cow_art

That's fair, and great if you know what you want to do internally. But unfortunately we really don't know a lot about what you want to do, so it is pretty hard to give constructive feedback and ask questions. So with this out of the way here are some things I would expect from an early access product that I would want to support: a finished flight model (this really is a minimum for me. I can live with lots of other features missing during early access, as long as I can have a fun time flying the Chinook. Please not another Apache-style release where the FM is still unfinished after 2+ years of early access) at least an indication what systems you currently plan to have ready for early access (a lot of the screens shown in the trailer are clearly placeholders / nonfunctional) an indication how you expect your novel logistics concept to work (if you are already working on it, I expect you have at least a rough outline that you can share?) an indication about the damage model. What do you plan to have ready for early access? At least some reasonable reactions to ground and weapons damage would be great. Thank you!

I ordered the VPC Ace Collection pedals + damper kit on January 8,received them yesterday (March 1). The pedals are good, but I am not quite happy with the damper. It's easy to install, fits the pedals well and does what it's supposed to do. But for my taste it sadly has too much stiction (even on the lightest damper setting). Unfortunately it does not work too well for me with helicopters. I found it quite hard to do tiny, precise pedal corrections with the damper But YMMV. The damper does feel good in principle, just not for tiny movements. Everyone who bought the damper primarily for fixed wing will probably be very happy. Edit: Virpil Support told me to use the damper a while longer. They say after running it through a few cycles it will improve. So take please take everything I said above with a grain of salt. I'll try their suggestion and see how it goes. Edit2: I used the damper another 4 hours yesterday and it did indeed get a bit better. Stiction is still noticable but got less. But I discovered something else (that might be clear to everyone who has used this kind of dampers before). But it was new to me and might be interesting for other "damper newbs": a big part of my problem was, that I was using the damper on the minimal setting. The minimal damper setting makes the stiction issue very prominent: Once the pedals are moving, they move very easily. But to overcome the initial resistance of the stiction I need to apply much more force. So once I have applied enough force to overcome the initial resistance, and the pedals are finally moving, I am applying too much force to be precise --> overshoot. I have now selected a much stronger damper setting (about 50%) . Now the force required to overcome the initial stiction is more or less equal to the force that's required to move the pedals. For me that fixes nearly everything. Pedals + Damper work very well now. I might still apply some lubricant and see if it improves the situation further, but all in all I am very happy with the damper now!

The CAS turning off when FTR is depressed may very well be part of the problem. But as far as I understand there is another problem, which comes from the interaction between the CAS logic and the "flight model". (Disclaimer: I am sure we have some SME here who can explain the problem far more accurately than me. But I'll give it a try, based on my limited understanding) AFAIK one job of the CAS is to provide a more immediate response to pilot inputs. In the real Apache there are delays in the control system. The CAS attempts to eliminate these delays by leading the inputs the pilot makes. The problem seems to be, that the delays, which the CAS is trying to eliminate, are currently not simulated in DCS. As a result the CAS in DCS needlessly exaggerates control inputs. Hence the twitchyness and instability.

I use a VKB MCGU, springs removed, dry clutch, 20cm extension. I bought it specifically because I thought it would maybe fix my gripes with how the Apache handles. It doesn't. Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that such a setup helps. Its an awesome stick, it makes every helicopter better (including the Apache). But the issues I have with the Apache's handling (and that others have mentioned in this thread) are not just due to suboptimal input devices, they are caused by the WIP FM/SCAS logic.

Nah its not just the input device. Of course better devices help a bit. But if you can fly the other DCS helos well and expect the same level of finesse and control from the Apache, it really is a frustrating experience at the moment. The flight model / SCAS are just not there yet and it seems these problems have all been reported by SMEs a long time ago. My current resolution is that I am not touching the Apache pilot seat again until Brad says he is perfectly happy with how the FM/SCAS behave.

Possibly related?

Well, there is one solution already implemented that makes flying the Apache super easy: jump into the front seat and let the AI helper ("George") be the pilot. Random youtube video for demonstration A lot of the CPG (=front seater) controls can be fit onto a gamepad. For example : You'll still have to do the front seaters job. But that's perfectly doable without a joystick and you'll not have to directly pilot the aircraft. Perhaps this is close to the kind of gameplay you are looking for? And, as mentioned above, it already works today.

Yea I second that. I am also on an i9-14900k and I am very much CPU bound in DCS (my 4090 is only at around 60-70% in VR). I mean: everything runs nicely and all, but your CPU is not bad and I guess the (theoretically!) 12% faster CPU won't make a noticeable difference in practice. So IMHO the upgrade is not worth the price tag until ED optimize their engine.

Interesting, both PCs where I encountered the problem also used the Steam version of DCS. Maybe it's somehow related to that?

I have observed the same behavior as @durp on two separate PCs now. One of them a completely new machine with fresh installs of Windows 11 and DCS: Sometimes after DCS starts, the CPU frame time is very bad for no apparent reason. In such cases, switching a setting that causes a DCS restart usually fixes the problem. @BIGNEWY perhaps that is useful information that you could pass on to your devs? Thanks!

Yea, 1000 thanks to mbucchia for implementing this! The ability to keep the focus area at 100% resolution and reduce the render quality of the periphery is a great way to squeeze some FPS out of older systems.

I very recently switched from an Index to a Varjo Aero. It is a massive step up. The screen-door effect is completely gone and the clarity is just amazing. I can't say anything about the performance with a 3090. But for what it's worth: as my new PC is still not here, I hooked the Aero up to my old PC (i7 6700k @4.2 Ghz, NVIDIA 2070 Super, 16GB RAM) and got DCS to run somewhat decently in Single Player, even on this ancient hardware (VR Preset with a few settings lowerd and DLAA added). Foveated Rendering makes it possible to have a pretty playable experience on older hardware (https://github.com/mbucchia/Varjo-Foveated ). My old PC is currently mostly CPU bound when I am using the Aero, so I guess if you have a decent CPU and are willing to turn down some graphics options a little, you'll be just fine. If I was you I'd definitely get one, that increase in visual quality compared to the Index is insane. I am sure you will love it.

Don't worry OP, it's not just you. The flight model is still work-in-progress and there is at least one known issue with the CAS that likely causes the Apache to feel more twitchy than it should.

I've only had a short time to try the update yesterday but my initial impressions were similar. The Apache feels great now while the FTR is being held down. But when the SCAS does its thing (without any hold modes) the helicopter feels kinda unpredictable and wobbly. WIP I guess?

I see! Great, thanks for taking the time to explain it in such detail!