Ourorborus

Sigh.. READ WHAT YOU ARE RESPONDING TO ...you just proved my point!

Because rolling back to stable for a large server is much more than just ticking a box to change versions. Please dont let this be dragged into a stable vs OB discussion. Everyone here knows why Openbeta exists. Perhaps I could have worded myself better: ....contrary to what was stated before, turning the feature off not only works for Multiplayer, but is in fact is preferable for many who play MP.

I think somebody else has already pointed out ... read what you are responding too. Noone is complaining about Openbeta. Many here are pointing out that this "feature" is unrealistic, immersion breaking and a severe step backwards for the game. <---This is open beta feedback! We have also pointed out the "feature" is advertised to be able to be turned off. This does not work and needs to be fixed <----- this is open beta feedback! I have expressed disappointment that the second point has not been fixed in the hotfix. <---- while not direct openbeta feedback it is a valid expression that something that seems so simple to fix was not looked at despite being a major issue for many. There is only person here advocating for a "one size fits all, force it upon everyone because its what I want If you don't like it go to stable" approach...........

So your solution is to drive anyone who doesn't what super blobs away from openbeta. So they just have to deal with the super blobs in 4 months when it makes it to stable because there was no one left on open beta to point out they are broken? Hardly the spirit of open beta! Noone is advocating to remove it entirely. The function is already supposed to be switchable. But the switch doesn't work. Fixing that switch should have been a priority.

So let the server managers allow/disallow the setting...... I play MP exclusively. We skipped last weeks mission as a direct result of this patch.

....and what it would look like in 2.9.... nullnullnull Seriously though, the polarising nature of this discussion highlights the need for this to be able to be disabled. While it may be perceived to work on some hardware it clearly breaks the sim on other hardware. Some individuals value "fun" over over realism. Many of us get our fun from realism, and this absolutely kills it. So let us be able to disable it!! It is disappointing the new hot fix does not appear to make the autoexec switch work. This should have been #1 priority.

Please make getting rid of these ugly, unrealistic, immersion breaking blobs in the sky highest hot fix priority. At the least make the ability to disable them work. In VR (G2) they look like massive blurry splotches over the top of any traffic. At longer ranges we can see the dot and dont need our RADAR for BVR. Ay shorter ranges the splodge makes seeing the aircraft look like a blob the size of a small football stadium!!

Did you ever find a fix for this issue? It happened three times tonight on our server.

Experienced this as well. Makes front/back seat coord difficult when C53 is a different point!

Experienced this for the first time tonight. It had the added bug that in Multiplayer, the CPG got good indications of solid engine start while pilot couldn't start no2. Then tried starting engines before CPG joined. Engine started (slowly) but CPG had Massive disconnect when joining after engine start. Indications of rotor brake on low rotr rpm, the works.

....and they dont provide much shelter either.... at least from rain!

I get the same issue without the menu. Just blue screen in HMD and when it returns I am stuck in cliff house. DCS still flying on 2d monitor. Of note I notice I get the windows USB disconnect sound and SRS loses contact with all my controllers. Selective suspend off globally and power management for each USB device disabled. Consequently I believe it is the AMD USB Disconnect issue. Sadly AMD have declared the issue solved (it isn't) so there isn't much hope. If anyone finds a way to get back into the sim from Cliffhouse I'd be grateful.

Short answer ... no. Sadly. Microsoft want you to use cortana. If you (like many security aware ppl) turn that off then the only option is to use the vr controllers to open menu etc. Which is far more difficult than just raising the headset.

Yes please. It may actually be easier to achieve than needing a request as the departure end cable is normally up for all takeoffs and landings by arrest-able aircraft. It is the aircraft that drops the hook in an emergency. The approach end cable can be requested while still airborne if needed. Given most aircraft in DCS are arrest-able or can at least safely trample the cable, it could be simply activated at the departure end of the duty runway without need for a specific request.

