virgo47

Ah, yes, my bad, I forgot that DCS-BIOS is not updated automatically. I removed the old one, DCS-COINS installer installed the new one and my Black Shark III reports properly again. I wrote it to my notes, because I do it so rarely, that I bet it's not the first time I forgot to remove the old DCS-BIOS.

+1 on this. I was surprised to see separate bindings for the same (relatively speaking, from the pilot/copilot seats) buttons and functions. Having bindings for pilot's radio buttons that don't work from copilot position anyway is not useful at all. I have one stick, but I can't have the radio there after I switch positions, unless I use some kind of modifier. There is more to this, but first I wasn't sure. Perhaps it's normal that the pilot extends copilot sights, but somehow I doubt it. Why is there a different keybind for each sight? (Strangely, but luckily, the copilot cannot extend the pilot's sight. ) I know these are physically different switches, but the reality should be practically adapted for the simulator. For comparison, this is much better executed in L-39, where two physical buttons with the same function in both cockpits have the same binding (e.g. intercom on the throttle). This doesn't seem like a feature, this is more a design bug. Either the buttons should be unified wherever possible (preferably) - working only from the position where I currently sit (this applies to anything duplicated on the dashboards too, such as QFE pressure knob, etc.) - or there should be two separate profiles in Controls Options which would allow us unified settings. (BTW: Is this taken into account when it's not in the bugs subforum?)

Great update, thanks for it! I want to ask about Ka-50 III. When I start dcs-coins -v, I can see that various mgdc_commondata_* is coming in for L-39 or UH-1H, but not for Ka-50. Is that COINS or rather DCS BIOS problem? I also tried to flip some switches, but these didn't log anything either, so it's not only common data, so it seems. BTW: Have you been thinking about that GitHub or other project for DCS COINS?

There are two aspects of this: Drop in FPS. Would be nice to be more graceful. Drop is OK, but FPS dive like this is bad. But that is still not my main concern. Unresponsive game that needs to be stopped. That's my problem. So I don't mind the slideshow. It's ugly, but whatever. But... DCS, please, just let me continue on the mission.

If anyone gets here, check Uncoupled Aiming On/Off binding. And in case you want to use the joystick for aiming Absolute/Relative Axis Aiming is also handy. With TrackIR you'll still have separate view and aiming, which sucks a bit. There should also be an option to sync the view to the gun - or, indeed, to disable the TrackIR, which effectively does the same.

+1, this is an unnecessary limitation. If I can aim with the joystick, it would be neat to be able to enable it with it - not to mention the default RShfit+T is hardly a one-hand binding. The same goes for Absolute/Relative Axis Aiming (RShift+Y by default), which is especially handy for joystick aiming. Also can't be bound to controller buttons.

EDIT: Never mind. Uncoupled Aiming On/Off seems to be the answer, works for the gunner as well! It would still be neat if DCS had a global binding to enable/disable Track IR. Going to the Controls and right-clicking there ... it's a bit annoying. However, for this scenario, Huey provides that "Uncoupled ..." binding, so no problem. (Except... it can only be bound to the keyboard, but better than nothing.)

If I shoot the ground up close, the particle effects make the game stuck and unplayable, although while recording the bug I noticed the FPS graph goes on. The game does not fix itself anytime soon (if ever), it's not completely frozen technically, but it is from the player's perspective. It does not react to input at all, the view is frozen too, etc. Only Task manager helps in this case. Video (see the graph up left): This reminds me of similar problems I had with cluster ammunition when I was flying Su-25T more than a year back. The moment the game gets to single-digit FPS, it's likely to get stuck like this. I guess it's not really Huey-specific but related to the low performance of smoke close to the player. This is the first time I encountered it with RTX 3060 I've gotten a year ago, but, granted, I haven't shot the ground from this close since. Seems like faster FPS helps, but the problem is somehow systemic. The game should be able to recover from low FPS situation, not effectively freeze. Log is attached. dcs.log

What? Oh, shh... you're right: https://flightsimcontrols.com/2023/09/08/stecs-in-eu/ (last paragraphs), I wish the warning was closer to the actual price tag. That's the price for impatience but never mind now.

Perhaps it can be limited to those other buttons, not left/right. Those are very unlikely to be pressed on hover. Depends on when you want the tooltip to go away, of course. But thanks for the feedback!

