[S-99]

This is a great model. But, other cockpits like this are just for looks. In realistic settings it makes the pilot look up when he needs to look up to see that target fly over his head say "my what a great piece of metal blocking my view".

[Woolie Wool]

This is a great model. But, other cockpits like this are just for looks. In realistic settings it makes the pilot look up when he needs to look up to see that target fly over his head say "my what a great piece of metal blocking my view".

Not to mention the vast majority of FS cockpits have no rearward visibility at all.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

That's because they have a radar...

[Woolie Wool]

Modern fighters have a radar too, but they're not built with zero rearward visibility. The Mk1 Eyeball still has some uses, believe it or not.

[Snail]

Modern fighters have a radar too, but they're not built with zero rearward visibility. The Mk1 Eyeball still has some uses, believe it or not.

Rearward visibility honestly isn't too important in space combat, at least in FreeSpace.

[Herra Tohtori]

Rearward visibility honestly isn't too important in space combat, at least in FreeSpace.

That's only because you aren't there in reality.

In real life, visibility to all directions would be extremely beneficial.

[Woolie Wool]

Modern fighters have a radar too, but they're not built with zero rearward visibility. The Mk1 Eyeball still has some uses, believe it or not.

Rearward visibility honestly isn't too important in space combat, at least in FreeSpace.

Where do you get this idea? A player with a large multiscreen setup and a 360 or even 270 degree field of view would have immense advantages over someone looking through a single mail slot of a monitor. Situational awareness is everything in aerial, and by extension FreeSpace combat. Even the most elementary fighter pilot manuals will tell you how important situational awareness is and how it's always good to have more of it. It's probably why (aside from the Merlin engine), the P-51 Mustang's effectiveness jumped massively when it was redesigned with a bubble canopy that afforded a 360-degree field of vision--and the old cockpit was still much better than FreeSpace's view, having around 270 degrees of horizontal visibility and well over 90 degrees of vertical. Situational awareness is so important that I felt more effective even using Wanderer's radar icons (although I eventually had to part with them due to problems with Wanderer's FRED build). Being able to spot a wing of oncoming Shivans by flicking my eyes to the right would be on another (higher) level entirely, especially if FS ships simulated modern combat aircraft by allowing you to acquire lock on an enemy by looking at him.

[Snail]

I concur, I guess there's another thing to be explained.

[Herra Tohtori]

...especially if FS ships simulated modern combat aircraft by allowing you to acquire lock on an enemy by looking at him.

Y = target ship closest to reticle?

Good visibility forward and to the sides is also crucial for acquiring firing solutions fast and easily without the cockpit structures covering the enemy. Granted, with the HUD the problem of leading obstructed targets, and the problem of having to pitch up continuously in a turn is not a problem like it used to be in WW2 aircraft (the enemy ahead you is very easy to obscure behind the nose, and if you don't do that you'll be unable to take sufficient lead to the target to hit them) but visibility undoubtedly helps, no matter how sophisticated visual aids the HUD presents for maintaining situational awareness.

[Droid803]

What are you talking about 'no rear visiblility'?
OF COURSE there is rear visibility. Just hit 'rear view'.

[Woolie Wool]

...especially if FS ships simulated modern combat aircraft by allowing you to acquire lock on an enemy by looking at him.

Y = target ship closest to reticle?

No, "pont your eyes in the general direction of an enemy and fire missile". The plane does not have to be facing the target to fire a missile. The FS2 reticle always appears in the direction the ship is facing.

[Woolie Wool]

What are you talking about 'no rear visiblility'?
OF COURSE there is rear visibility. Just hit 'rear view'.

Yeah, because the FS2 player camera shows no cockpit. If the pilot of an actual Perseus looked over his shoulder, he would see a metal bulkhead.

[Droid803]

Well, maybe there's something in the cockpit like in those mecha shows which makes the bulkheads 'transparent'...uhh...well, it gives full 360 view.

[Woolie Wool]

Well, maybe there's something in the cockpit like in those mecha shows which makes the bulkheads 'transparent'...uhh...well, it gives full 360 view.

We didn't see it Lt. Ash's Apollo, nor in cockpit head animations, nor in FS1 command brief ANIs.

Fun fact: The F-14 Tomcat, an obsolete and discontinued fighter, can target, track, and launch air-to-air missiles at six targets at once.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

I remember that the Tomcat was quite popular. Something that the F-16 Falcon hasn't lived up to.

[General Battuta]

I remember that the Tomcat was quite popular. Something that the F-16 Falcon hasn't lived up to.

Wait, what? The F-16 Viper (pilots are not fond of the 'Fighting Falcon' nickname) is one of the most popular fighters in the world, and far more popular than the F-14.

The Tomcat never sold nearly as many. Nor was it as powerful a platform for force projection; it was a specialized heavy fighter with expensive ordinance. It was very good at its job -- carrier defense and air superiority -- but not particularly versatile.

The F-16 is not really good for comparison to the F-14 anyway. One's a land-based multirole light fighter with fantastic maneuverability and ACM ability, the other's a carrier-based heavy fighter meant to haul missiles and go fast while attacking at BVR.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

Strangely, I always thought the Tomcat was more popular...

[General Battuta]

Strangely, I always thought the Tomcat was more popular...

Not by a long shot.

The only nation to fly the F-14 outside of the USA was, ironically, Iran.

Ironically, the F-14's BVR attack capability is basically useless simply because most rules of engagement require visual identification of targets.

Let's get back on topic, though!

[Woolie Wool]

Well, that and the AIM-54 Phoenix missiles cost two million dollars. Each.

[S-99]

I probably shouldn't speak so soon about cockpits.

F-117 cockpit


B2 cockpit

Ironically not much visibility. Then again these aren't fighter jets. These are bombers. Totally different and dedicated purpose.

Sorry to show this photo again, but i'd say the cockpit window on this thing would be better suited on a strike bomber i guess. Something more along the lines of the herc2 bubble would be best suited for this fighter. This fighter does have great forward and side to side visibility, but crippled upwards visibility.