Jump to content

Topic: User Interface


Recommended Posts

As I said in another thread... the UI must allow for a child windows in game, preferably with direct2D write capabilities :) Also the panel's should be the same, abandon the very thought of GDI support and go for the hardware accelerated library, That being said just try to avoid any library that isn't hardware accelerated including sound. If your sound card can mix the primary buffer than let it I say, why waste any CPU given it's such a precious commodity. Other than that I really love x-planes ability to drop you off 10 miles out on final to any runway you choose! This is a huge plus and easy thing to support by addon devs.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Start at the doors of the airport

2. Looking at the airport flightplan panel, which is your main panel for starting a flight / mainpanel of ASFS2012.

What about the other 90% of aviation? Where would a general aviation pilot start, who just walks from the parking lot right onto the ramp, or maybe into a hangar, all the way to the aircraft in real life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suggestions:

Most important: they “A”-Key (next view in category) is awesome in virtual cockpit.

In (old technology) 2-D-Cockpit, you can assign a key or button to each sub panel.

In VC (e.g. Catalina) you have to press 6 times the A-key to see the radios...

There should be direct keys for different views in the VC.

Free Flight Menus

Airport Selection:

Most drop-down lists are to short with e.g. 8 fields.

Would be nice, to identify seaplane basis.

After selection there could be a window with all informations about the airport (altitude, runways...)

Button “Addon Scenery” seems to be useless (only GAF 9 inside).

Time and Season

Didn't ever used a different date, but essential for starry sky.

Btw. Do the stars effect an impact of performance? Few people use this.

Weather

Fine Weather selection could be with seasonable temperatures and winds (to date and location).

Fuel and Payload

at this place should be a button to change the units of measurements.

Flight Planner

Enhancement of FSNavigator ...

Should be possible to enter a complete flight plan with keyboard (no further questions).

Map should be shown always simultaneously (WYSIWYG).

Map should have a scale.

Map with more informations (towns, rivers, streets which are important for VFR).

Nav Log more similar to professional ones.

Settings

Keyboard and joystick – I would like to have cfg file with my current settings!!!

After selecting a joystick, it should be possible to see all settings in the menu

(FSX I have to scroll down the complete list to find them all).

Realism Settings

The aircraft isn't glassware, should be possible to touch little branches...

Scenery Library

I've 250 entries – did you ever try to move one from bottom to top?

Drag and drop.

Departmentalization?

Here we can make a lot of nonsense (with the order) – plausibility checks?

Display Settings

Show feature performance impact (like UTX) fore each feature and a summary.

Kneeboard

Please add a pdf reader

(much time during flight – I could read the manuals – less questions to support forums)

Please add an Internet Browser

(much time during flight – more questions to support forums...)

OK, we'll only get the pdf reader

Albrecht

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have been listing mostly specific things that we want to see in the product, based on our own needs or based on foresight or visions or nightmares....

I think that there is also value in suggesting possible ways to integrate a lot of these specific capabilities, so that different types of users, or the same users with different scenarios, can get what they want in the same product.

Some of us have been making these types of suggestions as well.

I'm not sure how many of the posters on the AFS2012 forum realize this, and I apologize to those for whom this is obvious, but in a lot of cases, your different specific requests do not have to be mutually exclusive of each other, at least in respect to their behavior.

FS9/X and X-Plane have defined and fixed UI designs. Whatever the designers decided on is what we see and use. It is a static user interface. Yes, add-ons can inject menu items under a menu heading called “Add Ons” or something similar. Big deal. It is still fixed in the way that it can be altered.

We do not have to have a static user interface.

Before I go further, yes I realize that multiple ways of doing things are still possible with static user interfaces. That said, onward...

We do not have to have a static user interface. We can have a system with configurable options. By configurable I mean we can open the app and see something different because we configured it that way. By “see something different” I mean different menu items and structures and sequences that are appropriate for the configured “mode”. We can have multiple and open-ended configurations as needed, some created by vendors, some by end users.

This is important because if AFS2012 is designed for some really smart behavioral extensibility, then a correspondingly fluid UI capability will go a long way to making this easy to use.

Nolan

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, for one, am not in favor of having the sim load the last flight at startup. Since I would not want to fly again the same flight it would mean end the flight eveytime to get back to the main menu and a waste of "clicks" and time. I think this would better be a settings option for anyone to choose what suits one better. This is already possible in FSX with the default flight loading or not at startup.

