Lurker

I don't think distance should really be something that should be that obvious, as the ranger in the RADUGa sight, is very, very basic and not very accurate. However, threat should definitely be something that the target list should indicate, I.E. Highest threat on the top, lowest on the bottom, as long as Petrovich can identify them.

Let's hope that work on the weather doesn't go on the backburner, since it's some of the most, if not the most impressive I've yet seen in any simulator or game.

Aha, okay I see what you mean now.

You are assuming that it's the rendering that is the cause of the slowdown, in fact I think that the main issue is the actual ballistic calculations.

In Nineline's video, apart from one tank which has lost a sliver of "health", those T55s are completely undamaged. To me this indicates that there is definitely room for improvement in the damage modeling of ground units.

@Raptor9 thanks again for that extensive reply and explanation! While some may abhor walls of text, I really appreciate the detail and effort and as a result have a pretty clear understanding of the AP logic at work in the Apache.

I assume you mean choppers? If you mean the Mi24P and the Apache they are not really that similar. Not really. Apart from carrying somewhat similar loadouts their tactical use is drastically different. More importantly I can fly and fight in the Hind right now, while I will have to wait god knows how long to get access to the Apache. In my book the Apache is the less interesting helicopter, but I'm having so much fun with multicrew in the Hind that I will gladly buy the Apache just to experience it in a more modern helicopter.

Vulkan should be pretty much GPU agnostic. It's basically a modern more fancy version of OpenGL, or at least it's heavily based on OpenGL, and should work equally well with either Nvidia or AMD graphics cards.

You should really get the Hind, it will tide you over nicely until the Longbow.

No but you usually get wind direction\speed in the mission briefing (or you should) and again there is the Mk1 eyeball. Look for smoke stacks, or on airfields look for the little wind socks

There are currently certain issues with the flight model of the Mi24, the devs have acknowledged that the SAS channels and trim need tuning and that there are some edge cases of the flight envelope which need to be investigated. I think that the Mi24 flight model is probably more advanced than the Mi8, but again that is only in edge cases and should not be affecting normal flight. The Mi8 definitely feels more stable and more behaved than the Mi24, which I believe is not how it should be, since the Mi24 was developed to be more stable than the Mi8. I don't think that the Mi8's FM is anything but simple, PilotMi8 the lead developer used to fly on that type, and I'm pretty certain that it is very accurate in most flight conditions. One more thing to consider, unless it is fully loaded or carrying a sling load the Mi8 is much lighter than a Mi24, especially a fully armed and fueled Mi24P.

@Raptor9 thank you for that very detailed and very informative explanation! Seems like the Apache is going to be much more hands on than the Hind, which you can basically land without touching the pedals (if you trim it out correctly and when the damn SAS channels behave, that is) I also have a feeling that the controls with the particular design philosophy and solution of the Apache, are probably going to be much more intuitive to operate once we get the hang of it. I foresee one possible issue though, and that is force trimming the pedals. I have a MSFFB2 joystick which is wonderful for flying choppers, but none of us have force feedback pedals. Which brings me to a follow-up question. Say I'm flying on a given heading once again trimmed out, I push the trimmer and make a 90 degree turn and release the trimmer but I didn't really use the pedals in the turn it was kind of messy and uncoordinated and they aren't really very well trimmed out for the new heading, am I correct in assuming that the SAS computer will try and correct the yaw for this new heading as long as the pedals were not trimmed out previously beyond the so called "SAS sleeve" authority for the current new heading?

So now that I'm learning the ins and outs of SAS channels in the Hind, and after reading this thread I'm left with one question. In the Hind, the YAW AP SAS channel will hold a heading for a given torque. I.E. when you increase collective the SAS channel will automatically press the power pedal to compensate and keep the helicopter stable and vice versa. How does this work in the Apache? Does it's yaw channel compensate for torque changes or is it "simpler" which means that it would only hold a heading for a given trim condition at that particular time. I.E. you trim the helicopter for a stable hover, You then increase the collective and would need to push on the power pedal to keep the helicopter stable?

While most helicopters in DCS so far have been rather undemanding, the Hind's rotor is I think it's biggest FPS killer. It definitely needs some optimizations. So while I wouldn't like to see it removed, I think it does need optimizing. In fact the whole module is very demanding and could use some optimizations for more FPS.

