Thoughts on TrackIR4 with Vector Clip - Craig Read

[craig_read]

TrackIR PRO 4 (Vector Clip)

Summary:

Recommended well worth getting!

Pros:

Recommended, good value, would buy again. Setup is absolutely fantastic and very easy. The equipment itself looks brilliant. The software is very intuitive and easy to use. The performance hit is virtually nothing. Brilliant product.

Cons:

Takes some getting used to, but stick with it, because it's very rewarding and a real enhancement. Problems with the movement axis not always linked which means it can be awkward. The TrackIR unit is fragile and the small clips on it easily broken.

Review:

Well, where do I start? It's been about a week now since I bought my TrackIR PRO 4 with the vector clip and at first I must say I wasn't all that pleased with it. I had some deep reservations after using it the first time, and got one of those feelings we all have in the past of 'have I wasted my money?' BUT, it's strange how opinions can change isn't it? And how quickly!

Let's see, my first impressions of the TrackIR when getting it out the box was how small it was, and fragile. The actual unit is tiny, only a few centimetres tall and wide. From looking at the design itself it wasn't entirely intuitive as to how the unit fitted on the monitor, and since it was fragile I wasn't keen to start pulling and pushing the components. Needless to say all was covered in the "setup" sections on the CD and it was explained clearly. But still I would go VERY carefully, the unit legs are very fragile and easily broken. I also found that it wasn't that stable on the monitor. I have a 22" widescreen LCD and it kept slipping, however a bit of bluetac for it to rest on did the trick nicely and the unit was firmly stuck in place. The vector clip was easy, only silly me forgetting I didn't actually own a baseball cap or visor had to quickly buy a cheap one from the local shop. On the whole actually setting up the unit was as I expected and I have no complaints at all, also I must admit the unit does look very good and futuristic!

Setup was very straight forward. I actually installed the software before the TrackIR even arrived. I downloaded the software from the website and installed it. When I plugged in the TrackIR unit everything seemed automatic and in no time the unit was working with the software. This setup was very easy and quick, and I must say I was very impressed at this point.

The software is also very simple to use, with a range of "profiles" that can be used to change the acceleration or exaggeration of head movement you make within the games or simulations. As an engineer myself I found all this very intuitive, and not being a manual reader just delved straight into the software with little difficulty. I decided to download a profile, one that was recommended to me by the very same person who recommended the unit. I then setup the key commands, F12 was the key to centre the heads, this is when the position of your head is set to the datum centre for all movements and the middle mouse button as the �lock view� button.

I was most impressed with the fact I had to do absolutely nothing at all to get TrackIR working with MSFS. There were no menu selections, no changes to config files, absolutely nothing at all, again the ease of setup of this unit just shone through.

The fun began here, getting used to the movement was difficult at first, and I must say after a few hours I was beginning to regret buying the unit as I couldn�t get the hang of it. The movement was awkward for me, perhaps as I was not used to the tracker I thought? But it didn't feel intuitive and was hard to control. After I'd trained my head to use the unit better, I still found landing was very difficult with the unit active. I couldn't keep the view stable and depth movements in and out within the view distorted my perception of height, so I often came in too high. This would not normally be a problem as my instruments and the runway lights helped, but it took a few seconds me to stabilise the view of the instruments and then back to stabilise the view on the runway, this made landing very hard work.

During taxi, the unit was fantastic, I am more of an IFR flyer and fly the larger aircraft in my simulator. The unit increased my awareness of what was around me during taxi and that was a massive improvement to me. However takeoff, like landing, was jerky and awkward and I found it was hard to concentrate and stabilise the view. Often if I lean to one side without realising it the view would seem to show I was off centre, I would then correct this with rudder and the aircraft would steer off the centre as in the first place I was not off centre at all. I found in the takeoff and landing situation sticking the view was the only viable option for me to allow me to concentrate.

So what changed? So far you must all be thinking "well, he didn't like that too much, why the positive summary?". Well my perception changed. I read a number of comments by other uses, and gave my friend a call who recommended the unit to ask some questions. They advised me to stick with it, and also further improved my confidence as they too needed time to get used to it. So undeterred I plodded on.

I soon decided this profile I was using was not for me, and it was the cause of all my woes. So I set about setting up my own. I found creating a deadzone was very useful as it stabilised my views nicely for takeoff and landing, I could set the centre point using F12 in the simulator with a view that gave me instruments and a good runway view and the deadzone I had created in the pitch and roll enabled a nice stable view. There was still a little head movement now and again, a bit like the head latency effect in other addons which I was used to. This worked well for me, I didn't have to continue to freeze the view and landings were now much easier. Takeoffs too were much easier with this style of profile as I could easily follow the centreline. I found that with this deadzone, the view jerked a little as it returned to the centre view from glancing at instruments, but some minor adjustments got that jerkiness out.

