Dudikoff

Export version of the R-60M.

Perhaps it was addressed somewhere in the thread, but the mapping of the Right-Alt is handled in a weird way for non-US keyboards. OK, it's not a problem to switch to US keyboard when editing the profile, but the real issue for me is that when the new key sequence involves ALT and SHIFT keys, then when any letter is pressed, it is ignored by the DCS Flight Panels and cannot be added to the sequence.

If you don't have the money for both, there's a sort of a hybrid solution involving an Alienware laptop (preferably some thicker model with good cooling for the CPU) connected to an Alienware external graphics case which would house a 2080Ti desktop graphics card or whichever. For some reason, all the other brands' laptop external GPU solutions use Intel Thunderbolt 3 cases, but from what I've seen the performance hit is rather large (like at least 25% or more) as the TB3 controller gets overwhelmed. Still, getting a separate desktop for DCS and some more portable laptop for work (i.e. thinner) would of course be a safer (less risky) choice.

I think you don't understand what they're saying which is 'ED considers the Hornet its flagship module at the moment'. So, it's not really a matter of opinion as it is obviously their current showcase product.

+1 as the Ka-50 is the worst in this regard, but IMHO, this should be a mandatory requirement for all the modules. Not sure why ED is ignoring this.

I'm curious why they'd place Mirage 2000 in the 3rd gen group?

Yeah, with the Hornet and early access discounts, the whole package really is a no brainer purchase IMHO for anyone enjoying the carrier ops. Looking forward to its release.

Perfect size, apparently. How much are they asking for it as I don't see such models on AliExpress? It says it's LVDS 40-pin in specs, so search for a controller board with such a connection and that supports that resolution or higher.

That was my assumption as well after seeing the 2020 trailer, but (luckily) Glowing AMRAAM mentioned that the unannounced module is not present in the trailer.

Yeah, I've set up a similar max limit out of principle. My only problem is that my current 32" 4K monitor is G-Sync so its VRR won't work on an AMD card (unless it's powerful enough to provide relatively constant 60+ FPS in which case I could use V-Sync, I guess). Fortunately, thanks to AMD making their VRR mainstream, Nvidia finally gave up on supporting their VRR solution exclusively so my next monitor won't have such a limitation. In any case I'm not in a hurry to upgrade as for my single-player DCS flying, the current notebook 1080 (I needed portability) does surprisingly decent in 4K (it's an Alienware so I'm planning to add a desktop card via an external GPU case one day). Just hope AMD cards will be good enough to bring Nvidia's price hike down so I could look at some 3070 or 3080 as a potential upgrade if they really bring a noticeable boost in performance compared with the current crop.

The 1080Ti could be had for slightly under 800 EUR on release. The 2080Ti was at least 1400 EUR IIRC. I don't see how that price hike can be defended as a good value for that 30% increase. There are obviously those who are willing to pay for it and Nvidia appreciates it, but that doesn't change the price to performance math.

It's definitely too early to tell, but IIRC they were unofficially advertised as having a 50% performance bump over the 20XX cards with a 50% smaller TDP. No mention if the 50% bump in performance is related to RTX performance or non-RTX, but though I hope it's the latter, I'd presume it's the former since the RTX performance was pretty absymal on 20XX cards, especially given the bump in price. In any case, rumors are they might announce them some time in March already. https://wccftech.com/nvidia-will-be-annnouncing-7nm-ampere-gpus-at-gtc-2020-in-march/

I would lay blame for that huge price hike mostly at the monopoly Nvidia has on the high end GPU market. AMD should release some high-end competitor this year, but it will probably be at the 2080Ti level at best, while Nvidia is already pushing forward the release new Ampere GPU forward to put them back to square one.

With V-Sync on, the GPU is not at 100% as your FPS is limited to the refresh rate of your monitor; with it off, your GPU is trying to provide as many FPS as it can, hence the maxed out usage. In any case, I'd hold off on upgrading the GPU just as yet. https://www.techradar.com/news/nvidias-next-gen-7nm-ampere-graphics-cards-could-be-revealed-as-soon-as-march

Speaking of key bindings, there's a whole bunch of them listed in the sticky thread in the module's Bugs section (I'm also waiting for a few RIO ones to be added, like e.g. for arming the pylons). I get the impression those are completely ignored. What was the last time HB have added some new key bindings?

