streakeagle

I have a post about this in the virtual reality subforum because I thought maybe I was imagining things. But others appear to have noticed it, too. There are certain instant action missions I have played repeatedly since having VR and suddenly I can make out dots at much greater ranges... like 10 miles even with smaller planes like the MiG-15bis. Of course, that is against a cold blue sky or a clean desert background. In VR, they are little blurry smudges. But their movement stands out clear against those backgrounds. I never used to see anything until I got to close in ranges. I am not sure which update added this. I only noticed very recently in the open beta. I don't know if it was the first supercarrier update or the P-47 updated, or maybe it was earlier and I just wan't looking for it.

As long as it is optional, I don't care. But I won't fly the MiG-21 with the original dirty glass. Between glare and dirt, it made flying and fighting unnecessarily difficult. No other DCS module gave me so much trouble trying to see outside the cockpit. Have you ever sat in a real cockpit? Well maintained operational aircraft and well-preserved indoor museum aircraft have nearly perfect glass. Only 30 year old air frames, particularly ones left sitting outside with no maintenance look anything like the original MiG-21 canopy. There are plenty of photos and videos that show this is as true for the MiG-21 as any other aircraft.

I had a combination of issues that forced me to revert to older drivers with a GTX 1080. I am running 436.30, which solved my other issues and unexpectedly made DCS world run a little bit better, too. Both in VR and desktop monitor modes.

I don't miss the dirty glass at all. I can see to fight now. There are just enough blemishes to know you are looking through glass. I am having a blast with this latest patch. I had so much fun offline that I went online. Normally, I don't use VR online, but the latest patches have increased visual detection ranges in VR which were previously a crippling disadvantage against non-vr pilots. So between the VR spotting range increases and a MiG-21bis with a fair FM and clear glass, I went hunting for trouble online in VR. I couldn't find a good server for PVP where a MiG-21 could live long, so I went to a training server where the players are all blue. I found and Su-33 and shot him at short range with an AA-8. I was going to fly home and land the kill when I found out he had a friend. I suddenly lost radar and engine power after taking a hit. I have had the MiG-21bis since it was released (I originally paid for it on the crowd funding campaign). This is the most fun I have had with it in years. The original release was amazing, but it seemed like between ED's ever changing game engine and some horrible patches along the way, the MiG-21 kept getting worse. The course has changed. It may not be done, but it is finally heading in the right direction. The recent FM improvements are the biggest game changer, but the canopy glass was always a big problem for me, too... and the ugly caulking job around the mirror drove me nuts. I can't wait to see how it improves as the overhaul is completed.

FFB stick and pedals would be the bomb. I would love it if VKB could make a stick. I trust their engineering quality. I expect a high price... but for the price it better work right, especially with DCS World. If DCS has FFB issues, then the whole question is moot for me.

I love the mirror... no more 30 year old outdoor gate guard crappy seal. The taxi light switch mapping was fixed, too. With the improved flight model and this new cockpit combined, it is pure pleasure to fly. It took an awful long time to get here, and it isn't done yet, but thank you for what we finally have right now.

I am very happy with the throttle and the startup panel. But there are so many switches available that I need overlays for each aircraft. I have three considerations for assigning switches: 1) Does the aircraft in question have controls with the same name that logically map well to the name/type of switch. There are several that are pretty common among jet modules, like battery, generator, refuel probe, etc. But what isn't common is the the type of switch, i.e. 2-position or 3-position. The hardware has 2-position switches for the generators and a 3-position for the battery to match the Hornet, but generators may have a third position and some battery switches are only 2-position. 2) Does the physical location on the hardware make sense compared to the aircraft? i.e. landing gear and drag chutes are usually toward the front and to the left and the. Flap controls might be to the front or to the left of the throttle. 3) Can I find a group of switches of the needed type that matches a critical multi-switch system. The MiG-21 has 3 very important toggle switches for its radar: a 3-position off/standby/on, a 3-position ground clutter filter, and a 2-position boresight mode. It just so happens that startup panel has three switches at a convenient spot that fill the job perfectly for me: The EXT TANKS and DUMP switches, which are very easy to find and use blind while flying VR. Using those criteria, each aircraft can have radically different assignments and there are so many it will take me awhile to memorize all of the layouts. Of course, even if I make a nice overlay for each aircraft type, that does me almost no good in VR. But it would still be nice to have.