Thanks for the info, it must be a day max or so. Well, the pricing isn't THAT great after all 320 USD + 20% would be around 360 EUR, but it's 415, so the EU is paying an additional 15% premium, not to mention shipping - but I guess that's EU reality. But it was my birthday recently, so I'll probably finally replace my TWCS. 3 mins later: I opted for Standard after all, and it's ordered! Damage is done...

BTW: Enigma has a good video review on his YouTube channel with some interesting thoughts and solutions, e.g. encoder to axis, etc. Compares it with Virpil Throttle CM3. I'm still waiting for EU pricing, I hope it will not be that off from US (+VAT of course), because in US prices the value is very good (even if I add ~20% for VAT).

This is not a serious bug, but it is kind of strange and definitely annoying. I use a side button on the mouse (indicated as MOUSE_BTN4 in DCS) for two disjunct functions: Center View - when I don't use head-tracking And "Toggle while held" in opentrack, when I do use the head-tracking The problem is this: When I press the button with head-tracking, to stabilize my view, the cockpit elements DON'T show any tooltips, unless I was positioned on an element and the tooltip was already shown. Then it nicely shows also tooltip for other elements I move my cursor to. Otherwise, no tooltips. First I thought the Center View binding is causing this, but it is not. Even when I unbind it, it doesn't help. I could understand BTN1/2 disrupt the tooltips, because we use this (+ the mouse wheel scroll) to interact with the elements. But the tooltip is not shown, even if I press other buttons (mouse button 4, 5, etc.). I know it feels obscure, but: Anyone: Can anyone with temporary head-tracking disable button on the mouse confirm this? DCS: Is it possible to fix it? It would help tremendously in cockpit exploration when it is very hard to keep the mouse on smaller elements to get the tooltip. Of course, I can also bind the button to head-tracking toggle, but that is less flexible (I cannot use the button with modifiers for other tasks without toggling the head-tracking in the process).

Hello guys, With both Black Shark II and III, I encountered a strange problem I'd never seen before in any other plane. Normally, when I save the snap view (Save Cockpit Angles, RAlt+Num0 by default), I see no difference, when I go to the snap view right after saving. But in Ka-50, there is a camera shift, like some axis/translation is not saved at all. I played with it for a while, it seems that it is somehow related to the translation that comes with view rotation in the horizontal axis beyond ~90deg (you can see that the "head" moves forward for these). Strangely, the snap view is shifted EVEN MORE forward for these. Now, I'm used to the snap views being somewhat relative - they change with the chair height, or in MiG-15 with the Q-key (view align to the reticle), etc. This is all annoying but somewhat understandable... but this situation in Ka-50 makes any over-the-shoulder snapviews double hard to set - and you never get exactly the angle you wanted.

During the third/last training mission for the Landing and shutdown procedure, I managed to get to the point after "burn through the spark plugs" after which the next step was: "Set all other switches OFF." Whatever I did, the mission didn't move on from there. I decided to investigate, but I'm totally puzzled after the look on the mission. After sparks, there should be actually trigger "SWITCHED CONDITION (27.sparks)" with the message "Reduce the throttle..." and then the Magneto step and after these two should come the "Set all other switches OFF". I was looking for some simple flag number mismatch, but I can't find any. There are a few more issues with the mission: Some voice lines follow too closely and the previous one is cut (e.g. after the third turn, but there are more occasions). Sometimes, the highlighted instrument doesn't make sense, e.g. after the landing and "turn left" instruction, the RPM and manovacuumeter are highlighted. I'm adding not that short (obviously) track file for the mission. Not sure how important that is for track file playing, but I'm using FMOptions adjustment for Yak-52: -- See https://forum.dcs.world/topic/187159-no-buguncommanded-left-rudder-during-flight/ aileronTrimTab = -0.016 rudderTrimTab = -0.25 --aileronTrimTab = 0.0 elevatorTrimTab = 0.0 --rudderTrimTab = -0.666 yak_landing.miz_05092023_21-22.trk

One can trial Black Shark 2. I assume, if it's good, BS3 should be better (and hopefully without (m)any new bugs).

