Qcumber

When I try to launch in VR I just get a black screen. It happens with both Meta Link and VD. Using Quest Pro. I have tried disabling XR layers and no effect. Log file is attached. dcs.zip

Kept getting a black screen in VR last night with both meta link and VD. Sound was OK. I gave up as it was late. I need to try again tonight. Edit: I am still getting a black screen.

I agree with the engine sounds. I've heard a Corsair start up and fly but I've never sat in a cockpit. I imagine it should sound a lot more gutteral. Hopefully that will improve. To be honest I find the P-47 a bit disappointing with sound.

I prefer not to use ASW and keep to 72 FPS. It is not often that it drops below this. I sometimes use ASW when flying low over big cities etc but it is still smooth. It might be worth comparing systems. I set up a method for analysing frame times in VR. If you try running some tracks without Turbo and see how the frametimes look. Or you could just record them and send the XRFrametool data files to me and I can add them to the spreadsheet. If you then send me your DCS track I can play it on my system and compare.

It's not necessarily the headset. It is more likely a combination of other factors including pc hardware and software. In some cases Turbo mode can introduce stutters. I only need to use Turbo mode when I use VD via WiFi. It helps smooth out the frametimes but does not necessarily reduce visible stutter. With VD ethernet and Meta link I don't need it. The frametimes are very consistent. This is what mbucchia says about it in his GitHub Wiki: "Turbo mode Note: This is a highly experimental feature. If it makes your game crash or misbehave, please disable it. Turbo mode makes the game entirely ignore any frame timing or throttling dictated by the OpenXR runtime. In other words, Turbo mode forces the game to draw and submit frames as fast as possible regardless of any recommendations or policies from the OpenXR runtime. Turbo mode can increase your frame rate under certain conditions, but there is no rule or guarantee. Turbo mode can also have undesired side effects: Any statistics or performance measuring tool might now present incorrect data for frame times (however frame rate will be reported correctly). For example, on WMR, when using the performance overlay, all app CPU/GPU values will read 0. Any feature of your platform that relies on frame timing data, such as Motion Reprojection/Motion Smoothing/ASW, will not behave correctly. For example, on WMR, the motion reprojection will not engage automatically anymore, but it can be forced via the Lock motion reprojection option. Latency is increased, in a way that may or may not visible. Note: Turbo mode is offered as-is. There will be no support for issues filed while using Turbo mode."

Turbo mode works well for me and does not affect ASW. It does vary though and can depend on your system.

Open XR toolkit works fine for me. You don't need to use Open composite any more. What headset are you using and do you have any other open XR applications running? Try checking the order of XR layers. https://github.com/fredemmott/OpenXR-API-Layers-GUI

What headset are you using?

I would support using QVFR. Increase the foveated resolution as high as you can and use DLSS quality and you get sharp images, no ghosting and no shimmer. Are you using VR though? I can't see this in your signature.

If ASW is disabled then it will remain disabled in any application, including DCS. I would advise using keybinds in OTT to toggle ASW on/off whilst in DCS.

Try using a smaller foveated region. I use 0.25x0.25. Having experimented with various settings this gives me decent performance. With VD at Godlike I set centre resolution to 1.8, periphery to 0.4. This gives me a steady 72fps in most situations. I also use DLSS quality.

Remove the [Oculus] line and it should then work for VD. [Oculus] only applies to Meta Link.

Are you using Meta Link?

Amazing sim pit. I am jealous. How long did it take to build?

There is a lot of emphasis DCS on one-on-one dogfights. Historically most combat would have been group actions, protecting flights of attack aircraft or defending the fleet. Anyone getting into WWII DCS need to realise that. You need to learn to fly each aircraft in the way it was intended to be used. It's fun to watch Growling Sidewinder shoot down an F-22 in an I-16 but it's obviously not realistic. I am sure that the Hellcat and Zero will be interesting aircraft. Any new WWII plane is a very welcome addition.

Which is better Corsair or Zero? There's only one way to find out.....

In my experience it really does not look that dark in VR. I can see all instruments very well. I am not sure that flat screen videos will capture this very well.

The Spitfire will work on the Normandy map. Just create a mission with no assets.

Yes. You also need the WW2 asset pack.

There are lots of factors here in terms of Zero performance. Yes, the F4U and F6F did better in paper both in terms of science and history. However, Japan did not have the same scale of experienced pilots at that point in the war. If you pitch these planes against each other one-on-one or in small scale MP skirmishes in DCS I suspect the outcome will not be completely onesided.

After several hours of flying it is definitely a good warbird. I will hold judgement regarding "the best" for now as that can be judged in many different ways. The cockpit looks great. Better than the early warbirds and in a par with the P-47 and Mosquito. Performance is noticeably worse than other warbirds (by about 10-20%). It is quite straightforward to fly, although there are some weird issues with ground handling that is likely a bug. However, personal preference has to come in to play too. I have a lot more experience with the 109 and love the way it handles in combat. It is very simple and intuitive. Same for the P-51 and to a lesser extent the Spitfire. I need a lot more flying time with the F4U to see if this is a warbird that I enjoy flying. I am quite optimistic though.

That is a lot of energy. However it must be focussed. As long as there is a convergence of rounds on vital areas then this should be effective. But a focussed burst on a wing panel would just create a big hole with lots of wasted energy. Hit a control surface, a fuel tank, the engine (and the pilot obviously) then this is different. In DCS i have not seen any 190s "explode" but plenty go down in flames. I find that 6 x .50s from a P-51 is more effective than 2 x 20mm Hispanos and 4 x 0.303s from a Spitfire. However that might mean that I am better at flying a Mustang.

That's quite a bold statement. To clarify did you mean that .50 cals would regularly cause 109s and 190s to explode in real life? And they don't in DCS?

That looks good. It says three in stock for me. £84. I'm tempted.