[Danish Frigate engages 4 houthi drones. With subtitles]

I've helped with counting 'early bursts' from prox fused 76mm rounds, also fired from OTO Melara's, and let me tell you, it was probably about 20% that burst immediately upon reaching the minimum arming distance. It's probably not limited to the Danish Navy

[Latest Oculus v63 PTC build crashing DCS when used on Oculus Link]

This is all well and good, but do some people realise that DEMOCRACY IS IN DANGER?!?!

 

(For those unable to read between the lines - people need to chill and realise there are other games to play AND KILL BUGS IN)

[Crash at 15 Year Splash Screen in VR and pancake]

Given that we can probably rule out time travel, and today's the 4th, I'd say yes, it got delayed.

[Roll-linked NWS]

No, no such option in DCS unfortunately.

I'm not sure if an alt- modifier can be linked to an axis....a possible workaround if that's possible, but I don't think it is.

[Latest Oculus v63 PTC build crashing DCS when used on Oculus Link]

12 hours ago, yoadknux said:

This mentality is exactly why this field will never grow and remain a niche, expensive and time consuming segment in PC gaming. Imagine buying a shooter game, and the shooter game works, but one day it stops working with Logitech hardware. So the game launches but the keyboard doesn't work. Or a game that launches only with an AMD GPU and not NVIDIA GPU.

A "few weeks" is a very long downtime in PC gaming, enough to make any average player move on. And the fact that there's no official acknowldgement nor a date for a fix just make this issue worse

Game breaking bugs of this nature are EXTREMELY rare - a data point of one, but this is the first time I haven't been able to play when (or rather, how) I wanted to since I started with Lock On all those years ago. And, as mentioned, it can of course still be run in normal 2D mode (hence the 'how').

So while you technically have a point, let's not overstate it. Ironically, had this happened several weeks ago prior to the stable/openbeta path merger, we'd probably have had a hotfix already. So it's a rare 'window of vulnerability' that caught them. As you say, it SHOULDN'T happen, but it does, in very, very rare cases. It's acknowledged and fixed internally already. That'll have to do.

[Latest Oculus v63 PTC build crashing DCS when used on Oculus Link]

Quite ironic that as the open beta and stable paths are merged, and patch cycle times increase, a game breaking bug (for those on Meta VR devices at least) emerges And I mean that quite sincerely, what are the chances, lol. Ah, sims, always a game of patience.

Anyway, 2D flying it is for the moment. Pity my Track IR decided to break in a super weird way at the same time (1 HZ position updates, no idea why)

[Latest Oculus v63 PTC build crashing DCS when used on Oculus Link]

On 3/14/2024 at 12:43 AM, NathB said:

I too have exactly the same issue.. not on the Oculus PTC but version63 has stopped DCS launching, and you can't revert back to an older version as far as i'm aware.

Very Frustrating as I soley play DCS and only in VR these days. However if you are willing to go back to 2D I found a get around to get DCS loaded in non-VR mode. You have to rename your saved games DCS folder to something else like 'Temp' and then it'll launch DCS.. it does mean you'll have to set up all your graphics settings etc again unfortunately (unless there's another way to load DCS in non-VR mode).

 

I hope a fix comes out soon!

 

You don't need to delete anything - just find 'options.lua' under your C:\Users\*your name*\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta *or whatever your install folder is called*\Config - under the ["VR"] subsection, look for ["enable"] = and set it to false

 

And for ED, as I've said before, it would be better if there was an easier way to toggle VR on and off before starting DCS.

 

Also for ED (forum mods) - the 'Game Crash' and 'VR Bugs' forum subsections have what seems like 10+ threads on this same topic/problem now.

 

The official answer to this problem for the moment (again, buried somewhere in one of the threads) is that it's fixed internally, but given the lengthy waits between patches the newer system entails, we are stuck for the moment with no idea when the fix will be released, at least several weeks away it seems.

[DCS won't start beyond the splash screen]

How convenient. One day they'll (edit to add: I mean Meta) employ people who don't randomly break stuff, but today is not that day I guess.

