Caldera

Hey Guys, I did some more testing. So below is allot of pictures of two different screen configurations. These were taken sitting on the tarmac at Incirlik on the Persia map. Just for the sake of consistency all were under the same conditions. The view was default forward in a A-10C II, no TrackIR and the TGP was off. So one new thing that I did discover, at least the way MSI Afterburner reports, is that the DRAM memory usage values would drop over time. So I took a first screen shot as soon as I saw the GPU temperature stabilize and I took a second screen shot at 15 minutes after that time. The FPS moves a bit so just depending on when I took the screen shot the differences can be noticed. DCS @ 3440x2520 2 screens DCS @ 3440x1440 1 screen At high resolution the FPS stayed very steady I would call it right around 50FPS. Notice that the DRAM usage is lower at higher resolution. Anyone care to explain that? DCS @ 2560x2180 2 screens DCS @ 2560x1080 1 screen At the lower resolution the FPS did not stay so steady. In fact it would constantly dip down below the level of the higher resolution pictures that you see above. I could not predict the average FPS and it was varying from 45-75 FPS. The GPU never seemed to settle down with temperature or usage. The GPU was all over the map. All in all I am decidedly... ...less certain. Caldera

Hector, Thanks for the reply! I got to looking at MSI Afterburner a bit more. It has at least two memory usage variables that can be monitored. One is called RAM usage and the other is called RAM usage /process, for both DRAM and VRAM. So I am thinking that it would be it safe to assume that: Ram usage is the ram allocated for use by the application RAM usage /process is the ram that is currently in use by the application For example on my system right now using MSI Afterburner running DCS: GPU Temp Usage VRAM Usage Usage /process DRAM Usage Usage /process Framerate GPU 73C 54% VRAM 6035 4203 DRAM 13356 7449 40 fps The memory values seem to vary by a few percent constantly all except the VRAM usage value, which stays pretty darn constant. It would be interesting to see the difference of these variables being monitored on another card. For example, a 3080 TI running on a higher resolution, such that is on your system. It seems that maybe that a first glance at all this requires another look? If what I suspect is true, then things don't really look as marginal as I had thought earlier in regards to my system performance. Caldera

Hey All, Like about 99% of the people who game and own a PC I am thinking about a GPU upgrade. Luckily, in some ways, the scalped prices have slowed me down and given me more time to consider what I really need. However, I do not fully understand how the GPU and DCS with multi-monitors function. I was hoping to get educated here as I know that allot of you have much more experience than I do. This is my current display set-up, and frankly it is all that I physically have room for on my desk (and space that I have). I currently only run two MFCD's on screen 2. I run two displays because my eyes are kind of bad and I can not easily read the MFCD's on the main monitor. Screen 1 is running at 2560 x 1080 and screen 2 is running at 1920 x 1080. I have the DCS settings set up as high as I could so that my system will run stable and minimize stutter. I do limit the GPU to 40 fps (might dip below that near the ground etc...). I watch the GPU utilization via MSI Afterburner in percent and use that number for bench marking. The card mostly runs in the 60-80% range and around 40-50C. My GPU runs a whole lot cooler at 40 fps vs unrestricted. My screen 1 is capable of 3440 x 1440 (144 hz), but with my current GPU it is a "no deal". So I could go to a higher resolution on the main screen if I wanted to (or could) do so. Notice that my GPU currently is a RTX 2060 at 6MB. MSI Afterburner (also Task Manager) reports that is at or very close to maximum memory utilized when in flight. I do not understand how DCS stacks memory usage up on the card. Or, how much memory the card really should have and not be utilizing shared GPU memory (which mine does do at times). Questions: Is the GPU running both screens in 3D mode? Does the cockpit run in 3D mode? How much memory should the card load at 2560 x 2180? How much memory should the card have to run at 3440 x 2520 and not use shared memory? Thanks in advance. Caldera Happy 2022!

Hey All, This has probably been hashed and re-hashed, but my mouse wheel finger is severely fatigued of trying to "just" search for a solution. I do not use the Knee Board very much and I would like to be able to. This is because it is just a real pain to use with my set-up. I run a two display set-up, where screen 1 is 2560 x 1080 and screen 2 is 1920 x 1080. They are positioned like the picture below. The monitor setup file that I had been using is custom. It has been is stable for quite some time now, with no changes. That is, until I decided that I would like to use the Knee Board more often. This is what the Knee Board looks like on my displays. So in in order for the Knee Board to actually be useful, it has to be re-sized and re-positioned each and every time it is used. This is very annoying, some what time consuming and a bit painful especially in flight. I have tried to edit my monitor setup file. It currently looks like the picture below and obviously not working. The only lines that are new are contained within kneeboard. I am not even sure that kneeboard is in fact a viewport. I just copied this part of the script from another source to try it out. I don't remember how to create or activate a viewport either. Any help is appreciated and thanks in advance, Caldera Happy New Year!

