Ourorborus

Militaries around the world have a knack for generating words like this. I have seen half-duplex used before in technical publications. Other fun ones include: "ET tool" Which stands for "Entrenching tool tool" "Surveilling" instead of "Survey" And pretty much the entire Navy sub language known as "Jack speak" (I.e decks, bulkheads, the head etc.....)

Subscription pay models only work for companies that own a well established monopoly that people require in order to do business, i.e for income generating purposes. Two successful examples are Microsoft Office and Adobe creative suite. Both only work because the end user MUST pay the subscription or risk losing their income. Both companies have created mass resentment and lost most of their casual user base. The Adobe example has created a resurgence in competitive software aimed at the consumer/prosumer market. Another example is Cakewalk Recording software. The company went under 12 months after going to a subscription model as most of it's (very loyal) user base were home amateurs operating on a shoe string who could not afford the risk of ransomware. Better to go to another product that they buy once and keep using until it no longer works, than be forced to continue to pay for the privilege. This is different to software that requires an ongoing subscription to access the service (read many online games, Netflix etc) because in this model you are paying for the service, not the product. At any time the user can decide they don't want to watch movies anymore and end their subscription. DCS is neither necessary for income generation nor an ongoing service. (unless the subscription applies to multiplayer only). It is a product that people purchase for enjoyment, and play until the next shiny thing looks more appealing (other game/sim/new module) so they can walk away if they don't like the subscription model, and based on history they will.

Actually the correct answer is "Isn't the the same dress as {insert a third party who your wife does not like, or wears fashion your wife does not like} was wearing recently?"

No, No and No I have already walked away from Adobe, Microsoft and several other software solutions because of this model. It is a trap that only leads to rising prices and user disenchantment.

How are the MIDS channels used in Mission design? In reality the MIDS give an extra two voice circuits. These could be used for AWACS or flight comms for example, freeing up the VHF/UHF circuits for JTAC/ATC etc. How then do I set the flight or the AWACS to use MIDS rather than a UHF/VHF freq?

Allowing for crosswind in the cruise is what the old wiz wheel is for :). Put simply fly straight and level in balance but maintain a heading that compensates for the cross wind, such that your track made good is the direction you want to go. Modern FMS can do this calculation for you, and that is why ATC will expect you to account for wind if cleared to "track" a direction. If vectored (i.e. fly heading) you are not expected to adjust for wind but fly the exact heading issued, ATC will correct for wind during vectors.

As an Australian I would love to see the "Pig" recreated in DCS. Known as the Aardvark to our US cousins, the Pig was an iconic "flagship" of the RAAF for several decades. Operational service included Vietnam, the Gulf and Libya. The Pig had several unique design traits including swing wings, side by side seating and ejectable cockpit. It also had terrain following radar allowing very low level approaches to a target and could reach Mach 2.5 at altitude. I was fortunate to be in the tower for their last sortie and would love to try my hand at the wheel so to speak. The F111 would also give virtual F14 RIOs some variety by sitting in the Nav's seat.

Rudder deflection is always required for balanced turns, having a different propulsion system doesn't change the laws of aerodynamics. What changes is how much control input is required to achieve the required deflection. Historic aircraft had a direct linkage between the controls and the surfaces, thus any rudder deflection required control input to achieve. This is particularly the case for taildraggers that need large rudder deflection during ground roll. Modern fly by wire aircraft have the control surfaces moved by computer to achieve the desired flight path as directed by the control input. Careful observation will show there is not always a direct relationship between stick position and aileron/elevator deflection, and forward stick movement may involve more than elevator deflection. On these aircraft, the computer will normally adjust the rudder as required to maintain balanced flight. Rudder control input is only required when you wish to deliberately enter an unbalanced condition (aeros/BFM) or on the ground. Semi modern hydraulic aircraft tend to have yaw dampers which are designed to adjust the rudders to maintain balanced flight. Although we tend to classify the divide as jets vs helo/ww2. the difference is really modern vs older aircraft. e.g. King Airs have Yaw Dampers. And modern helos have fly by wire that reduce the need for control input during certain stages of flight. (I know many Blackhawk pilots that put their feet on the floor during cruise and NH-90 pilots who trust the autohover enough to only guard the controls during the hover)

Actually reset view and test mouse are directly related to steam VR. as it is the bridge between WMR - Steam VR-- DCS that causes this issue. Same with the on/off headset. the interaltion between WMR and steam VR is where the issues this solves come from. Like I said first world problem and not a complaint. This is a wishlist forum and I would love to see native WMR support.

