Dangerzone

Various non-carrier planes with hooks can land on the carrier. I can confirm that the F16 and F4 also are capable of landing on the carrier in DCS with their hooks too. You won't get them to launch using the CAT's (although with light enough payload - going from the fantail to the bow you can get some planes airborne too depending on carrier speed and wind). But that depends on how hard you land, you may well have some undercarriage issues as well. So to confirm: Yes - they can land using the hook No - they can not takeoff using the Catapults Maybe - they can takeoff using the full length of the deck - depending on variables.

Thanks for the clarification. Presently it seems we've had numerous things that can muck up a cat launch (JBD's staying up, director not acknowledging your there, etc) - so I'm hoping that your assumption is right and the catapult is independent to the plane directors , lest there's more variables that could mess up the launchers. Guess we'll know soon enough. Update expected to be released today...

I thought it was said that ignoring the plane directors would create problems and possibly break things. Have you got information or heard somewhere where the cat launch is independent to the plane directors so we still have an option to launch even if something happens that break the plane directors? I'm hoping this is the case, but I don't recall seeing anything.

Yes - going to 160% in the centre for me and 5% on the outer edges improved not only the FPS but the image as well significantly. That steppiness (or jitters, or stutters - it has a few names ) is common to DCS - and I think it may actually be CPU, not GPU related. I managed to get rid of it for a while there. Can't remember exactly what I did, but I was chasing CPU stuff, not GPU stuff. Disabling hotplug, using Process Lasso, changes in the BIOS to disable energy efficient stuff, disabled core parking (I think the core parking might have been it, but can't say for sure),

You're probably best to start a new post in the wishlist section in order for your request to be seen.

With quadviews (and that's the key) - I've been able to outperform my reverb on the 4090. I don't fully know the black magic at play - but stunning visuals, and 90fps is definitely achievable at altitude. The Pimax also has a 72hz/fps option as well - and I've come to use that for now. Just gives me a bit more elbowroom with CPU bound settings (as I'm CPU, not GPU bound with the Pimax Crystal thanks to Quadviews). Coming from a G2 as well - you'll only notice enhancements with Quadviews. Yes - quadviews 'softens' the margins, but even with that, from the reverb with such a small sweet spot - the Pimax with Quadviews is still an upgrade.

It's fixed foviated rendering with Quadviews for PCL. The difference it made for me was huge. However, it did take a bit to get working. You can confirm if it's working by opening up Quadviews companion, ticking the "Focus View" checkbox down the bottom, apply the changes, then launch DCS. (This needs to be done before launching DCS). The focus view will create a black border so you see only what will be sharp. The black area will be the less rendered area, but the black just makes it stand out so you can confirm for sure that it's definitely working for you first. Once you've confirmed it's working, you can untick the focus view and go back to 'normal operation'. I know OpenToolkit can interfere with it, so it might be worth uninstalling OXRTK and re-installing Quadviews plus Quadviews companion, and then enabling it. For me, since having this installed, I've never had any GPU rendering issues again. I think my card runs about 60% usage. I could up it, but my primary problem now is being bottlenecked by the CPU. Yes - it's a pain to get up and running, but once working the difference is night and day.

Are you running Quadviews. I couldn't get 90fps with my 4090 until I went to Quadviews and things have been fantastic ever since. To confirm Quadviews is working, use quadviews companion and set the boundary box, load DCS and make sure that DCS is only showing in a square view. If this isn't happening, then Quadviews isn't active.

If it's not working in the sdame way draconus' is - try disconnecting from the internet and launching instead with no internet connection and see if that makes any difference. I'm not sure if it will, but if I recall correctly, a while ago I I had a similar issue (purchased modules weren't available) and launching with no internet connection gave me the 2 days and 23hr window message instead. I'm not sure though if that was because the activation servers were available, or if it's when they went through that period where they lost all the accounts data on their activation server, so it may be a different situation, but still worth a try.