1. The diamond texture is a big miss. The texture on the MCG Pro is nice. The rubber inlays that provide the texture on the F-14 grip are fantastic! I don't fault replica sticks for not having textures if the real ones didn't have textures, but the real KG series grips had very nice textures. 2. The top button to the left is a pov hat, but doesn't have a center depress function. 3. The top button at the center should have been another pov hat with center depress. With those three fixes, I would recommend this stick, though there are other KG variants that would provide more control options. I still like using this grip while flying the Bf109 and Fw190s, but that is the only time I will use it.

VKB now sells adapters for the TM Hornet grip. You have to choose the drop-down option, Warthog or Hornet, when you order. I actually don't care for metal with its cold and hard feel. I prefer the grips be identical to the real ones, which are not metal. Metal feels cold and hard. The Warthog grip is my least favorite grip. It has the cold, hard metal and the shape is not comfortable for me to hold. When I replaced the Warthog with the MCG Pro, going to the combination of plastic with a diamond texture and a rounded shape was a huge step up for me. The only losses were the odd control arrangement and the light weight. But there were gains in control options especially analog axis support and flip down trigger as well as the huge jump in the mechanical design and feel of the base. My F-4 B-8 is heavy because it has metal through the center, but it is some sort of heavy industrial grade plastic or resin with a nice glossy finish for the actual grip. I like grips that look and feel like the B-8. The TM Hornet grip is almost as comfortable as my B-8, yet has controls for more modern aircraft. The F-14 grip is absolutely the next best thing to my B-8. The only way it could be better is to match the grade of plastic used on real grips. I do like the feeling of weight. So, if VKB used a metal core it would feel more like a real grip. The KG12 is plastic. I think the flip safety trigger is metal.

That looks really nice! The metal frame makes it look sturdy but clean. I see everything you need to fly any aircraft in DCS. The center panel with the MFDs and comms is what I need to do.

I thought maybe I was imagining it. But I can clearly see little MiG-15s at about 10 miles. I am pretty sure that it was less than 3 to 5 miles before. They must be back to rendering objects larger than the distance calculations determine.

I didn't even start DCSLeap and saw a noticeable drop in fps. I have my settings tuned to try to hit 80 fps when possible and avoid drops below 40 fps. Without Leapmotion/SteamVR, I was hitting 80 fps in high altitude/clear sky and stable at 40 fps cruising low over the Persian Gulf while flying the F-86 instant action takeoff without SteamVR/LeapMotion. With SteamVR/LeapMotion, I saw steady 35 to 38 fps with drops to 30 fps... that is a mission with no combat or heavy load of AI. I want this tech so bad, but the hardware/software needs to step up to the capability I want. I guess I should wait until VR itself runs as resolutions/frame rates/visual quality I like before loading down my PC with extra software. I didn't really expect a hit in this situation. If I have 4 cores and DCS World uses at most 2 cores, I thought the extra overhead would be sucked up by the other two cores. But DCS world isn't really well coded for multi-cpu and it still has to interface with everything else while trying to do what it normally does, so I guess it is just too much for my system at the moment. I love the tech and it is fun to try it out, but it is going to collect dust over the short term.

I hope deltaalphalima1 is clearing a reasonable profit margin on this, because this makes the Warthog a lot better and he is clearly cranking them out as fast as he can. I bought two because I have two Warthog throttles and I will be getting around to installing and testing my 2nd one very soon. I can't recommend this enough for people who have Warthog throttles and would like a decent analog thumb stick. Keep cranking them out and supplying the community!

