winghunter

LAHR near Freiburg was an important French, Canadian and US base up into the 90s https://www.mil-airfields.de/deutschland/lahr-flugplatz.html

This is 1988 1970. So it depends. Some 80s Autobahns had the emergency lane, while others may not. The east german ones were surely smaller.

The same issue exists for Caucasus, so I'm not sure theres an easy fix. Havent checked other maps yet. It may break all existing missions if they fix it

Why didnt they use the elevation of Thüringer Wald and Harz for setting up elevated defenses

DCS uses Transverse Mercator projection. In the case of CWgermany the central meridian is 21° E The runway locations are correct and match the real world sattelite imagery. I know this, because we export the runway coordinates and render them inside DCS Web Planner (purple rectangles) https://dcs-web-editor.github.io/dcs-web-viewer-deploy/?lat=53.63664895322603&lon=9.98785972595215&zoom=14# What is incorrect, is the TH as well as the MH reading inside DCS and DCS ME. So it appears to be rather a bug with DCS than this particular map.

The airports are mostly correct (purple lines), some may also have changed since the 80s. But the TH indicated in the dcs mission editor is off. And possibly ingame too.

Seems like the attachments are even smaller now It says max total size: 238 kB This is tiny by today's standards

Still exists, its really annoying

Hope this helps

PLANNER https://dcs-web-editor.github.io/dcs-web-viewer-deploy/ LIVE MAP https://dcs-web-editor.github.io/dcs-web-viewer-deploy/live/

Old city center VS new areas around it

You're talking cities, I'm talking towns though "Dorf" Towns are different from cities, they predate city planning. The towns are generally very old, hundreds or thousands of years, were built very densely, often surrounded by a city wall for defense. It makes it very easy to spot a town from the air, you'll see the bright red roofs and white walls from very very far. While in the game it is currently very hard to spot a town in the distance. IRL it's also easy to spot the city center in a bigger city, because in the center the houses are packed very dense, while the new areas "Neubausiedlung" is typically more spaced out. At least that's my experience flying in this area.

There is a huge military base, training and defensive area in ED-R 132A That was the NATO HQ for Southern Germany in cold war

Or maybe the trees inside towns are simply too big. Whatever the reason, it makes cities really hard to spot tat distance, while its much easier IRL nullnullnullnullnullnullnullnullnull

Towns almost vanish at low level, as they have so many trees that they disappear on the horizon. It makes VFR flying harder than IRL. At a distance, they become very hard to spot, and easily blend with forests. Overall, you'd see less tall trees in german towns, they are mostly grassy gardens with bushes. Especially older towns dont have much green.

I have 2x16 of brand A, and bought 2x32 of brand B. Both brands are 6000Mhz DDR5 Since I have 4 slots, can I use all of these ? Or will 2x32 perform better. Also, does the placement order matter ? 16 -32 -32 16 vs 16 -16 - 32 -32

what does the 127.0.0.1/health endpoint say when you open it in the browser

Try this file instead. Are you on wifi or ethernet? dcs-web-viewer-api-4-test60.lua(1).zip

Which script have you installed? dcs-web-api-lua-4? or 3

Do you have the F-4 ? Then open its ingame browser Otherwise just use Chrome browser outside DCS https://dcs-web-editor.github.io/dcs-web-viewer-deploy/live/

Major performance upgrade for TacView playback zip.acmi support for zipped TacView files Showing missiles, rockets, bombs tacview tiny.mp4

I wish someone hacked the Quest 3 controllers so they can be used standalone

1. Comfort Bigscreen Beyond 2: Lightest and smallest VR headset, but the facial interface can get warm and uncomfortable over time. A planned halo strap may improve comfort in the future. MeganeX: Slightly heavier but more comfortable due to its halo strap and better ventilation. Users can easily tilt it up for breaks. 2. Visual Quality Bigscreen Beyond 2: 2560x2560 per eye (6.5 MP) at 75Hz (upscale to 90Hz). Sharp and crisp, but with a lower pixel count compared to MeganeX. Better edge clarity and sweet spot with excellent lens design. MeganeX: 3552x3840 per eye (27 MP) at 90Hz (possible 120Hz in the future). Superior panel with better contrast, richer colors, and a more natural image. Some warping at the edges, which may improve via software updates. 3. Field of View (FOV) Bigscreen Beyond 2: Superior FOV (~108° horizontal, 104° vertical) but has worse binocular overlap, which may cause eye strain for some users. MeganeX: Smaller FOV (~95° horizontal, 98° vertical) but more natural eye comfort due to better binocular overlap. 4. Performance Bigscreen Beyond 2: Requires less GPU power due to lower resolution, making it easier to maintain smooth performance. MeganeX: Demands a powerful NVIDIA GPU (no AMD support), with about 9 fps lower performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator. 5. Audio & Tracking Bigscreen Beyond 2: Integrated audio strap available now, with better microphone quality. MeganeX: No official audio strap yet, but planned for future release. Both headsets rely on external base station tracking (one or two required). 6. Software Stability Bigscreen Beyond 2: More stable and integrates seamlessly with SteamVR. MeganeX: Experiences occasional crashes and longer startup times but promises future support for motion smoothing and OpenXR. 7. Price Bigscreen Beyond 2: More affordable (~$1,150-$1,200 after taxes) and better value for most users. MeganeX: More expensive (~$1,600/€1,900) but offers superior display and comfort. 8. Conclusion Bigscreen Beyond 2: Better for most users due to its affordability, superior FOV, and better lenses. MeganeX: Preferred by the reviewer for personal use due to its exceptional display quality and comfort. Overall, both headsets are impressive, pushing VR technology forward with micro-OLED panels and compact designs. --- My2c The halo strap would be a must have for the bsb2. The current FI looks extremely uncomfy. And meanwhie I'm in the binocular overlap camp. Without it, the image looks "2D" even though you're in VR. I rather have that, than a bigger FoV

more FOV, less binocular overlap

TacView playback, open acmi files The new timeline tool for mission rehearsal / preview also allows to play back TacView files in 2D in the browser. Its not meant as a TacView replacement, but rather as a helper tool for mission creators. Like watching a replay of your last playtest inside the mission editor, to adjust the mission etc. Or for debriefing a large mission with hundreds of units. Work in progress... tacview free.mp4