Dangerzone

I haven't replayed used saved tracks in ages. However a couple of tips just incase you're not aware: 1) Always save a copy of your track as a backup before replaying. Replaying tracks can corrupt the file permanently - so backups are very helpful/ 2) Always let the replay play out at 1x speed. Never attempt to increase the speed of the track file or it can corrupt. (So if you're replaying and increasing the speed to get to the point you want to film, this will almost definitely corrupt the track). It also wouldn't surprise me if people making youtube video's are actually using multiplayer and others to assist them.

I've got the VKB MGC, and the Virpil CM3 throttle. The throttle is brilliant. Quality build. Solid. Love that customisation is saved to the device itself - not some software that needs to be running. Chalk and cheese if you ask me between this and other controllers such as the TM warthog. The only single downfall that I can see that may affect some people is that it's not an exact replica of whatever throttle they want to use. (ie - I fly with some people that prefer the TM Warthog becaues they fly mainly A10's and want an exact replica). For me however - not being a replica is a bonus. I prefer something practical with lots of buttons on the handle (beyond what most aircraft will have) so that I can use it with a variety of aircraft. For other purists, they may prefer a 1:1 control mapping. I only wish I could get the mode button on the CM3 to somehow interact with the VKB joystick to allow other modes on the joystick itself. That's probably a bit cheeky and asking a bit much though.

Thanks for clarifying. I'm still confused though - if the stick doesn't freeze - how do you want it to behave? Here's what currently happens... For example, the stick is physically forward and right at +4,+2 respectively when the user hits the trim button. DCS records the 'offset' at +4 and +2 meaning whatever the stick input is from now on DCS will add +4 and +2 to the x and y coordinates for the final input. However there's a problem. The user still has the stick at +4 and +2 because the user can't move the stick instantly back to the center. Regardless of how quick the user is - there will be some delay in getting the stick back to center. If DCS didn't freeze the inputs, the next calculation would be Stick physically at +4 and +2, but now add the offset coordinates of +4 and +2 - so the controls in DCS would jump instantly to +8 and +4 when the trimmer is pressed. As the user reduces the controls back to center the controls in DCS would end back at +4 and +2 when the stick is at the center, but there is that sudden lurch forward, and a quick change required to get it under control. This is an undesired effect. Most users don't want to see this jump effect. So what DCS does is when you hit trim, it records +4 and +2 but now doesn't want to do any calculations until the stick is back in the center. Then the next input from the user that is executed will be another +4 and +2 - no sudden jumps in controls. From there, it unfreezes the controls and you can move it to wherever you want. It allows for smooth transition. Now, if you want to see what would happen without the freezing like you propose, you can already experience this (just in the opposite way) - as the trimmer reset button does the direct inverse of the trimmer button, but without the freezing. So - to experience this: Before taking off, move the stick backwards 2/3rds of the way (so the stick is at -7,0), and hit the trimmer button, and then move the stick back to center to unfreeze while still on the ground. Now start to take off. You'll need to put in forward stick movement to get into a hover and airborne, so you'll probably be somewhere forward at +8 or +9 physically, but the input to DCS will be around +1 or +2. Now hit trimmer RESET. Notice the sudden jump forward, the loss of control of the aircraft and the extreme movements required to get back undercontrol? That's what you would experience if we had no freezing when hitting the trimmer itself. I may still be completely misunderstanding you, so if I am - can you please give an example like I have about what steps you think should take place, and what the physical, and DCS inputs would be during those steps so we can better understand your proposal? Cheers DZ

I go into the Microsoft store but have no update option available, just an open option. Likewise if I open up OpenXRtools for Windows Mixed Reality - there is no update option either. I'm currently running version 110.2204.7007.0 according to the About dialog in OpenXR Tools for WMR. Can you please confirm if this is the latest version or how we update? Thanks DZ

I haven't had the chance to try this yet - but by the reports it's looking like it's an absolute must when I get the chance. I can't help but wonder though... it simply selecting another default profile (VRDirectx) and using it's parameters has such a massive positive change on a random profile.... what additional enhancements yet again could be achieved if we knew what all these values did and could tweak them specifically for the DCS world? For me, the DCS world always felt.... 'small'. The aircraft carrier didn't reflect the actual distance I would expect to feel from one end to the other. Likewise buildings, etc. I'm really keen to give this a shot and see what sort of difference it makes.

