All Activity

I totally missed that, thanks for pointing it out.

I mean, it's hard to present it when you don't want to see it, but go off, king.

Nah. At most you'd get a driver crash. That's how you know you went too far. If you don't overvolt you're not going to fry your card. These are mine. Default Very mild unvervolt.

Aha. Same guy, 5090.

Типа взлетел утром, включил автопилот, ушел на работу. Пришел с работы, выключил автопилот - сел. Такие полеты интересны?

As you increase speed or decrease speed the nose will act according going up or down. For roll trim, pretty much what others have said.

OK, so you admit to not having evidence and only conjecture. So when you said that you had evidence, you were lying, weren't you? There are multiple narratives out there, so what is this nonsense about there being only one narrative? And you are not even explaining what narrative you are talking about, but this seems to be a pattern with you, where you just keep insinuating, rather than actually writing things down. This strongly suggests that you are just bluffing, and can't actually write things down. Again, I have never been a cheerleader for Razbam. You seem to have a severe problem with the truth.

Good advice, but where should the MAP and blade pitch (RPM) be at when on final leg to the carrier? This is where I struggle massively; I seem to always come in too fast or too slow during the last few dozen feet before landing, always either ending up fast, at around 110kts, or too slow, at under 90kts. I'll try to correct last second with throttle, before hitting the deck, but that thing just yaws wildly left/right, depending on if I'm increasing or decreasing throttle. Anyhow, it's frustrating as hell lol! I can't seem to get the last leg down to where I can consistently land. I have landed and hooked the wire, but it's like 2 our of 20 times. I think I need to get the MAP and RPM setting dialed in during the final approach, as well as the 10 degree pitch trim, and that should get me on the deck safely.

Lol. The skin in the video is available in the skin's menu in settings. However, the 5090's curve looks completely different to the 4090's and I'm a lot leery of blowing my <profanity> up.

Here you see a couple images of an aircraft with its external lights on and a signal flare activated through triggered actions for comparison. In general, aircraft lights are only visible from a few hundred feet away. The signal flare on the other hand is visible from miles away. Everyone has seen aircraft with their running lights on at night, visibility in miles is accurate as that is the point of the lights. It would really help with night flying if aircraft lights in DCS had realistic draw distances. I feel like there must be a simple fix, just make them work like the signal flare!

That's a good tutorial but, unfortunately, MSI have completely changed the look of their app and make it impossible to correlate with the video. I was about to inflict it on my 5090. Oh well.

The only unit Ive found to be able to do point defence currently is C-RAM, I can drop the test miz, consists of 1 SA-3 site, covered by 2x single unit groups of popular SHORAD units, each with differing settings (for instance one with engage air weapons, one with defend against ARM), with attacking F-4s using Shrikes configured with mk37 fuzes in loft for the SA-3

Sounds like somebody outside is mowing their lawn. I figure my fans have to be working (perfectly silently) because I get zero fogging on the lenses. With the OG, at this time of year, that was a serious issue.

Hi @Special K, what is "exclusiveMainRenderCore" for? Thanks.

I'm happy that you like Angus, my daughter, listening to him, challenged me to write a book where he is the main character. And funny enough, the book will be published this year.

You have not learned your lesson have you. Why not go back to zambrano's discord and stay there. You really are a perpetual nuisance here and I am gobsmacked why you have not been banned other than this forum is far more lenient than zambrano's discord criticising that arsehole. Go away and stop spamming the forum, we hear you, now go away please. Mizzy What a strange mindset you have, non sequitur Mizzy

We will definitely see this come up again. Possibly not via a ron zombrano kamikaze run but it will come up. It's tough to be in business and there are going to be 3rd party devs who, despite their best efforts, just don't last.

No, because the monitor just acts like a repeater of your VR headset. There's nothing extra being rendered. We've tested this. It makes no difference.

This may have already been addressed but I couldn’t find anything in the threads. Just returned to the Apache after a while away and when I pulled up the George AI from the back seat, it was way at the top of my FOV. and in order to use it effectively, I had to disable the IHADSS. I’m using a Varjo Aero. Furthermore, when I selected a topic which required a list, that list was way at the bottom of my FOV. In 2D we know that these positions are right/low and left in the FOV. Is there a method to change these locations in VR to the correct ones that show in 2D? Thanks

Make sure that you don't have the spacebar binded to one of your controls, for example many people have it binded to the gun trigger.

probably yes, but it shows a bigger problem: how many more contracts are older than we suspect? Chinook? F4U? ED apparently doesn't want us to know which 3rd party modules carry the old risk And who says we won't be seeing this problem arise again in the next 7 years? I don't know how many older versions of DCS you wanna install?

Very good advice. With a slight undervolt my 4070ti Super runs 10°C cooler and the difference is 1-2 fps at most.

Other thought: the autopilot stays on with moderate stick input. Lots of new Viper people (myself included) instinctively start trimming when they're actually fighting the AP. Other than that, the F-16 just needs roll compensation for asymmetric load. -Ryan

All “new” agreements… the Razbam contracts were already signed prior to the Hawk issue.

Just because ASC was able to build a Load Master doesn't make it an FPS, and to do that, ED would have had to make changes to the core, because as far as we know, a third party doesn't have access to that type of code. Also, we're only seeing a camera, not a body, and if I recall correctly, the closest thing to that same vision is that of a downed pilot parachuting out, who can do exactly the same thing when he hits the ground, moving around objects, and I think that's the functionality ASC is leveraging (unless ED says otherwise). You're asking for functionality (HALO/HAHO), which has to be done by ED first in the core because it's not implemented, and things like JTAC, which would affect CA's stuff. I think we're talking about different things.