ARM505

British cockpit ergonomics (but not only them!) were utterly disastrous, for far longer than you'd expect. I've sat in a Lightning....coming from modern airliners, but even being familiar with previous generation aircraft like the Spitfire and Hurricane, I was appalled at the layout and positioning, switch directions etc. It could have been improved with literally 30 seconds of thought, but for some reason the ethos seems to have been "Properly trained men don't need common switchology! They are without fault, and do not make mistakes under pressure! Terrible layouts separate the men from the boys!"

I actually find the audio fine. It sounds like the actual helicopter. If anything, it's quite quiet. Any multiplayer helicopter play sound is utterly dominated by the UH1 which overrides everything anyway I appreciate that they're going to work on it, but it didn't detract from the module for me. The textures didn't bother me because textures aren't as big a deal in VR, but hopefully they improve the res. The metal cockpit switches are quite shiny. Maybe I'm too easy to please. It is quite a pricey module for what it is, yes. I find myself coming back to flying this over and over, it's a pleasure to actually fly. So.....I got my monies worth I guess.

People who want it closer to 'naked helicopter' can turn off the SCAS. And even then, it behaves more as I'd expect a real, certified, safe to operate aircraft behaves (ie. not trying to kill you every instant). Compare the AH64's model - I've spent quite a few hours now flying all US helicopters we have back to back (UH1, KW, Apache). And, to put it simply, the Apache needs to calm down. This is all just personal opinion of course. But I'd have expected the Apache to feel like a heavier, more powerful version of the KW's flight model as a very general statement, specifically with regard to stability - it has a very advanced (albeit quirky) SCAS, and all accounts by pilots on these and other forums are that it is very stable and easy to fly. The AH64 in DCS is not quite how I would have expected that to feel. It's not as easy to precisely place, it's more twitchy (especially in yaw) and generally not hard to bump up against the SCAS limits..... This is a can of worms, and very much personal feel, so there's no need to debate the point really, it's absolutely just my opinion. I'm very, very glad the KW is here though, to open up a little bit of debate about 'hard' vs 'realistic' in helo FM's (again!) I'm using Virpil gear, the joystick fitted with the longest extension, flying with a Quest 3 in VR, no curves (linear response - technically always the correct answer IMHO with a stick with extension). On an OT point - did I miss something in the Apache updates? When I last flew it seriously, I needed to trim for speed/conditions (basic force trim stuff), now it adjusts everything automatically, as I'd expect, very nice! Might make me sound clueless, I don't know, but it seems like it's a work in progress, which is great.

Just to add, VRS in the Kiowa is still entirely possible, just in much more reasonable entry conditions (IMHO).

Being easier to fly, you just attempt more precision stunts with it, that's all. Playing around online last night, I could nose through small gaps in treelines, hover into and turn around in hangars, land on small towers with one skid etc. Stuff that is actually possible in real life in other words, because safe, certified aircraft aren't supposed to instantly do backflips if you leave the controls for a second, or somehow settle into an instantly generated column of descending air, and I like to replicate stuff I've seen actual helicopters do which I know is possible. So....the challenge is up to you and what you make of it. A Boeing 777 is challenging to fly.....if the challenge is to make it look like the loc and gs dots are painted in position in a gusty crosswind.

The FM feels great to me (with all of one hour in a real Robbie R22). I'll play around with the SCAS off for a bit to see how that feels. Frankly, the only issues I've personally experienced: - the really forgiving damage model in some respects. It's there, but...you need to work to break it. You can put your tailrotor into the ground/hangars etc. - the ground contact model is a pain...the skids don't grip like they should IMHO, so it wants to rotate on the ground like it's on ice a little bit. Feels like should should be a bit more planted. The textures aren't an issue in VR. The airbags were a surprise when they popped in my face in VR though. I had no idea that was a thing!

...and none of the wipers do anything yet anyway, unless I've missed something? Not knocking DCS, it's a bit of an advanced feature, but at the moment there's no practical application for any of the rain removal systems....

Oddly enough, I've alway run the controls menu in the collapsed view since it became available - no issues with stuttering (I use a Meta Quest 3 and run DCS in VR exclusively). Out of interest, I tried the old controls view (non-collapsed list, box unticked) - and there were definite stutters and hiccups, quite significant ones. Back to the collapsed menu (box ticked), and even expanded or not, the stutters went away. Weird.

Just left-click drag and highlight the text, but your point is valid. Nice 'fam flight' write up to the OP.

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

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)

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

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.

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.

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)

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.

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 )

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)

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

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).

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

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.

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.

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)

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.