Let me clarify my former posts. In the UI that I was suggesting, you wouldn't have to end the flight to get back to the main menu. I was suggesting something more like the X-Plane UI than like the FSX UI. In my suggestion there wouldn't really be a main menu. The flight would automatically load at startup (It wouldn't have to be the last flight. It could be a default flight), and then you could change the settings there. I just dislike having to wait for the FSX UI to load and then wait for the flight to load also. I'd rather have the flight load first, and then be able to change things if I want to. I think this would have a better appearance also. I'd rather start up the sim and be standing on the ramp looking at my plane than have a main menu like FSX. Even if Aerosoft does decide to do a "main menu" style UI, I'd like it to look as if you're standing in a hanger with your aircraft in front of you. I prefer realistic-looking things like this to a menu style UI. I agree that probably the best approach would be to have the option of several different built-in UI's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me clarify my former posts. In the UI that I was suggesting, you wouldn't have to end the flight to get back to the main menu. I was suggesting something more like the X-Plane UI than like the FSX UI. In my suggestion there wouldn't really be a main menu. The flight would automatically load at startup (It wouldn't have to be the last flight. It could be a default flight), and then you could change the settings there. I just dislike having to wait for the FSX UI to load and then wait for the flight to load also. I'd rather have the flight load first, and then be able to change things if I want to. I think this would have a better appearance also. I'd rather start up the sim and be standing on the ramp looking at my plane than have a main menu like FSX. Even if Aerosoft does decide to do a "main menu" style UI, I'd like it to look as if you're standing in a hanger with your aircraft in front of you. I prefer realistic-looking things like this to a menu style UI. I agree that probably the best approach would be to have the option of several different built-in UI's.

I thought too of that idea but it has a big problem.

For example: If you like EHAM and use Netherlands 2000 in FS9 and have your default flight there. The loading times are taking very long even on a RAID. If you just want to fly around a bit in the plain desert it takes you 5 minutes to load, set up a new flight, load again. Thats the problem and I see a lot of users who don't have that much time . And AFS2012 will sure load a bigger amount of textures, models, gauges after some time than FSX does at the moment because there will be more advantages for developers.

Emmanuel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are sitting on the runway at the airport to which you were nearest the last time you closed it,

I do not like to start a simulator on a runway. I think the simulator should allways start at the gate or ramp. Newer on a runnway. In reallife you do not jump in a plane that is sett on a runway.

But for testing purposes you might jump to the runway to save som time when you know you have to do the same over and over again. But by default i think the sim should allways start at a gate or ramp in a cold and dark cocpit.

For people that are new to flightsims, might have some help through training "missions". But default chould allways be pro dark and cold. :)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are sitting on the runway at the airport to which you were nearest the last time you closed it

Just to clarify, X-Plane does have the option to start on the ramp of the nearest airport, as well as cold and dark.

The loading times are taking very long even on a RAID.

That is very true indeed. That being said, I like the X-Plane approach, and incidentally, that's also how earlier versions of FS did it. However, the scenery loading would need to be streamlined. How about drawing everything as soon as you have it? That would mean the sim would launch instantly, but you'd only see a clear blue sky for the first few seconds. Then, an untextured airplane would appear, which would gradually be textured. Next, a runway would pop into place, etc. Since the sim would remain responsive during all of this, you could interrupt the loading process at any point by selecting another location, airplane, time of day, weather, or whatever. Again, the new conditions would take effect instantly, but the thing you changed would gradually pop up (i.e. if you changed from summer to winter, you'd see a untextured mesh that'd be gradually covered with snow textures).

By the way, X-Plane supports this mode, too: If you change location from the IOS, or by loading a situation through a joystick button, the flight resumes immediately, and the scenery pops into place piece by piece after a while. Looks kind of interesting. There's one thing to consider, however: What happens if you manage to end up below the terrain?

Judith

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the other 90% of aviation? Where would a general aviation pilot start, who just walks from the parking lot right onto the ramp, or maybe into a hangar, all the way to the aircraft in real life?

As I wrote. Walking to the Gate. Ok, I havn't explicitly said, walking to the hangar. Sorry. I just wanted to say, that there should be more than a menu. Yeah, your idea is good. Walking through the airport, driving (ot let driving) to the hangar, aircraft and so on. The feeling of flight is more than sitting in a cockpit. With this there are also much more options for addons. And don't get me wrong. I know it's just a brainstorming.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought too of that idea but it has a big problem.

