Rogue Trooper

Advanced technology does not always mean better, It may offer a wider variety of applications for the weapon but ultimately the weapons core intent must remain unchanged.

Yeah we will see. In DCS an MFD is very very new age to us chopper boys GGTharos. You know what I am saying? Lots of flash jet boys talk here with a glancing interest in choppers, but we got 70s chopper airframes in DCS..... you feel me? And in DCS you work the pit, it is going to be interesting to see what this modern stuff brings to the stone age.

BFT?

You can click a few physical steam switches blind as you know where they occupy a specific space within reality. I do this all the time in my Sim pit for VR as all critical weapon choices are made Via toggle switches. They are simply on or off and they always occupy a space that does not change. It is like actuating the left/right turn indicator in a car, the physical indicator is always there but an MFD replacement with sub menus would be dreadful don't you think? MFDs require pressing OSBs to enter sub menus and human interaction to verify the screens have changed and are ready for the next OSB to be pressed? MFDs require attention. I think you lack low level hell in a chopper GGTharos. You need to work quickly and efficiently in attack choppers..... this is probably where the multicrew would be king.

I really hope the OH-58D and AH-64D have maximum compatibility with their systems. It will be the newer better version of the game team Apache

Some seriously good looking modelling going on here.

To the original topic of the poster, I would have also liked an A for all the reasons you mention. I think an A would be easier to learn and I "think" faster to react to direct threats in a more equally balanced battlefield (cockpit workload and setting systems without taking your eyes off the battlefield)...... The new DCS Longbow will no doubt school me on this topic and will probably prove me wrong, but I got a feeling staring into MFDs for a minute may not be so healthy for NOE evasive flying. The Longbow will be bloody Awesome regardless!

The Apache Radar is in Limbo on the DCS Apache or real life Apache? Great info in this thread guys, keep it coming please.

Is this with 100% SS or ~50% SS? Thanks in advance.

I had something similar with my G2 headset when I first used it (came from G1) , indeed I could not even read the DCS FPS count unless I looked directly at it. Everything was blurry. Deleting my fxo and metashaders 2 files and then a full system reboot seemed to clean up the image and made everything much sharper. Now I can read the FPS count whilst it is in the top left periphery. Tracking is much better which makes it easier to activate rear bulkhead power switches behind the pilots right side in the KA-50, even flipping switches on the low side consoles are very much improved due to the tracking.

Superb Video. The DCS Apache D (Longbow)will be bloody awesome!

For me the Pilot body is an Absolute must in VR and the Razbam pilots are just the best. + 1 on the airframe rolling as soon as you push the nozzles back, a very nice touch. My favourite jet aircraft in DCS gets better.

When flying it without APs and observing how the air frame yaws so easily around the rotor mast makes total sense to me. The KA-50 modelling feels totally right to me.

Polychops will win. They will release the most advanced chopper in DCS, It does not matter if they release it before or after the Hind. They have won. Sometimes I do not understand where the DCS chopper community has its head at. But I will enjoy the hind

Would full ear coverage headphones work with the G2? God... I miss the solid thump of the Huey blades. The whine of the kamovs electronic systems. The Screach of the Gazelle engines. when it comes to sounds in DCS..... I have had enough of the sound of the masses!!!!!!! I WANT ROARING POWERFUL DEAFENING ENGINES back in my game play!!!! I will add it to my G2 to do list.

I liked the cable thickness of the G1, It had a military feel about it. The G2 cable in comparison is almost a non feature when rolling your skull to 7 O' but hoping for a clear 6. I wear my cable onto, over and under the left shoulder.

I think it is something that depends on your true IPD, VR headset fixed/movable IPD and whether you require corrective lenses for your eye balls. Probably also your ball size, length from cornea to rear of eye ball...etc etc etc. I think DCS IPD is relevant to the individual user and is therefore useless as a scientific static point of reference. Ultimately, it hints towards a VR experience that is analogues to a pair of glasses.... perfectly designed to fit the individual. Which is easily achievable.... if you think about it in the right way.

This was something I also thought about. Is there a standard size that all developers are using?

I am running the G2 at an SS value of 60% at the moment and loving it. I covet an SS of 100%. At the moment 60% and 100% super sampling are both luxuries I cannot afford at the cost of FPS. For sure the lenses are superior and it does make the image sharper regardless of super sampling. The colours are much better than my old G1 and the head tracking is much much better. The settable physical IPD results in better depth of field. I also like the comfort but I had no problem with the G1's comfort. I feel there is more "goggle" in my view with the G2 when compared with the G1 and is probably due to the mark 1 eye ball being further from the lens. I am a glasses wearer and used prescription VR optician lenses with my G1, for me this makes a serious difference.. G2 VR optician lenses ordered but 4 or 5 weeks away. After I receive the VR opticians then I will look into the FOV mod. Not sure about the headphones. I am sure they are great when your mates are around shooting the banter in the background. but the missus talking to the cat? Not sure.

I originally set up my DCS IPD using the Reverb G1 and an DCS IPD of 55 seemed about right to me, I think around 3 or 4 months ago I started to think the Spitfire cockpit looked too big and I also started to notice the same with the Gazelle (I have sat in a real Westland UK Gazelle and the control panel is very small, the switches are tiny). The F-16 still looks ok to me. I now have the Reverb G2 and I am resetting the DCS IPD amongst other tweaks. I am currently at 57 and perhaps the 109, spitfire and gazelle still look too big. I need to spend more time in the 16. I should note that the F-16 stick never looks right to me in comparison with my Thrustmaster Hawg.

I used the Thrustmaster MFDs as a reference as these are the same size as the F16s MFDs... very unscientific I know. I use a value of 57 for DCS IPD (was 55).

Yes I also feel the G2 is funny on the eyes in zoom. In normal field size it is nice. G1 was ok for me so I will keep an eye on this as I set the G2 up..

The Future of DCS Choppers is An agile attack chopper that is armed to the teeth, equipped with superb optics, night vision capability as well as instrumentation that will pick up invisible threats.

I am with you here Dongir. An agile attack chopper that is armed to the teeth, equipped with superb optics, night vision capability as well as instrumentation that will pick up invisible threats. I will buy Both choppers regardless of being released together or apart, they will both be thoroughly learnt and used.

Do not worry Sublime, I think there is a lot of flack coming your way simply because what you posted is correct from a western point of view of attack choppers being superbly agile low level hunter killers........ which the Hind is not. But it is a capable machine and If Ed include door gunners with this machine then we will all learn how good it is and how much better it is in some areas but poorer in other areas. It is a great attack chopper.... but it is not the best..... it is not a true thoroughbred sniper.