RuskyV

I would do that in a nano second if I could use all my early access modules I have payed a huge amount of money for....

The biggest FPS issues I’m seeing in VR is when there are any contrails or smoke, and when on our MP server it just kills my fps. The server mission we run has not changed since 2.5.5 when I was getting a perfectly acceptable frame rate. Our mission does have a number of planes flying around in the con layer and since the latest updates it has become an issue, we have also noticed that since the latest patches that server use has dropped quit a bit. This I think also tells of the issues being seen by a lot of people, some who might not even be forum users.

I guess this will also partly explain why you can currently select the HSD as SOI but can’t actually do anything with it.

This is probably a firmware related thing with Thrustmaster deciding to label their button inputs with numbers instead of letters. I agree for the sake of simplicity it would be handy to have the correct labeling for the right button action. having said that not everyone who purchases the warthog will use it just for flight sims or if they do they might not be familiar with the real names of the buttons and switches form the A10 or F16.

Seen the same issue with the CV1 over the PG map, not noticed the massive plane shadow though. Flying the same plane but with medium settings and seeing the same issue.

Hey thanks for the campaign Florence201, ill definitely be trying this one out sounds like a fun twist :)

Thanks for the info Ironhand, roughly what altitude would aim for to make most of your shots?

To elaborate assume that its a high aspect head on shot against a mig29 non maneuvering and lets say 20k feet just for the sake of it and in a BVR scenario. what maximum range am i expected to get from either missiles? Currently the encyclopedia in DCS says 55km for the AIM-120 (assuming this is the C-5 variant) and for the R77 which says 50km assuming this is the Rmax figure. I would like to know if there is any experience here that can tell me if this figure is close or way off when actually used. I appreciate there is a deeper level of complexity that could be talked about here but im looking for figures based on user experience, or what you would consider an Rmax shot based on the scenario above.

I’m looking for some quick and dirty numbers on missile ranges, specifically a comparison with the aim120c And the r77. I’m not interested in brochure range but the actual performance inside dcs, I understand there are variables to consider like altitude and speed of the launching aircraft. I was wondering if there is anyone who can give me a ballpark figures maybe at low med and high altitudes, or just a given altitude that a missile is commonly employed. Using the search functions in the forums gives me little information in comparisons compared to performances of the individual missiles that seem to be discussed more from a physics point of view within dcs. Can anyone fill in the blanks for me?:thumbup:

I like the idea that you could destroy a power grid this would make for some awesome scenarios.

And it's a double whamy when your peripheral vision is not only that great in real life but add in VR and the problem is compounded even more.

How did they even make it into this build if they were never ready....:doh:....

Do you have a FFB wheel plugged in?

There is also a no trim issue currently with the F14b, it appears to be linked with people who are using or have connected a FFB wheel. This could be something completely different in your case but it might be worth investigating.

Having the same issues here with a T300RS racing wheel, no FFB enabled and the plane is not trimming. I've noticed that the in game stick shows the trim movement but the trim gauge is not moving. Animation in the cockpit stick is moving but no actual trimming of the plane. Like others have said i cant disconnect my wheel as im using the pedals as rudders. Worked fine before the update...

Whatever it is they are doing has been working for as long as i've been a fan of DCS, it is quite puzzling how its managed to be sustainable but i guess there is no competition for them at the moment so there is no pressure to develop any faster than the speed they have always gone. Whatever works i guess...

There are now two half finished modules in EDs inventory that are less complete than the JF17... Must be a reason why they don't use their own ground Radar API?

The reason this wouldn't happen (i think) is probably due to the fact the RED side would not have access to classified RCS data in the real world? From a balance prospective it probably is intensional so not to have mission designers setting waypoints on the fringe of all threat circles allowing them to fly with higher accuracy past SAM or radar threats for any given aircraft? Form a measurement standpoint Would the RCS of any fighter (although slightly different) really matter to a radar unless it was stealth capable? An F16 or a Mig29 are very similar in size any difference would probably be negligible when you are using miles or Kilometers as your unit measurement. Unless you are using stealth technology then i could see your idea being useful in order to exploit its advantages. Is RCS even used in DCS? or is it just an arbitrary number given to certain plane types?

A very good idea +1

I find all the Russian planes alot bigger in VR compared to al the western aircraft, even after adjusting the IPD setting in EDs menu. I can only guess that this is accurate.

I understand first and foremost money needs to be made i do however think its a little off when all i see so far from the list is a quality of life update. If you intend to update the cockpit textures that's fine (frankly they need doing), if however this is a new variant of the black shark then why don't you market it as such and have two module variants? like the OP has said there is a lot of people that have paid a few times over for this particular module and im worried this could be a new trend being set as an alternate way of making more money, concerns especially with the A10c updates coming in the future. I'm a supporter of ED and have been for a number of years, i've also seen some really bad decisions that have caused ripples through the community, I really hope that this is not going to be the start of a future trend being introduced to us here because this would be a rather unsavory way of turning over money in the future.. For me personally i will happily take the free texture update but as for the "upgrade" im going to hold onto my cash and let others tell me first if the value of this new update/upgrade is worth the extra features! One thing that i have learned over the years of being a ED fan is to be far more cautious about where i lay down my hard earned cash especially around early access modules and beta's.

sucks to be in the EU, we don't have access to that link as all i get is a GDPR warning.

So you are actually slower with air to air loadouts than you are carrying bombs...hmmm lol

I have just fly the Hornet now, the rest just gets a free flight if lucky..

The thing missing in all civil flight sims (and one that DCS does really well) is having missions that give you a reason to fly in the first place. I love the idea of flying out to a location to drop off or pick up people in cessna or some sort of rescue mission or even fire fighting, you could be flying a police helicopter intercepting criminals or aiding DEA agents in a drugs bust somewhere. DCS has an excellent flight model system and to not use this for other forms of precision flying is bit of a waste. True the ATC is close to abysmal compared to the competition but given that "one day" it will improve then i it could eventually really lend itself to civil flying. I love DCS for its combat aircraft but im not going say its only good for just combat, i think it would be a very worthwhile investment to encourage people over from the civil flying and into DCS, this would benefit all fans of flight and with a larger player base how would this not be beneficial to all? That being said DCS definitely needs improvement to its weather system and particularly ATC in order for the civil flyers out there to have a good enough reason fly less with "other simulators"and take part in DCS.