Jump to content

PiedDroit

Members
  • Posts

    1610
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by PiedDroit

  1. I do not agree with that "you can't prevent fish-eye effect" idea. I have been flying Falcon BMS for long time and in that sim this effect does not exist. I don't know maybe some people like it but for me it feels bad.

    It's a different rendering engine, it has the same issue, but maybe the lower FoV used in that sim would make you think it is different, or the position of the viewpoint would trick you into thinking you have a higher FoV than what you actually get.

     

    You can try moving the view back a little (RCtrl+RShift+KP/) to get a better view on the cockpit, without getting too much distortion.

     

    Anyway, this is no place to make comparisons, you should put your DCS screenshots and your request in the wishlist forum.

     

    P.S.:

    An interesting article on the subject, where the author suggest to add barrel distortion to mitigate the high FoV distortion in video games:

    http://www.decarpentier.nl/lens-distortion

  2. I'm not very good with this technology, but I understand the reason behind the distortion so I'll try to explain it.

     

    This is due to the way the graphic engine creates the 3D view.

    What is does is that it consideres a flat plane (a slice) taken in the 3D world, all from a single point in the 3D world (the view point).

    What you see on your screen is how that slice is seen from the view point.

     

    The FoV angle corresponds the angle at the view point to the edges of the slice being rendered.

     

    The problem is that this slice is flat, so there is distortion as soon as you move away from the center (imagine you're close to a mural painting, what you see in front of you looks good, but the far edges of the painting are distorted).

     

    I guess the 3D engine doesn't allow rendering a non-flat slice, ideally it should consider a spherical slice to map on the screen to eliminate these effects.

     

    ps: I found this picture that explain that 3D rendering is done by projecting the objects on a flat plane.

    When the FoV is small, there is no issue but if you make the projection plane very wide by increasing the FoV then try to squeeze it on your screen, you get funny effects on the sides.

    The projection plane should be spherical to eliminate these issues, but then there will be some processing needed to adapt the spherical plane to the flat screen (similar to what transformations are done for VR rendering), this would still generate some graphic anomalies but that would still be much better on the sides.

     

    3q4Gg.png

    https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/136757/how-do-modern-game-engines-achieve-real-time-rendering-vs-blenders-slow-rende/136776

    (not directly related question but it explains some stuff)

     

    In this article the guy also explains that modern hardware is designed around this technique, which explains that trying to do something different might not be possible or cost extra processing power.

     

    p.p.s.:

    The other technique to avoid this is to render from more that one viewpoint, by fragmenting the view into multiple viewports side to side (in DCS you can do it with 3 viewports with the 3 cameras monitor setting). The problem is that it increases the work on the graphic engine to render 3 viewports instead of one, with makes FPS drop significantly.

  3. You can filter by forum ID, this would need to be update everytime a new forums pops up though:

     

    ED Forums new posts

     

    I remember finding this here:

    You can make a bookmark for the New Posts link that excludes every forum that you don't want to see. It's kind of a pain to set up, but after that it is easy to maintain.

     

    Mine looks like this, for example:

     

    http://forums.eagle.ru/search.php?do=getnew&exclude=20,24,25,26,27,28,30,31,33,35,37,39,42,43,44,45,49,50,52,54,61,62,64,73,74,79,81,84,85,98,99,100,109,112,152,172,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,144,145,172,199,257,275,295

    It will require you to click on every single forum and sub-forum and make a list of all the forum id's (the number after the "f=" in the URL).

  4. I absolutely agree.

     

    In the meantime, while the reply was in broken English (which I won't hold against ANYBODY), I do believe DCS/ED has already resolved my issue for me.

     

    Thanks to everyone who replied.

     

    Did you try this:

    The easiest way is to go to the Module Manager, select the Installed tab and clear the checkbox.

    It's the same question, dunno if the solution is still valid.

  5. The aerobatic performance of this aircraft can't be modelled accurately, surely?

     

    I've just downloaded the latest version of DCS 1.5, and have attempted to familiarise myself with the SU-25T, I have never flown fast jets, but it's like flying a lead-brick.

