KLR Rico

Originally, 19 cm, and the v2 seat is at 25 cm. It's *still* not right, but even on v2 I didn't make it easy to change. :P It will indeed invert the signal. It's easy enough to take care of in software, but I had the fortune to have inverting buffers on hand, so I didn't need to change anything. Yeah, I think you'd be fine without them, it's just something that came up after a few months of use and is probably particular to my setup. I don't think you'll have any problems. When you're setting up the final stages of hardware it's helpful to have a lab type power supply with variable voltage and current limiting, so you can set things up without the rig tearing itself apart if things go haywire.

You don't. You just hope all the built in redundancy makes it so you're never in a situation where you would.

Confirming what we already knew. ;) Way to go, ED!

"once established in the climb" I usually retract them at 180kts. They're definately doing something because you can watch the TVV drop as they come up.

Ditto. I didn't have any problem with the monitor. In VR it's all over the place, and often for no apparent reason at all. I can have 800 objects in view and 45 FPS, or 2000+ objects and a solid 90FPS. Low or high settings don't make a difference. No matter what settings I use, GPU is always around 60%, and per-core CPU usage is also never higher than 60%. Something is screwed up. Fortunately ATW makes it mostly playable, but the bluring and ghosting that happens when the frame plummets is just :puke:

:thumbup: I think that will prove to be useful. I have -2/+6 to get full scale deflection with the strength slider at mid point. With the strength slider at the most sensitive setting it still requires >3g to get full scale deflection, which is just barely enough for the helicopters. Two profiles should work pretty well though. The isn't any kind of chassis ground path between the motors, and the feedback pots weren't grounded to the wiper motors, so I'm not too sure what was going on there. Autopsies on the failed controllers seemed to show that the bootstrap diodes for the high side mosfet drivers were failing, and then that would fry the mosfets, but I couldn't work out exactly what was going on, but figured isolating the different power supplies would be a start. The optoisolators (aka photocouplers, and some other similar names) are IC packages that contain a LED and a phototransistor. It allows you to send information while keeping the circuits electrically separated. I had some challenges implementing them though. Early on, I changed the arduino's PWM frequency from the default 500Hz to ~30KHz to move the (very loud) motor hum into the ultrasonic range. I thought I spec'd some optoisolators that had enough bandwidth to work at that frequency, but I couldn't it to work well at all; low pulse widths would barely get through. Fortunately using a buffer it cleaned it up enough that I didn't have to do anything else.

^ This is good. While reading some of the stories from the great aces, I see that getting in close was often a key element.

For me, using the mouse with the pilot's body on breaks immersion. It really trips me up when I reach over but the avatar doesn't. I prefer being a ghost and flying in the empty cockpit.

I think there's a large segment of us that are running the latest intels clocked > 4.5ghz, >8gb ram, and 9 series GPU's, and we still can't get the frame rates we want even with settings on low. Something is jacked up, but I guess we'll have to wait until 2.5 and deal with it once it's settled down a bit.

I don't have any videos, but I guess it's pretty much the same as Bergison's. If it's not too late, try to incorporate some way to adjust the pivot points on the panels, especially the bottom ones. There is a big difference from just a small adjustment in how wide or narrow they are in terms of effectiveness and comfort. Another thing I want to add is a force strength potentiometer on the side of the chair. You can adjust the strength on the fly with a software slider, but doing it with a knob on the chair would be better, I think. Oh, and BTW, make sure you use a nice big mushroom style kill switch within easy reach. The first time you loose a rotor blade in the shark you'll be glad you did. :lol: I had some trouble with burning up the motor controllers, which I think it was caused by ground loop issues. The seat power supply, speed controls, arduino, and computer were all tied together by ground. I added optoisolators to separate the arduino from the motor controllers and haven't had a problem since. I'm thinking about building a 3rd version now, but instead of panels, I'll use a set of parallel rollers and nylon fabric (like a camp chair) suspended between them. The rollers would tighten or loosen the fabric seat so you'd sink or lift in it. I'm going to be building a mock up one pretty soon. As far as x-sim, also look at http://www.xsimulator.net/, apparently it's some kind of derivative of x-sim. I didn't see it until the other day and it looks much simpler and cleaner than x-sim. The main problem with x-sim is that it's got a billion features, but they've just been tacked on and now the software is super convoluted. I feel like I got it working by accident. I'm going to check xsimulator out for v3, but I need to learn how it does the serial output so I can rewrite my arduino code.