 

Anyway, day x+1 of wishing DCS had a way of selecting VR on or off before launching the software. Yes, yes, DCS launcher (not installed on my new PC, not going to) so it's back to digging around in the .cfg files to turn VR off. It's all good. (edit to add: to those who don't know where this is, it's in 'options.lua' under your C:\Users\*your name*\Saved Games\DCS.openbeta *or whatever yours is called*\Config - under the ["VR"] subsection, look for ["enable"] = and set it to false )

[DCS won't start beyond the splash screen]

I have the same issue. The above options don't work in the the headset's menu itself (there is not such PTC option in the 'Experimental' menu). In the Oculus software that runs on the desktop, there is a PTC switch, mine is OFF.

DCS logs in, authenticates, then simply doesn't run. (MT)

[Two Screws Missing]

The *wake* is missing the distinctive 4 screw pattern, not the actual carrier model. Yes, it's a bit of a nitpick, but it's a good catch

[External Zoom?]

No, it isn't a normal 'zoom' command.

The commands for VR 'zoom' are under the 'UI Layer' control category - there's a VR sub category, and the commands you're looking for are 'Toggle VR Spyglass Zoom' and 'Toggle VR Zoom' (one is just a higher zoom level than the other).

[Sparrows and TWS]

57 minutes ago, draconus said:

You're still ranting instead of reporting bugs but at least we know it comes from love and passion.

 

Sorry to add nothing of value, but I'm just laughing at this which is (to me) the quote of the week. Thanks.

[update the UH1 H or make a UH1H 2]

The Spitfire cockpit got a re-bake.....I've also been hoping the Huey can get a spring clean, it's a great machine.

I also don't mind paying for a V2, I understand that these things take resources. And ED has to forge a long term maintenance plan for these things, we have iconic aircraft that are going to need to evolve with the product, so....pretty much along the lines of the KA50 and A10, yeah.

[Button press no longer jumps to button binding]

Just out of interest, if you have a specific term in the 'search' bar at the top (for example, 'gear') then the command will not be highlighted if you press it, EVEN IF that command does appear in the searched for items below. e.g. 'gear' is searched for, all commands with 'gear' appear below, but if you press (for example) your command for 'landing gear down', that command will not highlight. You need to delete the search term above, then it all operates as normal. I'm not sure if this changed recently, but for some reason it stood out to me when changing commands very recently.

[Anti skid versus locked wheel protection]

Is there any specific aircraft/manual you're referring to?

But it's actually a very good question. My (probably wrong) answer is that in (for example) a 737, antiskid uses IRU data, compares it to wheelspeed sensor values, and maintain/releases brake pressure to maintain wheel speed at a certain reference speed in relation to ground speed (best guess, as the 737 FCOM isn't wonderfully explanatory in this regard if I remember correctly). The 777 manual is even less illustrative, saying only "When a wheel speed sensor detects a skid, the associated antiskid valve reduces brake pressure until skidding stops.", and that "Locked wheel protection is provided using a comparison with other wheel speeds". Apparently, pilots are on a 'need to know' basis in this regard, and they just don't need to know *shrugs*

So: locked wheel protection on the other hand, compares one individual wheel speed to another specific wheel - then releasing brake pressure when the reference wheel is (for example) 50% slower than the other (basically three inputs: reference wheel speed, threshold, like the 50% in my example, and 'low' value, ie speed below which the protection will be inhibited)

[F-4E wear and tear.]

This will certainly open a whole can of worms in the 'rivet counter' mentality people (which isn't a bad thing) - I for one will not want to look too much 'behind the scenes' (as a pilot, you trust that when you signed it out, the guy who signed it over to you did all the right stuff), but I will appreciate little things like that lack of perfectly symmetric engine parameters, gear deployment etc. and at least the 'feel' of a persistent, non factory fresh aircraft.

[Is there a way to prevent DCS auto assigning controls]

Agree on the DCS pet peeves - literally the only control bindings DCS ever gets right, are the pitch and roll axes of my joystick. Every single other assignment, be it buttons, axes, whatever, has been wrong, with one notable exception - the TM MFD controls, which admittedly are a lot of buttons. But the losses far outweigh the gains.