For example: If you like EHAM and use Netherlands 2000 in FS9 and have your default flight there. The loading times are taking very long even on a RAID. If you just want to fly around a bit in the plain desert it takes you 5 minutes to load, set up a new flight, load again. Thats the problem and I see a lot of users who don't have that much time . And AFS2012 will sure load a bigger amount of textures, models, gauges after some time than FSX does at the moment because there will be more advantages for developers.

Emmanuel

Good point. For me, I don't fly at big airports with long loading times, but many people do. As a matter of fact, I suggested this approach because I think it would cut down loading times in some cases. It really depends on how you use the sim; that's why I think we should have the option of either built-in.

I do not like to start a simulator on a runway. I think the simulator should allways start at the gate or ramp. Newer on a runnway. In reallife you do not jump in a plane that is sett on a runway.

But for testing purposes you might jump to the runway to save som time when you know you have to do the same over and over again. But by default i think the sim should allways start at a gate or ramp in a cold and dark cocpit.

For people that are new to flightsims, might have some help through training "missions". But default chould allways be pro dark and cold. :)

I agree. In my second post, I changed it to starting cold and dark on the ramp instead of the runway.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I think there is an easy solution to the initial load problem... for instance I think loading times can be cut in half easily if FSX didn't bother to read every aircraft.cfg file at startup. That gets pretty expensive when you have AI aircraft installed. A static list can be loaded in a tiny fraction of the time, except you would have to force it to refresh if you added any new planes, or better yet hope the program notices a change in the default directory structure. On the other hand X-plane has an obvious weakness in multiplayer mode since if your playing with a friend the both of you have to have the exact same directory structure for aircraft. Same problem with scenery except there has got to be a better way to load up all the models and textures.. anyways most of that archaic stuff is always there for good reason but it's sad how initial load times in FSX got worse from FS9 when really it should have been roughly the same. Probably because someone had the bright idea of reprogramming it with some newer yet slower feature in windows...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would prefer a drop down UI with windows opening for more complex detail settings. I think it is important that the UI is not visible during normal flight (nothing worse than having a task bar in your window all the time).

I personally don't like the "multiple rows of tabs" interface, where you have 2 or more rows of tabs with the active one in front and the 2 rows switching up and down depending what tab you have open - always get lost in these.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep the "MS office vista look" tab interface is like a step back in workflow "in nice wording I completely hate it!" dry.gif

The professional 3D programs(Solid Edge and Inventor) have regrettfully done this to all its customers, we use Solid Edge ST at work, and I and my co-workers am really irritated by the approch to tab-based interface,

please don't do this in FS also..blink.gif You have to do 4 click sometimes to do something that was perhaps max 2 click before this "faboulous MS-Office interface"

and sometimes it hides really important features behind other tab's ... when are supposed to have everything you need on current tab in use "Doh.."wacko.gif (to quote Homer Simpson)

Also as some have reported, REX is not that good a interface, it is infact very confusing , "visually pleasing and fancy" but a bit confusing mellow.gif

Other than that I really like programs like REX, and am quite pleased with itsmile.gif

Some user have given suggestions on using a map for choosing airports, well that method was used in Flight Unlimited's "Glory-days" biggrin.gif

I really like what one user posted, like having a "check list" of what is done before you start the flight, that would boost the workflow in sim much more..smile.gif and you could easily check if you forgot to set the load-manager, or if you forgot to set the weather for the flight..cool.gif

After all this is a flight sim what better way to check your setup before flight than a checklist??laugh.gif

Also I like to having the menu-window "locked" like in FSX by holding down the "Alt-key" for a short while and it stays on instead of press it once, then loose focus of window or wrong menu-settings, and then press alt once again ,like in fs9 and older FS versions, that was a bit tedious sometimes..sad.gif

Regards

Rune ENHD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Solid Edge... omg ... this GUI made me crazy. Just because of my nerdy teacher ^^.

Well actually I think there is not really a great choice in designing the main screen. Yes you could arrange the fields a bit different and the colors for better reading and so on ... . But the approach of FS9/FSX is the simplest solution. You need Aircraft, Location, Weather, Date/Time ergo 4 fields and you have to visit them all if you want to set up a whole flight.

More important is how the other menus like scenery index, addons and more.. are realised, which is more difficult. And there the range is big:

Buttons on top, bottom, left, right, floating, drop down, ...

