eFirehawk

I know it's off topic but please ED do not ever make DCS or its modules subscription-based... this whole software subscription models drive me insane nowadays and I applaud ED and Heatblur by not doing it even considering the shortcomings.

In my case, I'm using this one and it's excellent. Fits my head shape well and also makes the battery cover behind the head less uncomfortable. https://www.amazon.de/-/en/gp/product/B0CR8ZYYVX/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Thanks everyone. I'm happy to report that the new Mongoost CM3 base kept the exact same button numbers as the WarBRD base did, so in DCS I just had to map one random bind to the new base, take the .lua name generated for it in the options and simply rename the .lua files that belonged to the WarBRD with the new MongoosT name and ID. All key binds fell perfectly into place.

Hi everyone, I have all my stuff in DCS mapped to a Virpil WarBRD base + TM F-15E stick. Is there any way to seamlessly 'move' the bindings and axis if I switch the base to a Virpil MongoostCM3 base and the same stick? Thanks

I can report the same... on high settings I get mostly uninterrupted 72fps since the last patch with all jets that I fly relatively regularly except the SE, which makes the fps on average 15fps lower... which is a shame since it's my favorite jet and the best DCS module so far in my opinion.

That's a big one for me too... please Pimax.

I used mine for a while without removing the screws with a TM A10 grip. I just needed to remove them to connect the TM F18 grip at an angle now that I have a chair center-mount.

Apart from that, did you notice any 'game breaking' bugs in the campaign this time? I'm thinking about buying it along with Persian Lion as my first DCS campaign but if it's bugged to the point of not being able to complete the missions I won't bother.

...many years later Did anyone ever figure out the new default names and folder structure of the RWR? I'm trying to make a mod too.

Ouch. Bummer. Audio files and structure are now encrypted

Hi everyone, I made an RWR sound mod for the F-15E and would like to do one for the F-18C as well, however, I can't figure out where the sound files are located and what files to replace. Any ideas? Thanks

Hi everyone, I remember the A-10Cs CCIP reticle would take priority over the flight path marker, thus leaving it uncluttered for a few .degrees, giving you a clear view of just the target and reticle dot. Even though the jet probably doesn't have it, it doesn't hurt to ask anyway: I'd like to know if there's any way to prevent the FPM mixing together with the CCIP reticle in the F-18? In VR where I don't do a fantastic zoom-in of the HUD before shooting ground targets, sometimes (no always) it gets difficult to aim with all the clutter. If not, any tips on how to mitigate this slightly? Thanks

Ever used a Crystal? I'm interested in the difference in FOV. On paper they seem to be close. 110 deg for the Crystal vs 120 for the XR4.

In my opinion it is perfectly smooth and precise. I do not use it however simply due to the fact that it's not spring loaded. Having to manually return it to the center after every elevation input is annoying as hell - the feel for the center detent is very faint and vague, so I ended up mapping it on my TM F-18 stick.

Same here. Anyone ever found a way? I have that button binded in every single module I have, except the F-14.

Hi everyone, I have a WarBRD base and I'm happy with it. But now I use a center-mount and needed to put a 10cm extension. The precision and smoothness is great, but deflection angle is a bit much and stick feels too light, even with the hardest springs. So I became interested in the Mongoost CM3 base, as it can take more torque as is made to be used with extensions. However I hear it's mostly used by the heli crowd due to the clutches. Is anyone using that base for jets, also with a 10cm extension ( given that 10cm is not the longest type )? If so, is it as good and precise as the WarBRD? Thanks

Thanks guys. So far the conclusion then is: Keep hunched forward and yes, it is a thing they do in the real jet too apparently. @MAXsenna KC-135 MPRS