If the turn is steady state then you bring the gyro sight over the target for a couple seconds then fire. Evasive, not so much, because you never have the steady state you need. In that case all you can really do is wait it out for a better shot, or try to lead and take your chances with a potshot. You can learn to lead the gyro sight and take shots without using the stabilized method, but if you want it to work as it's supposed to, you need to be steady. And yes, the modern ccip sights are much better because you can hit your target without the sight ever really settling in on it. It's easy enough aim in front of a target and wait for them to pass under your sight.

Looking really good! I made a G-seat too, and it's incredibly immersive. Everyone needs one!

If we're thinking the same thing, then yes. Modern planes will show you where the bullets will hit if you pull the trigger now. Gyros will show you where the bullets will hit if you had fired some number of seconds prior. To use the gyro you have to keep your target in the sight for a couple seconds before pulling the trigger.

Target spotting is harder than with a monitor with equivalent resolution because the FOV is much larger, it's like you're always zoomed out. I think FlyInside's magnifier and binocular functions are great. The binocular zoom makes me a little disoriented, but since I only use it to glance at the odd instrument or gauge, it's no problem at all for me. Either way, we're definately going to need some sort of zoom. There are a lot of switches you can't really get your face close enough to read, the MiG-21 is full of them. Mars, sorry to hear it hasn't been working out for you, that's pretty frustrating.

That is indeed the current one, so your updater is good. You might try a repair (\bin\DCS_updater.exe). If that doesn't work, then I'd probably clean reinstall next. Before you do, make a copy of your DCS folder under users, and if your clean installation works you can reuse the control profiles.

I also found the campaign to be confusing when I first started. They just kind of dump you into it without explanation or guidance. The bridge is the target. If you're ever in doubt, the target is always the waypoint after the IP. The F10 radio menu has some options for SEAD to take out air defenses, CAP to give you top cover, or CAS to help with the ground targets. JTAC will help you find your own ground targets, but it's not necessarily going to be related to the mission objective. There's a message that pops up when your mission is complete, but you can use the apostrophe key to see if you're done. If you are, it will have "Result: 100", or something along those lines. After which point, landing or doing anything else like destroying more targets is optional. After you've flown a few missions you'll get used to the workflow, the way the enemies are positioned and identifying the forward edge of the battle area (FEBA). Generally speaking, you'll want to stay on the friendly side of FEBA while you're figuring out what to do next.

