Mateo

Hello there! I would like to share my settings and a way of using it for all fans of MiG-29 who are in troubles due to pitch channel singularity and who are using a short stick like Saitek X52, Saitek Cyborg or Logitech etc. I have spent plenty of hours testing especially take offs and landings with different settings, I found out: during normal flight within envelope, pitch trim is set a bit for AFT ("pulling"), during special circumstances trim setting is FWD or for high AFT setting. when in flight envelope you are pulling the stick over 75% of range, the MiG enters the range over critical AOA, which is rarely used. during inverted flight and afterburner use, stick need to be pushed almost to the limit of FWD range. during landing or rather flare itself, stick need to be pulled in sophisticated manner to almost 'MAX AFT' which is simple to feel in real aircraft, but not so obvious in simulator. I have tested Saitek Cyborg Evo and Logitech Extreme 3D Pro, both gave me soft touchdown, so I share my way to let other's try. FIrst of all that procedure is based on document "Техника пилотирования МиГ-29". For not speaking russian I will translate most important part about landing: [...] At the height of 30...20 m check the speed and aiming point and continue visually glancing ahead and a bit left to judge descend rate visually. At height 10...8 m start flaring and let the aircraft fly horizontally at height 0.5...0.8 m. With following descend and speed drop reduce thrust to IDLE. Touchdown should occur at speed 260 ... 250 km/h and AOA should be 11 degrees. [...] Touchdown with AOA above 13 degrees is forbidden. So the first thing to do it correctly with short stick is to achieve more precision when pulling. I have achieved this by settings that I have uploaded here. Please note that all range of stick movement is available, the trick is that precision is increased within range used for normal flight. Making it with 'Curve' settings only is impossible and will result in much worse effect for short stick use. The second thing is to contribute the pulling with trim action, because it is precise. Below 30 m height, involve few trim up inputs in order to reduce descend rate just a bit. Then both pulling the stick and trimming up might be used to fly the aircraft almost horizontally at height of 0.5 m. The third thing and the last one is to avoid pushing the stick. It can be achieved by pulling the stick by fingertips few times or gently pull once and hold pulled. Never let it move in forward direction too much as it will result in lost of stability on flare, and it will for sure result in hard touchdown with bounce. Wish you soft landings. Best Regards, Mateo

Hello, Could someone advice if currently there are some DCS 1.5 servers online ? I have made clean installation with FC3 and I notice only 1 server online, while running DCS 2.5 I see plenty of it on server list. I've read about this issue and I don't know if this is common problem (with blank server list) or simply everybody went on upgraded version (2.5). I can additionally tell that: - port forwarding works fine - IPv6 turned ON - ipconfig/dnsflush done - autoexec.cfg added line net.force_ipv4_lan = true

I agree that my hardware is outdated, but I think the clue is somewhere else. Nowadays the development of new, more efficient hardware is very fast, people don't want to buy new kit every year. Let's consider something like water in two different DCS versions. Water at High in older DCS compared to water at High in new DCS looks very similar to me. Performance cost is huge. You can say that people have today more powerful kit and developers consider this as a base, but why developers don't improve really the graphics - they produce something new on new engine, and it looks even worse and need more powerful hardware, that is my point. Progress should not mean that new version demand more power but looks worse. I think nobody will complain and many people will appreciate a possibility to turn HDR off and reduce water FPS consumption. If DCS would be stable and work not only on rocket-PC but also eldery it would be the same successful as Grand Thieft Auto V, because it would be the same principle - the more PC handle it, the more people buy it. Best Regards, Mateo

I would like to say my thoughts about performance and I would appreciate if ED would utilize it and take advantage of all conclusions. First of all my hardware isn't new but also isn't so bad: Workstation Dell M6700 Precision, Intel Core i7-3740QM, @ 2.70GHz 2.70GHz, 16GB RAM, Video Card K3000M with 2GB memory. I use DCS 1.5.8 with HDR off, SSAA OFF, Lens effects off, water to low and rest settings to medium (in general), it gives me with good circumstances 50 FPS (medium altitude flying in cockpit) and with bad circumstances about 28-30 FPS (close to city, airports and with some models of aircraft using effects - shoot, flare etc.). When use DCS 2.5 it is like drama even at everything possible to LOW or OFF. I have finally 15-24 FPS, and all DCS looks like LOMAC.. DCS 1.5.8 in this case made everything look magnificent, while 2.5 makes me cry. All I can do is to forget about multiplayer or big single player mission and the beauty of the World. The most interesting thing is that if I play a mission with AI Su-17M4 model (which is the most performance friendly) flying at 10 000 km altitude precisely at the center of Black Sea I have 24 FPS - without terrain rendering, without shooting, just water. Low altitude gives same results. Over terrain I have only 3-6 FPS less so terrain consume just 3 FPS but engine itself and water consume 20+. Conclusion: new engine of DCS 2.5 has got low performace i.a. due to new FPS consuming water and HDR forced to be ON. User should have the possibility to turn it off. Water settings doesn't change anything visually in 2.5. As it is rendered even below terrain it is not surpricing that it should be treated as major factor for performace among various hardwares.