Goblin

Pic of a mirror in a Patrouille Suisse F-5 :)

I'm so sorry! I thought this was the wishlist forum... Silly me. :) No, Kuky, I'm not saying that. I'm not saying ditch the mirrors. I'm saying I want mirrors that are not so resource intensive. It's a fact that many users turn off the mirrors because of FPS drops. I'm just suggesting, or wishing, that it might be possible to make even simpler mirrors, as an option. Maybe just an option to have the mirrors lo-res, and the displays at a higher res? That's all. IRL mirrors are used to check your own aircraft, and keeping tabs on your wingman. They're useless for anything farther away. You will never spot a bogey in one of them, because you'd already be dead by the time he's that close. Since we can't change the angle of the mirrors in DCS, they're just eyecandy anyway. Don't get me wrong, they're nice to have, because they make the cockpit look more real. But, they have very little tactical use. I have flown aircraft with rearview mirror. They're quite small... :)

Buzzles, You missed my point. To see details in a mirror, you need to be pretty close to the object in the mirror. Next time you're out driving, take a look at a house that's 500m behind you. You really only use the mirrors for objects that are in close proximity. This is why I think ED could "ease up" on the rendering of the mirrors. They are way too detailed, and this shows up as such a performance hit that lots of simmers prefer to turn them off...

Here's a video of Aerofly FS2. I know, it's not nearly the same simulation category as DCS, although it's quite spectacular in VR. But, I like the way they render the mirrors and resembles what I'd like to have as 'simple' mirrors in DCS. @13 minutes shows what I mean.

Yes, but the mirrors still reduce FPS a lot. What I'm hoping for are mirrors that only show what you need, so to speak. The mirrors we got today seems to reflect every little detail there is, and this is not necessary.

The mirrors in DCS require a lot of rendering resources. There's a very noticable drop in framerates when they are used. Would it be possible to make simple mirrors, perhaps? IRL, mirrors are used to check your immediate surroundings when on ground, and when in formation. They are also used to check your own aircraft. So in DCS, there's really no need to be able to view the terrain in detail, or aircraft more than maybe 20m away. The view you see in the mirrors could be limited to either brown for terrain, and blue for sky, your own aircraft and aircraft close enough to be in your formation. This would even be more realistic, because you don't really see much more details through a real mirror, that small. Just have a look in your rear view mirror in your car...

Yeah, but why would you want to use a fake depth of field effect in VR, where you have real 3D depth..? :)

So, to sum this thread up, the lights in DCS should not be so bright when close, but should be visible farther from the light source. Examples: Aircraft landing lights should not light up the runway in daylight. But they should be visible to other aircraft at least 10NM out on a clear day, and even farther at night. Runway lights should be seen at quite a long distance, but should not be so bright when you are close to the runway. City lights should be seen at very long distances.

Does it work, Fab?

Don't know the answer, but that would be great, to save some fps.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2722709&postcount=21

Ah! Thanks! :)

The default view position is offset to the right, to line up with the sight. This is problematic in VR because you normally sit in the middle, and lean into the sight. I know I can "re-set" the view by leaning further right and press "center vr view", but there should be an easier fix... Maybe there is and I never heard of it? :)

Yeah, that would be nice. I think that they are working on a Garmin GPS for eastern block aircraft in the NTTR...

Hey, your meaning counts as much as mine! I don't know it's a stability problem, as I have no idea how the flightmodel is coded.

Hadn't thought about this before I read your post. You're right. Close up the lights are too intensive, but the intesity fades quickly, and then disapears when it should be visible.

Sounds like good advice! I can imagine the ED crew are swamped in 2.5 development, and have been for a while if we consider the development of 2.0 and modules. When 2.5 is out, let it sit for a while, and re-visit the details...

Well, I have flown the Cessna 172, SAAB Safari, Grob 115, Fokker 50 and DHC8, which all have been used in military versions ;) But I know what you mean, not flown fighters. There's nothing magical about fighter aircraft aerodynamics though... But, no, that's not what I meant... Thought I made it clear, but I'll try again :) I think the stall behaviour needs to be tweaked slightly. I don't think that much needs to be altered, and maybe it will be enough to increase the yaw stability some. Actually, this contradicts many of your arguments. Fighters are usually designed with relaxed static and dynamic stability, in order to be agile. Some even with instability requiring computerized fly-by-wire systems to be stable. This can lead to unexpected behaviour when transgressing the boundaries of the performance envelope.