I have a monitor with the same panel (with addition of G-Sync) so I'm kind of in the same spot. There are still no 120Hz 32" 4K monitors, unfortunately. The new panels should enter production some time this year supposedly, but they have been delayed already several times over the years. If you like the 4K resolution, you could perhaps consider one of these new 120/144Hz 43" monitors (Acer and Asus make them). They are much bigger, so it's only an option if you could push them back somewhat I guess. They also have a VA panel though, which is slower than IPS in some situations (e.g. dark objects on light backgrounds). Another option would be one of these 38" (well, actually 37.5") monitors. It's roughly an ultrawide version of the 32" 16:9 panel, so it would have the same height as your monitor, but it would be wider which should be a plus in simulation games. On the other hand, it has a lower resolution than your 32" (3840*1600 vs 3840*2160) so it would be less sharp, but I guess that might also make it slightly better with the dodgy DCS spotting?

It was apparently never integrated, but since that's not really news, is there a point in repeating the same post over and over again? Igla-V was presumably never integrated on the Ka-50 because it would make no sense given that the helicopter has only been made in limited numbers and it was decided Mi-28N and Ka-52 would be made instead. At the same time, several variants of Igla-V systems were developed for mounting on existing Soviet and later Russian helicopters and integrating it on the Ka-50 would require little effort. They even reserved a spot for it in the controls. So, it's hardly a fantasy add-on. As to why ED is doing it, well, we won't get an Mi-28N or a Ka-52 in DCS for sure, plus they are trying to add some extra features to justify a new paid upgrade. My bigger concern is that the new 3D model will have MAWS and I presume there won't be two different Ka-50 objects in the game after upgrading to BS3 so will we lose the option of using the older Ka-50 model (e.g. for some older scenarios)? Or perhaps we'll be able to use the BS2 variant (3D model and cockpit) in parallel to BS3? Ideally, there would be two variants in game, but also the older variant's 3D model would also get updated (i.e. remove the new MAWS bits, not sure if the wings will change for the new variant).

Max 30 FPS definitely sounds like some artificially imposed FPS limit. Maybe the VSync is limiting you to its half-rate (30 FPS)? Did you set a frame-limiter via Nvidia Inspector perhaps or the VSync at half-rate in Nvidia Control Panel? I'm playing at 4K with a notebook 1080 and in SP it can reach 60 FPS (depending on the scene, naturally) with occasional drops (but I have a GSync monitor). IIRC, details are set to mostly high, 2x MSAA, not really sure of the exact settings.

Unless I'm missing the obvious, his list is showing the 2700x which is an eight core part, while the 3600x is a hexa-core part. I'd still go for the 3600X, though, of course (since the DCS won't make use of the extra two cores, while it will benefit from the IPC increase), just wanted to clear why the OP was confused with the suggestion to downgrade to 3600x (presumably).

Sorry for barging in the topic uninformed, but I'm just wondering how many non-F14/18 owners would buy the carrier module they can't use? I don't see that as a realistic customer category. Also, why would this ownership influence the price of the upgraded carrier module? The F-18 and F-14 owners already have a perfectly workable carrier to land on, while the F-14 owners should also get the Forrestal carrier for free as well. Unless of course e.g. ED plans to make a new discounted bundle consisting of the F-18 and the new carrier, which would make it slightly unfair for the current Hornet owners..

I'd presume he means the VRM (as the most important part of the PCB) design?

OT, but isn't a big part of the problem the decision to immediately ditch all of the nuclear power plants after that disaster in Japan (which seems a foolish thing to do without a proper alternative at hand, IMHO)? As those have been replaced by gas and coal plants (IIRC), which doesn't sound very green and renewable, I'm probably missing proper info or the big picture here since taken like this, it altogether sounds like a bad joke. So, I'm hoping you can correct my misconceptions on the topic with some first-hand info.

What I'm waiting for the most are the actual campaigns themselves. It would also be nice for them to finally allow all the cockpit functions to be mapped in the control settings. The lack of many cockpit functions of the RIO position is pretty glaring. Like e.g. pylon switches without which it's impossible to drop A2G ordnance. I don't know if they assume that most players will have a keyboard and mouse at hand or just use a RIO, but I hope that getting the module out of EA will at least add all the controls there (plus also some up/down ones for the rotary encoders in the cockpit instead of having to map a control for each of its positions).

I wonder how this would be enforced. My suggestion would be that such cheeky players get assigned a hostile IFF code while within a certain distance from the carrier and as such would be bumped to the top of the priority list of the closest CIWS station. The distance should be as small as realistically possible so they can still approach and admire its beauty (as prospective buyers), but that they could still be reliably shot down if perceived to make a break for a last second sneaky landing attempt.

I have to admit my first thought was also if all that detail will turn landings into a choppy mess :) Still, a really awesome trailer and needless to say, can't wait for its release.