Emmanuel

P.S: I will try to make a little concept of the main screen, when I'am back at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Guys:

I posted this as a part of my response in the 'october' issue of the thread, but i feel its worth expanding on things a bit here where its more appropriate;

User Interface

I have a few thoughts on this, but have you considered a networkable ‘instructors station’?

So, the scenario is that you start the instructor’s station on your laptop or non FS pc; you configure your aircraft, your flight plan, your weather, and your location and then start the sim (within the instructor station) and if you’re desktop FS PC is turned on, the Sim starts up. During the flight, you can still tweak your settings, WX, Failures even, from the instructor station.

Obviously there are users that would only want to have the one machine, so perhaps the instructors station is mirrored in the sim itself, and if the sim is launched from the same machine as the flying machine then the instructors station starts first, if you are networked, then the sim knows that and goes straight to the setup flight.

Regarding a comment I read somewhere in these forums about FSUIPC not being necessary. I wholly agree. Again it’s not that FSUIPC is bad, it’s that it shouldn’t NEED to exist in the first place. The sim should do all that FSUIPC does natively.

I think too many people are getting bogged down in an approach for Airline flying, another approach for GA flying, another approach for flying Choppers and so on. We just need one GUI, what you choose to fly in the sim is wholly irrellevant at the setup stage. Cold and dark, on the ground, at a gate, in the hanger, are all the same wether a 747, a Cessna, or a Jetranger.

The key functionality that is required is the ability to choose the airframe, setup the scenario (cold and dark, downwind, finals, climbout etc), set the weather, set the traffic (i fly online so thats kind of irrelevant for me, but those that use AI might want to adjust levels), set the date and time, and then fly. If the sim needs to pause to setup the scenario (short final for example) then it should. Then you continue to fly.

Obviously there still needs to be some way of setting up the mechanics of the sim, graphics and hardware settings and so on. As something that is not (or at least should not be) required often, there is no reason why these functions need to be available on the main menu, they could be part of a tabbed setup.

Just my tuppenceworth,

Cheers

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen a lot of discussion about missions for the new simulator. Scripted missions are fine and dandy and have their place but I would like to suggest something new and different. Something like a random mission generator. This generator would use several factors to determine what missions to generate. These factors could be customizable via the user. You could have a/c type, for example, Helicopter, Gen. aviation, Commercial jet, Private jet, turboprop.. etc. Then the user could set a distance... 50 to 5000nm, and the generator could select several destination airports within that range. After the parameters are set, several mission types would pop up on say, an airport diagram dialogue of your current airport. Passengers waiting at gates, cargo needing to be delivered, etc. A dispatch planner could be included, printable of course, with a fuel load req'd etc.

Those would be examples of some commercial applications. What if you're in a C172? How about a photo flight? Aerial tour? aerial survey? What about helicopters? how about Photo flights again? how about air-crane ops? how about aerial tours? VIP transport? Oil platform transport?

The possibilities are endless. Military a/c could be included in this as well. Say for instance when you get to the gate you have some sort of FSpax type dialogue pop up and tell you boarding times, comfort, satisfaction.. etc. These results could be recorded and published. You could have this be implemented with VAs as well. They could put "parameter files" up for their different A/C, or even set particular destinations. Set time tables that if a flight wasn't available at a particular time, it was inaccessible. So many ideas and possibilities and it really seems like it could be feasible.

Just my two cents to make a great feature for a great simulator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you could make an options bar that includes "facilities" so you can request stairs, jetways, fuel truck and missions available at the airport. that would be easier to use and should be more realistic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there,

I just registered to share an idea that popped up in my mind. I don't have the time to follow the discussion closely so it might be that it was already raised. So please feel free to delete this post if so, I won't be angry ;)

I was thinking about the mouse cursor in the VC and I often hear and read comments from 2D-panel users saying that it is a real pain in the you-know-where to use the VC for instance in heavy weather. The Cockpit is bouncing around the cursor and if you have to press a tiny, little button in that situation it sometimes take a few tries until you hit the right spot.

My thoughts are these:

The mouse cursor is in a way the "hand of the pilot", hence when the aircraft is bouncing up and down due to turbulences, the pilots hand should move in the same way. So my suggestion is that you don't link the mouse cursor to a position on the screen, but to a position in the cockpit. As a result your cursor will stay on the exact same spot in the VC whereas your point of view can tilt, pan and shake.

Good luck with your simulator!

