Scott-S6

Mine's here.The quality issue is overblown, imo (and I'm very fussy about this). An extra 10% GF would have made it look and feel better but it's fine, it doesn't creak or flex. My main complaint is that the two-way hats are very sloppy. (other than the usual of virpil adding press to hats that are not shaped or positioned for it to work ergonomically but that's not hard to eliminate)

Other grips, which I already have. I don't need a 64 grip specifically (I fly lots of aircraft and even if replica controls were available for all of them constantly swapping would become tedious very quickly). I ordered the 64 grip because it's the most versatile option but that's not sufficient for me to tolerate a poor quality unit.

This is concerning. I was expecting the same PA GF material as their other sticks. If this is standard and not just a poor mix on Lumbergh's example then I'll be returning mine.

The audio device you select for headset only gets the audio that plays in the pilot's headset, not the general cockpit audio so what you described is exactly correct for the options you selected. You want the cockpit audio to go to the buttkicker and to your headset. That requires additional software - see the buttkicker software.

Yes, I am a wizard.

You should ask in the thrustmaster sub-forum, this is for controls from Total Controls. Also, this might help https://ts.thrustmaster.com/download/accessories/pc/hotas/manual/HOTAS_Warthog/HWarthog_Bootloader_Method.pdf

While it doesn't come with a damper, fitting/removing the spring is easy and installing a damper is easy.

I've yet to see a lower-end android device that wasn't awful. Especially Samsungs. But I've always had flagship devices ever since Android launched so my expectations are rather colored by that. I'm not a big fan of Helios and for a UFC its two-way communication with DCS isn't needed. I used to use macropad but have since abandoned touchscreens in the cockpit using physical controls for everything - a trio of streamdeck XLs is the core of that with one of them as UFC.

You just go to whatever keybind and instead of pressing a button rotate the encoder in one direction. Then pick the opposite keybind and rotate the encoder in the opposite direction. It's as simple as that.

You can have a UFC that you interact with on an additional monitor and an additional monitor that does not expand the rendered game area imposes very little GPU load. It doesn't even need to be driven from your GPU. A good android tablet (which definitely isn't the majority of them) is a lot more expensive than a small touchscreen display.

Why an android tablet when you could just get a small monitor?

Here's some more pics. The seatbox has a really aggressive curvature that's very comfortable. It sits in a simple wooden frame that centers it and holds it at the correct angle (easy to make with a table saw). The cushion set has a hexagonal gel pad in the base (that's how MB describe what they're currently using and it seemed like a good idea) while the back is stuffed with cotton wadding (the better quality version of what you use to fill stuffed animals). The outer of it is Dupont Cordura which is definitely not an authentic material (it melts and then burns in a fire) but is comfortable and fairly inexpensive. If anyone can identify which aircraft this seatbox was used in that would be interesting.

Seat box was eBay (there's a bunch of NOS still available), cover set was DIY

The sun only moves if the mission time isn't set to static. And I entirely agree that the cockpit is by far the most significant shadow/lighting effect.

The reason that the comparison to movies is bogus is because everything is prerendered. In games you have to make the differentiation between what you can prerender and what must be rendered realtime. Streetlights in a city casting shadows on buildings and static street objects is completely pointless as an application for realtime raytracing - you can use raytracing in your environment modelling app to create pre-rendered lighting and shadow maps, getting the same effect without real-time raytracing (no need for GPU or game engine support, drastically less GPU load) and this has been done for a long time. This isn't "faking" it or approximating it, it simply doesn't need to be raytraced realtime since the light sources and objects are static. Raytracing the shadows for a car moving on the street could be a use case for realtime raytracing as the alternative is to approximate those shadows. The question is - will you as a DCS pilot be able to tell the difference or even see those shadows? The use cases for real time rendering are quite specific and many have little relevance to DCS.

