All Activity

Mostly looks fine. There are a couple of blips, but I'm assuming that the dcs log file and the CSV file are for two different runs? Was curious if showed up in log for matching timestamps. I've attached a couple of screenshots from blips. The blips coincide with high App CPU timings as well. I noticed you're running Through The Inferno for this, so possibly it's just loading a bunch of stuff in, or scripts, at the time which are triggering this. I see you're running both Quad-Views-Foveated and the OpenXR Toolkit. Do you have Turbo mode enabled in either of those? Turbo mode will throw off frame timings (it'd skew the numbers in this csv report as well). Quad-Views-Foveated has it on by default...except for SteamVR which you're currently using. Overall though looked ok. How's the "feel" in general when you play? I wouldn't get too hung up on a blip (.1% frametime if this is what it's based on) if the game is smooth and you're just chasing a number which is an outlier (especially if due to to something like TTI). EDIT: I don't use fpsVR so can't comment as to what it displays to you, or how it calculates it's numbers.

Do not say it known issue.If it already known issue,why no fix?

I'm so grateful to ED.LastMissionTrack.trk 111.trk Really Cool HUH? Do not say it known issue.If it already known issue,why no fix?

After confirming "check" or arming the injection seat, RIO asked me to close the canopy so I closed and confirmed with my "check". Then proceeded other checks... I could not recall that RIO would close the canopy for me in the assist startup.

I'm so grateful to ED. LastMissionTrack.trk Really Cool HUH?

Can you clarify what you mean by this? I was under the impression that DCS supported leap natively, and that developers didnt need to do anything special for it.

Yes. That is why in my response, which you quote here, I write that "As others have mentioned, the planes in these videos are C-130H variants".

TWS sometimes won't auto enable STT in MP.about 10NM

It's a real pain to have to individually bind the FC '29 three times when as far as I can tell there's no major difference between them.

Yeah, lot's of people I have been flying with are using farps and airstrips in the areas that are finished, they all see things rendered and I am not seeing what they see. I will try again, just did a repair and will see if it helped at all.

The 3d model for both the Fulcrum and Apache can be turned off in special settings.

Now that we have the controls indicator I've noticed this as well. The aileron trim "neutral" zone has a left bias. It also seems like the deadzone/curve issue, or twitchiness, on takeoff is caused by wind. If I run a mission with 0-2kts of wind I have no issues. When I run a mission with 5-10kts of wind, it's like the deadzone/curves aren't applied and my wings rock with the slightest inputs.

I tried this on Nevada and saw similar. I was trying to zero the altimeter (for Groom Lake QFE) and found that my bombs were miles out and I go NOLA warnings. Also using pre-desig when set with altimeter far from QNH I noticed the desig symbol altitude is wrong. Had A for laser on the hud, but it seems almost like only barometric altitude is being used (in a dive so probably too steep for radar?) not laser range

As far as I can make out whether its wind or target motion is irrelevant. You the pilot just need to do your pilot stuff to track the target so that will take in to account both wind and target motion ... the result is then applied as a simple total vector correction to the nil wing/tgt motion CCIP.

That children analogy - that is beautiful! Accurate, but beautifully funny, love it.

I'm just trying to do basic CCIP bombing, no predesignating. Speed, dive angle all well within parameters and getting the laser ranging but bombs are still falling short. I watched Wags' video.

I'm finally home tonight and will create a track file for this.

+1 for a fix to this. This thread was created in 2019, here we are in 2025 and players still have to choose between a functional kneeboard and passing IC. On the topic of scaling issues, multi-monitor setups break the control indicator scaling too. These basic features should not break just because of alternative monitor setups, and the fix actions should not break IC.

Just and FYI, those videos are of a C-130H with a four bladed propeller. The C-130J is a newer model with scimitar blades that sound much different. See the attached video.

I believe he is mistaken, mixing it up with salvo fire

It’s not a button. It’s simply a bind to simulate pressing through the AOA limit which takes about 17 kg of force.

I have also seen Mach 1.5 limits for the centerline tank. Which is about where you jettison it in my profile/recommended manual profile as well. I have never seen g limits for ground weapons, only speed limits. For example it seems no faster then Mach 0.8-0.9, I’m a bit too lazy to look up exact limits right now. One issue with S-8 is detonation of the rocket motors from aerodynamic heating.

Thank you that clears up why! After you release lock, is it reasonable that it’s also comparing the spot you pre designated with current pipper position? It seems to atleast do this for motion compensation, as you move the pipper it lags as if trying to provide lead for a moving target in the direction you move your nose. Giving the impression that it’s harder then normal to move the pipper

Give me a shout if you are still needing any help.

I received a feedback that CH-47 and kiowa also dont have support yet, I dont have them to test myself, but Ill add to the list. Updated list for @WINWING @WinwingTech : - MB-339 - F4U-1D Corsair - F-5E Flaming Cliffs 2024 - F-86F Flaming Cliffs 2024 - MIG-29 Flaming Cliffs 2024 (All variants MIG-29A, MIG-29S) - New MIG-29A Fulcrum full fidelity - Su-25A (SimAppPro only have Su-25T variant) - MIG-15 Flaming Cliffs 2024 - Kiowa - CH-47