I use an extension and single #50 springs. I have zero problems with the weight of the TM grips when mounted on my VKB. I do not use the special Warthog cam... it has a strong detent feel. If I wanted my stick to feel like that, I would have just kept using the Warthog! The regular smooth cam centers just fine despite the extra weight. My grip use based on my flying habits in order of how often I use them: Random aircraft and don't want to constantly quit out to swap grips, I use the MCG Pro. F-14 or older American aircraft, I use the F-14 grip. Modern American aircraft and don't want to swap grips, use the TM Hornet grip. A-10C or F-16C, I use the TM Warthog grip. Bf109K4, Fw190A8, or Fw190D9, I use the KG12 grip. The Hornet grip and the F-14 grip are my favorite ones, but the MCG Pro is just too convenient, so it sees the most use. But I have been flying the F-14 Tomcat quite a bit lately and I really love using the grip with it. I did some fancy programming tricks to make it more useful in other aircraft, so it is now a really good choice for flying anything with a B-8 style grip like the F-5, F-86, and UH-1 or earlier stuff like the P-51D. Lately, I have been focusing on multiplayer, so I have stuck to the MCG Pro to make sure I have good mapping for every aircraft in the game available while I am online. The KG12 was an early budget design. I would like to see VKB follow through with the high-end one they were planning to make that would be both a better replica and higher quality, but it should also reflect the capabilities of their latest grips (and those of competitors) that maximize the capabilities of every available button/lever while maintaining replica appearance: i.e. position sensing for both up and down for the flip-down trigger, making buttons 4-way hats with center-depress, twist grip base, etc.

being able to turn the hands on/off easily is a good thing. that is an advantage of DCSLeap. But if I am in VR, having to use keyboard presses to toggle them isn't going to cut it. I would prefer to use the existing DCS virtual hands with on/off mappable to any desired control. I didn't even assess the FPS cost of using Leap Motion / SteamVR / DCSLeap. I will have to try that this week.

I played with the mechanics of the levers today. First, I was able to install the finger lifts. They don't do anything but move up and down, but they look good and don't interfere with the operation of the levers at all. Next, I was able measure the angles and adjust everything to work very close to the F-4. The mechanical idle stop is exactly where it should be. The engine off position is about 2 degrees off, but it doesn't matter because all it has to do is hit a button, which it does. Afterburner is where all the trouble lies. The F-101 is designed to have full military power with the throttle all the way forward, so there is no detent when the levers are toggled inboard, just the idle detent. But when you move the levers outboard to engage afterburners, there is a detent to keep you from dropping out of afterburner. I have adjusted the detent for the correct angle for the F-4's military power/afterburner boundary. So all I need to do to make it right is make some sort of adjustable bracket to make a detent for military power when the levers are inboard. An additional problem with afterburner is that the maximum range of motion is about 7 degrees to short. So, the available control range for afterburner is a bit smaller than the real F-4. It shouldn't be a problem for flying in game as the available range of motion from military to full afterburner is still probably larger than most consumer grade HOTAS setups. I can easily add a bracket that would make the finger lifts operational so that you would need to lift them to cut off the engine. But the existing detent works by moving the levers outboard to go to cutoff. I would have to machine out the frame to get rid of the existing detent so that you would use the finger lifts to move the levers past idle to cutoff rather than moving the levers outboard. The existing detent is at the correct position and I would hate to damage the throttle's structure in any way. So, I may just leave things as they are with the finger lifts being there just for looks. I think for now, I am going to move on to integrating the throttle into a USB controller. Most likely using one of my Warthog throttles to be the left and right throttle axes and maybe find a way to wire up the buttons to the switches on the throttle and the surround panels.

