RuskyV

Is this with a clean configuration?

I Used this video as a guide to getting my sim pedals working

I’m going to take punt and ask if you have the barometric altitude set correctly, there is a switch on the standby altitude meter that should be switched to ELEC. this may not be the solution and in part it’s a question as well. I ask this as i sometimes see this not being set correctly in some videos posted, so wonder if this is actually "a thing". unfortunately I don’t have a solid answer

Thanks @Frederf

So narrowing azimuth doesn’t give a faster scan rate when using DBS? If true when would you use a narrower scan pattern using the GM modes? Possibly for GMT or SEA modes where you are tracking a moving target?

here is something else I noticed while using DBS modes https://youtu.be/Aq5HXTGUHGI time stamp 6:28 and you can also see the radar slew is different, in the video it allow you to move the cursor while the image display is constantly updated in the background. The DCS version when moved has to build a whole new image under cursor before displaying the new image location, this causes the screen to go black every time it’s moved.

How do you get openXR working for DCS using an oculus headset? I use the rift s and thought this was only for WMR users. I know it works fine for me in MSF2020, really would love this feature to work for DCS too.

ED need to add filtering or dampening for micro head movements, I’ve mentioned this before with HMD issues in other threads but have failed to see any official response. It’s one of those many options mentioned time again that could be part of a QOL up date to the core game. Core QOL updates are really needed now…

Did you do a cold start, or hot start? if a cold start did you do the HMD alignment?

Did ED ever look into this as a QOL update? seems like this could unlock some performance?

I'm a user of the FSSB and something that has helped me is reducing the pitch curvature to 78, the remaining 22 percent seems to have no input into the flight model, this was observed by conventional joystick users when pulling the stick all the way back and finding that last percentage was having no impact on pitch at all. (There is a thread somewhere that discusses this). interesting that the last 22 percent has no impact on commanded pitch rate, but I guess that's not really the topic of this thread... anyhow give it a shot and see if it helps

From what I have seen the the radar will only update a contact faster if within range of a standard sized fighter, providing more updates within the normal detection ranges. I’ve not seen it effecting detection range. It’s of little practical use to spotlight when you can gain the same/better info entering SAM mode with regards to target motion. Strange the the radar will pick out an il76 at 50+ nm with a standard 4 bar scan at 120 azimuth, giving sufficient returns to be able to STT. It seems like an arbitrary number is given for fighter size and when it is detected, depending on the module being used of course. For the viper it seems to always be just under 40nm.

That’s really interesting, it does highlight how the current beta version differs quite a bit in role compared to those numbers. Pretty sure we don’t currently get a 40% reduction in role for CAT3 or landing gains. .

I think this is a bug as I’m pretty sure PGMs don’t need the 5mil consent cue to drop. I could be wrong..

It can sometimes be a bit tricky in VR as DCS does not apply any filtering for very small micro movements of the head, which doesn’t help at all Not sure if the OP is using VR or not so it could be a different issue altogether.

Does setting the axis as a slider not work in the axis options? Or will it re centre because the axis you use has a spring? I think in the winwing software you can change some axis to buttons inputs, if you can it would just be a case of mapping a button in DCS.

Well I guess this blows my flat earth theory clean out the water, I was sort of hopeful that the viper was going to continue flying straight and level…..back to the drawing board I guess

I trim and it helps me land, those are good enough circumstances for me to want to do it. If it helps others too then why not…

Glad someone finally captured this happening, it’s almost like the radar forgets the default elevation for the given bar scan.

Makes perfect sense to me, thanks for explaining

It’s not about the Hornet, your in the F16 forum

So by scanning an area with the radar set to a smaller scan volume you could in theory pick up a target further out?

Does it still pitch up after you trim it out? If it does check and see the stick your using isn’t commanding the pitch, it could be a hardware issue, a way to check is to look in the axis bindings to see if there is any deflection. If there is try wiggling the stick to see if it goes away. Might be a bad pot or HAL sensor.

Just for some feedback, I’m using an R3 from real simulation and I can confirm that when setting to 78 in axis tuning makes quite a difference in pitch control ability more in line with how it was a few patches ago. The benefit is that it doesn’t hinder pitch performance so if you needed to pull hard you still have the response needed so it’s not sluggish at all and feels more linear. Roll interestingly does seem to slow roll rate when fully deflected, not a lot but enough to be noticeable which impacts performance. Using 78 seems to be clipping the top end of the axis so It might be that a different number is used for roll. I didn’t bother testing higher numbers but some using standard sticks might find this to be useful. With pitch command being spread over usable stick deflection an not having the last 22% do anything, 78% is now being used by 100% of the stick. Great find.

Curious, is there any performance increase by using these trees?