Galinette

Could you please follow your own advice?

These videos are outdated, the aircraft always draws the route back to base point after the last steer point, and this was fixed with the TSD route update.

No, it's actually one of the most irrelevant one. Please explain how either: Including only a small set of liveries in the base game, with additional downloadable livery packs Including only low res liveries in the base game, with additional HD livery packs Would allow more cheating than possible today, or would prevent improving an hypothetical existing livery cheating problem by classical means such as adding liveries to IC. In the case of the first point, yes a player without the additional livery packs would see a default livery for players using the additional ones, not a "ultra high visibility cheated livery". In the case of the second point, it's even less relevant. Edit : For the record, I'm using three DCS installations for various reasons such as module development on my desktop (gaming & main dev hardware) and two on my laptop (which is a PITA to upgrade for storage space) with only the required module installed on each.

@SharpeXB I think everyone in this thread knows your opinion now. I summarize: Anyone considering that $65-$100 is a significant amount should re-examine its life priorities. Having 50GB (and growing at a fast pace) of textures on the base install is not an issue for you. Removing liveries in the base install is bad because it will allow people cheating. Please add something constructive, or let us discuss the topic constructively, your last posts were just bitching and not significantly helpful.

Or, if you want to leave all liveries, having a light, low detail aircraft (model and textures) that can be upgraded to a high detail version on demand. I don't need having rivets modeled on the stuff I destroy, only on the aircraft I fly.

When an anti-cheat mechanism is not effective (if you want to cheat aircraft visibility, you can hack with ReShade, which can't be IC checked) and increases the base game size by 50GB for everyone, it's not a good idea... Now count the VRAM GB $ cost of those liveries. It's not a secret, VRAM use explodes in multiplayer, while terrain is the same. That's not 1.60$ for 50GB (And wait the evolution of that 50GB figure in one year...)

Currently, the base DCS install contains about 50GB of module liveries only. You don't need to own the corresponding modules, they are installed for everyone. This also potentially causes a high stress on VRAM in multiplayer, if a lot of users use different liveries. With the F-4 incoming, this will likely not improve in coming months. The disk size option is alone, I think, something that prevents selling a couple of modules, for lower budget users that have a full SSD and try keeping their DCS installation slim. Having 50GB of liveries should definitely be something optional. There should be fewer / lower resolution liveries in the base game. Then, either install additional or higher resolution liveries with aircraft modules, or with dedicated free texture pack modules.

Issue with base liveries, is they add up to the base game size, not only to the people owning the module. The tomcat folder is 16GB alone for a base DCS install, mostly due to liveries. They also will eat VRAM whenever used on a multiplayer server. That's my 2 cents only, but there are already way too much big heavy liveries in the base DCS. And since they can be freely added in Saved Games, anyone can choose to have more disk space and VRAM use, and that's better.

What is your radar thread count setting in special options?

Hi! Sounds are extremely subjective. We tried to make them as best as possible from ground crew feedback and ground crew recordings, with good recording gear (high pressure microphones, etc...). I know that you don't like them, and live close to an airbase. People helping us on this work on the airbase on a daily basis. We are not against adopting a mod, if the author agrees, and if ground crew like it more than the official files. In the case of Sedenion's mod, they were unanimously unfavorable. Also, don't take youtube videos as a reference, phone and action cam microphones are very prone to distort and filter out a lot of noise components, because noise reduction is a feature. Sound update is not scheduled at the moment, unless a new mod is released that receives good feedback from SMEs. Thus, we encourage development and use of mods, especially for sounds, and fully agree it's a matter of taste. Some might be more pleasing to the eye. Other stuff are planned, such as IFF, failures, etc... The pace of updates is of course not the same as an early access module.

Wings do bend if you exceed 11G and the more you exceed, the more they bend. So if you experienced swinging, you most likely were significantly above 11G. No system protect you from this on the F-15E. And at 700kts you need to be very gentle while pulling the stick. That's actually intended. What we lack is the feeling of the load factor. Real life pilots will definitely "feel" when they are getting close to 11G (that's an understatement) while on a simulator there is no much help besides using a JetPad, ButtKicker or similar device

Did you try adjusting the thread count? A good starting value is 4. It should definitely not cause stutters with that CPU. TF is much less demanding than HRM. I'm interested by a video showing the FPS graph, and TF on and off showing the issue

It's not detecting jamming per se, but it detects that a contact with a high closure rate keeps a constant range, which he interprets as RGPO/VGPO. Interesting effect, though it will be very complex to make it work in active pause.

I will check this. Maybe a "low fidelity" checkbox could be a solution, but this would make it more prone to crash into stuff like power lines. Added to the todo list anyway

Yes. This is unlikely to be fixed soon. The problem is TWS does kalman filtering & track correlation. It assumes by essence that time is flowing. What I suspect is that the kalman filter gets flushed by continuous estimations at still time values so is unable to establish a proper track. Also, it sees a closure rate but the range remains constant. We don't rely at all on any object ID for tracking & correlation, to make it as realistic as possible in behavior. It would be significantly more complex to have this approach work in active pause.

That's likely because you had either: - a lock on the A/A radar - activated GUNS mode - activated an AUTO ACQ A/A mode All those prevent taking control of A/G radar, showing "RADAR IN USE" and preventing force control taking with a second press. It's independent of which page is on which display. The two latter also prevent taking control of the A/A radar from back seat

Most likely fixed in next release (the ASL was reworked a lot and INS related horizontal deviation issues have been fixed)

We already fixed a radar stuck in TWS bug, coming next update. In that case, using mode reject should go back to RWS, though.

No, I confirm this is likely a bug related to the module HRM radar accessing units that are being deleted by the engine. Such a bug has been already fixed, this comes in next openbeta update.

I confirm that currently SORT mode will use the EL setting. I missed the actual behavior. Fixed (too late for next update, will be more likely in november)

(developer here) No, they will only show on active radars. Not because they emit, but because they either scan across your position, or are tracking towards your position. In game both give the same effect because it's not possible to discriminate the cases. I believe that IRL a scanning antenna will create the whiskers, while a tracking antenna will only create a powerful return that smears horizontally. And yes this is not interference, but purely caused by the antenna retro reflection.

Yes, that's because AoA sensors are more as ideal , feather like. They move with every minimal breeze or turbulence while on the ground. IRL sensors have some mass and a little bit of friction, so they will be stuck on the ground if winds are light. They can show a similar behavior under very strong turbulent wind. In many cases the aircraft will ignore value below a threshold CAS. So yes, it's not 100% correct, but not 100% a glitch either. Should be improved, but not a big priority at the moment.

The gyro compass would like to have a chat with you. Edit : I was certain that the gyro compasses you find everywhere were purely inertial, I forgot these are slaved to magnetic sensor. My bad You are fully right that most (and even 100%) of western aviation works on magnetic headings, and that DCS ATC is wrong.

Thanks for reporting, this is now fixed! It may not make it for next release, but the next one.

Damn, smaller FOV than the G2? Loosing the stellar microphone, acceptable audio, and the already not so good FOV of the G2 might be a no go then... I'll wait a bit more too see what's coming next. I guess that with a half price offer Varjo has something under the hood.