit but I managed to create pseudo 3d border for it:

very nice!

I was working on something similar, but it takes too much time at the moment, so I came down with either making the whole thing as a touch screen or use pre-existing graphic elements from the DG.

To my agony, the both are still pretty much head-to-head. Oh well, let's wait for tomorrow. Maybe a few more votes will tip one of a bit more clearly.

 

[yagni01]

One thing to keep in mind is the time frame where the ship lives - near-term vs. far-future. You have glass cockpits that can control systems with touches 'on the glass' or ones that use the touch-ability to activate bezel buttons, open and manipulate menus, etc. I use modern airliners and concepts for the MPCV as ideas on controls and separation of concerns for near-term vessels. I see two major areas of effort: 1) Creation of customizable display formats (PFD, ND, EICAS) where existing MFDs may not be available or appropriate, and 'mashups' of existing MFDs to create large scale displays that can incorporate 2-3 existing MFDs in a single 'display' where not every MFD must have the same amount of screen real estate. Not to mention the addition of a Flight Management System/Control Display Unit.

 

[francisdrake]

To me the glass cockpit is the preferred method by far. Orbiters default MFDs allow me to fly nearly all vessels without learning the basic instrumentation over and over again. And it gives a pretty outlook on the surroundings, at least when being near a planet.

A vitual cockpit is nice to look around, but I don't use them for reading gauges or giving commands. The gauges and HUD are hard to read, and the buttons are not easy to hit.

For vessel-specific tasks (which are sometimes only reachable through the 2D panel or virtual cockpit) I would rather prefer if the add-on developers would provide a 'systems MFD', tailored to their vessel. In such a systems-MFD the vessel-specific topics could be displayed (electrical energy managment, oxygen level, heat managment, etc.) and also commands could be listed, saving me to memorize various individual key commands :idea:

 

[yagni01]

Agree. More and more, anything that is not an actual movable control is going onto a MFD. The above image with all the 'steam gauges' for engines, fuel, consumables, position, attitude, etc., could simply be moved into different DUs..

 

[MaverickSawyer]

I think that having the dedicated MFD would be a good idea. However, the current 2D panel works quite well IMO. Either way, it's going to be good.

 

[jangofett287]

One problem I have with the latest, is that the panel stretches to fill the screen. This may be fine on normal screens. but my screen is 1680x1050 (16:9)

 

[Loru]

AFAIK there is a way to force panel to keep desired size

 

[jedidia]

One problem I have with the latest, is that the panel stretches to fill the screen. This may be fine on normal screens. but my screen is 1680x1050 (16:9)

I'm planning to aim for a 16:10 ratio, as that accommodates all aspect ratios pretty well. It gets a bit annoying on low-res 4:3, but I think noone except for me (at the moment) has one anymore, so that should be fine.

It seems that Glass Cockpit is a clear winner. Fine with me, the graphical work will be pretty easy, and I think I can get enough inspirations for Fonts and color scheemes from existing ones.

 

[PeterRoss]

It gets a bit annoying on low-res 4:3, but I think noone except for me (at the moment) has one anymore, so that should be fine.

I'm using 4:3 1280x1024 monitor by now :uhh:

 

[jedidia]

I'm using 1024x786 currently

 

[Urwumpe]

I'm using 1024x786 currently

I also use 1024x768 for debugging - and 1280 x 1024 otherwise.

 

[Jarvitä]

I'm using 4:3 1280x1024 monitor by now :uhh:

1280*1024 is 5:4.

I've got a 1600*1200 and a 1920*1200 monitor, so either 4:3 or 16:10 is fine for me.