sirrah

I don't think that would work well with the nice new pilot body. But as @Jackjack171 said, it's no biggie. Only for quick training missions (where you start airborne), it would be handy to start at the desired seat height.

Is there some way to change the default seat height in our Viper? I find myself lowering the seat a bit, everytime I step in the cockpit. The default seat height is so high, that I can completely see the entire IFF antennas, and as far as I can recall form my time at the RNLAF (as a mechanic, not pilot unfortunately ), that normally wasn't the case.

If you found a bug, better post it in this sub forum: https://forum.dcs.world/forum/333-bugs-and-problems/ as in this "mission" section, it'll probably not be seen by ED. Additionally, it might be wise to add the map where this instant action mission is on and the exact mission name.

Partial answer to my own OP (just in case anyone else is reading this) I've contacted Invictus (Chris) directly from his website on WhatsApp and he responded really quickly (same evening) and gave me clear answers. He told me he's also working on a new PCB for his force transducer mod, which will replace the oem TM Cougar PCB (which I personally am not fond of) and also allows use of the Warthog grip additional CMS depress function. Anyways, my feeling is very good about this and as soon as Chris has managed to get the new PCB to work, I'm going to place my order

Hi @BIGNEWY or @NineLine Sorry, but tagging this report as "missing track file", is just nonsense... This happens everywhere and all the time as long as you are sitting in a Viper and the sun is shining. I can post a trackfile, sure, but it's just as easy for your team to just start any instant action free flight mission. Obviously, this can only be reproduced if tested in VR. The issue won't be visible in 2D. The "can't reproduce part", ok. Strange, but ok (others have been able to reproduce, as can be seen in the various replies above) Again, my bug report is about the (big) difference in canopy sun reflection, seen with the left eye and the right eye. Although a slight difference would indeed be seen in real life, the difference in DCS is just wrong and unrealistic (and makes it feel a bit like looking cross-eyed). Perhaps this is something you only start seeing after you focus on it. But once you see it, it can't be unseen and is quite annoying on the eyes.

Thanks for the mission @DonLuicia, I enjoyed it. Good for beginners, yet still interesting and immersive enough for veterans. Few points of (constructive) feedback if you don't mind: Even though I hardly (I even think not at all) used my afterburner during the entire mission, my silly AI wingman did the infamous "two bingo fuel"-"two ejecting". Perhaps you might want to consider forcing him to not use AB, or just give him ext tanks. Maybe add some more air traffic at Incirlik AB, during take-off and landing, to make it a bit more alive. Just an idea: You could also add a radio F10 "hard difficulty" option and have it spawn some MANPADS near the target area (although I'm thinking now, most probably the player would fly too high for them to launch) Anyway, thanks for your work!

No big deal obviously, but I thought I'd report anyway (easy fix also)

This was also what I had in mind (would also work for SAM with optical tracking systems) Perhaps the easiest solution though, would be to (briefly) make your wingman immortal and just let the missile hit him (you won't be able to see that while flying anyways)

I'm not sure what exactly you refer to as being unrealistic (for instance; in DCS, the Hornet's landing gear can withstand much higher impacts than for instance the Viper's landing gear. As is correct). If you only refer to DCS players landing non carrier capable aircraft on aircraft carriers: Sure, some planes were not designed to land on carriers, but that doesn't mean they can't land on or take-off from them. If you value your life and the aircraft, it's just not a very wise thing to try and do in real life (hence the reason that for most of these airframes, it was never tried in real life). But that doesn't mean it's impossible. I understand where you're wish is coming from. I too prefer realism over arcade and suppose that's what most DCS players seek. But there will always be folks who try and search the boundaries of what's possible in DCS; the stuff that would absolutely get you jailed in real life, but that's completely fine, because this is a computer game/sim, where everybody can do what he/she likes.

In my everlasting* search for an "affordable" force sensor stick , I came across this website: https://invictuscockpits.com/ And in particular, his Force Transducer mod for the TM Cougar: https://invictuscockpits.com/products/f-16-viper-force-sensor-modification Does anyone here have any experience with this seller, his products and his communication? I must say, his website looks very clear, appealing and promising. * I'd shelved the DCS Viper module a few years, while waiting for the pilot body feature. All that time, I planned to eventually add a force sensor stick to my setup. Now that the pilot body has been implemented, I want to go for it (I don't want my muscle memory to get used to my current and flawed Cougar sidestick). I've seen the Realsimulator FSSB (way too expensive for me to justify), the Winwing Orion 2 MFSSB (still too much to explain to my wife ), the Vipergear VFS-WE (send inquiries but never received an answer), the one Rel4y is working on (no offense, but losing a bit of faith in responsiveness there). Not sure, but it looks like Invictus continued where Vipergear stopped and the force sensor mod price seems quite reasonable.

