SPAS79

Any advice on how to go about that without having to redo everything? Also, I have been enjoying the F/A-18C a lot lately, is going back to 2.5.5 stable going to take away from the experience (as in, are all its latest upgrades available in 2.5.5?) The biggest regret will be not being able to do online multiplayer anymore, but I can't really accept the state in 2.5.6, especially running on a 5GHZ 9700k, 2080ti, SSD and 32GB@3200MHz RAM... My plan is to: deactivate any mod I have (thanks to OvGME) run a repair/clean downgrade to 2.5.5 run a repair/clean reinstall mods (thanks OvGME) ??? Profit. This should also let me use the new nvidia drivers, until ED sorts out 2.5.6.

[sARCASM] Also, having a CPU that runs at 6.5-7 GHz would make you have performance comparable to 2.5.5... [/sARCASM]

1) I'm being massively whoooooshed here, and I tend to be pretty geeky with this kind of stuff, but this is too much geekiness for me. 2) [RANT] as said by a previous poster, I have left other sims because I was sick and tired of workarounds, tweaks, third-party addons to fix this and that. BUT that was because THAT sim was abandoned, the development stopped, the devs laid off (we all know the story). DCS is in active development, so I would expect better, although I feel DCS is slowly evolving into this user-level "thereIfixedIt" model, and while your analysis is awesome I would rather migrate to another sim (if and when Microprose decides to raise back from the dead, or the unspeakable BMS thing) rather than spending hours on end trying to fix something broken. Hell, DCS 2.5.5 was working so smoothly and beautifully it was unbelievable. I do appreciate 2.5.6 is OB and everything, but I feel like the cost/benefit for the new lighting system is a bit uneven... I've lost about 30% performance for some better lighting (which was OK before, anyway). I don't like where DCS is going and the fact that devs are blaming it on leftover spaghetti from people who left the company. If it is your product and your company, you should fix it and not expect the users to go through hoops to make your product work for them. All in all, good analysis and I hope ED will take notes (as I'm sure they'll do) and fix things (here not so sure, but this is just my opinion). I will wait patiently and keep tinkering with my external instruments exports and Helios, which is my current favorite timesink.

I was in that position, dude. Then rolled back to NVIDIA 442.72 and stuff was fine. I have since re-upgraded and loathed it, so I'm in the process of restoring 442.72 and its settings...

I had this issue and what fixed it for me was rolling back nvidia drivers to 442.xx

Honestly, I have the opposite experience with 445.75 killing performance in multiplayer to where it's unplayable. Go figure. EDIT: I gave it a spin, and now I've got freezes every 5-10 seconds, still haven't tried VR.

Possibly, not quite at max but you could go reasonably high (no super-expensive shadows and AA settings) at 1080p, maybe even 1440. Especially if you are looking at running the stable version 2.5.5. If you are aiming for 2.5.6, well that's a different story. I have 9700k@5GHz, 32 GB RAM and 2080ti and sometimes I'm in the 30s (at 1440p)

Is ICQ still a thing?

Just - instal SRS, - run its server, - connect to it locally, - display radio overlay - mess with radio volume - ??? - profit.

what other jets? is this something that is doable in the F16 / F18?

Fair enough.

Wow, all that stuff and not even a summary page to go in the kneeboard.

Although HoF (meaning when the canister "pops") should change the footprint (i.e. the area covered.) More time in the wind=more dispersal. Then yes, the submunitions function at the same altitude, but if the canister pops at 2000ft (AGL, we're always talking AGL, right?) and you have a 30knots wind the area covered (thus the density per sq. km, so to speak) should be different than canister popping at 500ft and no wind THEREFORE the chance to hit varies a lot. I would think that the current implementation of the CBU-105 (IDK what's a BLU-108 is) is faulty... but knowing how the government procures things, that's probably how it works in real life (as in: it sucks).

