SinusoidDelta

Uboats ARG extractor tool may be helpful:https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/1797654/

I'm on mobile at the moment so I can't view the logs. You'll likely get a better response posting the log to this subforum:https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=444

I don't know of anyone who has owned one. I contacted them about a year ago. They only had one model, an F-16 replica, that they would sell for personal use. Pricing was around $3000.

This thread should be of help: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=95985 CptSmiley has done an excellent with the FM.

The OP was not asking about key bindings. Based on the fact that OP created this thread, one can infer he already knew those controls exist. He is asking how or if they should be used. The question was about how the system works during take off/landing and if you manually need to disangage it. The answer is, the NWS disengage function is unnecessary and redundant. It's a relic from the previous PFM. You do not need to hold the NWS disengage during TO roll or landing for NWS to disengage. Once the nose strut is no longer compressed (around 90kts IIRC) NWS is disabled. Keep full aft stick applied at nosewheel touchdown to ensure the nose strut does not compress prematurely. Be very gentle with rudder applications. All things posted in this thread. I'm certainly guilty of giving RL data that may not accurate to what's in the code but it's the best place to start when the devs won't tell us the specifics. Maybe it's not a good approach. Not-so-politely dismissing the validity of every post in a thread and exclaiming a single correct answer exists when that is not at all the case is frankly unnecessary.

DCS isn't an open source product and I don't think there is any business reason for ED/TFC developers to speak to the community. I applaud anyone who is willing to spend their own free time on a project like the OP is trying to tackle. Let's try not to scare those types of community members away.

Few aircraft have visited the stratosphere as often as the F-104 did. That makes it pretty sweet in my book. http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/sky-high-3270307/

The F-15 NWS is engaged whenever the nose strut is compressed (weight on wheels relay in the diagram below). I don't know if it is modeled as such currently.

:lol: I've had the same thing happen a few times. Everything seems to be going well and suddenly boom! I watched your refueling track and the position reconnecting seems reasonable compared to the initial position. Just when it should make contact the boom slips toward the left wing root, slides over the edge and then slips under the left wing. Thats where the track ends. I assume this is where the explosion happens. Night time tracks look absolutely horrendous on my PC. I took some screenshots FWIW. Can you post a daytime track? Edit: I tweaked the image brightness/contrast a bit so hopefully you can see the aircraft instead of only the lights. Position at inital contact Position at reconnect Boom slides off and under the wing

If anyone's interested, the paper linked below has several subsonic/supersonic trajectories and more importantly at several launch angles: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20060004771.pdf

I agree. Currently the Su-27 far exceeds its quoted maximum speed of 2.3M. At It's probably not high on the priority list considering all that ED is working on at the moment. It also doesn't seem to provide any real advantage AFAIK.

Whatever setting allows you to fly realistically. I posted my setting suggestion in the 3rd post in this thread

Upload it to: https://www.dropbox.com and post a link to it here.

It's not solely about curve settings. The F-15 has more aft travel than forward unlike our joysticks which have equal forward/aft travel (see below). The stick also requires much more force to move IRL, ~135N (~30lbs.) for full aft displacement. I think the most "realistic" setting is going to be unique to the type of joystick being used. I may be overselling the user curve settings option but it has worked very well for me. Am I the only person using it? It's actually a deadband in force only AFAIK. 4.5N of force is required before the control surfaces are deflected. (From this paper: https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/87906main_H-1073.pdf Me too :thumbup:

Go for it! Here's another one: http://hackaday.com/2012/11/05/custom-circuit-drives-a-small-round-crt-display/

The manual states the maximum speed is M2.35. I'm still surprised how greatly that number can be exceeded. At those speeds I don't think there should be any guarantee for care free handling. Also from the manual:

....woosh :doh: :lol:

I'd also recommend a stick extension for the most precision. I don't think Stuge was necessarily disagreeing but that you can gain some precision with curves. Even with my VKB Mamba+extension I prefer a user curve similar to the one I posted above. I honestly wouldn't recommend the basic exponential curve setting because it's non linear. With the user curve you can create linear response in segments which helps the muscle memory aspect for larger, sustained G inputs. It also gives the ability to make very precise small inputs for A2A refueling & wing work. As you said though, there isn't one 'correct' setting, only my preference.

You can check the frame rate with the performance HUD, a part of the Oculus SDK: https://developer3.oculus.com/documentation/pcsdk/latest/concepts/dg-hud/

There's also Infinity Aerospace that makes custom functional stick grips for $200... http://infinityaerospace.com/product/featured/military-style-stick-grips/

I'm sad now. The VA was my favorite server.

I prefer the user curve option rather than the exponential curve. The image below is a rough example of what settings I use. Try them out for a baseline and let me know what you think.

Maybe I'm stating the obvious but I feel this is currently the biggest issue with DCS in VR. Everything else is dramatically better in VR. Without imposters it's possible to see the point where an aircraft suddenly vanishes, making BFM and rejoins much more difficult.

The ARI is scheduled such that lateral stick travel with aft stick increases right rudder. Forward stick with lateral input increases left rudder. Here is the ARI scheduling. Note there are two schedules for both flaps up/down: CAS can command up to +/- 15deg rudder deflection and the pedals can command +/-15 deg as well. The full 30deg can only be command with the ARI.

I gues my memory is off. Here is my post from the original bug report: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2505897&postcount=13