Yes - I'm gutted by the lack of updates with Vaicom. I have grown to love it and be quite dependent on it. I've even toyed with the idea of wondering how difficult it would be to replicate a similar voice attack plugin and hooking into the lua exports and making something open source. It seems that streamdeck users have the ability to use DCS codes to connect with via export hooks, and I'm guessing VAICOM uses standard/available codes that don't require access to the SDK, so it seems it should be possible. Just a question of how much effort. Personally I'd prefer to see Vaicom succeed. It's a wonderful tool (when it works correctly) and I'd like to see the developer benefit from their hard work (and users who have purchased it benefit from their purchase) - but if it's going to end up being abandonware - I think DCS deserves something that will continue to perform the same functionality moving forward instead of seeing these features slowly disappear due to incompatibilities with future DCS updates.

... how many people have noticed the swinging coiled cable to the left side of the CPG chair. (Visible only from the front seat)?

AH64 FPS in cockpit varies for me. NVS definitely has an impact on frames. I think there's a number of factors involved including: Cockpit textures being significantly high Using NVS seems to take a hit on the FPS counter. Where I'm looking seems to also have a bit of a change (in vs out of cockpit). I'm not sure - but I am suspicious atm that having Video showing up on the MFD's also increases the rendering time / decreases FPS. I have a 2080Super and a system running 5.0Ghz with 64GB Ram. I run terrain textures on low, and textures on medium. Smoke, Grass, etc is off. SSAA/MSAA/FXAA all off. Almost everything else as low as it can go. I've switched over to OpenXR. Extremely thankful for that mod, otherwise I think the Apache would be unflyable for me at night time via SteamVR (as night seems to be worse frames than day - although I suspect that has to do with the 'extra' rendering of the IHADDS/NVS video). I haven't tried low textures... mostly because when I do - the low textures in the UH-1 when I switch over to fly it is unreadable blur on a number of the labels. I believe the Mi-24 came out with user mod textures that were less demanding and helped FPS. Maybe we'll see something similar with the AH64 that will help in time - although regardless I still think once in the cockpit compared to other aircraft, the combination of NVS/IHADDS and video on monitors will probably mean it performs less than other birds.

What side effects please?

That's how Central position trimmer mode works. You hit trim - joystick is in the position left until you move it back to the center. I'm just confused as to what other penalties do you have with central trimmer mode?

The image only renders in one eye only - so as such I don't think there is any distance to the image. It might be the perceived distance that your brain is telling you it's at - but AFAIK, to accurately simulate distance - the image would need to be displayed in both eyes? Otherwise if it's the optical distance (after going through the lens) - which I think most are around 1m or so - if that was too close, then wouldn't that be the same for all rendering regardless of one or two eyes? I've used IR monoculars IRL too - and it's definitely different - but normally I am only using one eye when using the IR monoculars - even if the other is open - it doesn't have light or other things shining in it as I'm in the field, and not in a cockpit. IDK for sure - just thinking out loud, but like you - I have used IR monoculars IRL - and it's very different, and I strugged at start with DCS's implementation too but all it took was time to adjust.

I go with the rendering with one eye only. I'm forcing myself to continue to get the brain trained to 'get used to it'. I've found over time that I'm getting better and better than it. I've found it helps to lower the brightness down, and also at times to close one eye at times if I'm mentally lost until I regain my composure. The 'Shock' effect (for lack of a better word) is worst at the very start. The longer I stay in the better it gets, and each time I go and fly again I find the 'shock' factor less and less as my brain is slowly getting more familiar with it. I think it's one of those things that the brain simply isn't used to but the longer you persist, the more the brain will adapt. FWIW - I'm extremely grateful that I get to experience this in VR as opposed to having to fly 2D.

Kharab Iskh (Lat/Lon in Screenshot)

Have you guys considered OpenXR? Not sure what headset you use, but I switched, and bypassing steam with this has made things far more smoother. I'm able to fly in locations that I'd never be able to fly in normally without stuttering.