Ah ok sorry I did do a forum search, but that function isn't.. well.. great

short track file added, as well as miz file to reproduce L118 art slingload test.miz M118 artillery slingload bug.trk

Sorry if reported or discussed before (did a forum search, but couldn't find this) I notice in VR, that the "dynamic" canopy reflections from the sun, are quite different in the left and right eye (VR lens). Although I do understand that the images of the left and right lens are not identical (hence the depth perception in VR), this difference in reflection seems off. This is most noticeable when you look at the reflection, place the sim in pause, close your left eye, then open your left eye and close your right eye. I find the effect slightly "disruptive/inconvenient" (not sure if that's the correct English word for it) and I was wondering if I'm the only one experiencing/noticing this. It's a bit similar to the issue we had when the new cloud system was just released and in VR people saw differences in the left and right eye. Just to emphasize, I'm talking about these reflections: (the ones you see appear on the inside of the canopy when you roll the aircraft with the sun in your back) null (so I'm not talking about the "static" cockpit instruments reflection)

Now that we apparently lowered this wish list forum, in having to bump wishes with pictures (yes, I'm looking at you, annoying "F/A18E/F Super Hornet" thread...): (please ED; in between all of these constantly bumped threads, also notice the simple, yet major QOL improvement wishes like this one)

You're right, that would make life a lot easier indeed

Hmm that's curious And you did add the invisible landing pad? (As well as the other essential units in order to rearm/refuel) Perhaps you could share your miz file here, so we can have a look

Sorry if I'm misunderstanding the problem you seem to be having, but I just added the sandbag helipad (M92 Sandbag 11) in one of my missions and the rearm and refuel functionality works like a charm here. I did place it over the invisible helipad (just like @Rudel_chw suggested), my helo spawns on top of it and I can still rearm/refuel. (I actually combined a few of the sandbag helipads, as one isn't big enough for the Apache). (Sorry for the poor pic quality, I quickly took a picture of my screen)

Fwiw, I'd like to add my 2 cents to this thread: As someone who stopped using mods long time ago (for several reasons), I'm so incredibly thrilled and thankful to see this mod added to DCS core. Today I was able to take a look at what was added and imho it is incredible! We (I) have been waiting for some of these object for sooo long. Especially all the barriers (HESCO and sandbags), it is truly fantastic to be able to use them now! I can't remember the last time (if ever) that we received so many new truly useable new ME assets. The SA brought some, but most of them (nice as they are) were quite specific and not really usable to dress-up FARP's and airbases. This last update is platinum for me (and not because of the F4, nice as it may be too)

So far for the polite and civilized discussion option.. Your sarcasm is sickeningly toxic and gives this forum a bad reputation... Do you know Reddit? That platform will suit your way of communicating better I think. You're saying this like it's mathematics.. It isn't. What you find more important than anything else, is your opinion, not everyone's (I know it'll be difficult, but give it a go and try to understand that) Yes, I'm going to ignore you're childish sarcasm from now on and fully agree with this statement Again, check our Reddit, it's perfect for you. Also, this is a forum (with mainly decent people). If you don't want people to respond to your posts, then stop with the provocative and sarcastic posts, or just stop posting entirely... Sirrah out. (@ forum moderators; If you want to remove/delete this post of mine, please also remove all my other posts in this thread (or even better, just remove the entire thread)

Yes, you already mentioned in your OP that you prefer other features. Your (unnecessary) sarcasm is quite clear in every post you make here. Of course you can say whatever you want here (within certain forum rules that is). I apologize if my reaction gave you a different impression. I must admit I got very annoyed by your OP (and in fact, the sarcasm in all your posts). I guess I should have counted to 10 before posting. For me (also a paying customer) a DCS module without a pilot body is just not enjoyable at all and I had to wait years for the Viper to get this feature (even though it was suggested before EA release that it would come soon). Now, years later, I can finally start enjoying the Viper and then I read your OP... So, maybe now you can imagine a bit why I reacted the way I did.

A large porion of the DCS player base (me included) have been waiting for this feature for a very long time. You're sarcastically complaining that you'd rather seen other features. Many of us could have done the same for many of the stuff already implemented years ago, but we didn't. You can always decide to turn the pilot body off and go back to an unrealistic "empty cockpit" experience if you prefer that. Fwiw: I've spend over a decade working on F-16's for the RNLAF and I can assure you, if you sit in the cockpit (especially with the canopy closed), the thing is tight. I'm not a very big guy, but during system tests/inspections even I had to twist and shift my body extensively to be able to see/reach some of the side panel switches. Some switches have a special shape, so that haptic feedback allows you to blindly operate them, you could bind those to your HOTAS to not have to hide the pilot body. But let's agree, the "obscured" side panels are hardly used during flight. I rather switch off the pilot body a few seconds during startup, then fly my entire sortie as if I'm steering a drone aircraft.

Now that the Viper finally received a pilot body (yay! ), I'm ready to start really learning it (I've been waiting for this moment since the Viper was released in EA). So, can any of the experienced Viper drivers here give me advise on which interactive training missions are good and which one I should steer clear of at the moment (due to bugs or being outdated perhaps)? I remember for instance that when I tried the startup mission in the first week after EA release, the sec check part didn't work properly at all. Or are there maybe any must have user made training missions out there? I of course also have Chucks brilliant manual, but for me personally (in VR), nothing can beat a good interactive training mission.

From performance point of view, the low res models could form a solution to those with less budget (lower spec pc's). So, why not just keep both and let the mission designers decide whether to replace the old models with newer ones.

Not sure yet what I'm going to do with it*, but as I'm a sucker for helo modules, I will purchase this one! *please don't shoot me for asking, but does the Kiowa have any unique selling points when it comes to its capabilities? I mean I'm guessing it won't be as nimble as the Gazelle, won't have as much firepower as the Apache or Hind, and won't have the Hip's lifting abilities. So, will it be a bit of a combination of the aforementioned, or does the Kiowa excel on a certain front? Anyways, it looks awesome (that alone is reason enough for a purchase ) and only two weeks(tm) away!

You don't have to I was merely searching for some confirmation on what I think I've seen/heard somewhere (perhaps it was said in one of the various Heatblur YT videos). The Tomcat was a day one purchase for me (pre-purchase actually), but I've never been fond of the required Jester micromanagement. So, hoping to see some of the new F4 AI also coming to the Tomcat at some point