Dangerzone

Yup. This ^^^. This discourages me off the 5xxx series. I can’t understand how anyone in marketing thinks it's a good idea to use this kind of spin or distortion, knowing it is opens them up expose them as misrepresenting - or being so cavalier with the truth. It leaves me me wondering—if they’re willing to misrepresent something so blatant, what might they be hiding in areas that are harder to verify? That said, maybe I’m out of touch with what truly affects multi-national corporations. Perhaps credibility doesn’t hold the same weight or have the same impact for them as it does for the smaller businesses I'm more familiar with directly - where credibility is a significant factor. Maybe this approach works better for their bottom line, and I’m just in the minority with how it turns me off.

Interesting... another thread with recollection, but no actual confirmation. Maybe it's implemented for all aircraft, but bugged and hasn't been addressed which is where the uncertainty comes from? I guess this is going to be one of those DCS mysteries where we can only guess, but not know for certain?

There’s have been rare unexpected damage done at low altitudes that have been put down to bird strike, both with myself, and others who I fly with in FF modules, so I thought it was functional. This makes me wonder if that’s not the case now and if there were other factors.

Bird strike only affects FC planes? Where did you get that information from? I thought it affected the high fidelity aircraft too?

it's my (limited) understanding that task switching out can do a couple of things: Firstly, certain input peripherals (keyboard, mouse, etc) may no longer be tracked by DCS during this time as the 'focus' has gone elsewhere. This may be freeing up some CPU resources in DCS (in which CPU bottlenecking can be a larger player when it comes to frames than even GPU. I was myself CPU bound with dips down to 15fps the other night in DCS with a 4090 running it in 2D while only in the mission editor - not flying - so there's definitely something going on there). The second thing is that I've been told (not sure how accurate) - that when you switch to another program, windows can free unused memory/buffer in the GPU's memory (and who knows - probably CPU as well?) - which may be making room for DCS to use more of these resources. There's a mountain of things that could be causing this, and it may be a different cause from one user to the next - even if the symptoms are similar. Given as NGreenaway has stated - it is a widespread (and long time) problem - my hope is that it's resolved with Vulkan when it's released. Until then - I'm afraid we're left to find a way to manage it ourselves.

I know that the size of DCS is one of those things that some have issues with, but honestly - I'd far prefer to have the maps downloaded locally than go that 'stream off internet' based solution another company has opted towards, even if that means I need additional storage to support it. Another alternative option is to install a copy of DCS on a NAS, external HDD, etc - and keep that version of DCS updated, and use the dcs_local_source.txt file function on your installed version of DCS to point to the NAS for the updating. This allows people to uninstall some maps from their local SSD if they need more room, and when they want to swap to another map, simply uninstall another map, and choose to install the map they want to use. The dcs_local_source.txt file if setup in the DCS Install directory with the path to the 'cached' install of DCS will simply copy the files across off the NAS/External HDD instead of having to download them all over again. Obviously having a 4TB SSD is the ultimate solution, but for those who are more financially restricted at the moment and still want to buy and use numerous maps but don't have the room to have them all installed at the same time - it's a good alternative to having to wait a looong time on slow internet connections to re-download a previously downloaded map.

Not sure if this would help me. I seem to be CPU bound, never GPU bound. Just this week I had the FPS dipping as low as 20 and all over the place, being CPU bound. 4090, and I was only in the mission editor - not even flying. Strangely, haven't had an issue so far when actually flying - so no idea what DCS was getting all bound up about (excuse the pun).

For bug replication and reporting there's no need to uninstall any mods at all - to have a mod-free version to test on. Instead you can simply: Rename the DCS folder in the saved games directory to DCS.OLD Launch DCS. (It will create a new vanilla configuration of DCS with no mods installed). Optional: Close DCS, and then copy the config\input directory from DCS.OLD to the new DCS folder so there's no rebinding of controls required. Re-RUN DCS and replicate the problem. Optional: Once done - close DCS - delete the DCS directory and rename DCS.OLD back to DCS to restore your previous setting. This makes it dead simple to have a clean setup of DCS with no mods, etc. It also helps with narrowing down the issue, because if the bug is caused by a bad configuration setting / mod / corrupt file or anything else that can exist in the config directory - it narrows this down almost immediately and allows you to re-setup DCS until you find the issue yourself. By having the configuration in the saved games directory (and not a bunch of windows registries all over the place) - ED really has made multiple configs, and debugging easy in this regards.

Especially if they never hang around to give an update on the situation - such as if it was resolved amicably in the end or not. Almost as handy as the "5 Star!! Fantastic product, great quality, real happy with it, even though I haven't had a chance to unpack it or use it yet" reviews I see left on various products too. I'm also very interested in the "plenty of other more serious and reputable brands", because I don't know of plenty in this sector at all - and if that has been exaggerated, then why would I trust the rest of the post. And +1 on the 'drive by review' quote - very appropriate.

... that you don't talk about Robots? (Fight club reference)

^^^ This. Plus to add to the 'and beyond'... even if something is released in 2025, it's more often than not released in Early Access, so depending on what features are available 'on release', it may or not suit individual purposes, or may require significant time to be usable. (ie - Dynamic spawns not usable on dynamically created FARP's for instance)... With DCS, until it's in your hands for us to evaluate ourselves, nothing is really certain. It does however give indication of what is being worked on and the current state, which can be encouraging. Just the hype about a release of a trailer that may show something that may or may not be released in the next year certainly shows there's still plenty of passion for DCS which is a good thing. For me personally though - the thing that tops all others for me that I want to see is some soft of greater stability/reliability and support come to DCS for server admins, scripters, mission designers, and mod makers, etc. As well as that if bugs are introduced - especially things that break things that were working, they're treated as a much higher priority in getting fixed. DCS has reached a stage to me that there's nothing they can add to the game that's more important than supporting what already implemented reliably.

https://discord.com/channels/542985647502393346/543013214485610520/1324828675358724259 DCS's official Discord channel.