     

    With the pylons completely empty, it has no maneuvering ability, if I attempt a medium level turn at 30 degrees of bank, with more than a fraction of back-pressure on the stick, and combined rudder pressure, the stall warning goes off, and I get either a wing-drop on the inside-turning wing or a completely ridiculous flip from the outside-turning wing which inverts me towards the ground. Even under full engine power.

     

    I've attempted this at airspeeds between 400-670knts. If you attempt to commence a turn at 60 degrees of bank -- forget it.

     

    Turning performance doesn't appear to be worse with a full weapon deployment, however it does struggle to reach 500knts at straight and level. Obviously flaps and spoilers retracted.

     

    In my opinion, for a war-fighter aircraft, with two massively powerful turbojets, it doesn't fly correctly.

    You should post a short track of your turn, SU-25T is quite nimble when empty.

    Empty, you should easily reach 400 knots, which is 730 in the HUD (airspeed displayed is in km/h, not knots).

    If you struggle to reach 500 (I assume km/h), I'd check the throttle axis.

    Even loaded it goes to 500 without too much a struggle (except with extreme load maybe, however it is much harder to maneuver once loaded).

    By any chance are you using an A/B detent? That could be the issue.

    You can display the controls (RCtl+Enter if I'm not mistaken), to see if throttle goes to the max.

  6. The room scale features on the Vive also increases W/G-A and reduces SPR significantly once they try it a few times.....

     

    (Wife/Girlfriend Approval and Spousal Purchasing Resistance)

     

    ;)

    Hehe in my case I'll need to upgrade both systems, mine and hers - double the price :D

     

    How is the Rift with glasses? Im nearsighted, can I just use it without my glasses. The physical screen is pretty close to my face but then there are also some kind lenses in it?

    Is it possible to use it with my glasses off??

    The image is collimated to a higher distance which means you’ll need some kind of correction. Glasses or lenses

  7. :eek:...so I guess with the time it will get worse :cry:

    It's not *that* bad - I might have exaggerated a bit :music_whistling:

    Annoying enough to make we write a code snippet for it. Which in retrospect, is not an event that has a huge threshold to trigger - I'm a bit "trigger happy" on that.

     

    I retested it, the jitter, spans on something like 0.4% of the range (i.e. it would oscillate between x and x+250 at worse, on the -32767,32767 range), only at certain positions.

    Still distracting for me as this is sufficent to make the zoom flicker.

     

    p.s.: the slider is the only axis with the potentiometer, throttle levers should not suffer this kind of issues as they use HAL sensors.

  8. According to the wikipedia definition, yes, they are kind of "Supercruise"... Oups ? Is that mean that this kind of "marketing concept" has nothing to do with "aircraft generation" ? :music_whistling: However, no doubt that engines efficiency increased since the F-5 or Mig-21, so yes, aircraft like Rafale, F-22 or other 4-5th generation, are probably more easily "Supercruise"... justifying the new super concept "Supercruise"

    I don't think they can sustain it, if so, no supercruise.

     

    The definition has 3 aspect, which are quite subjective :

    1- sustained (I'd assume level flight for more than just several minutes)

    2- useful load (just 2 heaters can be deemed as useful load depending on the mission)

    3- efficiency (how much is efficient ? an A/B that is light on fuel consumption can still be considered as efficient I guess)

  9. Aware, but I'd prefer a physical stop.

    Still useful for others ;)

     

    For a physical stop I guess one could also build a customized plastic disk that is smaller than the default one.

    Of better/easier, wrap some foam around the "neck" of the gimbal part so it hits the "collar" sooner (mmm, I might do that actually, that will act as a damper).

     

    I personaly prefer not hitting the physical stop at all as I don't want to accidentaly break the gimbal part due to repeated shocks (using 15 cm extension).

  10. I found 4" was too long for my taste and cut it down to 3" (7.5cm). IMO the gimbal has way too much angular movement for a much longer stick to feel right, the throw ends up getting kind of ridiculous.

    I just answered a similar (and old) post in another thread as I thought the info is useful:

    You can limit the stick input necessary to get full deflection by reducing the saturation X value in DCS axis tuning.

    This is also doable with TARGET software.

    No need to cut your extension, you can have a long extension and a short throw at the same time alright.

