All Activity

I have been trying to practice carrier approaches & have found that my engine quits most of the time after just one or two approaches. I see that the cylinder head temperature drops very easily with the rpm at 2400 & the manifold between 20 & 30 usually. I don't know what I'm doing wrong. I've tried both leaving the cowl flaps alone after spawning into the carrier landing mission & also continually adjusting them , but the engine always seems to quit. I had to give up for now on the Corsair School campaign carrier qualification mission since the engine doesn't last long enough for me to do 5 landings (not that I could do that many anyway, I'm new to this, but the engine thing makes it doubly hard). Here's a track. Thanks in advance for any tips. F4u engine quit.trk

Version 1.0.0 of my Helios Profile for the Mosquito FB MK.VI. Hope you all enjoy! Download here: https://github.com/HeliosProfiles/DCS-Mosquito-FB-Mk.VI-Profile-by-MadKreator37/releases/latest User Files: Soon For support and help visit: CaptnZeen/ Helios Official Discord: https://discord.gg/VEjZ8RB4u7 or MadKreator37 Discord: https://discord.gg/u8gT7DPHcV

I think I've resolved the issue by switching to MSAAx2 and turning off DLSS. The only things Ive set inside the NVIDIA control panel are the power setting to Performance and prerendering 3 frames. I'm using Virtual Desktop to connect. And yes, the Gamma slider does react in-game. With the changes I made today, the HUD colors are now consistent regardless of the background.

Version 1.0.0 of my Helios Profile for the Mosquito FB MK.VI. Hope you all enjoy! Download here: https://github.com/HeliosProfiles/DCS-Mosquito-FB-Mk.VI-Profile-by-MadKreator37/releases/latest For support and help visit: CaptnZeen/ Helios Official Discord: https://discord.gg/VEjZ8RB4u7 or MadKreator37 Discord: https://discord.gg/u8gT7DPHcV

I was hoping not to be the Guinea Pig!

I was going for the Cristal super but decided to buy another QP as I missed it so much. Let us know your verdict when you go for the Cristal.

I would like to know this too as i have Total Control AH-64 units in my pit.

Hey guys, very good work, but for the bomb bays you can make an argument 26 so that the doors open when the AI fires missiles/bombs.

The Ultrawide has less binocular overlap. To be honest that does not bother me too much as I can push the IPD out wide a still get good vision. I think it is because I have a strong astigmatism. The Ultrawide might be the best option for me. I'm not sure when shipping starts though.

The issue is : the RSBN coded in the Mig are nowhere consistent with the map. Some are irrelevant in the context of the map (cold war, east vs west) like Rammstein or Brement airfields (don't get me wrong : it is nice to have more airfields covered but not if the other ones aren't) and some are just "not like indicated on the map" (Wittstock is 14 in the Mig but 22 on the map). In addition, only 19 out of 40+ potential airfields are covered... This is wrong at every level.

FOV is of course way better than the G2, to be honest I have hoped to experience an even wider FOV, but of course it is quite good. I will definitely try the ultra wide, as soon as possible.

I haven't been able to find anything added. Only the USN and USAF same as before. Not sure if they are for other countries or what.

My GPU is a bit behind yours but with QVFR CPU is important too so hopefully my 5080 will be ok How good is the FOV? That is another reason I am considering an upgrade. I wear glasses but use lens inserts and the QP allows you to get very close to the lenses as there is no face mask, so FOV is not too bad. Like wearing flying helmet goggles. What is the 50 PPD Super like from that perspective?

Running the Super with a 4090 without any performance problems. Neither I have any reliability problems. Switched from a G2 and the Super is worth every cent,

Debian 13 "Trixie" was released last weekend. It comes with Wine 10.0, which uses Wayland by default. I've updated the git repo to get rid of the now obsolete Xwayland. A pleasant surprise, presumably dating back to DCS 2.9.16, is a significant decrease in RAM usage that allows running Caucasus and Marianas with 8 GB of RAM. You can now operate a dedicated DCS server for as little as 8 €/month on, e.g., a CX32 Hetzner Cloud server, albeit with mediocre performance (my 100 unit benchmark mission will stall out the server).