Hi, I was just wondering if there is any documentation on how to use dcs_local_source.txt ? I already know the basics, such as 1) Add a file to the ROOT install directory of DCS 2) Add a text line in that file pointing to the ROOT directory of another install (over network, or local HDD) as a search location for where to look for update files (before it downloads them from the internet). What I'm primarily interested in is finding out if it's possible to have multiple search locations? (And if so, how is it separated? By semicolumn, by a new line, but a comma, etc), but I'd also be keen to know if there's any actual 'how to use' official documentation so I can read up on everything - as I couldn't find anything in the manual. TIA - DZ

I find it handy when I've overlooked re-trimming and find myself in a situation where I need close to maximum axis - and quickly. An example of this... I'm trimmed far forward. i get to a point where I need to pull right back, so I do (pull back). Problem is - even though joystick is full aft - the calculated axis is now only about center, but I desperately need to be pulled right back due to a combat situation, etc. What I need to do now is hit the trim button while pulling right back, then release to center, and then when it's detected I'm in center again I have to pull right back again to get that maximum aft movement. A second or two in that coz I have to recenter - which could be the difference between life and death. Instead I'm pulling back - axis is near the center and I realise.... I forgot the @#$#@ trim! Hit reset - and instantly I have full axis available to me - not having to pull, then recenter then pull again. It is of course handier and easy down on the ground as well - but just throwing a couple of scenario's since you're curious. Maybe I shoudn't get myself into those scenari's, but what can I say... I play hard. Personally and with hindsight - now I would have programmed the trimmer differently myself if I was doing it. I would have it work as follows: Pressing and holding the Trim button would 'freeze the axis'. Then allow the user to move the joystick to where I want (aka center for starters, but could be anywhere really), and release the button, and it will calculate the offset between the two and apply that to future inputs. So if I push forward, hold the button and recenter - then release, this would still have the axis as forward even though my stick is center, and I can continue from there. This seems very similar to DCS, but where this differs from DCS at the moment is that I wouldn't need to recenter my joystick, plus I'd have full control when the joystick is frozen, vs when it's active (aka - push and release the button). At present with DCS, there is no option. You press the button, and then it's up to DCS to decide when you have control again (when I recenter the joystick and pedals). I have found myself a few times wondering why I have no axis input on one axis just to realise while I've released my rudder, I haven't my joystick or vise versa, and I was only really chasing trim in one of those. This isn't a problem with normal flight, but in sudden situations I find myself wishing I didn't have that added task or trap there. Another thing I would do differently is I would also have a config option available for a soft trim reset. So when it's reset to center, it doesn't jump there immediately, but gradually moves there over x seconds. This way instead of a sudden and violent input - it would move back there, allowing the pilot to offset the move (if required) along the way. I may be bias though - I've discovered I can do this with VKB internally - and love both of the features. It seems a little more controlled and 'in control' at the same time vs the current implementation in DCS. Neither of these is a big deal, and obviously we have to make a hack because we don't have FFB to experience a real example - and ED, and us are doing the best we can. I have found though that different people have different strengths and weaknesses with the 'work arounds' available to us, and that's why I'm always an advocate for having more options available so users can choose what works for them. Hope this gives an example that you're looking for.

Yes - that is the unfortunate part about it. And it has to be physical buttons, so you can't use just one, and have long press be the Trim, and short press the trim reset (at least yet, or from what I can tell).

Actually I think I've figured it out (without having to physically remove the twist): 1) Click the big DEFAULT button in VKB Device Config 2) Plug in the T-Rudder into the same black box 3) Click Bootloader and load the most recent Firmware (the one without TWIST referenced in it's name) 4) Recalibrate 5) Repeat steps 1-4. (For some reason the first time I did it, black box flashed with a red light - second time it worked correctly) Now seems that I have both. I think I can restore a saved configuration to have my original configuration back - I just need to make sure that after loading it I set Profile-Axes-7 to "D-Mars" (and not V-Mars), and then go into Global-External-External Devices and make sure Axis 8 is set to NONE, and then save it. Yet to be tested in DCS or elsewhere - but a quick assessment in VKB_Joytester appears as though rudders are working as expected. If this works, I'll be absolutely stoked!