Hi everyone, A little light-hearted question that I've been thinking about these days... given the lack of dynamic campaign and poor AI, especially for ground units with terminator aimbots, I decided to enjoy DCS by doing similar, just flight related tasks in all modules that I own ( little to no combat ) - as VR just gave a completely new life to it. This way I haven't been burnt out and always keep learning something new. Although my main jet is the F-15E ( taking about 80% of my flight time, and the Jeff the remaining 20% ), one of the challenges I set for myself is to become 'reliable' in air refueling in all modules that I own ( SU-33, A-10, F-14 15 16 18, JF-17, M-2000 and F1 ), and how I feel regarding the known difficult planes to do AAR in. Nearly all of them became a piece of cake by now, even the Harrier. The A-10 still gives me some trouble due to weird visibility, but I'm getting the hang of it. The F-14 however, has been giving me some grief and I wanted to know if anyone else feels the same. In VR, the canopy bow seems to be very inconveniently placed in a way that perfectly blocks me from having a decent view of the refuel pod and engines of the tanker. If I do the refueling looking mostly to the side, I sometimes drift off and disconnect from the probe by moving too far horizontally. Basically in order to achieve a perfect refuel session I have to keep absolutely extreme focus, bobbing my head around the canopy to see stuff. It can't be that it feels like second nature in other jets but just in this one I feel tired after just a few minutes. There are some unorthodox solutions that I've used but I don't believe they are realistic, such as going low to the point that the refuel pod is completely above the canopy - this makes refuel very easy as long as I'm aware that I'm edging the lowest possible position that the drogue can go. What are your thoughts on this? HB's Tomcat cockpit is modeled to perfection, so could this be an issue of my VR head position? Or are there accounts of real pilots commenting on this too?

I had the hopes that I could retire my Crystal with the VR1, given how unsatisfied I am with everything it has except the very good, clear ( but definitely not edge-to-edge ) sweetspot. Oh well. Guess I'm gonna be stuck with it for a while longer.

Hi everyone, I'm selling a Winwing F-16 grip + Orion 2 base + Cam & Spring kit, barely used. Purchased directly from WW on the 24th of October, 2023. I'm in Germany if anyone would like to test and pick them up personally. Brand-new, in the Winwing website the stick + base combo costs €220.75 and the cam and spring kit costs €47.95, which totals €268.70. I'd be willing to let it go for €200.00. Also accept offers. If interested feel free to PM me. edit: SOLD

Mind telling me what is the issue with TM switches? Are you referring to throttles or grips? I will stop using my WW base + A-10 grip and go back to Virpil + A-10 grip from TM, with one of the reasons being the buttons and switches feel much better on my 10 year-old TM Warthog grip ( plus the Virpil is way more precise and smooth, and the metal grip of the WW feels like plastic to me for some reason ). The WW feels slightly cheaper in comparison. For the throttle itself I agree that TM charges too much nowadays for what you get, and the original TDC slew was terrible - although with the Deltasim upgrade mine was incredible, way better than the 'slightly less crap' TDC of the WinWing.

I got a Crystal, and to be fair I wish I went for the Aero. Got all addons ( thicker face pad for prescription lenses, Apache head strap, DMAS, hub ) and I feel like the only thing good about the headset is the clarity within the sweet spot. Even the sweet spot isn't all that either - at least in my case, edge to edge clarity is not true at all. And the FOV to me feels about the same as the G2, both with prescription lenses. It is uncomfortable, got plenty of software hiccups, making it work with USB ports is finicky, eye tracking needs to be calibrated every time and occasionally stops working out of nowhere. To me it feels like a prototype of a headset, that should have costed no more than 800 bucks or so. In order to keep trying to improve my experience I exceeded the return window. So to me the Crystal right now feels nothing more than a stop-gap until something else better ( even if with a tiny bit less clarity ) comes up. But then again, maybe I was unlucky or my case is very peculiar due to prescription lenses, head size/shape and computer itself. VR stuff can be very personal. If you go for a Crystal just try to get it from a shop with good return policy and don't wast time testing it before the return window is gone.

Do you guys need to calibrate the eye-tracking every single time you turn it on? I do and it gets annoying after a while. If I calibrate it, take it out and leave it on the desk powered on, calibration is always fine. I can take it out of my head dozens of times and whenever I put it back on, eye-tracking still works just fine. But if I turn it off, when I power it on again either right away or next day, eye tracking calibration is completely thrown off.

I don't have a QPro but can understand the issue I believe. Like I said, same here. I got a second set of prescription lenses today, dialed down a little bit and no dice. I also tried using the Crystal without glasses or lenses and although my vision is not good, it is definitely not terrible either and even like that I got the impression that the edges are indeed blurry, as if the sweet stop of the Crystal is a glorified G2 of sorts. Let us know how it goes with support.

Would you mind sharing the before and after levels? My real glasses are -1.5 and so were the Crystal lenses, but I ordered a -1.0 set for the Crystal some days ago hoping to reduce severe eye strain, which is a problem I never had with the G2. Will also post if it helps with the coma and blurriness too... will be a welcome unexpected surprise if it does.