I'm not saying stall behaviour of the A-10C is correct in DCS... A slip angle is the angle of the relative airflow and the longitudinal axis of the aircraft, and as such has nothing to do with deflection of flightcontrols other than deflection of flight controls will induce a slip. Did that make sense..? :) Pitching up, without rolling... Even if you could do this perfectly, with no roll input, you may still have crossed controls, so that the ailerons are deflected ever so slightly. This can be enough to trigger assymetric wing stall on most aircraft. Assymetric loadout or fuel imbalance can also contribute to this. I mentioned the C172 because that one is also said to be almost impossible to spin. It's not! ;) I have flown aircraft that will throw themselves over on their backs, in a heartbeat, if stalled assymetrically. So I'll still think the stall behaviour of the simulated A-10C in DCS is easy to handle. But, it might need a slight tune-up of the SAS.

It's not that simple... There are aerodynamic couplings between axes. For instance, aft CG will affect yaw and pitch stability, but not roll. But a yaw, will induce a roll, so roll may be indirectly affected. Better yaw stability is less likely to cause a roll upset.

"Damped" can also mean getting wet... Whatever :) I just fired up DCS and tried the Hog for the first time since I got my Rift... Man, oh MAN, what an experience..! It rocks in VR! But, that's not what I wanted to test... I went high alpha flying, and tried some stalls. First I jettisoned stores. Didn't empty the gun though. T'was just a quick test. Yes, the wing drops in the stall. Correct or not, it was a very docile drop! A Cessna 172 will drop the wing faster, if flown a little uncoordinated. I'd say the stall characteristics of the Hog is very benign. Now, it may very well be that it should have even better stall characteristics. That I don't know. But I wouldn't say it's hard to control it in high AoA flight. Rudder was very responsive, for instance. Edit: I should mention that I use a VKB Black Mamba stick, with an extension and cam gimbals. It has extremely good precision around center and when transitioning across pitch and roll axes, which makes it easier to make very small control inputs, without overcorrecting. I also use Slaw Viper pedals with a damper. Same thing with those. Heavy pedals with contactless sensors.

It's been a while since I last flew the A-10C in DCS, but I know a thing or two about stalls... The general stability in pitch, which greatly affects the ability to balance the aircraft in high AoA, is affected by center of gravity (CG). An aircraft with CG aft will be less stable in pitch, meaning that a involontary increase in AoA won't be dampened out aerodynamically and must be corrected manually. I guess emptying the gun will make the Hog less stable..? Also, wingdrop can occur on any aircraft if flown uncoordinated (slipping). The A-10C has a stability augmented flight control system. Normally this will help stabilizing (duh!) high AoA flight. Maybe just the stabilizing algorithms needs a tune in DCS? Just a thought...

I think lights are too bright in DCS, at night, and in the day. I tried changing star size in star.fx from the default 1500 to 250. Now they look perfect! This should be the default setting, if you ask me. Landing and taxi lights on aircraft are also too bright. They even light up the tarmac in broad daylight, and they turn night into day... I can't speak for any of the RL counterparts of the modules in DCS, but I fly airliners for a living, and no aircraft lights I have ever seen is this bright. You shouldn't see the ground light up in front of you when turning on the lights in bright sunlight. Only when the surface is wet and reflective. During darkness and night, the lights should brighten the ground in front, but not so bright that it looks like it's daylight. Same goes for airport lights. They look like they're on 100% all the time. IRL we ask ATC to dim the lights for us. During night they're often dimmed to 3%, and are still easy to see. I wish the lights in DCS could be dimmed. I bet they can be configured in some .fx files, perhaps?

Holy crap! I see I'm not the only one waiting for DCS: Spitfire ;-) That's a seriously cool pit!

Hey! Nice! Thanks for the find!