>Russins so technologically limited that they use 2 monitors

>>33649496
>less is suddenly better
wut?

>>33649496
You sound pretty jelly OP.

>>33649496

Redundancy.

>>33649496

What if you don't have time to switch views? Having both active at all times is a benefit in this case.

File: Dassault Rafale cockpit.jpg (96KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 600x800px

>>33649496
>Using 2 displays
>Using 1 display
>Not having one giant, portrait-aspect display tucked against your crotch, and 2 more landscape supplementary MFDs above your knees
Honhon, silly Americans!

>>33649971
Is it just me, or does anyone else love the concept of HOTAS more than a center stick? It just seems more ergonomic

..... the Abrams has two monitors, one ontop the other.
Top shows your gun or citv view, second is admin to type monitoring/map or crow system aiming.

>>33649990
HOTAS and stick position are distinct HMI elements. You can have a sidestick without HOTAS, or HOTAS with a center stick.

>>33649990
Most manufacturers and air forces seem to agree with you, considering almost every new aircraft is sidestick these days.

I like center sticks but only because I like older aircraft.

>>33650096
Sorry, I meant throttle on the left side of the cockpit, and stick on the right

>>33650125
>I like older aircraft

Such as?

>>33649496
You clearly have never worked a desk job in your life.
Two views are always better than one. Switching contexts fucking sucks.
A lot of the time, it's even better to get two monitors with the same field of view as one wide monitor, simply because windowing systems tend to suck at full screen.
I can't imagine this being a problem with ultra-proprietary airplane firmware though.

>>33649963
Why would you have no time to switch? American doctrine states that BVR has priority. Nobody needs to get WVR to identify a target.

File: ir313-image22.jpg (142KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1000x667px

best control scheme out there imo

>>33650210
>Such as?

Pretty much any American or Euro fighters/attackers from WWII up to the end of the Cold War, but I'm particularly fond of 3rd and 4th generation jets.

File: iranf313.jpg (126KB, 780x520px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 780x520px

>>33650210
especially this one

File: 6589.jpg (159KB, 1023x779px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1023x779px

>>33649971
>joins laughing in european

File: rafcock.jpg (336KB, 1024x680px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 1024x680px

ive heard its really comfortable

>>33650272
I don't know what the hell that is, but the nose looks extremely narrow. How are you going to fit any sort of meaningful radar in there?

>>33649496
Does anybody know if the PAK-FA's radar will have terrain-mapping capability?

>>33650716
gen 5 stealth

File: su-35 cockpit.jpg (288KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1000x667px

Two monitors there for safety reason in the first place.

If one of them start multifunction then the second one will still work and show all important information.

File: cockpit.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>33649496
Technically speaking the F-35 has 2, 10x8" monitors as well; they just have a very thin bezel designed to make it look like one.

On *each monitor* you can have either a full-screen 13" display of something, or you can split it into 2, portrait 9" displays, or you can split it further with a 8" portrait display and two little 3" displays underneath. So across both monitors, you can between 2 active displays, or 12 active displays simultaneously.

See webm.

>>33649730
>>33650233
What would you rather use for your computer? 4x 6" monitors or 1x 23" monitor?

>>33649963
You have to switch views in other jets too; the only difference is that you're limited to multiple small monitors that have to be switched separately. Refer to the webm.

>>33650723
It'll have SAR, but for whatever reason Russian jets tend to have poor SAR resolutions (eg 3m or 1m vs ~0.1m in US jets).

>>33650716
That's the Qaher-313 (see >>33650464) - it's a fake plane that Iran produced for self-propaganda purposes. It'll never fly, let alone be useful for combat.

>>33650944
Oh and plus there's the bar along the top of the screens, which acts as both a quick-display (it shows autopilot data, engine data, alerts, etc) and a shortcut bar to let you quickly bring up certain menus, or to swap the left and right displays.

>>33650971
Also there's a little emergency display between the pilot's knees and the HMDS.

>>33650841
>that screen

Please tell me this isn't an actual simulator used by the Russians.

File: irKahir313_Kokpit.jpg (265KB, 1600x811px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1600x811px

>>33650944
>>33650716
>>33650272
literally made from radio shack parts

File: Rafale cockpit.jpg (294KB, 1772x1323px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 1772x1323px

>>33650537
Seriously though, objectively the best cockpit layout ever. The central HLD is a fucking masterpiece.