You're completely missing the point, especially with that comparison to movies. Cities don't need raytracing because the light sources and the buildings are static. You can create a shadow texture map with pre-rendered raytracing and then no raytracing is needed by the game during run time (which is what we're talking about here - realtime raytracing, not pre-rendered raytracing which has been widely used for environmental lighting and shadows for a long time). All realtime raytracing would add is dynamic shadows to vehicles moving about or reflections on their glass. Is that something that you're even going to see? CP2077 is a great example. The environmental lighting could have be done without realtime raytracing using conventional techniques. All RT really did that couldn't have been done conventionally was the reflections on vehicles and the wet street at night and there are well established techniques to approximate that. It's far more novelty than anything else. Now, a co-op horror game where one of you has a flashlight and the other has a gun would be a fantastic use of raytracing. It would be core to gameplay as you have to think about your positioning relative to each other and the environment. The player with the flashlight isn't really going to see it (you could even make RT optional for him) but for the player without it's going to look awesome.

But lots of those can be easily approximated in an environment like DCS where there is usually only one significant light source. Light through clouds definitely does not require ray tracing and the shadows cast by an explosion are so brief (literally less than a single frame where the explosion is bright enough for them to be visible in daylight) that they are a great example of "who cares?". Cities don't need raytracing, static light sources against static terrain casts static shadows and there are many much simpler techniques. There are other use cases where a good approximation is difficult and ray tracing makes a difference but this isn't it. Shadows don't need ray tracing when there's only one light source. Lots of other methods are available. It's very telling that there are so few examples of ray tracing actually making a difference, even in games where the lighting and shadows are far more visible. I have a 4090 so I can run max raytracing on everyrhing and most of the time it is highly underwhelming. First person games where you are moving with other characters that also have light sources is pretty much the only time that it's at all impressive. Search and rescue with a group of helicopters using spotlights at night in cramped environments would be awesome but for most of DCS raytracing would do very little.

Is ray tracing even useful for DCS? The only shadow fidelity we care about is the cockpit shadows and with only one light source they're easily faked. The only place you'd really see ray tracing doing anything is on the deck of a carrier at night. Not worth implementing, imo.

On the realsimulator news page - "Finally, we advise you to pay attention to our website because in the coming days, we will present new products!" So, throttles maybe?

You'll probably need to make a couple of brackets. Shouldn't be anything difficult.

I follow their discord, there's been some more recent news than that. It's not looking great but they're trying to save the project. If RS ever make their throttle available, I'll buy one. It's not ideal, not being a dual throttle, I could make use of it. ETA RS page says new products being announced shortly. Look at the controls on the throttle - a couple of buttons, one hat, one toggle. It's basically useless. There's a reason that they've been trying to sell that for months. Might be okay for the F5, not for anything more modern. Easier to start from scratch than make that into a versatile throttle for gen4/4+ aircraft - the grip isn't large enough or appropriately shaped to accommodate a bunch of additional controls.

The F/GT has basically the same seat. The problem is that seat pan is too flat (the wedge shaped cushions do not solve the problem). It needs to be angled. The way that it's secured, angling the seat pan is a pain. What you want to do is make a wood or metal wedge to go between the pan and the cushions. You want about 15-20deg. I managed to get it comfortable that way but then I put a real seatbox in and it's great.

Few good options for a real one - newer stuff can't be acquired legitimately and the older stuff has far fewer controls on it. I'm pretty sure the CM4 will have basically the same problems. The CM1-3 are all minor iterations on the same design and some of the problems are inherent to it being usable on a desktop which isn't going to change. Thanks for the suggestion re GVL but if I can't find something suitable I'll make my own.

I'm looking for a high quality dual throttle. As long as it has a good enough selection of controls to be versatile, I don't really care what it's a replica of (or if it's a replica of anything). I'm currently using a Virpil CM3 which is fine for the mix of controls it provides and the software is great but the hats, buttons and grip could all be be better. I'm also not a fan of the very short arm which causes it to rotate excessively through it's travel. I've had WW and TM, underwhelmed. Is there a higher end option that I'm not considering who are actually willing to sell to private individuals? For some context in terms of quality, I'm happy with realsimulator and virtualfly. I'm hoping that the falcon matters EF throttle will actually happen and be what I'm looking for but in the mean time, any ideas?

This is the correct answer for monitor mounting but I don't think that's what he's doing.