Oh man... shot down! I have both the MCG and the T-Rudder, however I think I have to run 2 separate black boxes, because my joystick has the twist built into it. Do you know if the twist can be removed through the settings/firmware to allow the t-rudder to be connected (without physically having to remove the twist itself)? Edit: Yes it can (see 2 posts down)

A few other thoughts for consideration: While you can fly with friends with other aircraft in DCS on the same server, if you are new to DCS (and your friends are too) - it may be far more beneficial to start off with the same aircraft. When I first started DCS honestly... the systems were overwhelming. What really helped was that I was flying with 2 other friends in the same bird. We'd be able to constantly talk to each other. "Hmmm.. .why isn't this working?". "Have you tried this", etc. The back and forth of us working things out meant that we could lean on each other and made the process far easier than going it fully alone. Another friend came onboard, but had a different bird. He didn't stick with it - found it too hard to learn by himself. Do not underestimate the complexities of the simulation, or the benefits of having someone else flying the same bird to consult with. It's one thing to watch a video and see that it works. It's another to then find that what you've done doesn't work because you've overlooked something and someone else flying the same aircraft is able to help and vise versa. There are also a number of 'clans' / 'guilds' / 'squadrons' or whatever the right term is out there, and many have people eager to help and teach as well which might be worth considering joining. I get the desire to fly on a closed MP - but at least give some of these servers a shot - you may find it to be beneficial as well, plus you can fly with others you get to know even when your original friends aren't around. As for Steam vs DCS Stand alone - check the prices! I've found with the currency conversion - steam can be significantly more expensive than buying direct at times. Don't just think they're the same price. Also - running stand alone gives you more options and from our own experience... less complications. It would be my recommendation that even if you still choose to buy through steam - do the migration of each module through to your DCS account after purchase and run your installation via DCS Stand alone (so only the purchase is through steam - not the installation) as I think it will serve you better. FWIW - I'd suggest just buying through ED direct. It helps them out more, but I understand some people are more comfortable buying through steam where they can get refunds, etc (even though you can free trial for 2 weeks if you go direct - but that's a whole new debate) - so if steam will remain to be your preference - buy your modules through steam when you want, but then transfer to the ED account and have a stand alone installation so you can benefit from trials, etc. HTH

Another Vaicom user here with the same problem. I actually have disabled Vaicom at the moment while flying with the Apache. I'm going to want it back again (love it when flying the FA18 off and back on the deck of the Supercarrier, among other things) but yeah - it's got an inheritent problem with the in game menu for some reason. Symptoms include the menu appearing randomly (which is normally fixed with an update or doing the usual 'fixes') but keeps returning after other updates, or as in your mentioned case - unable to access any COM menu's while in flight while it's activated. There's obviously some base link between coms menu and Vaicom - and the way it's done is obviously in such a way that it can interfere with normal operations if not exactly right. I'm guessing Vaicom doesn't have access to the SDK so are doing their best without it maybe?

As someone who likes to incorporate CSAR into my missions when pilots eject - I would like to express my support for an option in the AH64 for surviving pilots to be able to bail out or "Eject" (Ctrl + E x 3) from the Apache if they've managed to survive a crash landing with a damaged bird. I'm not sure if it's a simple implementation or not, but if it is an easy implementation - could this please be considered?

No need to be on the fence. Instead I'm all for people having Options. Allow this to be an option in the ME like labels, etc. Thus servers and users who want to be able to use this feature can enable it, and others can't. That way you can have your cake and eat it too (coz.. what's the point of having a cake if you can't eat it).

Or maybe it was put on hold with the development of Vulkan taking precedence (as Vulkan may give this plus a whole lot of other benefits at the same time)? Not sure - just a conjecture.

I can understand your frustration. Just to give a potential perspective from another view... it may be more efficient for staff to work on less modules 'at at time' than more spread out. I know when I develop - I'm far more efficient if I can stick with the one module at a time than going back and forth between a bunch. If I'm right - we can hope for not just one item, but a number of items to be resolved with the Hind when ED put staff focused back on the Hind's development, so while the request for "even just one item fixed" sounds reasonable - it may not be as efficient to do it that way. I get that it would be nice to see one item each time there's a hotfix/patch update - but in the long run we may all be better off if it's done in groups. I'm not sure whether or not this is the case (I'm projecting my development experience here) - but if I am - you could end up seeing a number of items in the Hind instead of one or two before a Stable Release is put out.