I kept using it, never flying without it and now find it most useful during flights. I'm even getting to a point where I can programme the FMC/MCP without locking the view at all, my head has got used to the sensitivity. I won't be flying the simulator without it now, as it enhances the experience so much, but it wasn't perfect yet.

There was still something niggling me though about this TrackIR, and I couldn't quite put my finger on it. Then only two days ago it struck me! And this is part of my plea for improvement to Natural Point.

At this point I'd got over the difficult stages and managed to get the unit to work very well for me. The TrackIR movements were still not all that intuitive for me, I found I still had to concentrate in some cases to get the view I wanted, but I now know why. TrackIR doesn't always take into account the current head orientation, let me explain this further. If you roll your head, the view will eventually go upside down, if you roll your head left, the view flips over via the left and if you roll right the view flips over to the right. The view is now upside down. Now imagine you are upside down, as you are in the view, if you then yaw your head to YOUR right, you'll actually be looking to the left since your upside down. Are you following me here? With TrackIR the yaw is independent of the roll. Another example is roll and movement in X, if you tilt (roll) your head to 45 degrees and then move horizontally (X) in a 0 degrees plain (that is flat), the software will interpret this as a roll of the head to 45 degrees and then a horizontal movement in the 45 degree plain, which isn't what your head is doing. As a result some movements require concentration, and some views are difficult to get, especially when roll and yaw are involved, because the movement isn't all that intuitive. In fact through experimentation, yaw and roll are independent of all other axis I think... It's hard to say..

Now since TrackIR calculates yaw, pitch, roll, etc. independently, which you can see from their software (the gauges), I think that all this is correctable without new hardware, with just a software upgrade. And if it could be implemented, this would greatly improve the TrackIR even further!

So to summarise:

If you are thinking of buying the TrackIR, I would recommend it. It's not without its flaws but it's well worth the money.

The software is very good, the setup is very easy, and the reliability is something a lot of other software vendors should hope to get.

It takes some getting used to, if at first you don't like it, keep trying, stick with it. Once you've got a grasp of it, it really makes a difference. I would recommend trying to create your own personal profiles, and if you suffer from the same problems I did, try changing and customising your profiles with deadzones etc.

The software could be improved, the movement isn't totally intuitive as movement in different axes isn't necessarily linked to other the other axes. If this can be done, this will be the icing on the cake as far as TrackIR is concerned, and those who found they couldn't get on with it, would with this change.

Hope that helps you guys..

Cheers

Craig

On AVSIM - http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=s...id=45&page=

This is hopefully going to be updated exactly as above..

[Jim]

Craig:

Thanks for the review, your thoughts are really appreciated.

Did you try the TrueView function? Turn it off and on and see if that makes a difference to how you perceive the motion to be, if that doesn't do it, we will add your comments to our list of new features for future releases.

TrackIR is a word of mouth product, and I think you have proven that entirely!

[craig_read]

Jim,

Well it's a great product you've put together you should be pleased with it!

Yeah I tried the trueview function.. on and off.. clicked on on the profile and then used FS.. and the same issues arose.. what should this TrueView function do? Perhaps a problem with my install?

Cheers

Craig

[VincentG]

Picture it this way. I'll use a flight simulator as an example, because that's what I use, and it makes it easier to assign an arbitrary forwards and backwards direction for the explanation. In normal, non true view mode if you turn your head the translation axis doesn't rotate with it.. meaning if you look 90 degrees to the right (that is so in game your view rotates 90 degrees), then in game it would make sense that sliding your head to the left (relative to your sitting position) would move it towards the front of the cockpit, in game. Instead it moves you to the left side of the plane. The translation axis hasn't rotated to follow the orientation of your head.

Whereas in trueview; I can look almost behind me, out a side window, and then if I move my head to the side (proper in game direction) I peek out over the edge of the window.

[craig_read]

The trueview function seems to correct the side to side movement.. But if you roll your head to 45 degrees.. and then yaw left or right.. the yaw occurs in the 0 degrees plain not the 45 degrees plain of the head movement.. It's not translated with the orientation of the head.

I think this is one of the reasons why some people have trouble with it.. Take looking at the overhead panel for example.. To look at that I would look up then yaw left (if I am in the FO seat).. In reality I would be looking at the panel.. but with TrackIR the image looks up and seems to just rotate.. Obviously because the yaw is in the 0 degrees plain still and if the view is direclty up this is just a rotation.. Do you see what I mean? I think these things are what can make the TrackIR feel counter intuitive and difficult.. I imagine this is a software change and if it could be done, those that had trouble before would find it easier to use..

This is only a very small observation for improvement though in what is a fantastic bit of kit in my opinion.. I'll be recommending them to others..

Just my thoughts

Cheers

Craig

[VincentG]

Thx for the input, will pass it on.....