I have deliberately avoided the technical side of pulses/modulation etc and limited to how the operator uses the equipment, but yes different modes transmit the data differently. Mode 4 and S do have "codes" but yes they are different (i.e not a 4 digit number), and 100% transparent to the operator. i.e not set in cockpit. Mode 4 (more correctly called a key) is input by the Comms guys in the same way crypto radio fills are coded. The operator (pilot) just turns it on and selects functionality. Mode S uses a 24bit hex code. However this is assigned to aircraft (or operators) at registration and not assigned by ATC. The belief being there are more codes than aircraft. (side note, this same belief existed when Mode 3 was released). In practice though it is the aircraft callsign (Flight number/registration) in the datablock that is used. This does give a varied use case though, as an assigned mode 3 code is useless unless you know who it was assigned to by ATC, whereas you can get the callsign out of the Mode S. On the other hand Mode S has a lockout feature in that if you interrogate mode S, it will not respond to another interrogation for a set time. (a simplification but true). Limiting its use in TCAS/IFF type scenarios. I.E if you interrogated a mode S aircraft from your F18 (assuming you could) it might render that aircraft invisible to ATC for a period of time. There are exceptions to this that I wont go into. In practice this means: You set your Mode 3C to whatever ATC tells you to. You only disable Mode C (i.e. use Mode 3A) if ATC tells you your pressure altitude is not verified accurately (required precision is 200ft). You would turn this off at Fence in. And back on at Fenceout. (Side note: you almost never use the "ident button". It is only used if you are instructed "SQUAWK IDENT" If you press it after dialing your assigned code, ATC will assume you are an idiot.) Set Mode 1 and 2 as per ATO for your package. Leave on/ turn off at fence in according to SPINS direction. Mode four, turn on, leave on. That's it for transponder settings. Your onboard interrogator will use your Modes 1,2 and 4 "codes" to interrogate contacts. Always remember a Negative IFF (1,2 or 4) only means they are not friendly. It DOES NOT mean they are enemy.

Civil Mode C (often marked ALT) is the exact same system as Military Mode 3C. And is used for ATC. Civil drops the "3" as they do not use Modes 1, 2, and 4. So until the advent of Mode S, all civil transponders only operated 3 and 3C. 3 (or 3A) and 3C are not different modes per say. They function identically and are compatible in all regards except for the addition of Pressure Altitude to 3C. (Note this is pressure altitude and is NOT subject to your QNH setting.) From an operators perspective, 1,2,3 are functionally the same, you plug in an assigned code. The interrogator asks the question and gets the code in response. THATS IT!! The term IFF is a bit misleading as it ONLY idents Friend but not Foe. Your 1 and 2 codes are assigned in the ATO. Your mode 3 is assigned on first contact with surveillance equipped ATC. (there also are generic codes for flight without a surveillance service). If the interrogator is mounted as a steerable beam on a military platform, it is usually known as IFF. If the interrogator has a regular sweep it is known as Secondary Surveillance RADAR (SSR). Just like a primary RADAR, Azimuth is gained from the direction the sensor receives the response, and distance is gained from the response time. As Secondary (IFF) is an active response, it has a greater range for a given power. SSR is preferred over Primary Surveillance Radar (PSR) in a cooperative environment (i.e. ATC) as it is more accurate, less prone to interference and gives an ident. Also most PSR do not give an altitude, and even 3D PSR altitudes are vastly less accurate than Mode 3C. Mode four codes are assigned a bit more like crypto radio codes in that they are programmed into the system based on days and times etc. The Operator doesn't see the code. Mode 4 systems can also offer a little more functionality in interrogation than just the code response. Mode S functions the same but there are more codes in the bin and it also responds with data from the aircraft's FMS. While not actively looked at by ATC, this can trigger alerts like the pilot has dialed a different level into the FMS than ATC has cleared them.

