chaos

I feel like a complete idiot but I can't figure this out.... I own a VKB Gunfighter III stick and wanted to marry it to a TM F-18 grip. I've installed the adapter, double-checked all the connections but for the life of me... I can't make it work. Obviously the axis are fine (as they're "external") but all of the the buttons/Castle Switch/Trigger do not register any presses when I check it in VKB Device Config. How does one make it work? I was a bit surprised that VKB doesn't provide any step-by-step instructions. I assumed it was plug and play but clearly there's something I'm not doing correctly. That leaves the possibility that the grip itself is faulty and I don't have any way to test this as I don't own a TM base. This, however, seems unlikely. Is anybody willing to type up a step-by-step on how to get it working? Thanks.

I am sitting behind a desk on simple chair. The angle at which the pedals sit is perfect for me. I have the MFG rudder assembly set at the lowest setting (20deg.) so there's plenty of room to angle them upwards if I ever need it to. The ball of my foot hits the bottom of the pedal exactly where it needs to (my shoe size is US size 9/ EU size 43). It does require a fair amount of travel on the top end to brake but this is an issue with the rudder assembly itself. In real aircraft the travel is possibly as little as half the amount that is required on the MFG pedals. Again, not a pedal issue as such. One more thing... I did notice that the bolt threads a little bit too easily into the threaded bushing of the pedals. There's a little play. I would've liked to see a tighter fit there. However, after fastening the pedals, everything is secure. P.S. I have version 1.0 of the MFG pedals (s/n 45)

I too find the process of using the in-game map copying of the coordinates down onto a piece of paper and then manually inserting it into the UFC annoying (albeit accurate I would assume). This is an amazing time-saver and I would very much appreciate it if you can make this available once the app is ready. Does the mod also take into account the various coordinate formats required? I'm amazed at the different talents and skills people have. Well done, sir!

Yes, that's what I meant to say. Thanks for letting me know...

That's an interesting observation! I don't have the time to check this but if I change the temp. in the ME, will it reflect the adjusted temperature in-game?

Thanks oldtimesake. Did you make sure to adjust the temperature in-game? For some odd reason the "standard weather" in the mission editor assumes a temperature of 20C i.s.o. 15C. When all is said and done... I think the performance of the F-16 in-game is pretty close to your performance charts...

I got them a few days ago and only managed to install them last night. Well packaged and they feel extremely solid. The fit was snug and installing them is as simple as inserting the 2 bolts/side. Extremely well engineered pedals if you ask me. The only nitpick I could find was the slightly rough finish on the curved parts of the pedal. This is obviously 3D printed and is simply unavoidable because of the process. If you want it to look like the milled part of the real F-16 you should break out a box of sanding paper. Again, this is nitpicking and as far as I'm concerned a non-issue. I expect these parts to last a lot longer than the MFG crosswind rudder assembly they're bolted on. A solid buy!

It's called a "wander lamp" or "utility light". It's mounted in the cockpit and you can take it out of the holder and use it as a "flashlight". It's permanently attached by a power-cord and does not require for the battery switch to be on. That is, it is on the "hot battery bus" so you can use it without any electrical switching.

Yep, expected delivery 5th of Jan. Nice!

... that's how I looked at it. Unfortunately, you're missing out on the experience. If you really want to experience "flight", short of the real thing, then VR is the way to go. Until we get direct Computer-to-Brain interface, this is it. Yes, performance is an issue for some and using the standard controller is just a pain but we're getting there. PointCTRL is a step in the right direction and hardware-performance is just a matter of time. Maybe someone in the neighborhood is willing to let you have a go... I can only imagine what fun I'll have once DCS:Clouds becomes a thing

If this belongs in the dedicated VR forum than feel free to move it. I just want to let other non-VR users know about my experience and I feel that the reach of this forum is better suited for that... Right, so... I own a potato-laptop by today’s standard. Mind you, it was crazy fast… 5 years ago. It’s an i7 6700 @ 3.4GHz coupled with 32GB and a desktop class GTX980 graphics card. It served me well for all those years. I play DCS exclusively. However, as is to be expected, it has gotten slower over the years and I’ve held off on upgrading for as long as I could. No more, for I have entered the realm of VR properly… Some 4(?) years ago I managed to “sneak” into Microsoft’s flagship store by pretending to be a developer and thereby gaining access to their Hololens AR Headset. I also got to try Valve’s brand new VR headset at the time which was underwhelming to say the least. A pixelated mess with horrible screen-door effect. Clearly, VR wasn’t ready and because of that experience, I’ve held off on buying a headset for all these years. Despite the (mostly) glowing reviews on this forum regarding this or that headset, I could not be convinced to pull the trigger. Fast forward 2020. My wife purchased the Quest 2 to counter the hours of boredom thanks to the virus (she’s a bit of a tech-head herself). Naturally I had to try it on my potato-laptop since it was sitting there anyway. Convinced that it would suck, I started DCS and was transported to the familiar hangar with Sue sitting in it. Holy CR*P! The sense of scale is terrific! I instantly felt the need to reach out and touch the leading edge of her beautiful wing. Ok, so far, so good. Surely it would suck once I started flying it… Loading up a simple mission in the Caucassus (just me, myself and I) with my trusty A-10 under my butt. I sat there for what could’ve been 5 minutes staring at the cockpit gauges, displays and the view outside. This looks friggin’ amazing. The urge to pull those fire-handles and twist the knobs and dials is very strong. I’m sitting in the cockpit and it feels exactly like it did when I spent the better part of a day inside the Jaguar at RAF Cosford. The scale is correct. It feels cramped and the depth perception is just perfect. I clicked “fly” and off I went. Flying a circuit feels like the real thing. I can visually estimate the correct distance from the runway and speed control is easy. Glancing at my HUD and back at the runway is quick and a lot more intuitive compared to TrackIR. I’m flying a circuit as I would do in real life. Yes, performance is less than ideal but it is playable. I even managed to dogfight and score kills in the F-18. For those sitting on the fence, waiting for the next gen VR headset to come out; wait no more. It was probably the best $400 I ever spent on any gaming peripheral. I would say it is on par with a HOTAS system which, in my view, has become a necessity these days. VR is not a necessity as such but it will blow your socks off.