I'm not excusing it's existence- I'm simply suggesting for your own sanity that you have a look at how long this bug has existed without any official acknowledgement - and whether your expectations of what ED 'need to do' fit within the reality of ED's history and trend over the past few years. (It's existed far longer than this individual thread has been going), and plan accordingly. You may have taken my post as being pessimistic, but I'm actually being optimistic - in that I'm hoping for this to be eventually resolved (albeit by Vulkan). Optimistic because there's hope / light at the end of a tunnel - even if it's a long tunnel... as I have little expectations that it will be resolved otherwise. This doesn't mean I agree with it, but my personal opinion on whether that's right, wrong, unacceptable, etc, is irrelevant as ED are going to do DCS their way regardless of what I say or do. So for my own peace of mind, I'll base my decisions on how much time, effort, development, cash and passion I invest into DCS on ED's history and actions... not my expectations on what I think they should or hope they will do. It helps me to manage DCS and be able to enjoy it for what it can currently give. So I look to alternative solutions and workarounds as it's far more likely for me to succeed with these than holding out for ED to fix this in the mean time. I guess I've been greatly influenced by the advise I heard recently of "We don't get to make the world we live in, only choose how we live in it".

Will depend on your altitude. At 10,000ft the horizon is beyond 200 miles, and is over 350 miles at 30,000ft. So if you fly helicopters, then yeah, but if you're going high - there's a lot more you might still be able to see?

Whoa there - so AI is now making suggestions on forums that we should be developing using AI.... It's the beginning of skynet psyops!

I think the request may be for VR zooming to have an option to do it on an axis like 2D has - not just 2 options for 2 different fixed zoom levels.

There's no match making as you've mentioned, so it really comes down to getting into a community that serves what you're looking for, etc. Training servers where you can match up with someone else for AA practice against a human player, and not AI might be a good place to start, to hone in on your skills if that's what you're wanting to achieve). Or, a group as you've mentioned - even if not a regular player can still be a good place to start. You'll be surprised just how many % of group members are in a similar situation to you - casual players, not regular. Not all groups are Mil-sim, scheduled event type of groups, and the more that join, the more chance of there being a few online to enjoy MP with. Another consideration could be PvPvE servers - where the server is primarily PvE, but there are the occasional opposition human players online as well. These types of MP missions can be quite satisfying as you work with others to achieve objectives against AI in a more co-op type of role, but there's still encounters with human opposition forces as well to keep you on your toes. If you mention where you live / what timezone you live in and what are the more likely times you're on - people in the MP community may even be able to recommend certain servers for you.

A little text disclaimer down the bottom of the video, or at the end stating "Filmed with Vulkan Engine" would be nice.

It's back? I didn't know it had left. My suggestion is to adjust expectations with this one. Considering the F10 / VRAM / Memory leak issues have been around for years without being resolved, my guess is that it's not a simple issue to fix with the current engine (or it would have been solved already). Add to this, given that the graphics are being actively reworked with Vulkan, it's plausible that the plan is for the fix will most likely be with Vulkan when it's out. Personally, I don't expect to see a solution before then, outside of what each user can change to work around this with their particular setup.

I haven't seen this issue before, but I would imagine, a dead pixel can't be fixed by software/firmware updates so my expectation would be that they would get you to return the product under warranty for a replacement. Would you mind please keeping us updated here as to whether this is correct, and how things go for you?

Sadly, I'd be betting the HP will give up before you have to worry about 23H2 not being usable. One thing I noticed with HP is that they have failure points (cables in particular), and if the G1 is anything to go by - they make it difficult, or simply don't make replacement cables available. My experience is that their after-warranty support is very limited (far worse than what I experienced with Pimax's support). That's not to say that Pimax doesn't have issues, but to give credit where credit is due, and I think they've done well with having the cables detachable and user-replaceable. (Along with the lenses as well). As for the windows update, I'm 100% with you, however I use the method to enter/alter the FlightSettingsMaxPauseDays setting in the registry - giving me decades to 'pause' my updates. https://www.elevenforum.com/t/change-maximum-days-to-pause-windows-update-in-windows-11.9202/ This gives the benefit of being able to un-pause if/when I decide to do the updates myself, and then re-pause immediately afterwards again. (Bringing back similar functionality to the good-ol XP days where we had control on when we wanted to do the updates - not Microsoft forcing them on us).

One option may be - if you live in a country with consumer laws that protect you, and there are official Pimax resellers there, you could purchase from them instead of direct from Pimax. That way, if you get a faulty one - you have the protection of your countries laws to return it instead of relying solely on Pimax. Same with warranty issues - return to store, instead of dealing directly with Pimax?

Well - I stand corrected. it looks like this issue isn't going to get a look-in as the board gets closer to completion, as it was "essentially finished" 3 years ago - and this bug hasn't been acknowledged, let alone dealt with since.

4-5 years ago they were released around 20-Dec, but the last few years have been in January I believe.

I believe the offline mode not working as offline mode is a known issue that Pimax are currently working on. You can find the bug report here: