All Activity

I am presuming your source is this Document: I have used Google translate on pages 306-310 that describe the Air to Air Gun modes. I accept that some of the Google translation is awkward but I see no references to this 6 deg and 12 deg lead difference. Trying to make sense of the google translation I have a hunch that this mode is using radar/IRST derived range and angular rates to derive the firing solution. In this mode it is similar to FA18 old director mode ( pre BATR etc). In the standard mode I think its using radar/IRST range but measured on aircraft body rates so in effect an LCOS solution rather than a director solution. If you have another reference that talks about this 6 deg versus 12 degrees I would be interested to read it.

"buzzing the tower" after saving some Afghan National Army guys who were taking fire from a Dushka at their road post one cold January morning in North West Afghanistan

I'm gonna prepare instructions pdf as well as video tutorials before release

"buzzing the tower" after saving some Afghan National Army guys who were taking fire from a Dushka at their road post one cold January morning in North West Afghanistan

@SharpeXB As always with your long standing "modus operadi", you keep derailing threads. To keep talking in circles, with back-and-forth arguments, just to guide the conversation off-topic, in whatever unrelated direction that entertations you, is not being part of a discussion. That's for sure. I've been guilty myself of taking your bait and fueling you - my bad - sorry to everybody else who was looking into this. You've dismissed the topic outright, without even having the most basic understanding of Linux, how it runs games. It's been made clear that this subject doesn't interest you, nor does it concern you. You're clearly antagonizing for whatever sadistical reason. In other words: it's "trolling". So there is no point for you in being here. Go away. Go derail some other thread, please.

Thank you Maxsenna. I will try that. I'm a little fearful with digging around in files. I'm a techno idiot. Are you saying that if I have 2 identical copies of Dcs installed, one on drive C, the other on drive D, that I would add the variant file to the version on D to prevent conflicts with C.

And Skip had a freeze at above 28.500ft in a CE.

Yes you can hear it, because the campaign uses "Sound to all" triggers for the voice overs, not actual radio transmissions. This way they're not obstructed by stock wingman calls, and safe from ED's baked in, exaggerated degradation effects. You can continue the campaign using the skip mission button in the menu.

Went through the list and just did what was recommended. Also set the FPS restrictions in RTSS. I haven't run any proper tests yet, but so far it feels quite okay. -- Nice — that’s a clean log overall and a great baseline for performance tuning. Here’s a breakdown of what I see and what you can tweak or safely ignore: Summary of key points from your log Category Status / Message Recommendation CPU Ryzen 7 9800X3D, 8 cores, all available (affinity mask 11111111) Perfect — no cores restricted. Keep it this way in Process Lasso. Process Lasso WARNING APP (Main): ProcessLasso is running Fine — DCS detects it. Ensure DCS has “Disallow ProBalance” and “Performance Mode” checked. Hyper-V WARNING EDCORE: hypervisor is active Optional — you can leave it on unless you need the very lowest latency in VR. Graphics settings DLSS Quality (DLSS_PerfQuality = 1), Scaling = 1, AA = DLAA, MSAA = 0, Upscaling = DLSS Correct now — no double-scaling; DLSS handles AA internally. Platform timer 15.6 ms Normal for Windows; you can’t improve this. OpenXR runtime Varjo 4.3.1 + OpenXR Toolkit + XR Frame Tools layers Excellent Varjo-Aero stack; nothing wrong. Missing textures glove_, KevinWakePattern.dds, type.anim Harmless. These are placeholder animation textures missing from core files — won’t affect FPS. DLSS init 832×712 → 1244×1068 and 968×832 → 1452×1244 DLSS upscaling is active per-eye, correct for Varjo Aero quad-views. Driver NVIDIA 571.96 Up-to-date. Recommended optimization checklist Graphics options (already good) ["Upscaling"] = "DLSS", ["Scaling"] = 1, ["AA"] = "DLAA", ["MSAA"] = 0, ["Sharpening"] = 0.3, ["maxFPS"] = 300, -- leave uncapped unless using RTSS frame cap ["water"] = 0, ["clouds"] = 0, -- reduces VR overhead ["terrainTextures"] = "min", -- lightest ["visibRange"] = "High", -- balanced choice You can lower visibRange to Medium or reduce preloadRadius (77200 → ~50000) if frametimes stutter when entering dense maps. Process Lasso Verify the persistent rules for DCS.exe: CPU Affinity: all cores (0–7) CPU Priority: High Disallow ProBalance: Induce Performance Mode: (check “Options → Performance Mode → Manage Performance Mode Processes” to ensure DCS is listed) Power plan: Bitsum Highest Performance (installed) Background apps: Limit Chrome, Discord, Steam, OBS, etc. to cores 0–2 and set priority = Below Normal. RTSS (optional) Use RivaTuner Statistics Server to cap DCS at a multiple of your headset refresh: e.g. Varjo Aero = 90 Hz → cap = 90 fps. This stabilizes frametime spikes better than DCS’s internal maxFPS. DLSS/AA consistency Your log shows DLSS + DLAA = good combo. Don’t change the AA line even if DCS flips it; DLSS internally does the anti-aliasing anyway. Mods / packs You have CurrentHill Assets Pack active; it replaces several units (Mi-28N, T-90). This can generate extra texture loads and RAM use — if you see longer mission loads, try disabling it when testing pure performance. Optional cleanup The repeated “glove” texture errors come from missing cockpit VR hands. You can clean those up by deleting: Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\metashaders2\ Saved Games\DCS.openbeta\fxo\ and letting DCS rebuild them. Overall ✔ DLSS setup = correct ✔ Scaling = fixed (no double render) ✔ Process Lasso = detected and working ✔ Only harmless missing-texture warnings remain Your system is now properly optimized — the next gains come from frame-pacing tuning (RTSS) and background-process isolation, not from DCS settings.

