All Activity

Ah yes, sorry i understand what you mean now. I though this was fairly obvious. Creating curves on an FFB system is highly compromised in many ways and yes, the trim envelope can be reduced for this reason. However what I was trying to say in my first post is that there is still no issue or conflict with using DCS control curves and using a force feedback system. You just have to deal with the compromises. And having a slightly reduced trim envelope in many aircraft is a non-issue. Hence I used curves in the MiG-29 since my stick extension is about 1/3 of the control stick in the real aircraft. And yes, the reason the AFCS failed is as a result of the stick trimming but running out of available trim deflection on the real stick during the bit test, hence not meeting the requirements of the module's AFCS stick trim deflection in the game. I'm just telling everyone who is using a FFB stick, in layman's terms - having too much curve on the control axis may be the reason for the AFCs bit test fail, like it was in my case.

I'm pretty sure that the Yak-40 and An-26 are the most used aircrafts in my missions not counting player/client controlled AC

Thick is Mach. Thin is TAS.

I was using quadviews with DCS, but it worsened my VR experience. I have my gamma tweaked downward, as you do. I've not tried any night flying...just received my super 50PPD u/w two days ago; that said, I think I have the basic setup complete.

Из документации к модели Еще причины блокирования. Еще может быть не назначена клавиша/кнопка (неправильно назначена). Ну и как выше сказали, ты просто не удерживаешь клавишу/кнопку.

Ho gia un reverb g2, passare a un pimax light non ne vale la pena?

Работают, удерживать кнопку нужно.

Very small thing, but I guess it's also a somewhat easy fix. In DCS the Position Lights next to the intake and the Pos/Form Lights (I think is the correct term?) on the wingtips are roughly equally powerful. IRL, in all reference videos I can find, the wingtip lights are barely visible in comparison. In most daytime videos they can't be seen at all. In some videos, they're visible, but very weak compared to the ultra-power lights on the intake. Remark 1: I don't think there is a way to turn the wingtips lights down, while keeping the lights on the side on, correct? You can set the Wing/Tail switch to OFF and then turn the FORM knob down, dimming the wingtip lights, but this will turn the intake position light off, which is not what we we in the reference videos. Remark 2: It's obviously impossible (and completely unimportant) to determine exactly how bright they should be. "Visible, but way less bright than the other lights" should put it in the ballpark though and be good enough, imho.

Oh, I agree. I wasn't using "get good" in the literal sense, I was using it ironically. In DCS, I too learned the ropes of MP iteratively, not by jumping head first into the shallow end of the pool with a bunch of random people on a server, but by linking up with a group of experienced people who could provide that iterative structure, within a closed server environment. That's why I said earlier that joining a Squadron is a good thing for players new to the MP scene. There are people to help. Even for the most experienced of players, how does one find success in MP other than through effective teamwork? My first multiplayer experiences were in a different game. After I got tired of getting knocked down and frustrated every single time, I decided it was time to find mentors, wingmen, and teamates. I would imagine that story is not unique and describes the journey of many players from SP to MP. Yes, it takes practice, and who you choose as teachers makes a lot of difference. Choose wisely.

I see you too have the Virpil T-50CM3 Throttle I think there are some unresolved issues with that hardware in DCS. In the Changelog from https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/release/2.9.20.15010/ There is a fix for the same hardware on the F16 : "Fixed: Duplicating Thrust axes on the VPC Throttle MT-50CM3 joystick." And I had reported an issue with it in the Apache forum last May with the T-50CM3 Throttle, but got no answer from ED. Curious that my issue is that the controls are reverting to default when i shutdown and restart DCS, in certain conditions.

Что вообще с тормозными щитками? Жму кнопку - не работают.

Agreed, I would also appreciate this very much.

Have a look here. They are aware of it and will be or even are working on it, but the water injection and engine seizure issues had a higher priority. Unfortunately they are quite restrained in telling us if its a priority bug and when it well be adressed. Therefore my corsair grounded atm.

The English, Metric TAS indicator is confusing . The big needle is Mach and the little needle is Knots? or the other way around? I just want Mach and KPH like the Russian cockpit with out Knots. I can't do that?

It was a translator's error; I didn't say that there wasn't any balance, but rather that it's impossible. Both ED and third-party developers will always prioritize what brings them the most profit and where they have access to the best information (Bluefor), not a module that could land them in jail... That's the serious problem with the "red" (Russian and Chinese) modules. So, if anyone wants to make an Su-30MKI/MKK, Su-24, Su-35, etc., I recommend you create a third-party project and deal with the corresponding legal issues... and remember, it's not the first time someone has tried to do something "big" with the red forces, and they ended up abandoning the project due to "problems," like the Tu-22M3 project near 10 years ago... Besides, ED will require "authorization" to publish it, because they don't want to get into trouble. Regarding the MiG-21Bis 2.0, it's impossible for M3 to have access to the data of a Bison or a LancerR, due to security and data restrictions from the countries that operated them (M3 has very clear about them). Furthermore, we're talking about the first third-party module created for DCS World, back in 2015... and many people want an update and improvement for it (especially now that ED has finally created an RSBN system). As for the Su-17 from Octopus-G, that third-party developer posted screenshots, but it's normal for it to be a long-term project, not something that will be ready tomorrow. Regarding a MiG-23, the same applies as above: if someone wants it in DCS World, they know what to do—create a third-party project and try to get it done. ED has already made it clear that they will update the AI models from LOMAC/FC over time, but their modelers are focused on other projects. When they have time, they will announce it.

I hope we get the Naval version and some French ships.

Tatsächlich habe ich gerade Probleme verschiede Webseiten zu erreichen. Startpage.com z.B. Wahrscheinlich ist einer der großen DNS ausgefallen.

se vuoi poca spesa e massima resa, grazie a nuovi driver free Oasis su Steam per la VR ex-WMR, puoi pensare anche al Reverb G2. Ottimo e a meno di 150€ te lo prendi. Io uso il G1 con un a 3080 e va una bomba (sempre con i giusti compromessi)

У вас есть объяснение в графиках и формулах почему? Обеспечивается-не обеспечивается это не разговор.

The main reason for the chosen name was to distinguish it from the existing FC MiG-29 which is called "MiG-29" already, while the FF module is called "MiG-29A Fulcrum-A". Since they added "Fulcrum-A", they could have just called it "MiG-29 Fulcrum-A", I guess.

Hier geht's, lädt aber sehr langsam. Wahrscheinlich Provider- oder Routing-Probleme. Einfach abwarten.

Is this issue verified now?

А ещё может прийти дядя или скорее всего тётя из Министер дез Арми и сказать:-"Жё не ле пермепа!"

This?

Also note that the reason BS3's IGLA is so ineffective is because it uses the IGLA-1E (the same one used for the manpads in DCS), which is a fairly old IGLA. The KA-52 carries a much more modern IGLA-V. Why did ED choose to use an IGLA-1 and not an IGLA-5 when they made BS3? Probably to create a "what if" of the early 80s and not a "what if" of the later versions of the Kamov (which were the stepping stone to the production of the KA-52). If that were the case, then the IGLA-V would have been used (the IGLA-V was designed specifically for use on helicopters). I personally made an IGLA-V mod based on the IGLA-1 model but with an extended range of 5-6 km, a more sensitive seeker and better resistance to countermeasures, which makes it usable in a more interesting way (because the current IGLA 1E has no interest because it enters the same field of action as the cannon, which will always remain more effective)