I don't have mine yet, but I'm going Super Ultrawide 50PPD, and then early next year, I MIGHT buy the 57PPD optical engine only. Folks have said the 50PPD resolution is excellent, so for flight simming, I'm going for more FOV initially.

Thanks. The next Quest is unlikely to have eye tracking so I am not relying on that. I run my QP at a centre resolution of about 4800x4800 pixels. I know that seems extreme but I can get a steady 72 FPS using DLSS Quality with no ghosting. A very sharp and smooth image and my maximum VRAM is about 12gb. Based on that I should be able to run the Crystal Super with similar settings. I'm not in a rush to buy but the temptation is there. Which would be the better option: 57, 50 or Ultrawide?

Thanks man!

Resolution on distant object is insane! You see from my other post what headsets I have (or had earlier) and compare it to. But - I understand that the Quest Pro is a very special headset. Quest pro has 3.46 million pixels per eye. Pimax Crystal Super has 14.75 million pixels per eye. And a much bigger FOV. And a true wired Display port connection… But then again, I don’t have the Quest PRO…. A 327% pixel increase might not be noticeable for everyone Anyway, my Crystal Super is not buggy. If you think you will get a buggy headset, don’t buy it. It is expensive. That is correct. Also, one need the right hardware. I am not sure the 5080 is the answer with the amount of VRam it has. If you are happy with the Quest PRO - stay with until Meta announces their next headsets. They will probably be a good upgrade from what they have today- plus much cheaper than the Crystal Super - which is, I have to admit, a niche product.

I dont know anything about the quest 3. But it sounds like you found a reasonable setting with the old system and now you are using the same HMD on the new system but it doesn't look as good (washed out colors) Did you have any adjustments outside of whatever software the Q3 uses or DCS... for example NVIDIA control panel? maybe those are missing since the new computer Does the Q3 plug into the computer? are you using the same cable in the same type of port? The gamma was set in DCS? Does the HMD respond at all to the changes you make now to the Gamma slider? Gets brighter and darker but still washed out??

Check this post which should explain a few things. Good luck 007!

Observed in your track and reproduced in my own. Internal reports made. FACQ seems to work okay and will command STT on TUC's so i would reccomend using that for now or TWS until fixed. For future reference please make tracks in caucasus. That is the preferred map for the devs to use for debugging.

Hello all, I don't own the CH-47, but my graphics card is often its victim in MP servers (sorry, couldn't resist). I use VR. One of the problems I've been having is being subjected to excessively sized and overly-luminous light bloom orbs from the nav, beacon, and position lights. This happens in severe clear weather, so there is no reason to have any atmospheric light scattering effect. Also, besides being excessively sized, the relative size and luminosity of the orbs do not change to match increasing distance from the light source. Basically, the light remains the same absolute size and brightness on the screen regardless of distance. When you are 7 or 8 miles away, the red flashing beacon lights on the CH-47 look like a 2000lb GBU flash-bang grenades going off every second. The nav lights create a orb/bloom capable of hiding multiple Ch-47s behind it. These excessive light orb blooms have been a problem forever. However, It does not seem to be an impossible problem to solve, because the F18 had huge light orb blooms for years until they fixed them about a year or two ago. The carrier landing approach lights also had excessive light bloom which made the meatball unreadable. I think they made the IFOLS overlay to address the fact that the light orbs made reading the lights impossible. Regardless, they fixed the carrier lights for a short time and they became much more realistic, and completely usable. Unfortunately, they broke the IFOLS lighting again, so it's back to being a completely unreadable bloomy orbs that obscure the landing area once you're initially turning into the groove. Now that I think of it...while I say these light-orbs are a problem...I suspect they actually are more of a rendering decision instead of an actual technical problem that requires debugging. I recall that these light-orbs were actually described and defended as "correct as is" on the F18 for years before they actually fixed them, but I'm not sure if the developers were seeing what I was seeing through VR. In any case, the current orbs are as bad as they ever were on the F18 back in the old days.

NO! I want to keep it Basically with HMCS s SOI, the SPI when moved by the HAT, moves relative to the HMCS view area, rather than relative to the position on the Ground. So I can slew the SPI with the hat to the left, at the exact same time move my head to the right, and the SPI will move with my head to the right. Using this quirk I can, for example, move the SPI 180 degrees from my 9 o'clock to my 3 o'clock in less than a second. Nate