SonofEil

Yeah, that's my fear too.

The Ars Technica article I read mentions that it's up to game devs to implement game support of foveated rendering. ED's development pace may be glacial but they do seem to realize that VR is the future of flight sim, hopefully they can work on implementation once HTC makes the API available. I'm excited to finally see real world tests of the mythical foveated rendering. It's also the first of three requirements for my next VR purchase. The others being increased FOV and a resolution bump, neither of which are part of the upcoming Vive. Considering I got the Odyssey a few months ago I'm not in any hurry to upgrade, but it's definitely promising that all of those requirements already exist in consumer products, just separately at the moment. I suspect (hope) that one of the mainstream manufacturers will have such a product in the next 24 months.

Welcome back, I remember you from the Black Shark, early A-10 days. I also took a ~3 year hiatus when my old rig gave up the ghost. Came back about 18 months ago. -The only con I think people have encountered using the Steam version is they're last in line for the new toys. Steam releases and updates lag behind the direct non-Steam version, sometimes by weeks. -Yes, SSD is basically your only option anymore, you'll get crazy stutter and lag on an HDD. The good news is they're way cheaper than they used to be and they are worth it for the difference they make. -Presumably not if you go the Steam route, you'd be purchasing from them, but again, I can't speak to it. I make all of my non-Steam purchases through the DCS World website. There are other options for third party modules, purchasing direct from them, but I wouldn't recommend it. There's been some recent drama in that regard. -I used to have a shady torrent client as well back when I sailed the high seas, so to speak. I never downloaded one for my current build and DCS downloads and updates just fine. -I also never claimed my Nellis map, just payed them again for a new one. (You're welcome, ED.) But I know they were honoring such claims. Contact the moderator NineLine (who you may have known as SitHSpawn back in the day) and he'll point you in the right direction.

Yeah it’s pretty hilarious. I just put it up for fun while these two ladies have their little spat.

Not Russian, but...

While I'm not one to say 'more options = bad', I'm also not aware of NV ever being done single-eye in aviation. Maybe it was tested (I mean, everything has been tested), possibly even operationally, but I've never come across something like that. To me that would be a recipe for instant disorientation. Are you sure you're not thinking of the single tube NVG's that fed both eyes? Those might've been used by transport/bomber crews before, a loooong time ago.

Congrats! As has been said, the only way to do it is practice practice practice. I think my throttles have a 10 curve on them also, but that was needed to get the F-18 afterburner detent to agree with my TM WH throttle physical detent. On the stick, I started out at around 25 curve on both axis’s and when refueling finally got easier dropped the curves to 15 where they’re going to stay. The planes are overall too twitchy with no stick curves. One thing is you definitely want a dead zone on both axis of your stick, even if it’s as little as 2 or 3. No dead zone can cause issues when an absolute zero is needed by a system (usually autopilot) but your stick's physical zero has, for example, a resting 0.1 deflection.

I actually still have this mod in place since it literally didn’t make a difference good or bad to my image or performance. And I actually did drop my PD to 1.0 and turn off MSAA. Yeah my fps increased some, but it gave me a jaggie pixelated aliased picture. Turned PD back to 1.3 and MSAA back to 2X and everything was good again. MSAA has never made my picture blurry, it just removes the jaggies to varying degrees, like it’s supposed to.

I recently discovered shapeways and reeeeeally wish I hadn’t. $$$

You think wrong, sir. Besides RL NVG’s having a much narrower FOV than VR headsets, the FOV number still only refers to horizontal FOV, an imaginary line running horizontally across the center of your vision. Irl you can easily ‘look under’ even the wide angle four tube NVG’s. To answer the original question, yes DCS renders the NVG view incorrectly in VR and there isn’t a setting or workaround currently available to correct it.

I've only ever encountered the white blob when messing with in-game PD. Anything over I think 1.6 and I got the blob. I've never seen it at 1.4 though, but I'd adjust that down first to see if the blob goes away.

"Boo, Mission Failed" yourself, Wags!:) 1st: course familiarization 2nd: busted gate, the super low tricky one towards the end. 3rd: 5m25s Thanks Wags, the course is fun as hell. Haven't played with my stick like that since high school!:joystick: I really don't see anyone doing this in the mid 3's. Lower to mid 4's, yeah, but if I see people posting anything lower than 4 minutes I'm gonna need to see some pretty convincing proof.