Part of the optimization lies in changing out old technologies with new. This is why ED is going Vulkan to begin with. Also, the jump from a DX version to the next one has never yielded the performance gains you stipulate. There is nothing to support that DX12 alone will solve a noticeable part of the performance question. As to your second mention, I'll refer to the motivation listed in the paper. Apparently someone who has studied this very subject proves you wrong. A single person has been able to write a basic library and components needed in order to utilize the functionality of Vulkan and in that, bring technologies that were formerly restricted to the Pro consumer, to indeed the commercial one. Take a look at what I linked to earlier.

OK thats bad, i thought it can be done like on the mirage F-1 and its radar display cover, directly in the mission editor.

You're welcome. Most likely explanation would be infinite recursion.

I think that we should first wait for Vulkan and VR optimizations that will come with it. If the 5090 isn't enough to run DCS maxed out in VR (for the record, I find my ReverbG2 works fine with a 3090), the answer isn't to throw even more processing power at the problem, but to optimize DCS, because there's other VR software that has no problems at that resolution. Vulkan should allow that to be done, the legacy DX11 code is likely at the root of our performance issues. Technically true, but its successor interface, NVLink, is still available. My 3090 comes with it. They killed this tech on all but top end hardware, probably because people were buying two cheaper cards and linking them to get performance of a higher end one. Obviously not a concern with the very top end of the range, or with the Quattro line. This seems to be more of a thing for crypto mining than for gaming, though.

Thank you. Finally, I'd like to ask, what could be the reason for this? [string"..."] :5: stack overflow

Indeed, VR is the devil in question here. Then even that becomes more mainstream. Look, personally, I support implementing technologies that might not necessarily benefit me. DLSS with in-app upscaling is an example here. It allows people with lesser hardware to experience VR, and great. For me though, it degrades detail too much. Given how complex and time-consuming programming generally is, one has to think way ahead in terms of what technologies to implement and based on predicted development of the sim. Funny enough, original HTC Vive, was the only VR I was ever able to max out (1080ti). Ever since then, while GPUs get 15%-20% more powerfull per release (~ 3 years) on average, the release of new VR headsets and implementation of new features make the demand rather exponential. In particular, if you look at this generation, the main technologies propagated by Nvidia were further DLSS advancements (degrade your picture quality for better performance - in 2025 we call it a feature, pre 2000, this would be criminal). The other technology being Frame Generation - again, multiplying frames in order to trick the user, does not actually mitigate the still non-articulated frametime. This can be compared to a well known issue in DCS occuring for some users where their FPS is above 30 FPS (often above 80), yet when they look at the ground from cockpit, it jitters. To keep it short, besides the incremental update from e.g. Nvidia, there really are no new technologies that are implemented to mitigate the ever increasing demand from VR. Now, consider upcoming features like dynamic campaign, ever increasing rivet details on each new module, etc... We should frankly, as a community, welcome any performance- giving addition with open hands, be it CPU- or GPU- related. What I'm trying to get across as well, is that it isn't only a win for the top-end user. Remember that people here live in countries where the 5090 or even 4090 is not available yet, or ever will be. This technology gives us all new options.

i agree with u. The mariana ww2 make me feel more, like i said, in the previous posts, in the jungle. But a mini vietnam map without the A-4e and the F-4 Thunder is a lost of immersion. About the vietnam assets i would like if currenthill can work on it, even release the pack outside the official path like is happening now. i think many of us are ready to pay for a vietnam high quality asset pack

Thank you!

What's that?

The F1's systems must be at the right temperature to function properly. I think AERGES did a fantastic job with this aircraft.

Linking for visibility, also see other screenshots/examples:

Brother has a machine that worked with his Reverb G2 before Microsoft dropped WMR. We since updated to latest version of Windows 11 and current Nvidia drivers. Installed Oasis and VR now works for other games. However, in VR we launch a mission (or instant action) in DCS and it hangs loading. Tried resetting DCS setting including deleting the saved games folder and starting from scratch. No change. Anyone else run into to and resolve? Ideas?

I need to land like that, I keep breaking my bird.

Yeah but the threshold for that is much more mainstream attainable. This is far from the most demanding game.

I haven't seen this as reported? Can you link me?