Although a worthwhile addition to the stable of aircraft in DCS, I'm not 100% convinced that this is the "mystery-aircraft" we've been waiting for. My DCS is updating so I can't check for myself but... can somebody check the detail on the AI version of the Su-34 Platypus in the current version of DCS? It looks a lot more detailed in the video than I remember from the current in-game asset. Could it be... naaaah!

Same here. The osb label stays crossed out but the weapon appears to operate correctly. Plain-jane install. Open beta without any mods...

I stand corrected! I'll update my guide and thanks for referencing the other thread on the forum. It's a slightly different story after alignment is complete... Apparently you can use either option (IFA or NAV) if GPS is available. The option is yours. However, NAV is the default and should normally be used. At least that's what I gather from sources...

According to my F-18 guide (Chuck's-) it says to place it in NAV after alignment (page 72 step 54). Inflight Alignment is only done after something has seriously gone wrong and you need to bring the jet back home. From what little I know, the GPS continually updates the calculated position by the INS. It should be possible to do a "Manual Position Update" in case GPS is offline but I'd have to dive deeper into my docs. However, this should not be confused with "Inflight Alignment"...

I've been testing the SP mode in the F-18C and I've come across a couple of issues... Can somebody look at my TRK-file. I'm trying to shoot a HARM at an SA-11 but it goes ballistic and never attempts to even track the vehicle. Moreover; supposedly the SP allows for 360deg. protection (when speed and alt. allows) but I've never been able to have the missile turn for more that, say 45deg., if I approach the SAM site at an offset. Legit bug? HARM.trk

Ah! Yes, I'm on the OB...

Apparently I do not understand what the issue is... I can point the TGP to any target, initiate a point or area track and drop the bombs in CCRP. What is the problem? It does seem you require at least one waypoint. I've just confirmed what Scubamurph suggested <sniped by Scubamurph> I did have one waypoint... waaaay in the distance.

During the late 60's early 70's, aircraft routinely used radar bombing "from up-high" to "down low" to attack bridges, truck parks etc. I get that the the current gen of pilots are bound to very specific ROE and are only allowed to bomb what they can positively ID. However, as DCS is not bound by those rules since it is a game that caters to all time-frames, I welcome the feature even though it is far from an ideal tool.

Thanks to the peeps of ED who managed to create a perfectly believable rendition of the ground radar. It's been one of the features I've been waiting for since Flanker 1.5. Even though that was fun to play with, the current iteration is stunning. A true simulation without the "smoke and mirrors" as far as I can tell. Obviously a lot of resources went into this and I applaud ED for having done so. I cannot stress enough how excited I am using this, long overdue, feature. I've been having lots of fun figuring out the limits and how to best employ it. It's another tool in my toolbox. TPOD is obviously far superior targeting specific items but is not always available (it'd be great if user-created missions reflected that). It highlights even more so the need for proper weather simulation. I know it's on the road-map and going by the time they've already spent on it, it's obviously not a trivial matter. Once we get proper low-viz (fog/haze) the ground-radar will come into it's own. The current "fog-" option is just not cutting it. Certain objects are visible through it and is just a mess in my humble opinion. I would even forego the clouds-update if we could just have proper fog. And while we're at it... once ED implements the "dynamic campaign" make sure to allow for a limited supply of TPODs. Let's make the ground radar feature something that is vital in playing this game.

I would also hasten to add that, even in real world operations, JSTARS, JTAC etc. aren't always available. I would even guess that this is more often the case than not. Ground radar is _very_ useful in my opinion. Besides, it's a fundamental feature of the aircraft and ought to be simulated in order to have a complete module.

Thanks Lerxster. To be clear, we’re all on the OpenBeta client so that doesn’t appear to be the issue here...

Please check the attached dcs.log. I seem to be the only player having difficulty joining this particular server. I can connect just fine but it locks up after I go past the "briefing screen" (press Fly). I can connect to other (public-) servers without any problems. there are several errors and warning in this log. I have repaired my install and run no mods or scripts. Everything is standard.... Please have a read and let me know in this thread what could possibly be the problem. dcs (1).log

I recently purchased a VKB MCG Pro (III). From ordering to delivery took 4 days. From what I can tell, VKB (Europe) is located in the Netherlands and distribute locally. Ordering was quick and easy. My reasoning for choosing VKB was 2 fold. I'm not invested in TM-gear (i.e. Warthog) so interchanging various bits was not a consideration. Also, the MCG Pro sits less high on a desk compared to Virpil's offering. I'm anticipating their VKB -throttle later this year and will purchase it as soon as it becomes available. Having said that, VKB roadmap is clear as mud and I wish they would be a little bit more forthcoming as to what their plans are. Why Virpil decided to strip their throttle of the afterburner detent is beyond me. A throttle without a detent is just silly and a definite "No-Sale" from me. So, I'm stuck with a crappy T16000 throttle for now. Small power adjustments are nigh impossible although the rest holds up reasonably well...

I've also noticed this behavior in the F-16C. Might have something to do with the "sample-rate" at which the simulation runs. It only happens at (very) high speeds.