All Activity

Yes, that's what principle of operation of any trim tab in any aircraft is, no matter whether it's articulated by wheel, hat switch or whatever. Thus, in these planes which feature trim tabs and have control surfaces directly connected to control sticks, yokes and pedals, the latter want to move when trimming - unless pilot is strong enough to keep the controls fixed in place of course - then he will "only" feel force changes. FFB sticks should move a bit then for us gamers as well. If they don't in some modules, it means FFB implementation in FM is not yet complete, or FFB software of device itself needs further development as well.

^^This with DDR5 as picky, as it is, doing so would likely end with grey hair. Doing an Epyc Server right now, and I was about to call that thing dead before it finally beeped, RAM, and having lots of it, can be tricky with DDR5. Even if you buy 2 packs of 64GB kit ( 2x32 ) it is not given that they will run as a 4x32 128GB combo, they very well may not. The warnings are everywhere about this, it ain't a secret.

A core funtionality, with has not centred on none helo module.

DLSS can be a cause of blurriness. Are you using this, and/or DLAA? There are ways to make this better although won’t be perfect. Any blurriness in the cockpit as well?

Sorry for the delayed response. The failed VR load contains the below in the log. This is it not finding a connected headset. I’d have a look into this first as doesn’t seem to be a DCS problem based on that log, eg connection issue between PC and headset etc. 14:59:13.459][Warning] OpenXR: waiting for HMD to warm up... 2025-08-03 21:59:23.107 ERROR VISUALIZER (Main): OpenXR failure XrResult failure [XR_ERROR_FORM_FACTOR_UNAVAILABLE] Origin: xr Source: Projects\Visualizer\Source\OpenXR\openxr_program.cpp:558 On a side note you should run DCS from the bin folder now, the bin-mt folder is being removed in the future. DCS is all multithreaded now, the exes in both folders are identical.

Without knowing, may I suggest taking 2 screenshots of similar planes at same distance at similar aspects and measure the size of both planes? (Better just post about the results, not the screenshots, especially not from that other game.)

Well, it is coming from Reddit - The bitching source of the internet. It should be noted that ED is quoted as stating "We are still hoping to be able to implement the settlement agreement and to find a satisfactory outcome to the current situation, in the best interests of our valued community." Which would imply that perhaps Razbam is not necessarily holding up to their end of the agreement (which may be source code). Who knows, since no one is allowed to be transparent here.

Нравится мне этот И-16! Очень хочу ЛА-7 , кстатти, когда он?)

I have seen no comment from ED about this being in any court. They have stated that lawyers are involved. Which may be why they say it is a "legal matter". But that does not mean there is an active lawsuit or that there is any court proceedings of any kind. If ED would like to correct this by saying there is an active lawsuit or court case, I would welcome the transparency.

I always thought that the duplicated binds were unnecessary because they didn't work for me either.

I remember having the same issue with the general bindings of my HOTAS controller quite some months ago. My work around was to save/export the general bindings for each controller and load/import those into the controller keybinds of the specific aircraft. (Plz make a backup before you try this.)

This is a pretty naive POV. This isn't a criminal case with a single charge so it's a zero-sum game. It's a business dispute. The problem with ED splitting the difference is that it sets precedence for exploitation. It also assumes that DCS is the only line of revenue ED has. Also, given the literal trail of abandoned Razbam products and burned customers out there since the FSX days, how could one specify a single actor here as the 'bad guy?' That is, unless you get informed through a constant stream of unfunny memes. As a business dispute, ED will shoulder some fault. That's how it almost always goes with business disputes of this nature. That's just how it is. But to shovel blame entirely onto one party? That's the mark of someone who has never been privy to running anything. I have noticed that these kinds of individuals will state something as fact when when I've asked them to back it up by providing a source? Silence. In this very thread, someone mentioned Boeing, I asked them about it and crickets.

Oh, well I thought it did. I thought that was why ED was being so quiet about it.

at least 3 minutes after it landed, i still had a lock. I Launched one Aim-54 before and another after he landed, both failed to hit

Я не ограничен придуманными рамками просто. Если самолёт проектировался для посадки на грунт, я буду это проделывать. Если Генкулес садился на авиносец, я бы тоже попробовал. И так далее. В этом смысл симулятора, именно поэтому самолёту в игре место есть, в отличие от условного Спейс Шаттла.

Why do you think anything has gone to court?

I concur. Is this matter even settled in court yet? When will it be? ...and what does ED plan to do with those mods in the future? Why can't these questions be answered?

I figured it out: it's livery specific. Thanks again!

non aircraft specific. just the General controls. the aircraft binds work with everything. it’s just specifically the “General” binds that don’t work with the controller or mouse.

Just saw the update and gave it a try, both pimax play and firmware update. Sadly, I got the laggy headtracking again that has been a recurring theme whenever I upgrade from Version 1.36.01.01.02. This is also present in the DeoVR video player and makes it and DCS practically unusable. Downgrading to 1.36 is a routine operation for me by now, so the whole thing is just one hour of hope and disappointment. This round allowed me to upgrade to the 1.08 firmware, and I have not seen any downsides of that yet. Take care, Tobse!

I’ve been a VR DCS player for 4 years. I play a couple times a week. I’ve really struggled with plane recognition in VR and it’s probably my greatest source of dissatisfaction with the experience. I figured this was just the limit of VR, at least with my setup of a OQ3 and a 4090. Just for something different I tried IL2 last night. I don’t even know which one. It was my first time. It was a completely different experience. I was able to ID BF109s from YAKs, FW190s from 109s and even discern the yellow nose art on planes at much further ranges with no issues. Maybe this is the wrong place for this comment. It’s not my intent to throw shade. I only want to make my DCS experience better. But what’s going on?? This feels like much more of a bug than a wish list request. Why is it so hard to see plane details. It’s like everything is blurry.

sorry but the bug still persists in this new version

Yes, it is possible. You can lock onto completely still ships out on the water as well.

A bit scared to hear you that, I do not own the 339, but I'm looking forward to try the G.91.

You'll really like mission 7.