My experience: VKB gradually ground to a halt the more pages/files you had loaded into it. Could have aircraft/ theater specific profiles manual switched. Open KB has a few less features (but is actively supported so ask and you may receive). But doesnt grind to a halt with lots of pages. Also works with OpenXR (which in itself is a huge perf boost for me), and has the ability to load "aircraft" and "Theater" Tabs direct from DCS default kneeboard locs. Obviating the need for manual profile switching. YMMV especially regarding performance.

I have been looking for months with no success. There are several promising entries in various lua but none seem to work for vr as the angle just goes back to the HMD's angle.

+10000

This has been raised several times. resetting position works on a flat screen but not for VR. (I can't speak for TrackIR). As the angle is overidden by the angle reported by your HMD's accellerometers. The effect varies with individuals as everybody's face is different thus HMDs sit on your face at different angles. For me the JHMCS is about 6degrees too high. The only solution I have found is the wedge a small pad in the top of my HMD to tilt it down. For clarity, I refer to HMD as the physical VR HMD, and JHMCS as the in game helmet display. ED have yet to acknowledge the issue let alone fix it.

The current night lighting system does a very good job of adding variation between a will lit night and a very dark night. On my server there have been missions where we were caught out by our NVD being less than effective due to it being a very dark night. In real world NVD aided operations, one of the biggest pieces of weather information asked for by aircrew during prebrief is the millilux. Without going into the technical side, Lux is a measurement of light. Millilux is a therefore the measurement of ambient light present on a smaller scale than daylight (i.e. at night). This measurement helps give an indication of what to expect in terms of NVD visibility. With variations of gamma setting, monitors, HMDs etc, it would be impossible to indicate the actual millilux in game but it would be possible to indicate the ambient light for night missions. A simple scale of 1-5 where 1 is as dark as the engine gets and 5 is a very bright night would be a welcome addition to the weather part of our prebrief. Also seeing the indication in the ME could help the creator tailor their missions better.

The server I fly on has a virtual Australian Army Aviation Unit that features the Apache. It is growing fairly quickly and Sadly though I agree the inability to put George in the Backseat during MP is a major hindrance. His Suicidal tendencies as a pilot notwithstanding, as a CPG he just cannot coordinate fires in a MP environment. Datalink capability will also be a game changer for MP. Please please please prioritise this!!!

One of the best additions to the core game in recent years was the introduction of savable graphics presets. This can be very handy when switching aircraft. Especially so when changing to aircraft of different mission profiles. For example I have a preset for F18/14 and run a different preset for the helos. Primarily this is because in fixed wing I need a greater draw distance and can bump a few settings up due to spending most the time at altitude, whereas helos are always close to the ground and hence draw distance can be reduced to allow the headroom needed to make terrain look a bit better. I am not sure if it would even be achievable given the mission load sequence but the icing on the cake would be to have the appropriate graphics preset auto load when selecting an applicable aircraft. If this is not possible I would like to request the preset buttons be replicated on the main DCS page to save going into the settings page each time we swap aircraft.

I love what the OP has said and agree 100% that I would prefer to have functioning systems that are not 100% real than not have the systems at all. On the other hand, as Big Newy has said, ED uses SME's. Simulation of certain systems could potentially place both ED and those SMEs in hot water, and it is not just a black and white matter. To give two examples: 1. ED uses educated guess work to make something that functions well. And their educated guess falls very close to the mark. ED now looks like they may have used classified sources, and the SME looks like they have provided that source either directly or directly with such feedback as. "This button should be over here" 2. ED uses educated guesswork to make something that functions well. The result is close but with an obvious discrepancy. Now it looks like they used classified sources and deliberately changed some factor to avoid prosecution. In both instances the onus may fall upon on ED and the SME, potentially in separate cases, to prove no wrong doing. This can be difficult to prove as the proof relies on an absence of evidence, so the implication is you are hiding something. It is a fine line to tread and on the whole ED does it well. Perhaps the importation of systems from other platforms may be a way ahead. E.g. Importing the CAS page from the A10 would be clearly not a use of classified F18 documents and give the players a functional system.