I've been snatching them up as they've been released, so I have them all (for now). I can't really narrow it down much closer than 3 groups. Inside the groups, there's no particular order. Fly every day: If DCS is opened for more than 10 minutes, you can pretty much guarantee that I'll fly each of these at least once. - A-10C -- I love the depth to this one. All the systems, procedures, handling, etc. With enough practice it's a straight up killing machine, and deploying it effectively is rewarding. - Huey -- Awesome flight model, and it's another challenging/rewarding to fly type of aircraft. The only thing I don't like is that sometimes it feels incomplete. For example, you can fly around with the EGT and torque pinned all day without consequence. - P-51/TF-51 -- I just love flying around, buzzing villages, doing pattern work, etc. It has a great flight model and it feels like you're flying a real plane in real air, none of that on-rails nonsense. Binge aircraft I don't necessarily fly these every day, but when I get the bug, I'll fly one of them for a week straight. - Ka-50 -- Another in-depth killing machine. It's fun to peak out over a hilltop, snipe targets, and dodge TOW missiles. I'll spend a week doing a campaign with it, but then not touch it for a month. - M-2000C -- This one is still in development, so sometimes a bug will get in the way and I'll give up, but I really like what I've seen so far. It's an amazing close in knife-fighter, turns on a dime. - MiG-21 -- I forget how to fly this plane so quickly that it's hard to stay proficient. When I do get back into it's a lot of fun, a very in-depth model. Fly occasionally I don't dislike any of these, but I don't often get captivated by them. I'll just fly random missions here and there, or mess around on a free flight server. - MiG-15 and F-86 -- I'd say the same thing for both. A lot of fun to just fly around, or to do a bunch of dogfight missions. I do prefer the MiG-15 a little bit more though, that cannon is just brutal. - Fw-190 and Bf 109 -- I also think of these similarly. For combat I fly them both along with the P-51 about evenly. I just use the P-51 more for free flight. - F-15/Su-25T/Su-27 -- They're both fun and I'll do occasional missions, but I never really get into them a whole lot. - L-39 -- I fly it every now and again, but haven't learned it from top to bottom. It seems well modeled and it has the potential to uproot the TF-51 as my freeflight plane of choice, if I ever spend enough time learning it. - Mi-8 -- It's like a flying school bus. With guns and rockets. I mess around with it from time to time, but the Huey usually gets picked instead. Pretty much never fly These *might* get flown once a month. - C-101 -- There's nothing particularly bad about this plane, I just haven't found it to be all that satisfying. Whatever kind of flying I want to do, another one just does it better. - Hawk -- I really don't like the SFM. Things might change once it's flight model is good, but I kind of have the feeling it's going to end up in the same boat as the C-101. - Su-33/MiG-29 -- I don't even know if these are still SFM. That's what's been keeping me away. I haven't flown them in forever, I'm 99% sure I don't even have controls mapped for them. - A-10A/Su-25 -- With the A-10C and Su-25T, I've got no use for these guys.

I get sick really quickly with FPS type controls, dreadhalls for example. In DCSW I've had not even a little bit of discomfort, except for when I've ejected from the plane and start walking around. Standing is OK though.

What is the full version number of your 1.5 installation?

Sorry, I remember you asking about that a while back... The CV1's lens spacing mode shows the IPD setting as you adjust the slider. On mine, the range shows up as 58 to 69mm. Hope that helps. PS- Playing around with the slider, I find my setting is 64, but within +/- 3 mm of that is still comfortable.

Everyone says that VR is immersive, and it makes you feel like you're in the game, but how far does it go? I had a moment last night where I tried to brace my hand against the cockpit wall while twisting around in my seat during a dogfight. It was a little jarring when I reached out and hit nothing but air. :lol: Have you forgotten yourself and done something funny?

I'd like to request a VR subforum. With the release of the Rift and Vive, there's a lot to talk about. With everything crammed into the couple megathreads, it's hard to keep track of the different topics.

Thanks for finding that link. +1'd it

+1 In many cases, I'm seeing a 45 FPS difference between shadows on/off when using rift CV1 i5-4670k @ 4.5ghz, 16gb ram, 970 w/factory OC

Yay! Finally got myself above 90fps for at least 95% of the time. As many people know, there's been a lot of trouble trying to get higher frame rates. Sometimes the difference between using low and high settings will only affect frame rate by 15-20 FPS. From the debug FPS counter I noticed that Scene:Surf(ace?) took up a huge chunk of the rendering time, often near 9ms (and to get 90fps the total frame time must be under 11ms). There was some correlation between low FPS and object count, but at the same time there were occurrences where I'd have over 2K objects with 1.9M triangles, and I'd be running 90fps, while at other times I could have 400 objects and get 40fps, so there has to be more to it than that. I eventually got smart and thought I *might* want to look a little deeper into some of the existing work. Why reinvent the wheel? Mustang has already done some excellent work and posted some modded lua's here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1872481&postcount=31 I had to make some minor changes to get it to work for our current version, but the settings are basically straight from what he set up. Please note that apparently editing graphics.lua or high.lua isn't the way it should be done any more, and changes will be lost in game updates. However, I'm just going to roll with this until I feel like bothering to roll it all up into the autoexec.cfg. I haven't tested it in every situation yet, but I'm able to hold 90 FPS nearly constantly, and the visual quality is quite acceptable, IMO. I'll probably try to mess with it some, but for now I'm just going to enjoy the silky pixel flow. EDIT: F---'n shadows were set to off. :mad: Well, now I know that is killing frame rate... Tweaked.zip