Most of the key functions are on my HOTAS. I mainly use the mouse during startup. But if the VR hands worked reliably, I would use them whenever practical. I looked at the point control mouse emulator. I considered getting it, but after seeing the finger control size/shape and how it would affect using my stick... i.e. clearance on the trigger finger, I decided against it. Hand tracking is the way to go. It just needs to mature and be natively supported by the game and VR headset rather than having to use even more hardware and software. Oculus is heading that direction. I was hoping they would make it native to Rift S and that ED would support it. In the mean time, Leap Motion is a cool toy to pay with, but I won't use it for serious flying when I don't want a canopy inadvertently jettisoned or to crash into the ground while trying to flip a switch. A good mix for me would be to have a home pit that replicates the virtual pit and just use the VR hands to know where your real hands are. That means you would still be pushing real buttons, which means no hand tracking/gesture accidents and no need for special gloves to provide haptic feedback. The problem with that approach is you need to buy or build a replica cockpit for each aircraft you fly, or at least have interchangeable panels with proper control arrangements for VR interaction.

I have both. I continue to use both. As fun as VR is, I still enjoy breathtaking photo real graphics with high settings and at a steady, high fps. With TrackIR well-tuned, the only things I really lose are 1:1 tracking and vertical field of view. I find it more relaxing to play without a VR headset. Easier to sip on my rum and coke. I also enjoy being able to see everything around me, including all of my various controllers. The immersion of being inside the cockpit in VR is amazing. But until the hardware and software become good enough that I can play with decent resolution with a more natural field of view and with graphics settings maxed out, I will still be spending a lot of time flying with a large TV and TrackIR.

FWIW, I still see an operational website: https://www.realteus.com/products/forcefeel?variant=15384295145551

Tonight, I was playing the F-5E instant action mission where you are Greek and fly against Turkey F-5Es and a C-130. I have played this mission many times in VR and on a flat panel. I know where to look for the enemy, but in VR I always had to track them on radar and wait for them to get within visual range. But tonight, I could clearly see aircraft in front of me despite the distance and I could even make out a pair of smaller bogeys trailing the larger one. Was there a change or am I just imagining that I could never see them but now I suddenly can? It wasn't just that mission though... against the F-14 over Nevada and the Mirage 2000C over the Persian Gulf, I could swear they distant bogies are being drawn with more contrast and possibly a larger scale than before. I have been flying with a Rift S since it came out and I can never recall seeing so well at long distances.

Installed the throttle levers today. The only way it could have gone better is if I actually had an F-4 quadrant instead of an F-101 quadrant. Now I just need to get it connected to a USB controller.

I spent some time playing with the triggering settings and enabled DCLeap's hands to help verify what the camera is seeing. When I use my right hand to flip switches to the front or front left, I get fairly good behavior. If I try to go to the far left and or down, it is tricky to get the cameras to see the hand in a way that recognizes the trigger. The process of flipping my hand around for camera recognition causes inadvertent control problems: either flip the wrong way or bump into another control or moving too much to hit the intended control. Just clicking on menu buttons is challenging for me with DCLeap, whereas that is effortless for me using the in-game VR hands. My desktop resolution is 4K. It seems like the resolution selected when starting DCLeap affects the mouse sensitivity. I use the highest one listed that matches my aspect ratio because 3840 x 2160 isn't on the list.

I have an IPD of 62-63, so I don't have to worry about the problem of mechanical versus virtual IPD adjustment. The Rift S was an incredible improvement in visual quality/performance over the CV1. But there were drawbacks: 1) Inferior built-in audio. The open ear headset wastes power spreading it out in all directions, so you need higher volume settings with lower fidelity to hear well. If you just cup your hands over your ears, you can see how much better it could sound. My mic won't stay active. So, I end up wearing a full headset to get a good mic and audio at a cost of comfort and weight. 2) Lower fps with 40/80 instead of CV1's 45/90. If I could fly DCS at 80 fps, this wouldn't matter as much, but the difference between 40 and 45 is noticeable to me. But if I have to pay 5 fps to get both smoother and higher quality visuals, so be it. I can actually see clearly enough in most cockpits with the Rift S, not so with the CV1. 3) While I seldom have problems with the inside-out tracking while wearing the headset, I frequently have problems when I take it off to get a drink or go to the desktop for a moment. It loses track in such a way that it requires recalibration of the floor level. I normally leave the batteries out of the touch controllers. But I have to stop whatever I am doing, put a battery in a controller, then work through the recalibration pop-ups to go back to flying. If I forget to take the battery out, I end up with another dead battery.