Thanks Guys, I have surely not noticed this before I started using Voice Attack. I do not know why. Caldera

Hey All, Take a look at the picture. The refueling door is closed and the autopilot is on. But, the door indication still says READY on the column. This picture was taken after refueling where the refueling door was opened / closed using voice attack (via keyboard commands). I can clear the READY light by cycling the refueling door using the mouse. Must be a glitch? Caldera

Well... It seems for me just recently that nothing works. The TACAN to the tanker is MIA. Anyone else? Caldera

Foka, Thanks! Bonkers on me... Caldera

Yes, they are AI Hornets. Is this something new with the last update or just something that I have missed until now? Caldera

Hey All, Flying a custom mission this morning. Part of this mission is the destruction of a hostile FARP and the C-47 Helicopters that try to escape. At first I was just going WTFO? Then I noticed this coming from a pair of friendly F-18's in the area. Is this something new with the last update or just something that I have missed until now? Caldera

Yurgon, Thanks, for the work around. I have actually tried what you suggest quite a few times. It does work for BHOT or WHOT, but effectively limits use to one selection or the another once the adjustments are made. Then CCD is completely excluded. I am annoyed to have to constantly due that. For what I read, the Devs are indeed working on a solution and I can patiently wait (for what choice do I have?). I have not ever operated a TGP either, just in flight simulators and mostly only in DCS. With that said, I have used some pretty high dollar IR cameras (25K+). While this is not exactly apples to box cars the principle is the same. Any small variation in temperature can be detected amazingly easy and the non-IR image can easily be superimposed upon the IR image as an option. However, the focal range and magnification of these two devices is something well to consider and reason enough to disregard my above comments as you wish. This is what the sales people at Thorthrup - Grumman advertise. No price is listed on the website, but I was a nice boy all year! Merry Christmas, Caldera

Hey All, Today was the first day after the update that I have tried to use TACAN for the purpose of A2A refueling. I found out that the A/A T/R position on the switch did not work for me. After experimentation the T/R position did work. I did not notice a comment in the change log, but it is a LONG list this time. Anyone else have this happen to them? Merry Christmas, Caldera

Taz, LOL At this point I am not sure what I mean... A resolution is described as 1920 x 1080, for example. It basically is the number of pixels horizontally and vertically on a monitor. A resolution is usually not described as a number like 256, 512 or 1024. And for example, a setting of 1024 can not mean 1024 x 1024 as that would encompass about 45% of a 1920 x 1080 monitor. See what I am getting at? Caldera

Touten, Thanks! But this, "RES. OF COCKPIT DISPLAYS. Set the resolution of cockpit displays such as mirrors, targeting video indicators, multifunction displays, moving maps, etc. Note that higher resolution settings can negatively impact the smoothness of game play." is an answer that is not an answer. FWIW I do not use mirrors, mostly to control FPS. Taz, Thanks! It seems that I did an assume. Because a change did not force a DCS restart (like quite a few others do) I assumed that it did not need one for a change to take place. Any idea what 256 or 1024 resolution actually means? It just seems arbitrary to me, but indeed 1024 is the way to go. Caldera

Hey All, Tooltips: The preferable resolution for MFD and other cockpits displays. Small GPU hit. I may be a complete ningcompoop, but what exactly does this mean? If I look at my MFD with the TGP as SOI there seems to be no setting that will produce a change. At least what my bad eyes can see. Nor, does it really effect my FPS much at all that I have been able to determine. This is considering that the TGP is in itself is a major hit to FPS (around 8-10 fps on my system at times). I run two monitors with the MFCD's positioned on the second monitor which is a 15.6 inch flat screen running at 1920 x 1080 @ 60 hz (main monitor 2560 x 1080 @ 144 hz). So each MFCD that I physically see is about 7.5 inches square or 960 x 960 pixels. I also can see the MFD's on the main monitor display, of course. I can detect no difference in any of the Res of Cockpit Displays settings either on my main monitor or the second monitor. Frankly, the jaggies are pretty bad and the display is fuzzy as well as quite a of shimmering from what I would guess to be a lack of enough anti-aliasing. My system can really only support MSAA X2 right now. I am also running Anisotropic Filtering on the X8 setting. These settings seem adequate for in cockpit and out of cockpit views. I have never personally seen DCS running on any another computer other than my own. (The exception might be YouTube videos) Is what I am seeing about normal? What do the numbers 256, 512 or 1024 actually mean? Are these displays normally interlaced or something? (ex: 1024 Every Frame is an option) Merry Christmas, Thanks in advance, Caldera

