I have been monitoring this news group for about two years now and it has
gradually dried up. I will say again, you will get much more help at
alt.games.microsoft.flight-sims. This applies whether you are using a
microsoft sim or not, or even if you are a real life pilot. You will be
welcomed.


Quilljar Matrox
see http://client.webshots.com/album/194691959rhDQFi

Don't forget Greasy Grimey Grubby Rider migrated from here.........
d:->))

That may be true but I still monitor this group. There are other sims in
the world than MSFS, although as yet none have been able to claim that
they're better!

But until the traffic dries up to nothing, I'll continue to monitor both
newsgroups. It's not that much of an effort (at least with the Agent
newsreader).

Furthermore, I get more (and higher quality) flight sim news and
discussions by monitoring Avsim's site and groups. The crowd there is a
little serious about the hobby, and plus there's no " make your ***
bigger" spam there.

Caveat: Avsim does has an editorial right to monitior and manage their
forums, so 100% free speech is not guaranteed as it is here.

Dave Blevins



On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 23:22:13 +0000 (UTC), "Quilljar"
> wrote:

>It's a day since I sent the last posting. No one else has visited or posted.
>I rest my case
> Quilljar Matrox
> see http://client.webshots.com/album/194691959rhDQFi
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi Dave,
Yes I keep an eye on this group for the same reasons, and I think Carl Frisk
does too. He is a very knowledgeable guy. I only suggested the MS group
because newbies may not know of it ,and also it does deal with much more
than MS stuff as you probably know.
How can we ressurect this group then? It could be an interesting project.
Any ideas? Maybe we could make it specialise in some unusual aspect of
simming!

Quilljar Matrox
see http://client.webshots.com/album/194691959rhDQFi

"Quilljar" > wrote in message ...
> Hi Dave,
> Yes I keep an eye on this group for the same reasons, and I think Carl Frisk
> does too. He is a very knowledgeable guy. I only suggested the MS group
> because newbies may not know of it ,and also it does deal with much more
> than MS stuff as you probably know.
> How can we ressurect this group then? It could be an interesting project.
> Any ideas? Maybe we could make it specialise in some unusual aspect of
> simming!
>
> Quilljar Matrox
> see http://client.webshots.com/album/194691959rhDQFi
>
>
>

Carl: Popping his head in the door....

Quilljar,
Excellent train of thought you have going there.

At times this group can contain little gems of gold. Been a while though.

--
....Carl Frisk
Anger is a brief madness.
- Horace, 20 B.C.
http://www.carlfrisk.com

Quilljar wrote:
> Hi Dave,
> Yes I keep an eye on this group for the same reasons, and I think Carl Frisk
> does too. He is a very knowledgeable guy. I only suggested the MS group
> because newbies may not know of it ,and also it does deal with much more
> than MS stuff as you probably know.
> How can we ressurect this group then? It could be an interesting project.
> Any ideas? Maybe we could make it specialise in some unusual aspect of
> simming!
>
> Quilljar Matrox
> see http://client.webshots.com/album/194691959rhDQFi
>
>
>
Hi Quilljar

May I suggest some discussion for those who have the Parhelia, for
example. I have been meaning for some time to discuss this especially
with the dearth of decent panels for it.

Warren

>>
> Hi Quilljar
>
> May I suggest some discussion for those who have the Parhelia, for
> example. I have been meaning for some time to discuss this especially
> with the dearth of decent panels for it.
>
> Warren


Right,
I have used the Parhelia fior about three years now. What is the problem
exactly?


--
Quilljar Matrox
see http://client.webshots.com/album/194691959rhDQFi

Quilljar wrote:
>>Hi Quilljar
>>
>>May I suggest some discussion for those who have the Parhelia, for
>>example. I have been meaning for some time to discuss this especially
>>with the dearth of decent panels for it.
>>
>>Warren
>
>
>
> Right,
> I have used the Parhelia fior about three years now. What is the problem
> exactly?
>
>
I've also had the Parhelia since it came out - and about to buy the PCI
Express version with three LCD 17" screens, whereas at the moment I'm
using a single CRT in the centre with two LCDs on either side. This is
fine but the bezels are quite wide but the newer versions have much
thinner bezels. I need a really good DVI centre screen for my graphics
programs but I haven't yet decided which to get.

I like using the virtual cockpit where available but many designers of
aircraft seem to care more for the outside of the aircraft and treat the
panel almost as an after thought. Personally, I don't look at the
aircraft after I start flying it, but I like to see a good panel. I
don't really have time to learn G-max or XML so I use 2D panels.

The first panel I worked was the graphics for the Socata with Bill
Leaming who taught me a lot. Since then I have done quite a lot of
panels but only for my own use.