>>33651104
But why? Doesn't that middle screen only really work if you're angled correctly?

And here come's the Lukheed shill lol.

>>33650537
I heard central screen is projected to infinity like HUD so pilots eyes don't need to change accommodation between outside look and screen look. System unique for Rafale.

>>33651058
>Siyah Gri Beyaz
>benim zencim

>>33651058
So it's made out of parts that work? Great step forward desu.

>>33651209
It's true that Rafale pilots often run into issues when they get out of their seats and breakdance inside the cockpit.

>>33651461
What about when they want to get a closer look at the display? Or quickly compare info between the middle and side displays (which would generally require leaning)?

File: Rafale pilot.jpg (91KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1280x720px

>>33651396
Yep
>>33651478
>What about when they want to get a closer look at the display?
>closer
How close do you really wanna get? It's already right in front of your nose.
The image is already magnified, and also collimated like the HUD. Leaning in closer wouldn't give you a closer view anyways, not that you'd need it.

>>33650944
How is this not classified?

>>33651478
>Or quickly compare info between the middle and side displays (which would generally require leaning)?
Well they don't, they're aligned in a way that doesn't require leaning.

>>33651546
It's a public demo; the person 'flying' it doesn't have full access to all the jet's menus / data. They have these things to show politicians, public, press, etc how easy it is to fly and fight with.

>>33651058

Good luck finding a Radio Shack in this day and age.

>>33651580
I was actually at one a couple of days ago, it was in the middle of a closing sale though.

>>33651546

Considering that the F-35 is going to be dispersed among various NATO powers, there isn't much of a point and most of the actually important stuff is proprietary software.

>>33651577
>>33651588
Fair enough, and thanks. Was genuinely curious as I would have thought that a lot of the capabilities would be revealed through access to its interface

>>33650260
>American doctrine
Why would American doctrine matter to Russians?

>>33651104

That makes me think of Apple products.

Different for the sake of being different, not necessarily to be any better. Those two side screens much be a bitch to see while you're working around the cockpit with that central column so easily able to obscure them. What it does is nifty, but it intrudes too much on the cockpit.

I guess if thats what the French are more used to, though. Each country seems to have a difference preference on how their cockpit is laid out for how they train pilots and have experience in.

>>33652125
>Different for the sake of being different

>they don't do like we do, dem special snowflakes

>>33652153

Funny how you read my post that is explicitly saying "Thats not how I'd like it, but if thats what they prefer then fair enough" as being "hurr hurr Murrica best".

Calm your defensiveness there Pierre.

>>33652077
Because it's the correct way to do it. You don't need to grasp at straws when Americans have already proven the true path.

>>33652125
Eye relief could be rather important on very long missions, being able to see displayed information fast even after several hours flight is a nice feature.

Think about how your eyes struggle to focus on the dashboard after driving several hours during nighttime.

A bigger screen like in the F35 is good too. Less eye relief, more functionality. A question of choice, really.

>>33649496

Ikr OP 1 monitor you switch between views is totally more convenient than being able to see both at the same time. I wonder if they organized all the information into 5 overly specific different folders within 2 other folders accessed by tapping the side of the touch screen until that gay side tab came up.

I hate it when people like you design things.

>>33651058
> just fuck my avionics up f a m

File: Gripen NG Brazil cockpit WAD_display-960x539.jpg (68KB, 960x539px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 960x539px

>>33649496
Even Brazil has a single widescreen monitor. Brazil surpassed Russia in everything long ago.

>those visuals

Are Russians stuck in the 90s? Ive seen better on our updated Rafales

>>33650944
does anybody know why they use black background displays? Is it easier to see or less likely to wash out their vision at night? It makes sense with old planes using CRT and vector monitors because the underpowered area is black but those are deffo LCD panels.

File: samolet-kabina-pribory.jpg (110KB, 800x500px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 800x500px

>>33653518
Russia likes 80s cyberpunk. aesthetics.

>>33653298

>majority of brazils air superiority fighters are F-5's armed with two AIM-9B's

Oh I am kekin

>>33649496
That interface looks sexy as fuck