All Activity

That's something i didn't pay attention to, but will look at it . Thanks for the report. by the way , feel free to use "issues" to report what you think is wrong , or improvments https://github.com/landre-cerp/McduDcsBiosBridge/issues

Interesting. I get this with my QP. I will try your idea and see if it works for me.

OK, did some testing yesterday... My problems with Necksafer had nothing to do with the Eye Tracking Switch in DCS. In my case Nechsafer API has to be in #1 rank within the OpenXR API Layers GUI, otherwise it won´t work. So my API-order is: #1 Necksafer API #2 Motionsystems API (for motion compensation) #3 QV Companion API Only than I get Necksafer to run without a problem. However - the Eye Tracking Switch in DCS makes a big difference in Necksafer: Having it ON I have a very blurry sight when looking back. It seems that the Foveated Rendering Area stays at my actual head positioning of 110° while my view snaps to 160° and therefore is out of the high rendering area. Having it OFF it works perfect, the Foveated Rendering Area also snaps back to 160° while I am only looking at 110°

Thanks , I'll check how it works and if it's ok, I'll enlarge this area in the update.

You want to spoil that one for me too?

Not to play white knight for ED, but basically you have described it yourself. SRS is a standalone tool which has very minimal dependencies on DCS. Other than reading the radio unit switched location, SRS doesn't care about DCS and it's a radio app by itself. What ED is trying to do is to integrate all of that into the what everyone now knows is a code hell of a DCS so that's why it takes long whereas Ciribob basically has all his attention on the single app and that's it. On the other hand, latest VoIP is pretty much very good in itself and works mostly as SRS users would expect. There is no splitting of audio per sides (but to be honest, I'm not sure that's realistic setup in a first place) and IIRC MIDS radios aren't supported, but the rest works out of the box within DCS, it isn't supported by 3rd party apps. It's a shame that the current release of the VoIP wasn't the initial release as now there's basically no connection issues like before and radios work as advertised.

I'd also like to see something from the East as well. For example, the new version of the Hip, the Mi-8MTV-5.

What you have shown are the line "management" pages, it shows of which waypoints the line is created. That is correct IIRC as all lines and areas are created from the point in aircraft memory (waypoints and control points, I think target points can't be a part of the line/area/route) To see how it would display on the HSD, you can slew the HSD to the e.g. 6W and then see if the HSD will display PL-SHIELD or something else. Not a home PC so can't check the track, but I would go on a limb to say this is correct, you just haven't looked at the HSD

It’s something most missions don’t get right: it’s not the wind that matters but the wind over deck. The wind is just one component. If you jump into the LSO station you’ll see that the wind over deck blows precisely down the angle.

Jester is your RIO in Zone 5, not Bio. narrations will only happen during otherwise idle transit times when you have absolutely nothing else to do. They won’t interfere with the action, that would be an immersion killer.