I recently got a winwing HOTAS. I got the package that came with the desk mounts for the throttle and stick. This has proven to be instrumental in making progress on my F-4 throttle, because now the left console has been replaced by the desk mounted throttle pulled out of service to install the real throttle quadrant. But it just hit me: I can do the same for the stick. I can adapt the desk mount to my VKB GF base so that I can remount the F-4 stick back on the wood platform with the ejection seat. I have a spare Warthog stick base I can easily use to provide the pitch axis. I hope I can figure out a way to use the same base for the roll axis. If not, I have another base available that can be mounted as necessary to mechanically connect to the roll. I can also disassemble the extra warthog grip and wire my f-4 stick buttons to it, plus have several spares left over for other functions... say a tail hook lever? ejection handle? Whatever I need that won't get in the way of anything else. I intend to use the Warthog throttle to receive the real throttle lever inputs. I haven't decided whether I am going to use the throttle to provide the button inputs or use my old BU0836X board. I don't know when I will get around to putting this all together. I need a day or two just to get the real throttle mounted at the right position/height to fit with the surrounding panels I previously installed. I think I already have all the materials I need to do this out in the garage: wood, lengths of angled aluminum that can be cut to make mounting brackets and/or braces as required. I have a clear vision of where I am trying to go. I now have a clear vision of how I am going to get there. Now, I just need to carve out the time to execute the plan. I recently got TM TPR pedals in preparation for completing my F-4 cockpit. They are a reasonable representation of the physical appearance and mechanical action of F-4 rudder pedals. I still have my old Saitek rudder pedals, but I would only use them again as a last resort. I am thinking I need a set of Slaw pedals for the modern/generic desk pit and dedicate the TPR pedals to my F-4 sim pit. The future is so bright, I gotta wear shades B) Now, if ED or one of the third parties would give me a DCS F-4. I have tried flying the very well modeled F-4s from Milviz and Simworks in P3d, but I can't stand the FSX/P3d platform compared to dedicated combat flight sims. By default, the Thirdwire Strike Fighters series remains the best combat sim for flying F-4s, but it is at the opposite end of the spectrum from the FSX/P3d side. DCS sits in the middle with more or less the same combat simulation capabilities of the SF series and at the same time all the eye candy and systems modeling of P3d. I would hope that Heatblur would do a Naval F-4 variant due to their experience with the very similar F-14A/B: two seat all-weather fleet defense interceptor. I would love any variant flown by the USN VFs: F-4B/N or F-4J/S series. I don't know how ED will approach the long-delayed F-4E. They don't have any two-seaters unless you count the helicopters, which don't have anything close to Jester AI. My experience in P3d is that modern HOTAS controls provide more than enough for me to operate the radar from the front seat. I just need a moment in the back seat for making detailed search mode selections, but can change the range scale and lock onto targets just fine from the front seat thanks to HOTAS analog ministicks and countless buttons that are free to assign because the F-4 had only very basic HOTAS switches.

When Rift first came out, you could disable the oculus app from starting and still play DCS. But they patched that capability away. I have been experimenting with the Ultraleap Leap Motion VR hand tracking and it won't work with Oculus, so I have to force SteamVR to see my hands in-game. So now I have not one, but two VR apps running plus the leap motion driver and if I use DCSLeap, then I have four things running just while playing DCS World. I would love it if VR was more like a mouse, monitor, or HOTAS where you don't need any interposing apps to use them. But the VR people need to market their games and Oculus is kind of the Apple of VR: they want you in their environment using their software not just selling you the hardware.