First world problem I know, and steam VR is only one of many steps. but when I add the extra add-ons any steps to reduce would be welcome. Currently: Launch WMR Put on HMD Turn head left, righ down ...a couple of times... open desktop in WMR Open VR kneeboard - load kneeboard file Remove HMD Open DCS Batch file wait for, TARGET profile, Voice attack/Viacom pro/ Sim shaker to load Try to catch simshaker as it loads to turn up the volume from default 50% to 100% Place on HMD wait for DCS to load Recentre view test mouse works (for some reason Steam VR/WMR/DCS interface often means mouse wont work in VR) Smile and select mission. .. die horribly... start again

That was essentially the problem I was concerned about. The solution I intend to try will be to add an offset to the axis output based on the trim input. Thus: Trim setting from the sim will adjust the physical centre point of the pedals AND apply a software offset (in the opposite direction) to the axis output. eg. imagine the rudder axis extends from -4 to +4 with the natural centre being 0. If you press on the left pedal a little it will go to -1, a lot -4. If I adjust the in game trim left until the -1 position, the centring mechanism will move so that the physical centre is at -1. If I do nothing else the game will now apply the -1 (left) trim AND the -1 axis input. To Solve I intend to make the axis input the pot position - the trim position from the game. Thus if trimmed to the -1 position, the axis will output the zero position whilst being physically centred at the -1 position. ………….hopefully. I am still working on the design and print for the non trimmable version, but designed such I can easily modify it to the trimmed version once it works.

I just unplug the USB connector on my HMD before starting DCS if I want to run without VR.

+1 count me in. Steam VR works but like said earlier, too many conflicting variables, and starting the sim has become akin to a religious ceremony..

Cheers rust. I think I have a solution without hacking a doner device. If I can ouput the trim position telemetry that can add a variable to the Arduino sketch that I can then use to offset the centre.

My experience is to use them for scenery purpose only. They rarely engage anything I tell them to, ground or airborne. They seem to have a 30% chance of ejecting after observing any ground fire. Note I say "observing", not "being hit by". They regularly disappear and refuse to respond as soon as a JTAC starts talking. To be fair, when they do engage enemy fighters (on their own accord, not by my command) they fight much better than me. But seriously I would love to see a good response to the OP to find out what I am doing wrong.

+a million. Please don't limit to Imperial and Metric. An ICAO ruleset would be even better. (feet for ALT, NM for distance, everything else metric) Oh and while you are at it. QNH instead of QFE....

Same in ours (Australian) We also had a silver foot button so the non flying pilot could transmit without touching the cyclic. I always thought it was a local add on because it looked like something out of early model Holden.

I bump up the SYM button (top right corner) and turn the dimmer (top centre) down. Helps a bit. Mostly I just keep it on SA with Map off.

Those boundaries can change every AIRAC cycle (3months) so to be accurate the planner would need to receive the data from an AIP source. This costs money. It would also cause problems as some missions may be made incorrect when an ICAO airspace moves. ...then there is argument of Military not needing to comply with ICAO airspace. Worldwide they do this by convention/agreement, not law. and this becomes even less relevant in war. Suggest when creating a mission you add the airspace you incorporate the relevant boundaries into the briefing package.

+1 to the random wallpaper ….

Would be a great addition as part of some realistic ATC. Pilot"CABLE CABLE CABLE" ATC "Cable up" That said departure end cable is normally up for arrestable aircraft. What would be also cool would be "request cable", "approach end cable up"

I can't say thank you enough. Thanks to the Aussie dollar, modules can be quite expensive, even when discounted. The opportunity to try most at once helps me decide which modules to grab while on sale. Thank you very much ED!!

I managed to get this working many years ago with FSX. Was pleased with the results however ultimately I gave it up as for me the immersion was ruined by trying to use my BCF2000 in a sim. Using a mixing desk layout to control throttles, props and mixtures just ruined the immersion.

So I am currently working on a DIY rudder pedals to replace my aging Saiteks. Whilst mindstorming the centring mechanism I thought what if I made the Centre Point adjustable with a stepper motor? Then I could use the stepper motor to provide a realistic trim function. i.e. trim the pressure out without physically re-centring the axis. I could do this with a motor/trim control hardwired to the steppermotor and use that instead of the in game trim. Then I thought the ultimate solution would be to use the in game trim to drive the motor. Not to hard to do with an Arduino Leonardo, the stepper simply becomes an output. The problem: if, for example, I applied half left rudder trim in game, and that physically moved the centre point of the axis to half left. The potentiometer of the axis would still register half left PLUS the game aerodynamic model would register the trim as half left causing the final effect to be full left. In short is there a way to edit a Lua to make the in game trim feed a forcefeedback axis and have zero effect on the aerodynamic model?

..or choose country and service. It wouldn't be a huge amount of data to include..