Bucic

I'm not sure what's your interpretation of that spectrogram is. From my experience the frequency in DCS rises momentarily when the source passes the observer which I don't think is grounded in physics. For future reference: https://www.audiokinetic.com/en/blog/create-a-doppler-effect-with-wwise/ As you can see WWISE gives developers freedom in designing the effect. For good and for worse. I'll try to focus on capturing another bug that is directly related. Frequency rises by a very large degree with no increase in closure velocity. Usually can be triggered by using F5 camera and altering angles.

For the few seats I've seen procedures on the case was for both handles to be actuated, often implied to be part of the routine for correct body position for the ejection process. Lessons from the last months: 1. In case of atypical rotary switches consider altering the panel labels instead! 2. Never bother with component sourcing on platforms which do not have the specific filter implemented. I'm afraid to even sum up the number of hours it took me to finally buy rotary switches that are indexed in 45 degree increments. In the process I bought several high-grade thin-shafted Grayhill and COLE rotary switches by mistake. Their operation is heavenly satisfying but they are impossible to mount with aviation label panels. 3. If working at a working dad pace always mark your sourced switches with the intended position in the cockpit.

Is the new smoke modeling coming in the next week's update or is it already in the current build?

Using DDS Textures in GIMP 2.8 https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=816839147

@Flappie I clear metashaders, fxo and system shader cache (disk cleanup - check Shader Cache) at least before every update. I haven't updated since the beginning of February so I'm going to update and test it today or tomorrow. Next time you jump into F-5E please take a shot of the vicinity of the trim and CM panels with zero flood setting and full backlight brightness, in moonless conditions as you had in the shot you posted above. Weird stuff!

Second that! Somewhere between the classic and the Remaster would be a good spot to aim if F-5E dev team doesn't like them dirty but if I had to choose one, the classic version with the roughmet FIXES by yemet applied looked superior. Just take a look for yourself.

I don't think it is narrowing down on backlights and if anything it's the backlights that should get a separate thread The lack of flood light effect is far more jarring so I'd bombard this first. And since the lighting groups interact with each other I'm all for letting the thread run free. The first posts have set the outline well, in case anyone gets lost. Most importantly it seems the feedback channel (issues-mods-devs-updates) works better than ever for the F-5E.

Reel2Real real It's the weapon's panel from a real F-5E, although it's the version with top-right corner cutout for an ejection handle. It's got all the factory part number designations and date codes visible, even the exact manufacturer.

@FlappieYoFlappieYoFlappieYoFlappie (the forum engine doesn't like Firefox) Backlighting or flood lighting? Please keep in mind I have a real panel with backlight in working order in case the devs would like to see it in some specific conditions.

@kl_koral didn' t post it as a solution, merely as something to try out in the meantime.

Do whatever you can to configure your DCS to run DLAA slowly increase and test the sharpening value.

Thanks for referring Quaggles! Do you mean one of his charts or lua files contained that "22 mils, or 17.6 for 80% circle" data? Which manual snippet and location are you referring to in the last line?

I assure you the white borders are caused by the near 100% gloss materials applied. The limitation goes like this and it isn't specific to DCS. There was an epidemic of that effect around 2010's across different games. I think Unity games were notorious for this. And it goes like this. The gloss somehow gives an appearance of a lacquer coating with a thickness. Once you look at a curved surface arc tangentially that thickness no longer has the object behind it, is in full view and becomes what constitutes the object's contour. That contour then switches to a very high contrast color (white-ish, blue-ish, whatever) significantly detached from environment conditions.

I don't claim to be an expert on texturing, just a keen-eyed bastard ad 1. I know. It's a separate issue pretty much unsolvable right now. Simply inherent to how DCS renderer works. ad 2. Thanks for pointing this out. I wouldn't like to get burried in semantics here. I only go by "out of this world" vs "realistic". The Remastered cockpit is so fine! It just needs some touchups here and there.

I posted a set of multiple screenshots in the OP edit.

Please post a track, in whatever state.

Fixed in yesterday's update. Any airquakers up for confirming?

@FlappieWell, maybe not the radar controller but many other components across the cockpit. Including the control stick which is constantly in view. Unlike in other cases I think it's clear that this time you couldn't go wrong with a broad brush approach - no near 100% gloss should be present in F-5E ccockpit Especially knowing rendering caveats. High amount of gloss causes thick transparent laquer appearance.

I posted some 10 bug reports with the F-5 Remastered specifically and this is that last one on my bug to-do list. This, together with the embossed cockpit panel labels and unreadable caution lights are my biggest gripes with the Remastered cockpit. Those 2 I reported earlier.

Reported

Multiple cockpit components have 100% gloss material applied. This kind of material property has no place in a realistic cockpit, even on cockpit gauge glass, let alone on non-glass parts of the cockpit. Even Soviet oil paint doesn't give gloss anywhere near 100%. Examples: control stick emergency cockpit glass hammer cockpit indicator frames probably even the radar control palm rest adding additional items to the list: generic metalic chromium air spherical nozzles even the grey knobs have a metalic gloss to them the right hand adjustable flash light with coiled cable The use of such material properties additionally lead to graphical artifacts on object edges manifesting in white-ish lines that require heavy anti-aliasing. But the unrealistic look is a more serious issue here. Independent of hardware configuration, or in-dcs settings. EDIT 2025-02-20: Multiple examples uploaded, added ugly metalic components to the list as I see no point in starting a separate thread. https://1drv.ms/f/c/66cf2646234394fc/EtaGgsCLk8BNsDRTeFpxXlYBp4UqyIerOMj-QTnctB2Yfw?e=Luya4g An additional remark: To be confirmed (best at the radar controls and the control stick) - the affected surfaces reflect light without obeying occlusion as seen by unnatural pronounced gloss even in the shadows.

It's highly likely there has been a miscommunication between you and the pilots. Maybe they meant the stick doesn't move on them in-flight.

Please submit a bug report with a track. I don't have any FFB devices.

Some more from me starting on this page of the impressions thread https://forum.dcs.world/topic/365214-dcs-f-5e-remastered-first-impressions/page/4/ like those

I'm all for flying per RL procedures but the the reality is the in-cockpit indicator is barely useful. It almost always gives a configuration that is too nose-up. And the default trim settings at mission start are far worse. So if the indicator is your only problem, forget about it and enjoy the flying.