I think generally speaking, those who have the CL and have it working as advertised are quite happy with it. Some (like me) went through some teething issues, but are happy now. Those that have had ongoing quality issues trying to sort things out that will have the negative feedback (and rightly so) - so it really is a YMMV. I'd be looking into what return options you have available. Looking at that video, it seems as though Pimax are having a 'trial period' of their headsets. If this is true, and they offer a full refund, you could purchase the headset. If you get one with Quality issues, you could possibly return it and get your money back. That's something you'd need to clarify first to make sure that is the case, but if it is - then there may be reduced risk. Also - there's 2 things that Pimax did right IMO that I really appreciate. Both the lenses, and the cable are replaceable. (The 2 items at most risk of damage that will make the headset unusable IMO), which means better future roofing than some other's out there.

If you mean the ability to have people who don't own a module sit in (read only player slot as to say) a seat so you can take them for a "fly around" so they can see DCS, and have a 'ride along'? If so - I get the idea, but also think it's probably more work for the dev's than they'll potentially see return on investment. With something like that, I'd expect a very small player base would probably use it. It would also require them to download and install the entire module (which would mean making changes to the licensing and registered modules to allow for a 3rd option which is installed, and usable, but only as read only - no inputs). While this could be possible, I doubt that ED would see the return on investment for the work put in. Don't get me wrong, for me, as a DCS user, to be able to go in second seat on someone else who's flying a module I don't own - especially for video work would be fantastic. But I think it's a niche feature that won't get too much coverage. Especially since there's already a 2 week trial, so people can use this to 'have a try', and if they want to use it more frequently - they have the option of just buying the module on a second account.

I second this. This is what I had to do in order to fly the amount of aircraft I do - make things as common as possible. You can load your control assignments into a graphic, and put it on your kneeboard so you have something to refer to in VR if you need to as well. Sometimes it can be easier to learn certain functions of an aircraft out of VR, and then transition to VR once you have the muscle memory. My personal preference would be for both. To switch dynamically between VR and 2D. I just think of programming the CNI in the chinook, and other tasks where it would be nice to do the pre-flight stuff in 2D, but then switch to VR for the actual flight. VR also doesn't work with Airboss, and CA can be a bit flaky too - so that would be also nice to be able to toggle between the two. Unfortunately I don't think that's ever going to be a think in DCS from what I've seen previously mentioned, but one can always dream.

You won't get an ETA. You'll get an announcement when it's pending release, and that's it. ED already made a mistake by saying "Not 5 years" 5 years ago, and I think they're learning from their mistakes not to put time frames or expectations on anything anymore - so don't ever expect to see an ETA, just an announcement when it is pending.

My expectations are for various terrain, and images of in-dev aircraft, such as the Corsair, C130, etc. My hope is to see things like thunderstorms, and other weather systems, and maybe animated ground crew. (They've done/doing the carrier plane directors - so maybe they'll give a sneak peak of something happening at ground bases). I'd also like to see new animation with ground vehicles and personel such as suppression of infantry units running and diving for cover for greater immersion in things like the TEDAC on the AH64. Also napalm in preparation for Vietnam. My unrealistic dream would be to see greater animation such as special forces repelling from helo's, infantry embarking/disembarking into Chinook, infantry doing idle things in the back of helo's while flying, and more of that 'battlefield' type experience. Bow spray coming over ships bows in rough weather, and large swells in calm environments would be sweet too. (As we know that the swells are currently directly related to the immediate wind conditions, but IRL swells can be quite separate to immediate weather patterns as they can form thousands of kilometers away and take longer to travel). All in all though -I hope for one thing that will surprise me and get me excited about a new feature. Really, the most of what we see in 2025 will be things that can't be visualized. (Many more bug fixes, better AI, more API options for mission designers, etc).