Weeeeell I did lose some TCNs along the way and had to re tune to different ones (Creech, Boulder City, plus a couple of others). No big deal, but it's annoying and if this goes on while "aggressing" others it quickly becomes a burden you don't want to have. Just saying.

TBH I did get faulty stuff from VIRPIL. Opened two tickets, they were eventually resolved and I ended up with new hardware (base cable and a whole new 200mm extension + an extra extension's internal cable). I had to wait about three months tho.But they got them to me, with no extra costs (not even had to send the faulty hardware back, pics were sufficient). So, yeah, customer service can be crappy long in getting to you, but it will, eventually. And hopefully this will change with time, I say hopefully because faults apart, their hardware is pretty good, software isv good too, and looks like it will last for years. All in all, I would say go for it, just be prepared to communicate and wait in case stuff does not work out as it should initially.

Same here. In my experience, there's a factor that complicates things, exporting Hornet's (and Viper's) displays comes with a degree of fuzziness which depends ALSO on the resolution of your main monitor and your secondaries, so there's some "fine tuning" needed "in presence" (cannot be done remotely). And this is why numbers that work for somebody won't work for other people. I myself have a 28inch at 1440p, and export on two 8" and a touch 7" all in 1024x768, getting the fuzziness right on all screens (including the main) has not been trivial. Tl;dr: it is a long process and hardware-dependant, which is why ED doesn't do it out of the box. I'm sure somebody here could coach you, an I would go with that, otherwise it is just like asking somebody to tune your custom bike remotely sending you the parameters without actually trying it with the engine running.

Roger, what was unclear is that I get the message to vacate via alpha, but there's no humvee waiting there, I "bumped" into them going to what I thought was a good spot for parking. I'll try it again just to make sure it works... I was starting to think it was me "wandering" too far off the AWACS I'm supposedly escorting, or not managing my wingman, IDK. However, thanks for your work and for taking the time to follow up/answer. I imagine how much work goes into designing something like that.

So I've redone the first mission a couple of times. Magic 1-1 lands, I land (obv with full ATC spacebar-interaction). Music plays. So i touch down and ATC tells me to vacate via Alpha (which is at the end of 21L), and contact ground on ch3 comm2... I vacate, switch to that channel... listen... press spacebar... mash spacebar... nothing. I continue taxiing and arrive at a parking spot with about 5 HMMWVs... at which point I was ready to call it a night. We've all landed. Comms were done (well ground was absent but hey...) Music has played. Exit. Campaign failed... WHY?

Unbelievable. At least I have a list now.

This man gets it.

What's the point tho? You'd be better off mapping ctrl-k to the joystick (e.g. with joystick gremlin) or directly in DCS's control options. Voiceattack is for voice commands. Also, the original question has more to do with how Voiceattack works than Vaicom.

Edit: just read previous answer. Eh I'll leave mine there anyways.

That would be by selecting ATRK for a static target or an area, PTRK for a moving target. Note that when you manoeuver and the target is masked (by your plane or the terrain) PTRK should try to "guesstimate" the location of the target, i.e. it will continue to "pan" in the direction and at the angular speed last known for the target so when it reappears the TPOD should reacquire it. I'm a noob myself and this is my understanding of the Hornet's implementation of the 28, based on my years of blowing s**t up with the Warthog.

No I was talking about starting it with the config tool. I uninstalled and switched fully to DCS Updater from skatezilla, that is bearable. With DCS Configurator I was looking a loading times in the order of a couple of minutes (100-120 secondsa) for the DCS splash screen to appear... DCS Updater is instant in calling DCS, then the normal DCS loading applies. Also here 9700k@5.1, 32 GB, 2080ti and DCS is installed on an SSD.

also, about the IFFCC test page not showing up, see here https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4237708&postcount=5371 seems like the default head positioning makes impossible to see it, either drop your seat position or use the repositioning commands (CTRL+SHIFT+numpad arrows) to lower your POV and you'll see it.