Temetre

Both FCAS and Tempest are still early in development, all the pictures you see are just mockups or creative artists. NGAD has claims they already flew a tech demonstrator... but idk if I buy that they have anything remotely advanced. That would be incredibly quick, and from all I can tell, a lot about the designs acapabilities and features is still undetermined. And I doubt they do something like the F-35, start building the thing when its not even fully designed.

Man, I hope the alignment, using stored, isnt excessively long. The F4 is super interesting to me, but if its like >10m startups every time, then thats a reason not to get a plane. Complex startups can be fun and immersive to me, but waiting in front of a screen takes me out of it, so im just wasting time. Or where I wouldnt mind an unrealistic "fast alignment" (or fast gyro oil warmup lol?) option or so. Thats really the only thing that ever bothered me with DCS level of realism. Afaik the A-4E also has the bomb data entered as well, but its either skipped or done by engineers when the plane is loaded. The LABS computer is reliant on the radar for distancing too. Maybe the F-4 has the WSO (Rio?) enter the data correctly? Probably shouldnt be too complicated though, IIRC someone said it was 2 or 3 factors for each weapon. Im a bad pilot, but even then using LABS in the A-4E was super easy and quite accurate. Never even used it to toss, just for shallow dives (it does up to 30 degree tho).

Youre making good points and thats interesting stuff. But I feel part of my comment is basically self-evident: Not every F-14 is as dirty as this, so having an F-14 always in this state isnt strictly "realistic". Though in retrospect, maybe the person I quoted just ment to say the aircraft "can" look as worn as this; in that case, hes probably right. That said, Im actually kinda curious about this. Weve got a lot of aircraft in DCS, with many showing wear. But nothing is even close to what we got with the F-14. Some of the F-18s we fly have been around for 20 years as well, I think? And its not like every F-14 we fly has been built in 1970, I think last one was built in the early 90s? So why is the F-14 cockpit then in such a worse state than any other plane? Especially around the rear side panels, it looks like people splattered fluids on there and left it to rot or so. People originally told me it was because they scanned a museum plane in poor condition, and I just believed that because it seemed to fit. I do have a VR headset, and yup, the resolution for VR is too low even in 4K sometimes. The issue is that you got a screen that covers ~100-110 degrees of your field of vision, its like having a 3m curved screen in front of you. Thats not enough pixels, and the first thing to suffer is readability. That said, it also helps because everything is bigger, eg the F-16 screens are way more comfortable to use. The issue isnt just VR, reading cockpit text on a flat screen is also very difficult. That why we have to zoom so much all the time. It doesnt hurty my ability to control the F-14, but im also mostly sitting in the pilot seat and have jester flip switches. On a sidenote, I think its gonna be quite some time till VR is "the way" to play games like this. Still to many problems with VR, both hardware and software. And thats not even counting performance. You'd really want 8k screens for VR, but good luck running games with that res.

Seems to be a visual/text issue, I managed to drop the bombs accurately.

The realism argument doesnt make sense. You have to consider that these are F-14s from museums; its about as bad as an F14 can ever look, at the end of their life-span. Idk if they degraded from decommissioning to museum, I hope not. So this kind of wear seems out of place, even unrealistic, if we might fly the F-14 in a 1990 scenario or so, or really any scenario that isnt directly before comissioning. I doubt F-14As were even that long in service? Real question is more, is it worth the cost for Headblur to make new, less weathered cockpit textures? I assume modeling with this level of quality would be quite expensive, and they could put that effort and money elsewhere. And additionally, could they make less weathered cockpit textures with a level of realism and believability, since they cant just scan a better cockpit? I dont really got an opinion on this, you can get used to the wear, but I think its more useful to not make absolute statements as to what is realistic.

I dont think Ill ever fully understand the flight charachteristics, nor be good enough to push an aircraft to the F-14 to its limits, but I love being able to fly aircraft in Sims, and understand that im basically flying something that is so very close to the real thing in how it behaves. Props for the commitment and attention to detail. Probably everything I know about how aircraft behave is from games. Stuff like DCS is quite educational.

Thank you. Im new to VR and its really difficult to find any accurate information about a lot of this tech. Even the most basic stuff. So if I understand correctly, when Im using a Pico 4, is SteamVR not using any kind of motion reprojection? I suppose the reprojection is the ASW I can switch on in the Picos streaming software?