Hey All, Please understand that I am not un-thanking the developers. But, the TGP still has the same issues that it has had since "the clouds" evolved. At least for me,the TGP image is not so good at times. I am also very much looking forward to the FLIR update. Considering FLIR, have a look at the pictures below. It is worse over airports and / or very high viewing angles. At times, FLIR is non existent. Non airports and flatter viewing angles seem better. Narrow seems worse than wide. It does generally very well on destroyed vehicles and / or bomb craters (these are shelling craters), and oddly buildings / structures. Even gun projectile strikes can really stand out (HE rounds?). Merry Christmas to all, Caldera

Yes, it is a difficult weapon to find a real purpose for comparing it only to other Mavericks. The accuracy is no better than one of the none laser guided AGM's and you can only carry two. As soon as a "something" shoots back, you will most likely instantly mask the laser due to defensive maneuvering. Buddy lasing - From my testing the lasing aircraft has to be within 8.1 nm as well as the shooting aircraft. So there is no great advantage there. But you still can do it. Ground lasing - JTAC lasing works if you can get them to turn on their laser. I am unsure if Combined Arms with a human in control would work, but that could be fun. Multi lasing - Having at least two (or more) lasers on at the same time with the same frequency. I will have to test to see if this would work. For example a two ship with a buddy and a shooter both lasing the same target. That sounds fun as well. Shot Abort - You can change your mind while the missile is mid flight. If the laser is turned off the missile will most likely miss. The only significant advantage that I can come up with is that if you happen to know that you will be going up against a large concentration of infantry. The AGM-65L is by far lighter than a 2000 lbm bomb. It is second in infantry kill radius only to the MK-31 AP. It could be, in my opinion, a very effective weapon for that task. It also hits noticeably harder than a 500 lbm bomb with a bit more stand off range. So it could be used as a substitute for a GBU-12 (one on steroids) using the same overflight profile that you would use for that weapon. Caldera

Flappie, Mission made by myself with A-10C II. How did I manage to embed the very mission that I last flew? Caldera

has been starting a track. From what I can tell after exiting a mission, clicking on FLY AGAIN is performing the same function as WATCH TRACK. I have been having to use CLOSE to exit and then restarting the same mission in order to stop it from doing that. Caldera

Taz, The laser stays on until about 1 second before impact. Then it automatically shuts off. For my testing, I have been turning the laser on at around 14-15 nm and shooting the missile at around 7-8 nm. I have not noticed the laser shutting off mid flight like it used to. Look at my chart above. From my testing it is closer to 2 times the blast (splash) radius. However, the kill radius is better for the 500 pounder. Makes me wonder why the AGM does so good otherwise. My only theory is that it is required to ensure that all the various armor values are overcome from strikes at different aspect angles. "This is a weird one. The Maverick was still at 8.1 and also 8.1 for the TGP. The actual slant range at this very instant I would have approximated to be 9.0 to 8.5 nm. Where the TGP just popped to 8.1 and stayed there for a bit as I flew closer." FWIW, I can no longer get this to repeat. I do not know why. But maybe it was glitched for my initial testing spree. Or... I just imagined that it had happened at all. Caldera

Hey All, Does anyone happen to know what type of warhead the AGM-65L has? The internet, which is my only source, does not have data for this weapon that I can find. The reason that I am asking is because for DCS this weapon hits pretty dang hard. It has the second largest splash radius of any weapon that I have tested so far. I am guessing that it is modeled as a penetrator type warhead with at least 136 kg of high explosive. But I can't find any data, not even what the gross weight is. Take a look. Notice that the splash damage radius (INF HIT) is greater than a 2000 lbm GBU-10 and only second to the penetrator style GBU-31 (GBU-31 AP). It also killed a T-55 at 25 feet and took out infantry better than a CBU-103 by a very noticeable margin (which is supposed to be an anti-infantry weapon?). HE RATIO --> INF HIT (feet) divided by HE KGS (weight of the explosive charge) Up till this I had thought that the AGM-65G was the best, not true. Super weapon in DCS? Caldera

Thanks Jay. Caldera

Schurem, Don't forget to "waggle your wings" a bit if you have been flying straight and level for a while before you want to release. Never occurred to me to drop a JDAM in CCIP mode... Caldera

Razo, I think that was my problem as well. Thanks, Caldera

BDA This is the kill radius it is better than a 500 lbm bomb. A 500 pounder most likely would not have taken out the BTR-80. This is the splash damage radius and is page 2 of the report, which was about a page and a half. Notice that it hit infantry out to 525 feet and one BTR-80 out to 75 feet. Pretty impressive damage range for this weapon. Caldera