After getting frustrated with the constant roll to the left, and then checking bazillions of related threads, I decided to bite the bullet and change the LUA file - which is not that hard, I just don't like to mess with LUA files in the installation directory (BTW: does it break consistency check?). Now the Yak-52 flies normally - FINALLY. There is just one thing I don't get. Why can't ED edit the file for us? If the team can't do some proper fix, at least give us some stopgap solution. Is this an inherently problematic fix or what? Dragging some bugs for many years makes it also very difficult to communication-wise. ED ppl are nagged about the same thing again and again, new players don't always find the old threads (e.g. bad keyword choice), start a duplicate one, etc. Yak-52 is actually a very nice plane. But trying it for just a few hours makes me run to the forums to check whether this and that is a bug or a feature. It's mostly an old bug. Anyway, thanks for the LUA fix.

Never mind... now, after realizing it's not just "Brake Override Switch" but most of the toggles, I can see the other threads I didn't find previously. E.g. But, c'mon, two (or more) years later new module users have to be surprised by this? "Solved" as a duplicate.

I experimented a bit with the mission, so if you accept a tip from an amateur, the easy fix for the markers should be to raise the wind at 10m to 4 m/s. To make the crosswind component roughly the same, you may change the angle (blows to dir) from 60 to around 52, it will still ring the right markers (NDBs KW and K) as expected. No more nagging from me, the trial for MiG-15 ends today.

Binding "Brake Override Switch, toggle" works as ON only. ON/OFF bindings work as advertised, but the toggle does not toggle. BTW: Strangely enough, it is called Brake Override in the cockpit and bindings, but the string "Brake Override" (or any "override") is nowhere to be found in the manual - where it is referred to as "Brake release switch/circuit breaker" and the function is not well explained (unless hidden elsewhere). EDIT: Similarly, "Canopy, toggle" seems to work only as "Canopy OPEN", it definitely does not close - and from both closed and vent positions it only opens the canopy. EDIT 2: To my horror (because half of my bindings are now useless ;-)), many other toggle bindings do not work, e.g. the left CBs (all eight) don't. Similarly, "Fuel Quantity Indicator Dimmer, toggle" works only towards NIGHT position, carburetor hot/cold goes one way as well, etc. I appreciate the theoretical flexibility in bindings - for me, the binding for next/previous + toggle + each position is a control freak's dream come true - but all the options have to work. Reliability in binding departure is a great thing I like to lean on.

Thanks for the good news. Just to be sure - by "both" you mean LOD and pathing, or (LOD+pathing) AND markers as well? Or will I report the markers (possibly with some wind suggestions) in another topic?

I've been playing MiG-15 for three days and I encountered many of the bugs reported here, often for years. It really begs for more love. Without ejection, it's a flying coffin.

I'm playing with MiG-15 and doing the tutorials. The fourth training mission - Landing - is broken after the landing. There is a vehicle, which is invisible with a typical FOV and only appears when I zoom in, even when it's just a few meters away. I should follow the vehicle, but it goes on the grass and does not lead me anywhere, even if I try to go on the taxiway next to it (you don't wanna go on the grass for obvious reasons). It seems like this mission misses some update after the Caucasus update? Track attached (don't mind my "approach"). Short video of the funny vehicle: Also, the markers (explicitly mentioned in the mission) are silent - because in this Caucasus with this weather, the ATC prefers the opposite runway 04 (and those markers are indeed active). MiG-15bis Training - Landing2.miz_22082023_20-15.trk

Just a guess, but in these missions the instructor has the final say on weapons - via his switch in the rear cockpit. I remember the first rocket mission only vaguely now, but you can't fire too soon, before firing range gives you the go and even too low (there's a voice line about being too low as well). This is also a strong point of these missions, but it may be confusing, as you can't just ask "Hey, did you do something with my weapons?" I strongly suspect it's your instructor and his powerful switch in the rear cockpit.

I've been waiting for this before the throttle upgrade, but this might be it. I don't mind the plastic, really, if it is built well, of course. But I like the layout of the things there - something I wasn't that sure on the Virpil throttle. Now, the price for the max version seems very good, actually - and with it, we get a lot of buttons. Sure, the minimalistic base is... well, minimalistic, but the extension seems fine. Yes, it's kind of NXT level, but that's fine for me. I fly multiple planes and I want the flexibility. Yes, I'd welcome to have a bit wider product with a few additional axes/levers, but I was afraid I may not like (S)TECS when it would come out. And I like what I see. Looking forward to it, I'll wait for a few reviews, of course, but this really may be it. Thanks for the good work, VKB!