Unfortunately I didn't notice any improvement. I adjusted the config to 2.0, but strangely my SS in the Steam VR settings was already at 200%. I did some more testing with in-game PD and MSAA and landed right back where I've been, 1.3 and 2X. Tbh I haven't really noticed any clarity issues to begin with that couldn't be attributed to hardware limitations (display res/Fresnel lense), but it was worth a try. *shrug*

So I just learned that bunnies apparently have a 189.5 degree FOV per eye, with 19 degree of "overlapping" binocular vision split between forward and backward (and upward as well if we three dimensionalize this concept). ...I'm having a really hard time imagining what that would be like... Thank you David OC...I think.

Once advanced pointing and cockpit interface devices become the norm, we should have a grease pencil option so we can take notes on the canopy! (only half kidding.) But seriously, an upgraded kneeboard with comms log is definitely needed.

Oh I was just horsing around. I think I was low on fuel so staying out of burner, doing T&G’s, which you don’t do irl in a F-5 anyway. It was literally my first flight in 18 months, certainly longer since I’ve referenced the -1, but I know she needs at least 250 kts to be even marginally happy.

I know this is one small parameter change, like M61 accuracy, that would take literally ten seconds to fix. So fiix it please. Actually, it’s been over eight months since ED broke something that was never a problem previously. I’m tired of asking nicely. FIX IT.

Not my experience at all. Working with A-10’s at Bagram and other deployed locations we very rarely defueled aircraft except when required for specific maintenance, usually a fuel cell inspection or closely related system. In fact aircraft are usually refueled after their flights. Munitions also stay on the aircraft and there was not a special area for armed birds. They were sitting right there on the flightline with all the other aircraft. I think rockets might have been pulled from their pods after every mission, I seem to remember hearing that they’re more susceptible to accidental firing from stray voltage, but everything else stayed on wing. Here’s some 8mm film I took at Bagram with footage of planes just sitting around with mav’s and gbu’s hanging off them.

I just hopped back in tonight for the first time since going VR. What a roomy little office the F-5 has! The pilot is practically manspreading in the seat. Coming from the F-18, the F-5's engines are incredibly responsive (maybe unrealistically so?), yet they're also anemic, wheezy little things. I was doing a climbing turn from takeoff at full mil, 1500fpm, 180kts...and losing speed! I've flown real life GA airplanes with better climb performance! I'd forgotten you can't see how much fuel is in the external bags, and as soon as the "Ext Tanks Empty" caution light illuminates extreme range anxiety sets in. Range anxiety sets in immediately after wheels-up if you're flying without bags. Maneuvering she bleeds energy like a stuck pig and it's hell gaining it back unless you're in a controls-neutral dive. You can't just power your way out of trouble. I also decided to play around doing some low altitude, high AOA work. Mistake. And I honestly believe it's harder to set up a good, stable, textbook approach and landing in the F-5 than it is to do a carrier trap in the F-18. In short, I missed this old bird! Time to go get in some fights!! Enjoy your purchase, CybrSlydr!

Cobra, I’m willing to volunteer my time to transcribe Jester voice queues to a text format suitable to you. PM if interested.

Sure, with a hard landing irl the jet would be grounded for a thorough nose to tail internal and external inspection, structural points, frame alignment, controls rigging, etc. But I’d be surprised if you slammed the boat at a full 45,000k lb weight, 900+fpm decent, there weren’t some visible tangible consequences. Blown tire or gear piston, maybe even losing a something from the hardpoints. My point is that if it would happen to the jet in real life, the expectation among most of the simmers here (or at least the long-timers) is that ED replicate it in sim to the extent that they’re able. And that includes fuel management when approaching the boat and consequences for exceeding airframe load tolerances.

I’m glad we’re getting a pod, but disappointed that it sounds like another long wait for the improved infrared imaging. Oh well, c'est la vie.

Actually, yes, I think a majority of people here would want that. It’s kind of the point of this “as real as possible” thing. You could still jettison bags and weapons if you want to hit the deck quick, but there should absolutely be consequences for slamming down seriously overweight. Damage modeling is supposed to be getting some attention eventually, which is good, because the Hornet needs it in almost every aspect.

Pretty sure I know where you guys got that sound...:smilewink:

That kind of sets up a ‘blood from a turnip’ type of situation. Unless ED is holding reliably updated 3rd party source code in perpetual escrow (nope), their gaining source code access if another VEAO happens is far from guaranteed.