Vitus

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you could make an options bar that includes "facilities" so you can request stairs, jetways, fuel truck and missions available at the airport. that would be easier to use and should be more realistic

basically what I had in mind.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mouse cursor is in a way the "hand of the pilot", hence when the aircraft is bouncing up and down due to turbulences, the pilots hand should move in the same way.

I guess you've probably never flown in any kind of turbulence in real life, have you? Your hand will not remain in a fixed position relative to the cockpit when the aircraft is bouncing around. Your hand has inertia, and as such, it tries to maintain a fixed position in space, causing it to bounce around in relation to the cockpit. In that light, I find the mouse cursor's behavior in FSX kind of realistic. Of course, in a real aircraft, you can push the palm of your hand or a couple of fingers against the panel to mitigate the effect, and you also get tactile feedback and all. I'd suggest simply freezing all g effects and camera motion whenever the mouse is interacting with some knob or button (e.g. whenever the hand cursor appears). That would leave some difficulty in, while letting you 'grab' a knob to eliminate the relative motion.

Judith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your hand will not remain in a fixed position relative to the cockpit when the aircraft is bouncing around. Your hand has inertia, and as such, it tries to maintain a fixed position in space, causing it to bounce around in relation to the cockpit.

Hey Judith,

of course you are right and our hand moves with it's inertia. But you will certainly agree that our body is able to ease out this movement - in other words: if we want to push that button we are easily able to do so.

Plus you are totally missing my point: this is not about realism but usability! If you fly an aircraft through a heavy storm in your FS using the VC and you are trying to hit this tiny little button that disengaged the autopilot (just to give an example) you know what I am talking about.

In reality we can push these little buttons for two reasons: 1. we ease out the movements of the aircraft as described above and 2. our "interaction device" called "finger" is not a "POINTing device" but a large surface with the effect that even if we miss the exact center of a button, due to turbulence, we still operate it.

Cheers,

Vitus

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess you've probably never flown in any kind of turbulence in real life, have you? Your hand will not remain in a fixed position relative to the cockpit when the aircraft is bouncing around. Your hand has inertia, and as such, it tries to maintain a fixed position in space, causing it to bounce around in relation to the cockpit. In that light, I find the mouse cursor's behavior in FSX kind of realistic. Of course, in a real aircraft, you can push the palm of your hand or a couple of fingers against the panel to mitigate the effect, and you also get tactile feedback and all. I'd suggest simply freezing all g effects and camera motion whenever the mouse is interacting with some knob or button (e.g. whenever the hand cursor appears). That would leave some difficulty in, while letting you 'grab' a knob to eliminate the relative motion.

Judith

Hey Judith,

of course you are right and our hand moves with it's inertia. But you will certainly agree that our body is able to ease out this movement - in other words: if we want to push that button we are easily able to do so.

Plus you are totally missing my point: this is not about realism but usability! If you fly an aircraft through a heavy storm in your FS using the VC and you are trying to hit this tiny little button that disengaged the autopilot (just to give an example) you know what I am talking about.

In reality we can push these little buttons for two reasons: 1. we ease out the movements of the aircraft as described above and 2. our "interaction device" called "finger" is not a "POINTing device" but a large surface with the effect that even if we miss the exact center of a button, due to turbulence, we still operate it.

Cheers,

Vitus

I like the effect in FSX as well, what if you incorporate both your ideas and make it so that if the aircraft deflects by a given amount the hand movement is muted giving the user some time to complete the action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like to change something in the config and restart the FS (like scenery in Fs9).

Also, it will be nice to have a career mode and a "random" flight plan with a "objective" and a challenge thing E.G.:

I select: Flight time ~1h

Time of the day: Random

Weather: Random

Aircraft: B738 or A320 or...

Region: Random

Type (Cargo or PAX or MIL or Random)

And after a briefing: I fly!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another issue:

It is nice to have a keyboard mode like FSPassengers has that you press a button (e.g. "N" - Nav) and after the frequency("1" "1" "9" "3" "0").

Pausing the FS to change the flight level (aiming to the knob!) isn't a good thing to do.

When ATC asks me to change my FL i just press a Letter (e.g. L) and after, the desired altitude to be inserted in the MCP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the effect in FSX as well, what if you incorporate both your ideas and make it so that if the aircraft deflects by a given amount the hand movement is muted giving the user some time to complete the action.

Yeah nice idea. Another slider in the settings with which you can manually adjust the inertia of the "hand" :D

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy & Terms of Use