You don't need to use the VKB software. One of the fantastic things I love about VKB and Virpil is that the software is used to flash changes to the device. Once done - the settings are device side (so you can change computers and use exactly the same profile on another computer without VKB Software running in the background). It's fantastic. As for setting the stick up right - there is no right or wrong way - as the stick isn't a true FA18 replica stick, so it really comes down to how you want to set it up. I know I have my stick setup very differently to others and even have the TDC on the stick, as opposed to the throttle, and use a modifier for the paddle so that I can use the paddle axis for breaking (without the modifier), etc - so you probably don't want to see my profile. My reasoning is that I fly multiple aircraft I am to setup my stick to be as common as possible functionality wise between the aircraft I fly, so it really comes down to personal preference. If you want it setup similar to a FA18, I'd suggest looking at a FA18 stick's assignment, and trying to replicate as close as you can. Here's a link that shows a FA18 stick setup if you want to replicate as close to reality: Hope this helps DZ

Agreed. That's why I directed you to that thread in regards to the offline side of things, to keep things separate and easier to follow/address. Re it being 2 months ago - I didn't realise that much time had passed. I've just pinged Calvin on that thread for a followup.

Hi Calvin, Just following up on how you went with this? Cheers DZ

Was reported here: Calvin is going to chat to the Devs to address it.

And for that I am extremely grateful. If it was left solely up to the ticketing system / I think many people's experience would be much worse. Very grateful there are other ways of connecting with staff like yourself, and the effort you put in to chasing up matters internally that has no doubt escalated numerous issues that otherwise would have been a different experience to many. Thank you.

@Rakesh01 is the latest contributor. Temu is probably something I would have considered using in the future for some things, but after seeing spam, I'll never use them. No credible company should ever need to resort to spam, and those that do smell of scam than anything else.

Just FYI - I don't have a subscription for my headset. I have switched Pimax play to 'offline mode', and my firewall shows that it still attempts to contact 4 different webservices while in offline mode. I have denied it access on numerous occasions (so it couldn't connect) and the headset still functioned (however certain icons wouldn't show correctly), but I have been able to play it effectively offline of the internet. I haven't however had it offline for an extended period of time though - so don't know if there are any long term issues there. Pimax definitely needs to answer this question about what happens if the verification service is unavailable - both during the subscription period (is there a grace period, like DCS), as well as if purchased outright / after the 24 month period. I'm also not happy with the fact that the software still tries to connect to numerous servers in offline mode, so this trend is concerning - especially if there's no clear clarification and answers to these questions.

I can attest that quality in one part of a company doesn't mean that it's there in another part. I recently purchased another device (not related to Pimax), where the build quality is exceptional from what I can tell, but the companion software that it needs is seriously lacking. Sometimes the problem is from the top right through. Other times, it's just different departments with different cultures.

I completely agree with you. If I spend that much money, I want to know that I'm going to get something reliable, that lasts too, but more importantly - a product that is backed up by the company. And yes - different people can have different experiences. But to be fair, even though my initial experience was rough - they did come to the table. They provided replacement lenses quickly, and I have to give them credit for that. They also have multiple ways of contact for support outside of their ticketing system too, which deserves some credit. Since we live in a fallen world,, we're not going to have a 100% success rate, regardless of how good QC and builds are. That's where warranty and after sales support trumps even quality in my opinion. (Quality comes a close 2nd, but even with the best of the best, you can always luck out and be one of the few - and you want to know that you're going to be looked after and not dismissed in those instances). That's where video's like this one are far more superior than all the other reviews out there. I want to know the experience people have when things go wrong. Not so much what went wrong (although that's still of interest) - but how things were handled. A single video of "I had a problem, but company came through promptly and resolved the issue" is worth more than 100 "Great product - love it. Wow! Look how cool this is" review video's, because it shows you how much the company really cares or not.

I purchased my CL with no membership requirements at all, and I'm definitely not paying a monthly fee, but I see what you're referring to here: https://pimax.com/products/pimax-crystal-light. My guess is that this may just be a way of making it a little more affordable for people on the offset not to have to lay out the full amount so you have options. If so - I don't see this as being the same as Meta, and think it's OK, but I think it could be worded much better. But that's a guess. I'm finding it difficult to compare what the price is now, compared to what I purchased it for at release. They're showing a 'base' price of the unit as $599, but total cost of the unit as $858 outright. I think the total cost works close to what I paid for mine with no contract/obligations/subscription.

Agreed. @Calvin.Pimax - are you able to chase up with your contacts and find out why the extended warranty isn't available and showing as 'out of stock' please?