some1

It may be related to the issue I reported here, example track attached in that thread

I noticed that this aircraft is much harder to fly in formation during aerial refuelling than other DCS modules, because engine's reaction to throttle changes is more sluggish than in other airplanes. For example going from 85% RPM to 90% RPM takes several more seconds than in MiG-29, which is like 2-3x slower. And that aircraft is using a modified version of the same engine. Don't know which one is accurate, but it's worth double checking your sources.

The mach gauge should have marks at 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8... etc. In DCS the scale goes straight from 0.5 to 1.0. The same issue is also present in DCS F-15C airspeed indicator.

Attached is a simple mission, just load it and the lights will turn on. The issue is that in all aircraft, the fluorescent instruments start to glow on a sunny day (no overcast). The effect is rather awkward, but it's particularly bad in the Anton because the lights glow is also incorrectly wired to that effect and not the actual lamps. Fw-190A.miz

Many parts in the cockpit have wrong texture/material properties, that make them mirror-like in 2.7. Namely the floor, rear cabin wall, sticks, pedals, central console and roof escape hatch.

The view related commands that were added in the recent patches (like "Rshift-T") are not included in joystick default.lua. It's impossible to assign the new commands to joystick buttons, only keyboard shortcuts are possible.

Looks like I'm talking to myself here, but the issue is still there.

It's not a LOD error. You've just found one of many 20 year old models that are still in the game.

All PAPI lights are very dim in 2.7, not only on this airport.

New propeller effects also coming to I-16

All the testing was done in 2.5.6.

Thanks for the explanation Yes, valid point that Su-27 is a bit short for a bomber. On the other hand, the amount of error currently introduced is significant and even against a bigger target will result in a miss. Pictures from Tacview are a bit misleading as the objects in this program are scaled up for visibility. Bullets in the simulator pass several aircraft lengths behind.

Works for me, did not notice any issues, maybe except some new effects causing severe fps drop. 80% gpu usage sounds a bit too high for reprojection to work. It requires some headroom left. You can always enable the indicator overlay and check how is it working https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/mixed-reality/enthusiast-guide/using-steamvr-with-windows-mixed-reality Also make sure HAGS is disabled, it can mess with reprojection.

1. The black parts behind the panel now have glass-like dynamic reflections: 2. The front side panels are still super reflective in the sun:

And the rest of it could be water. The methanol in the mix was just an antifreeze and maybe helped with corrosion a bit. Water injection actually reduces fuel consumption a bit, and having direct fuel injection can significantly help with fuel economy. But yes, the numbers in the manual do not match what's in the game.

There is a whistling sound when the aircraft is turning, much like in a P51 Mustang. That's fine, but the sound can also be heard on the ground, even with engine off.

Clouds really transformed the game, but also kudos to ED and 3rd parties for all the fixes and improvements. This is one massive patch.

Most likely from vr too. There's no point in having a mask that's only in 2d. It's part of the rendering process, to save a few clicks of GPU utilisation.

This data does not change over time in a scenario I described here. Distance is constant. Angular rates are constant. Speed, altitude, everything is constant. Of course taking a shot at an uncooperative, manoeuvring enemy fighter is more art than science, but that's a different story. This one here is just a bit of math, as long as your sensors are accurate.

I've been playing the same scenario with various DCS aircraft, some are accurate out of the box, the rest like F-14 consistently undershoot. In these aircraft it's just a matter of adding extra lead to what the gunsight is showing. That's why it seems suspicious, as it looks more like an error in bullets ballistic calculations, than anything else. Flying in circles with non-manoeuvring target, it shouldn't really matter if the gunsight is historical or not. Relative to the shooter, the target is in the same place as it was one time of flight ago, or will be one time of flight in the future. It's just a matter of taking the range from the radar, angular rates from the gyros (or INS), and calculating where the bullets would be after travelling that distance.

Thanks for the write up. I understand what you're saying, and although the DCS simulation does not currently behave like you describe, one can argue that the end result is the same, and that means you cannot consistently snipe targets from afar.

I'm all for inaccuracy if that's what the real thing is doing, but currently what we have in DCS F-14 looks to be "accurately inaccurate".

It doesn't wander. It just shows you incorrect place in the sky, 100% of the time (not enough lead). And BATR cue always shows lagging behind the pipper. Like the computer can predict actual bullets path, but it shows you pipper in a different place nonetheless, and switches to correct solution only after you fire the bullets. Anything closer than 0.4 nm (2400ft) and you get a huge flashing breakaway X on the HUD. I agree that's quite far for a gun shot, but hey, I just follow the limits shown on the screens. Anyway, if you get closer and aim for the canopy, you'll hit his engines at best.

It just has this eerie, almost spaceship look at some angles

My experience with HAGS is that it broke WMR automatic reprojection. Did not test with the latest driver.