Brisse

I thought it was normal, but others are saying it's not. I checked in operational manual and there it says to immediately move the stick to neutral to recover, but in the sim that doesn't seem to be enough. In DCS you actually have to push a little bit forward to get out of the stall.

Real operational manual tells you not to apply rudder during stall, becouse that will put you into a spin. I believe this also happens in DCS if you apply enough rudder. Are you looking at the IAS gauge in the cockpit? I guess that might not show correct speed at high AoA because the airflow will hit the pitot tube at an angle.

Yugoslavia and Croatia disagrees.

The updater is intelligent and downloads only the files that needs to be updated, while keeping all files that are unchanged. It even cross checks for files it can use between the stable install and open beta install if you have both. For example, if you are installing open beta, it checks your stable install and copies everything it can use before starting to download what is necessary.

That's how it's supposed to work. Not a bug.

At least not traditional games. New games will have to be developed specifically for VR, which is already well underway. Perhaps the early games will be a bit rough but eventually developers will find out what works and what doesn't and through iteration, gaming in VR will improve, both the hardware and the software. As I said earlier in the thread: Forget about traditional games in VR. Forget about Battlefield, CoD, and all that mainstream stuff. Simulation type games, especially racing sims are the only genres I can see being brought over to VR. New genres will have to be invented to fill the gaps from genres that don't work in VR.

What's the problem exactly? You do know how the MiG-21bis is supposed to stall, right? 28 degrees AoA is considered safe at any speed and altitude. 33 degrees is the critical AoA. If you go there you will stall, and might even go into a spin. It doesn't recover from the stall by itself. You have to actively use stick inputs to recover.

VR isn't a new concept. Here's the stereoscopic "View-Master" from 1939: There was also a hard push for VR during the nineties with the likes of Sega and Nintendo trying to bring it to arcade games but it never caught on back then. There's a good reason however for the new push of VR development that we are seeing today, and nothing in the past comes close to the potential we can see today. Hardware has come to a certain point where it's possible to create a believable feeling of presence inside VR. We have come to a point where it's possible to go into VR without immediately feeling sick. Huge money are being invested into the development of VR and content creators are jumping into the fray. Without content, VR will mean nothing. Now we see game developers make games specifically for VR. We are seeing movie studios take interest in the technology, wanting to make new experiences similar to cinema, but in VR. We are seeing companies like Facebook and Google supporting 360 degree stereoscopic pictures and video. Applications for social interaction and education is being developed. Gaming is where it starts, but eventually, it's use is going to expand way beyond gaming. VR is not new, but this is the day and age when VR finally takes off, but it's only the beginning of that new era...

Okay, thanks :)

Quick question: What kind of audible cues are there for the radar warning receiver? Should we expect detailed audio cues like in Falcon 4 BMS?

Only two weeks after 2.0 then. Cool :) See you soon M2000C.

I'm with you Cobra. DCS isn't an abbreviation for "Political Simulator". I appreciate that ED and partners are trying to stay away from politics. It's a sensitive subject that can bring unwanted attention and conflict when you least expect it, and it can lead to situations where some content end up offending someone, even if it wasn't intentional. Anyone who refuse to call DCS a game is taking it way to seriously. In my opinion, it is both a simulator AND a game. It doesn't have to be only one of those things.

Which means it will take four 980ti's to render all those pixels. Let's hope for the sake of StarVR that graphic cards take a big leap in performance now that their moving on to smaller fabrication process, and that prices are reasonable instead of the ridiculous prices we have seen on the current generation of graphic cards.

Prop!? I was thinking more along the lines of MiG-21 :)

English cockpit is much appreciated. Thanks! :)

Haha, okay :) Well, I think the Viggen is superior in BVR, with much better systems, radar and missiles. Also, it carries more fuel than the MiG-21, so it has longer range and doesn't have to waste time on "eco-driving". No big surprise there, eh? The MiG-21bis, even though it was in service at the same time as the Ja-37, was using a much older airframe which put some constraints on the design of the radar. It had to fit into a very small space and that limits it's performance. Here's what I think might surprise some people: If the Viggen get into a dogfight with the MiG-21bis, it's going to have a really hard time defeating it, and might even end up losing the fight. Why you ask? Because the MiG-21bis has better acceleration, better rate of climb and a faster top speed. It's more agile and even though it looses a lot of energy while turning, it doesn't loose as much as the Viggen which looses energy ridiculously fast during high G turns.

How do you guys think the Ja-37 Viggen would stack up against the MiG-21bis in BVR and dogfighting? I know what I think. I'm just curious about what you think :)

Just got a newsletter. Sounds like we might have 2.0 open beta and Nevada NTTR next week if we are lucky :) The exact words were "release of DCS World 2.0 and the Nevada map at the end of this month".

You will have to let go of old and currently existing games when you get into VR (except flight/racing sims and similar). Just forget about them. They are made for mouse, keyboard and monitor or consoles and TV. Sure, you can mod them so they output to a VR headset, but the experience will be crap. VR is going to spawn new game developers, and new game genres specifically made for VR. Sure, they will be inspired and take some ideas from traditional games, but they will also be fundamentally different.

Read some literature on the MiG-21bis, or read/listen to what pilots have to say about it. A lot of the comments you stumble upon, you will recognize from the simulation if you have enough experience with it. The MiG-21bis is indeed a very dangerous plane to land, in real life, and in DCS. Throughout history, there have been an insane amount of accidents surrounding this aircraft, killing hundreds of pilots and sadly, also many civilians.

Cobra said so himself on SimHQ forum as I mentioned a few weeks ago in this thread. The time from announcement to release will be short.

You do realize that if you double the FOV, you increase the perceived size of a pixel by four, right? Pixel density is already a problem with only 100 degree FOV. Why would you want to make it four times worse?

Go through chapter 5. "Operational limitations" in the manual. Learn all that stuff and you will get much less flameouts. I think the one that caused me the most trouble when I was starting out was that I didn't respect the "never exceed 1300km/h IAS".

I suspected so, but your understanding is a bit flawed. EFM is an abbreviation for external flight model. External only means that it is made by a third party, so any flight model made by Leatherneck studios will be labelled as EFM. The term EFM tells nothing about the complexity of the flight model. It can be equivalent to AFM, but it can also be PFM. The thing is, that third parties are not allowed to label their flight models as AFM or PFM. Only ED's internally developed flight models use those labels. The scale you made should therefore look like this: SFM->AFM->PFM ???EFM??? EFM doesn't have a place on the scale.

You have no idea of what EFM actually means, do you? :)