 

NOTE TO DEVS: DO NOT AUTO ASSIGN BUTTONS OR AXES. Drop that 'feature' entirely.

[Mustache Growing Contest]

Legend says that his mustache was responsible for one of the MiG kills all by itself...

[Wake Turbulance?]

I turned it off as it felt far too extreme to me (having hit many wakes in real life, light, medium, heavy etc, including my own after precise level turns).

It's a tough one to call: *my* take on it (and like....well, you know what, everybody has an opinion) is that the actual modelling of a wake encounter *is* accurate-ish, BUT in real life, wakes are 'broken up' more quickly by the more chaotic, natural motion of air which is ALL moving, even slightly, compared to DCS's rendition of the atmosphere, which, apart from wind, is atom-perfect (ie. there is no natural churning of the atmosphere, it's all perfectly smooth, and turbulence in the sim is just a mathematical, zero sum simulation, unlike real air masses - DCS cannot, after all, model every cubic centimeter of the atmosphere, it has to abstract some things). The modelling they've done on the air mass after an aircraft passes through it was indeed VERY impressive though.

So in DCS, you get a more 'concentrated' and intense burst of wake vortex IMHO?.....hard to describe.

Some background: I fly heavy jets out of one of the busiest airports in the world (watch me start swearing when somebody mentions 'enhanced wake turbulence separation' - the only 'enhanced' part about it is that the chance of hitting somebodies wake is 'enhanced') - sure, hitting a heavies' wake in another heavy isn't the same is being in a light aircraft (and a fighter, pulling G's is probably chewing the air up a LOT), but you still get a sense of the strength of the air movement after a 300 ton airliner ploughs through it a couple of miles ahead of you. And to me, because of what I've felt, DCS feels to 'sharp' and the result of wake is too much.....

My 2c.....and I absolutely do not consider my opinion more important or anything - ED have far more time invested in the maths behind this by people much brighter than me, that's for sure....so who knows. But I do turn it off

[Issues]

I've been playing this since it's spiritual predecessor was called 'Flanker', and to me, it's never been better. As it's scope continually expands, the issues do too, I get what you're saying - it's like a permanent work in progress, BUT: when you look at the breadth of it all, and what it can do now, it is an INCREDIBLE piece of software. It helps to focus on the bits that work, and are fully fleshed out of course, it can feel like a permanent construction zone otherwise, true, but still........I stick with 'never been better' (helps that I have just bought a new PC)

[Huey or Gazelle for learning to fly a helicopter?]

The Huey is the simplest (mechanically, systems) and the most 'pure, unfiltered' chopper-ery chopper. all the others have some form of SAS/AP to greater or lesser degrees. I have all of them, and when I want a blast of raw helicopter, that's what I'll go to. The Hip leads nicely into the Hind (similar systems/methodology, rotor spins the same direction etc) though.....frankly, they're all worth it in some way or another (I did only pick up the Gazelle after the FM update, and it was my last pick anyway - not much into it)

So....UH1. Also, 'Fortunate son: ON/ON' (there is no OFF)

[New animation for the main rotor]

....especially when compared to how good (for example) the AH64 and KA50 look (was just admiring it in multiplayer now, really very good animation)

[Explodes at start of taxi]

Taxied around KUT a bit online, did a circuit with a touch and go, landed and taxied back in without spontaneously exploding - always a win in my book.

[Strange warning in F-15e HUD]

 

 

 

And to see the system under stress:

 

[Pilot body appreciation]

It's very well done, exceptional job, and makes me feel bad that I turn the pilot body off for 99.99% of all flying I do, in all modules. I need to see those switches....and the ones I need to see are normally the ones that are along the side cockpit, the exact ones that are lower priority, thus not mapped to any of my HOTAS/button boxes, and are completely obscured by the pilot model. Even in VR, I find the pilot body the most pointless aspect of a module. I don't get the insistance on it - if I made a module, I would prioritise other aspects. It sucks up work time (modelling, animation etc), for no real simulation gain, and no functional difference. It's already more of a hassle to flick switches compared to reality, I don't need another barrier.

Before the pilot body lovers complain, that is of course JUST MY OPINION, and one which module makes clearly disagree with.