Damage models: Most of them are FUBAR. I don't know if it's to be player friendly that way players can get away with more to benefit game play. I have personally put hellfires, GBU's into a hind and it shrugged it off. Tricker has tons of videos of him hitting helicopters with multiple 25mm from a Bradley. wow what a great segue. Weapon Damage: A burst of 25mm from the above example would wreck any aircraft, especially a helicopter. I proved that anything below a 30mm rarely damages anything past 4,500ft in my SA-6 thread. How I conducted my test: Using the previous known range of 4,500ft that was the constant. I started each test with a Bradley to engage with its 25mm(since it doesn't have AP/HE in DCS which should be fixed since the LAV does...) This is a good control to start with. - a common issue, the AI shooter would think a helicopter was destroyed and would stop engaging. This is after many rounds hitting target. - I would place the helicopter on the ground as a cold start(meaning they have to start up to get airborne) right above the 4,500ft mark so around 4,520ft. And run the editor. If the helicopter survived the 25mm event, I brought it within 4,500ft. - IF the 25mm was able to destroy the helicopter that was the end of the test, move on to the next helicopter. If not, I replaced the bradley with a common 30mm unit like a BMP-2, BTR-82A, and a BMPT for faster 30mm engagements. Same method, above 4,500ft, within 4,500ft. - IF the helicopter survived the 30mm test. I moved on to a 120mm test from an Abrams or Challenger II. That's where I stopped, no offense but the Russian 125mm tanks in the game are B.S so I didn't use them (prior master gunner, fight me). Test 1: CH-47F Survived all 25mm, 30mm and 120mm engagements, took off and flew away, even with damaged rotors. Truly amazing. Test 2: AH-64D Destroyed within a few bursts of 25mm from above 4,500ft. Test stopped. Test 3: Ka-50 III 25mm destroyed it right before take off above 4,500ft. Skipped straight to 120mm, it took 22 hits to destroy it, last hit was while it was airborne. Test 4: Mi-8 25mm above 4,500ft stopped engaging because it thought the AI was dead. Was able to destroy it within 4,500ft. 30mm above 4,500ft took it out within a few burst. Test stopped. Test 5: Mi-24P Survived all 25mm & 30mm engagements. 120mm needed 7 hits to destroy it. Test 5: OH-58D Survived all 25mm & 30mm engagements. Survived the 120mm above 4,500ft engagement and took off. 120mm within 4,500ft it almost took off but after numerous .50cal and 120mm hits it was finally destroyed. Test 6: SA342 25mm destroyed it above 4,500ft within a few bursts. Test stopped. Test 7: UH-1 25mm destroyed it above 4,500ft within a few bursts. Test stopped. CH-47 vs 25mm above 4,500ft.trk CH-47 vs 25mm within 4,500ft.trk CH-47 vs 30mm above 4,500ft.trk CH-47 vs 30mm within 4,500ft.trk CH-47 vs 120mm above 4,500ft.trk AH-64 vs 25mm above 4,500ft.trk Ka-50 vs 25mm above 4,500ft.trk Ka-50 vs 120mm above 4,500ft(22 hits to kill).trk Mi-8 vs 25mm above 4,500ft.trk Mi-8 vs 25mm within 4,500ft.trk Mi-8 vs 30mm above 4,500ft.trk Mi-24P vs 25mm above 4,500ft.trk Mi-24P vs 25mm within 4,500ft.trk Mi-24P vs 30mm within 4,500ft.trk Mi-24P vs 120mm above 4,500ft(7hits to kill).trk OH-58 vs 120mm above 4,500ft.trk OH-58 vs 120mm within 4,500ft.trk SA342 vs 25mm above 4,500ft.trk UH-1h vs 25mm above 4,500ft.trk

Reproduce: 1. Create a line graphic in the DCS Drawing editor, name it something the KW will pick up. Example: "KW-PL SHIELD" 2. Run the mission and look at your battlefield graphics 3. Note that the Line shows up with number waypoints, like it is a route: "7W, 6W, 5W" etc. Expected Behavior: The line should not have waypoint markers. Actual Behavior: The line has waypoint markers. Notes: not sure if this is a bug or how the actual aircraft works. It doesn't match the manual, so just wanted to confirm either way. Track and miz attached. Thanks! nullnull Thunderhorse_Day0_v1.miz KW_graphics.trk

I have experimented with FPS limits quite a bit and have found that it does not make any difference to performance other than what you mention here. Limiting to the refresh rate causes some stutter.

Oh yes. 20 Merlin's and a Griffon. Wonderful. You could feel it through your feet.

This shot is so cool! Never expected a Corsair in desert camouflage to look this good!

I can second that bug. Already did an update of the AMD drivers & a clean install.

Anyone? It’s not like SPO-15 is something that everyone knows everything about. Especially when some pilots have experienced the overspill and some haven’t. For example, it apparently happened to the German Air Force birds quite a bit. And of course many people will take anything from the GAF on MiG-29s as gospel. All I ask is the least charitable interpretation not be used

Damn , I did tell him to uninstall the a4 mod, thanks for working the problem

Having visible vortices and vaping is a nice QoL thing, but I wouldn't be bothered if they aren't implemented on release.

I have some reason to believe that a video will be arriving within the next 12 or so hours.

Hello, repair is fixed the error. Thanks.

just wanted to bump this, any chance we could get a reference manual of this type?

What’s your opinion on the vortices topic?

While waiting patiently... Any chance of a reconsideration RE: the F-35C Carrier based variant, as the flagship of this project? Both the Navy and Marine Corps are fielding it, and will take over those AoR's long before the AF and their F-16/15/22/etc. stable. Can be land based as well, if that detail was missed, w/o the complexity of V/STOL. Please consider. @BIGNEWY Bowie