Yeah me too. Although I don't think we'd be gaining much, since we're on a 3090RTX and probably CPU limited at this point. I think the biggest gains will come if or when Eagle Dynamics manage to make DCS truly hyperthreaded. Possibly some gains with Vulcan, but IMO the single biggest problem with VR in DCS at this point is how much CPU overhead it requires. If they ever manage to get it working on multiple threads, as well as scalable to multiple cores, then upscaling tech like DLSS would be a godsend. However I sincerely doubt that DLSS will ever be considered for DCS, as Eagle Dynamics have stated on multiple occasions that they are not interested in proprietary technology. AMD's FidelityFX is probably a safer bet in DCS since it works on all GPUs however I wouldn't expect official support for a long time. (Or at least until they manage to push out Vulcan out the door)

This "could" be correct behavior if you've executed a turn just using a cyclic and did not correct with pedals. The helicopter will try to yaw back to it's last known heading. This is fairly easy to check. The next time it happens, just push the pedals into the heading you want the helicopter to take and when you achieve the desired nose position release the pedals to neutral. They will still be deflected (depending on torque, speed etc) but the helicopter should then be pointing in the desired direction.

This should not be happening. It might be some kind of control\trim bug. If you're flying with the YAW AP SAS channel on, then what should be happening is that the helicopter will try to YAW into the last known heading for any given torque. Always use your pedals in turns (this disables the YAW AP channel, and sets a new heading after pedals are returned to neurtral) and correct as necessary (again with pedals). You should never have to use trim reset, except maybe in an emergency. I'm not sure that the real chopper even has a trim reset button. (Please correct me if Im wrong about this)

You must be new around here, add 3-6 months to most Eagle Dynamics estimates to get a realistic time frame for release. That is, unless it has been delayed or has run into implementation issues which might delay it even more, in which case implement "Everything is subject to change" logic.

That's not accurate at all. It's only an indicator but can't represent anything other than core usage. If a core has to wait for example, while another core is doing something (or another system component) it will sit at idle. You could have a process that is slowing down your entire system without it being noticed as an overhead in core usage. Before your hardware upgrade I suggest you do a complete re-install of windows. It's what I would do if I had your symptoms.

The helicopter will naturally want to weathervane into the wind. You can fight this tendency by doing what you are suggesting but it's possibly dangerous because in the real world the wind rarely blows at the exact same speed or does so without changing direction. The only reason why you would want to do what you are suggesting is if you are overweight and don't have enough tail rotor authority for vertical landings, in which case you should not even attempt a vertical landing in the first place.

You are oversimplifying it. So you spread the calculations over numerous threads. How do you sync them? How do you do this without creating extra overhead, while you already have to calculate hundreds of rounds per minute traveling from point A to point B? No this is not how hyperthreading is done, you can't just offload one little bit of the sim onto a few other cores and be done with it. All of it needs to be properly multithreaded with all of the threads in sync and communicating with each other without extra overhead and without waiting for each other, otherwise you will get an even more jumbled mess that will work less efficiently than a single core solution.

I'd say that realistically, the AH64D is at least a year away from early access. Again, realistically the FCR is probably going to be released a year on down the line from that and I really doubt all of it's modes will be available "out of the box" so to speak. And yes, I am aware that Eagle Dynamics announced that the Apache will be released into early access this year. I'm just going by previous experience, with how long we have had to wait for their other modules and the state of development the module is in currently. Before you throw me under the bus, I'm not complaining. Just tempering expectations. It's what I've learned to do over the years of flying in DCS. There is plenty to tide me over, currently and most importantly getting to grips with the wonderful Hind. If they do release it this year, then I will be wrong, and pleasantly surprised. No harm done.

If past experience with Eagle Dynamics' radar modelling is anything to go by, and the time it takes them to do so so, then the FCR won't be released for years down the line from Early Access AH64D release. So while I share everyone's enthusiasm for this shiny "new" thing called the FCR on the Longbow, I would seriously consider curbing it and our expectations on how soon we will get it.

Just to be clear, have you eliminated the possibility that any potential malware\adware\bloatware was eating up your CPU cycles?

Apart from the first day, taking it nice and easy in the Hind and keeping my vertical descent rate below 3m/s, I've managed to land it every single time even when coming in almost straight down from a hover with very little translational movement. In my case I'm finding it even easier to control on landing than the HIP, though I am taking it much slower since it is so damn heavy. It's definitely not a helicopter you want to be landing anywhere close to a hot zone, since it's such an easy target on approach and landing. One other thing to consider: Wind. Make sure you are facing into the wind when on approach or before you start your final descent. (This is on vertical landings, not rolling landings) Disclaimer, i use VR, which makes landing helicopters a lot easier due to depth and movement perception.