All Activity

Virtual Desktop has the hotkey option to swap monitors has anyone had any luck doing this in DCS. I was hoping to be able to swap to the monitor that has Discord on when needed vs peekout from under my quest pro. I asked over on Virtual Desktops Discord but we didn't have any luck. The hotkeys do work but just not in DCS. Thanks J

Hey - this is all a bit off-topic, and would be better suited to the main VR forum rather than the bug report/suggestions forum. In particular, there's another recent thread on thumb/finger mice.

Pretty sure that is not accurate. The M.2 slot next to the RAM (M2_1) uses four PCIe 5 lanes directly from the CPU, and the GPU slot uses 16 PCIe lanes directly from the CPU. Neither of these is affected by the other. M2_2 and M2_3 use lanes shared with the primary GPU slot. This allows a bifurcated configuration which splits 16 of the CPUs PCIe 5 lanes to x8/x4/x4 if desired. (8 for GPU, 4 each for those two M.2 slots.) Populating these M.2 slot a would drop the GPU slot to 8 lanes - by design. This is for people who prefer more storage, considering that 16 PCIe 5 lanes aren't really going to be affected by running at 8 instead of 16 with current GPUs. M2_4 and M2_5 use four chipset PCIe 4.0 lanes each, which are not shared at all. Note this assumes a supported CPU is used, as outlined on the website and in the manual. 9000 and 7000 series CPUs support this; 8000 series do not.

Well that's why I'm wondering if the real MiG-29 has a less wishy-washy way of referencing Bullseye somehow? Doing this arithmetic on the fly is a real pain and still requires a fair amount of guesswork and interpolation.

For me, the bug has been resolved after this update.

It's written incorrectly here That's right

Ok, thanks for the feedback. 1. Deleting the launcher.sqlite3 file fixed the odd characters in module names. Thanks. 2. I've changed to the non-MT binary. Will be testing throughout the week. 3. I did a COMPLETE reinstall while saving a copy of my Saved Games folders. Added back in Voice Attack. No issues and everything was splendid. Then SRS. Works like a charm. SimAppPro for WinWing stuff and NF8 Haptic pad plus the SimShaker software. I'm gold. Then TacView. It all went to crap. Total freezes. Left it sitting 15 minutes. No help. Delete the program, it all goes away. Something is amiss as I would think my system could handle it. Perhaps I'm configuring it wrong. I'll look into that later but for now I just want my sim time back. I appreciate all the insights. I'm on the latest Win11 updates, nVIdia updates and the system passed all hardware checks. Life is always twitchy, never perfect. Good flight fellas... Deleting the sqllite db did it. Thanks. TacView crushed DCS and freezes everything without recovery.

Still happening after the latest patch. There are improvements, but this problem persists.

Yes.

I had this exact issue and it was due to the HUD improvement mod i was running. removed it and all was good. If that is what it ends up being, it is now updated and works with the new pod so you just need to download the new file.

There have been plenty of threads about this exact same wish/topic (they seem to be sprouting up every few weeks), and ED has already provided the answer to it.

so much this, the manual has been in translation for like 18 months now, how many words per day is being produced I wonder It is good apache one is getting updated

I don't think the experience of flying a 160hp, 1400 lbs c172 (which I've done) offers a good comparison to a 2,000hp 12,000lbs warbird, but the new FM is easy and boring now, and I want the old one back. For those interested, I tried switching this flag in entry.lua to "true", and it did fly more like the old version... HOWEVER, several bugs were immediately apparent evem in brief testing. It would be nice if this could get cleaned up for those of us who want the initial version back. null

Whatever I try, can`t get the brakes to work smooth. Even a tiny touch of it bounces the nose into the ground. If you have any help, let me know.

кмк ракета весит кг 220+-10кг. все таки на 30см длиннее 77-1 которая весит 190

Hold on....So if I populate anyone of the top three slots with a M.2 it will drop the speeds of the top PCI-E socket to x8?

Tanks for the picture. Sounds good. What about the ultraleap compatibility ? Do you know ? Thanks

Do you have the original documents these fin diagrams come from?

I would quite happily leave DCS if a subscription model is introduced locking me out of my modules until I open my wallet every month to pay in USD from my currency and DCS asks for constant connection on my PvE experience.