  11. I'm using a 3" (about 7.5cm) extension, I originally made it 4" but I cut it down and re-threaded it at 3" and I think it's perfect. IMO when the extension gets to be too long you actually have more stick deflection than is realistic, even though the stick itself is shorter than a real life counterpart, because of the large range of motion the ball socket provides. But most will agree longer is better if you really like helos.

     

    You can simply reduce the saturation X value in the axis tuning in DCS instead of cutting your extension ;)

    Also doable with TARGET software.

  12. [...] , damn!!, I need this beauty to last me 5 years at least!!:P

    Don't worry, now you know the weakness you'll make sure to avoid breaking it ;)

    Mine is 4 yrs and still in super good shape despite multiple disassemblings.

    Not many users are breaking their stick, even those who tinker a lot with it (well, based on how many people talk about the WH on the forums).

     

    The crack always propagates in the same location,[...] the twist mechanism I'm working on for Warthog, but am focusing on my left hand grips first.

     

    Good stuff !

    I'll be interested to see your replacement parts.

  13. i have a 2cm movement also on those axes after 3-4 years of use as many others

    I cant check the video right now but this is not normal (2 cm play) . There can be 2 possibilites, one is that there is something broken.

    Other is that the rubber gasket moved out of place and prevents the pressure plate to work on its full range.

    On my WH I glued the gasket to the pressure plate because it became lose and wouldnt stay in place.

    This rubber gasket is located between the cup (gimbal part if you wil) and the pressure plate.

  14. If you don't put strength it should be alright ;)

    The piece that holds the magnet has a rectangular shape and insert into that small ball with a rectangular hole on top.This insertion takes the twisting torque from what I understand. I need to double check on that it's been a while I went this far.

    I didnt see the broken piece but I would assume it is the magnet support that breaks.

  15. I wondered when first saw a warthog dissasembly video what piece exactly prevents the stick to "yaw" like that???...in fact, Im really worried about this everytime I screw the stick to the conection base and make the needed force to tighten it...also, I dont understand when assembling again the stick, how do you know that you are mounting the upper (bell like) gimball piece in the correct position??? I mean that the connection is pointing pararel to the "y" vertical axis...

     

    Thanks and sorry for the little off topic...

    if you hold the stick firmly (ie prevent twist) while tightening the nut it should be alright, the gimbal will not turn further than allowed by the stick-to-gimbal connection that has a special shape.

    Also very tight fit is not necessary, this is not a motorcycle engine.

    As soon as you hit the tightening point, add a little and no more.

    If the stick lossens a bit while flying then no big deal, just lightly tighten it again.

     

    Many people seem to believe it can take abuse but this is not true, be gentle! It is qualified as robust because it will keep it's tightness for years and not wear easily. Of course if you handle it like if it was made of steel you will damage it.

    In that sense the reviews are misleading, people who don't overtighten just don't mention it because it might feel normal to them.

    P. S. : if worried about tightness, maybe add a tiny amount of teflon tape so vibrations don't loosen the assembly- never tried it but worth a shot?

     

    Mine has 4 years, I disassembled it completely once, partially numerous times, tried two types of extensions and disassembled each at least 4 times, modded it for reduced resistance, it can take it.

    The tightening issue is also the reason why I didn't like the extension in the shape of simple threaded tube and prefered the one with a nut and shaped connectors, that retained the initial interlocking design of the stick-to-gimbal connector.

     

    On the subject of the broken part, it is very unfortunate that users are not warned enough about this issue, that part is fragile and any WH user should be aware of it... I hope the OP will get a replacement part soon (3D print maybe ?).

  16. I tried 3 monitors, but the extra width isn't worth it IMO, the sides gets badly distorted (with 1 camera) or misaligned (3 cameras, that will also eat FPS).

    Bezels are very distracting too, I was never able to ignore them. Depends on people I guess.

    I went with ultrawide monitor and ditched the 3 monitors, the little extra width is all that's needed and also other games benefit from it.

  17. I had the same, issue, created a support ticket and got it removed from the list of my modules within 40 minutes.

    It is still listed in the list of modules on the DCS shop, but doesn't show up anymore in the game.

×
×
  • Create New...