The main problem I have is with only 15" screens at 1024 x 768 which
means if I use a photorealistic panel the gauges are too small. So I am
trying to find a compromise: Do I design a panel just for the three
screen set-up which spreads the gauges right across the screen or do I
go for a realistic version?

Warren

"Warren" > wrote in message ...
> Quilljar wrote:
>>>Hi Quilljar
>>>
>>>May I suggest some discussion for those who have the Parhelia, for
>>>example. I have been meaning for some time to discuss this especially
>>>with the dearth of decent panels for it.
>>>
>>>Warren
>>
>>
>>
>> Right,
>> I have used the Parhelia fior about three years now. What is the problem exactly?
>>
>>
> I've also had the Parhelia since it came out - and about to buy the PCI Express version with three LCD 17" screens,
> whereas at the moment I'm using a single CRT in the centre with two LCDs on either side. This is fine but the bezels
> are quite wide but the newer versions have much thinner bezels. I need a really good DVI centre screen for my graphics
> programs but I haven't yet decided which to get.
>
> I like using the virtual cockpit where available but many designers of aircraft seem to care more for the outside of
> the aircraft and treat the panel almost as an after thought. Personally, I don't look at the aircraft after I start
> flying it, but I like to see a good panel. I don't really have time to learn G-max or XML so I use 2D panels.
>
> The first panel I worked was the graphics for the Socata with Bill Leaming who taught me a lot. Since then I have done
> quite a lot of panels but only for my own use.
>
> The main problem I have is with only 15" screens at 1024 x 768 which means if I use a photorealistic panel the gauges
> are too small. So I am trying to find a compromise: Do I design a panel just for the three screen set-up which spreads
> the gauges right across the screen or do I go for a realistic version?
>
> Warren

I think I'd do a quick mock-up of both. Sit back, relax and decide which 'feels right'. Send the mockups off to
others who are interested and get their opinions. Hum that might spark some interest in this group.

--
....Carl Frisk
Anger is a brief madness.
- Horace, 20 B.C.
http://www.carlfrisk.com

Hi Warren,
Well, I have always grabbed the edge of the normal 2D panel and dragged it
in to its correct size. You then have to drag the scenery down to fit the
screen. If you click on the top of the panel you can place it wherever you
like. You get a great view this way. However, with the Parhelia and three
screens I prefer to use the Virtual cockpit. Hit the minus key to set it
further out. There is a great deal you can do with the keys and mouse to set
your cockpits exactly how you like them. Then save the flight and it will
always stay like that? If you haven't tried this trick then I recommend it
highly. There is no need to go re-designing any panels at all.

--
Quilljar Matrox
see http://client.webshots.com/album/194691959rhDQFi

Quilljar wrote:
> Hi Warren,
> Well, I have always grabbed the edge of the normal 2D panel and dragged it
> in to its correct size. You then have to drag the scenery down to fit the
> screen. If you click on the top of the panel you can place it wherever you
> like. You get a great view this way. However, with the Parhelia and three
> screens I prefer to use the Virtual cockpit. Hit the minus key to set it
> further out. There is a great deal you can do with the keys and mouse to set
> your cockpits exactly how you like them. Then save the flight and it will
> always stay like that? If you haven't tried this trick then I recommend it
> highly. There is no need to go re-designing any panels at all.
>
You're quite right - this is exactly the way I've been using it for
years. Where there's a virtual panel (as in the FS default aircraft)
there's no problem. However when one is trying an aircraft without a VC
I dislike looking at bits of panels strewn about the screen.

The other thing I dislike is when you have a nice setup you go to amend,
say, the flight number and the panel resets itself to a wide version. I
have been experimenting with ways to cure this and the best way I've
found is to make a new panel.

To give you a demo of my panels I'll put them up on a website over the
weekend and give you the URL.

As a matter of interest I wonder how many pilots have the Parhelia - I
know of only a few of which only yourself and Pete Dowson are the ones
with whom I have been in touch.

Warren

I would be delighted to benefit from your experience as I have never been
tempted to go in for panel design. That stretched panel and the oval gauges
on W key are a bit of an irritaion!
Well it looks as if we may have found a couple of ways to re-incarnate this
NG!
We could certainly ask on some other NGs for Parhelia Pilots to come here
for an exchange of info. I'll do that right away. Have you had a decko at
my screenshots with the three screens?
Incidentally have you bought the latest Realair Spitfire? It is a wonderful
machine and with the three screens makes an almost addictive plane to fly!
--
Quilljar Matrox
see http://client.webshots.com/album/194691959rhDQFi