Scott-S6

The USAF NGFWH has the whole head mounted display and visor pull off to mount NVGs. They also tested using the head mounted display with cameras and determined that it was inferior. Camera/display based NV systems have a long way to go. An NV system inferior to regular NVGs would be a nice addition?

Were you losing the fuel in that wing?

There is a vocal portion of the community that does not understand, over hypes themselves based on anything and then complains when their overinflated expectations don't match reality. I can see why a small dev team would choose to just not communicate.

I had to make a box to climb onto in order to step onto the seat and the handrail the armrest is attached to takes the place of the cockpit sidewall which you need to lean on in order to get your right foot down into into the cockpit well. BTW triathlon bar kits are a good source of cheap arm rest pieces.

There's a simple solution - calibrate the jet to your throttle and leave simap pro with the same settings for all of them.

You can put the PTSD back on standby. Electronic Arts can't hurt you here.

You don't have an arm rest?

Two weeks is a running joke. There's no date announced.

The south Atlantic map currently has animals as part of "civilian traffic" for exactly that reason. Hopefully the OnRe team are doing the same here.

Let's hope it's not like the F16 - that damage model needs a lot of work.

A shame that you didn't read the first sentence of his post which references exactly that.

Very tiring unless you trim constantly. On the other hand, the instant snap back to center works well with the trimming function.

It's 16 and it makes a huge difference. If you've got the stick in the right position you simply can't get form a proper grip without that angle. The alternative to an adaptor is simply to mount the whole unit (base+grip) angled forward.

Yes. The RS isn't one to one but the rigid center that very slightly displaces as you add force with max force and max displacement being reached simultaneously is correct.

Got it. I've been working on something to automate lua edits and it's incorrectly edited the EHSI_init.lua. Killed the instrument completely. Entirely my fault. I'm now wondering how long it's been dead without me noticing... Easy fix.

Sure. Given that it's dead in hot start as well, I don't think it's procedure. It'd be interesting if you see it light up as usual though. This is a highly abbreviated startup (no non-essential tests) but I've been using this checklist for ages. EHSI_start_test.trk

The EHSI is dead in hot start missions / instant action missions as well. Interesting. Thread title edited and OP updated. Also, I feel slightly less dumb.

I haven't flown the viper in a few months and my EHSI isn't turning on (dead screen - in the cockpit as well as in my cockpit so it's not an export issue). Checked my startup checklist and ran through the training mission again. Nothing. Has something changed? I'm on 2.8 stable. The EHSI is dead in hot start missions / instant action missions as well. Disabled my EHSI export. No change. I have changed GPU recently and added a new stick but this seems like an oddly specific fault to be related to those...

This is a huge problem with the winwing. Having used an RS base with a "standard" and correct 16deg grip, there is no comparison. The more upright position is just wrong.

No, that's not how the real unit works and also not how the RS works. There should be no central slop, just gradual displacement as you apply more pressure. See the chart above where displacement is linear with force. I have no idea why winwing went with that implementation but it's definitely not correct.

Deleting them is useless when you need to keep the space free for the next time it updates and redownloads them. Your batch file is pointless. A livery manager would be an actual solution rather than the many gigs of liveries being included by default.

It can be a good thing for someone that is extremely driven - even if they don't get to that dream they'll still get a long way. Other people will accomplish nothing while waiting for the dream to fall in their lap and would have done better with a much more attainable goal.

That would be a good approach if you could find interviews with pilots that have extensive recent experience flying both aircraft. I am not aware that such things exist. The perspective of a pilot that's only flown one isn't especially useful and neither is the account of some that hasn't flown for a considerable period, human memory is extremely fallible (the chap that runs realsimulator regularly has ex-viper pilots telling him that the stick forces are too high, he used to argue with them but now just invites them to try the real unit he has in his work shop (much higher forces than his consumer grade unit))

Lots of people are interested in doing things they can't afford to do. It has nothing to do with anything. ED (and other devs) need to make profit or there will be no more modules. There is no sustainable price at which everyone that might want it can afford it, there will always be someone that can't. Their job is to balance profit per sale with total sales to get the optimum balance. You can see that module prices have tracked pretty closely to the upper end of new video game releases which suggests that it's not a prohibitive price. Also, rudel makes an excellent point - if you can afford the computer and controllers is buying one or two modules a year really a problem? Especially with regular sales. ETA, it's pretty fun that in here you're talking about how the modules should be cheaper so that everyone can afford them but in another thread you're telling a guy that his 3070 is obsolete and "who would even buy less than a 3080 to play DCS?".

As is so often the case, the community solves the problem. Spreadsheet to generate throttle curve to align the detent on each aircraft with your throttle's physical detent. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3315617/