Do you have Microsoft Flight Sim 2020? Ive done a double check, because it also uses OpenXR, and it also sometimes got those massive reprojection artifacts (disabled repro in game, but SteamVR got its own reprojection forced i think?). But in MSFS 2020 those stutters are just shortly there, and then usually go away after a few seconds at most. Maybe this is an SteamVR/OpenXR issue and the imbalanced CPU usage of DCS MT causes this problem to appear permanently? With DCS MT one of my cores is 100% of the time bottlenecking. Ive had artifacts like this in SteamVR with OpenVR, but that was usually just a for frame or two and not nearly as bad.

And im pretty sure that is intentional, OpenXR is the new Tech and DCS devs want to go for it in the feature. Not that it seems like a great idea, considering I also got those horrible stutter (+reprojection?) issues with OpenXR+MT as well, its unplayable. No clue where exactly the problem lies.

Ive tried stable and the beta, it didnt fix any of the problems I got with motion stuttering+lag/performance in MT.

I dont quite understand VR tech yet, but I wonder: Maybe DCS OpenXR somehow forced in its own kind of motion reprojection, and works off bugged motion vectors? Its not so bad with plane movement, but head movement causes massive issues, like some crazy overshoot. Also performance problems. Im running a Pico 4, which uses different software and relies on streaming, but we seem to have similar issues.

I think I got the same kind of issue with a Pico 4, its like some really broken motion preprojection is forced on? Like it gets the wrong movement vectors for my head and interpolated frames massively overshoot. Plane movement has issues, but isnt as bad. Head movement also makes performance and latency worse. I also noticed one of my CPU cores is always at 100%, even if Im in main menu at 20fps limit, which clearly doesnt make sense. Im using Pico 4 -> SteamVR (for OpenXR) in MT. In ST, the game seems to work fine.

Hm, I just noticed something peculiar, maybe connected. For some reason, my first CPU core is always at 100% after starting DCS in MT+VR. Even in the main menu with fps caped to 40. Even in flight with FPS capped to 20 (70fps uncapped). No matter what I cap the FPS to, im always 2-3 fps below that. And the FPS drops more when I move my head, like its dropping frames. When I play MT non-VR DCS, I get 160fps and no CPU core is fully maxed. I dont think AMD got an FPS limiter in their settings; at least not without forcing Vsync, which id recommend against. You can use OpenXR toolkit to limit frames. Wasnt overly succesfull to me.

I got the same issue, steam struggles to identify the MT game. Wonder if its got something to do with this being OpenXR, or two executables with the same name? I have no clue.

Im using the Pico 4 streaming assistant, both in wired and wireless mode. Then SteamVR for with OpenVR/XR. Only MT+OpenXR has the problem. Its hard to tell if the head movement issue is more common with lower framerates ("low" being 60-70), high CPU/GPU usage or high latency, since those things coincide often. But Ive not noticed issues at this scale in other games (MSFS 2020) or in DCS ST (which also has low FPS+latency). Then again, most other games dont put this much load on my 6+6 CPU cores, and I dont think I got other OpenXR games to test. For me, the latency, which can be 50-70 in those situations, usually comes from game+encode, according to Pico 4 Streaming Assistant App overlay. The latency alone usually doesnt cause head tracking stutter in OpenVR applicatoins, however. It is really difficult to tell whats going on. Im not envious of ED having to figure out whats going on, lt alone answering if this issue is even directly caused by DCS. Probably worth mentioning you use a Quest 2 btw, someone speculated the issue might be limited to Pico 4.

Thats apparently normal, OpenXR is the default for MT (ST is still OpenVR), and doesnt got a standardized centering function. You need to go into controls and set up your own centering hotkey.

So I feel like that too, and im curious if its the same for you: Is the game actually lagging, or is it the head movement? For me, I found that when I keep my head straight and dont move, and then make the aircraft pitch and turn, everything is smooth. But when I turn my head, or move it sideways, its extremely stuttery. Almost like theres some kind of "overshooting" back and forth ghosting. So the plane and world around is fine, its actually the head movement that stutters. If had no better way to put it, it kinda feels like theres some kind of smoothing forced, that works for the planes movement (motion vectors?) but completely screws up my head movement. That is despite having SteamVR smoothing and ASW disabled. This issue is only in MT for me (which forces OpenXR), while ST+OpenVR is fine. --------------------- That is using Pico4 + SteamVR for both OpenVR/OpenXR.