I know I'm writing this days later, but I'm not excusing it. I'm saying people seem to be oversimplifying solutions here. My timeline may be off here, but my understanding of the situation (potentially biased as it may be) is that Razbam and ED were working together without any issue, and it seems that during that time, Razbam never got around to providing their source code, which was confirmed by Razbam and ED. It seemingly wasn't just the F-15E, but all of their modules. I don't know what the contracts stated was required in terms of timelines, or if there was some delay for whatever reason, but it seems that Razbam never turned over their source code, and my assumption following that is that ED eventually resorted to the only real trump card they held, which was stopping payments to Razbam and cutting off access to the DCS development system until that source code was provided. This seemed to be where things publicly blew up, as Razbam went out to announce only that they hadn't been paid, while seemingly leaving out the "We also didn't provide our source code" issue that was only mentioned later, and not even as an issue, more as a way of saying "ED are screwed without us, because we didn't provide them the source code so they can't fix out things". That all lead to the court case, which gets us to where we sit now, which is two legal teams made a bunch of legally binding agreements and handed them down to people. Having dealt with legal teams to some degree in my job, all I know is that a lot of the time, most of the company has little to no involvement, and the conversations are often not two way streets. Lawyers are very specific in what they will tell you, and they likely sent everyone an email that basically said "We've reached an agreement, you can discuss the following:" which is what we then received from ED. But that's all we're going to receive, because ED legally can't say anything without breaking the agreement and likely opening themselves up to more expensive legal issues. So I guess I'm not excusing ED, I'm just saying I understand how it was a difficult situation to plan for, and one that's difficult to deal with now. It burns ED on multiple fronts. ED has to deal with the reputation hit and public anger that is getting directed at them, even though it's possible this entire situation was entirely outside of their control. Assuming my timeline is what happened, it seems to me that the entire issue came about because Razbam wasn't providing ED with something ED needed to try and prevent this whole situation from being possible at all. But then on top of the public image hit, ED also now is stuck in a place where they have to provide the finances to support people. Either by offering refunds that would essentially be giving away digital product for no money (obviously, not the worst thing in the world, but it does still suck for a company giving up ~$60 for something beyond their control) and on top of that, they've had to pay all of these expensive lawyers to do work for the past few years, only to be met with an agreement that leaves them publicly able to say pretty much nothing. It's a crap situation for everyone, and from my take, it's frustrating because it feels like Razbam seemingly get to walk away without much issue on their end. They aren't working in DCS, sure, but that doesn't stop them from going to a more lucrative market like MSFS and getting to produce modules that potentially have a fraction of the complexity (no need to worry about weapons and sensors if you're just wanting to make a fun to fly jet that zips around in MSFS) and make money that way. Am I potentially being too generous to ED here? Sure. I might be. But I'm just going off of what I've seen posted here and on the Razbam Discord, and everything I've seen has lead me to believe that things were going smoothly until Razbam was cut off from being paid. And nothing logically makes sense to me for that to happen out of the blue, especially just with one developer, outside of it being a "final straw" type moment where ED did the only thing they could to try and force the resolution outside of going to court. I hope ED can figure out a way to fix the situation, but the reality is, it just feels like they are stuck eating a lot of the blame while a third party developer gets to just go off and do their own thing. ED gets the burden of having to deal with angry users if updates break the Razbam modules, and seemingly also catches most of the blame for whatever solution they propose following all of this. I've enjoyed the Harrier for a while now. It was one of my first planes, and I really hope ED can keep it working. But I'm personally most frustrated with Razbam, because until something comes out that tells me otherwise, I feel like they are the ones most responsible for possibly screwing me out of a module I enjoy.

I agree with the call for FSR 4 - however, for those that are not in the know, I've had good success with Optiscaler to force better FSR via hijacking the DLSS options in DCS. https://github.com/optiscaler/OptiScaler Nate

That's a very broad group of assumptions you've made. In my 43 years of aircraft maintenance, I've worked on many WWII and post war era aircraft and the lack of quality you speak of is very incorrect. Some of the best engineering and workmanship came out of the war effort and that's a fact. Instruments, in particular, are very precision. My Father-in-law is a watch maker and has repaired dozens of warbird instruments over the years and I can tell you from first hand experience that the quality is way better than you surmise. The way the F4U RPM and MP gauges are operating now is not right. The constant vibrating needle is incorrect and setting a manifold pressure of 44.5" is impossible when the needle is bouncing between 41 and 48 like an oscillating saw. IRL these 2 instruments are critical for proper power management and engine life and operate rather smoothly as posted in the videos here. Magnitude 3 LLC needs to correct this behavior in a future update to bring it closer to the expected realism. Maybe it's the same programmer who decided to make the folded wings shake while parked on the carrier and the antenna post to whip around like a sword in flight. Both equally unrealistic and immersion breaking. Cheers, John

Mi-24 owners leave the room...

As a nVidia gpu owner that wants options in the (near) future, also there should be FSRAA in the sim. I use DLAA and it is much superior to DLSS as that one wrecks image quality. FSRAA is analogue to DLAA. Both doesn't downscale the image while looking better than MSAA 4x, but with a bit of ghosting, and having the weight of MSAA turned off. You guys should be pushing for FSRAA as well.