Schmidtfire

I got into DCS for high level of sim accuracy. Not workarounds on a 69$ module and making my own solutions to mitigate shortcomings in the system modeling. While the technique might work and you are having tonsof fun with it, you will need to re-learn a lot when the systems work as they should. I rather wait for Razbam to overhaul the Harrier than learn wrong procedures.

Don't forget the Mi-24P.

Yes, just like binding a joystick :) Sounds stupid but it works.You have to go under the AXIS settings for each module. The settings is quite high up in the list. It is under Absolute ... shift. Input might not get recognized while binding, so when you are binding try selecting the axis manually from the drop down list. Will see If I can post some settings and curves after work. I also have the wireless version of EDTracker. Try also to keep the USB reciver quite close to you and clear of any objects or magnetic fields. EDIT: I will also post my EDTracker software settings, as I have change the sensitivity and smoothness. EDIT 2: If you are still experience drift. Try mounting the EDTracker in a different way on your headset and recalibrate.

Yeah. It does look a bit strange. I actually stopped use OpenTrack and only use the EDTracker software straight into DCS (binding axis and setting all curves in DCS control settings instead). Actually works really well, and less of a hassle. Another good thing is that you can adjust curves for each individual aircraft. The "lean" in effect is obviously gone. And I use EDTracker roll to slide left and right in the pit. So a bit more rigid, but very solid and reliable. In a real cockpit you are strapped in tight anyways, so not be able to lean in adds to the immersion ;)

I answer both. But VR exclusive in 5-10 years. I go back and forth. VR has the immersion hands down. TIR is the practical choice and also gives the best visuals. Also not as intense if you are a bit tired and flying a session after work with a cold beer on your desk. Biggest items to adress for VR is performance, visual quality and ergonomics.

Not bad considering this thread was started back in 2017 ;) While we keep waiting, Beamscanner has created a temporary fix/mod: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=190090 Passes IC too

Wow! She is a thing of beauty! Look at those curves :) But why does lady with a scythe try to ruin the picture?

It is most likely a DCS issue. Besides maybe making special A-A rocket munition for the pods, it is probably out of Razbams hands. I have seen the same behavior with Ub-16 on MiG21bis or unguided air-air rocket attack with the Flanker. The sheer power alone from close range would damage the target, even if the rocket does not detonate. In Vietnam there was several air-air kills made by Ub-16 pods.

This is my idea/solution for a "Look under" implementation. Head tilts down, NVG's goes up in your field of view. Make NVG's "mask" dynamic. When you look down Y axis, NVG "mask area" moves in opposite direction, up in Y axis on screen and clear any instruments. Sort of simulating a peek under the goggles i cockpit. Hate to sound like a broken record, but this is the best way to simulate something that is kind of complicated to get right in a sim. How much the NVG's will move probably needs some testing and maybe a slider for personal preference.

Very soon? The last timeframe I heard was hopefully sometime this year. Did I miss something?

Looking great, keep up the good work! :)

Is AI gunner planned for the Bo-105? On Huey and Mi-8 it is great when flying solo to let the AI engage the bad guys. It would be very helpful if the AI on Bo-105 could engage targets with HOT/TOW missiles. On the Gazelle you have to go into auto-hover and switch seats, it is fun at times but not always efficient and kills the immersion a bit. It is also very difficult to attack while in forward flight. Not asking for a super advanced "Jester" but basic AI that can engage targets while on the move towards target or in a hover :) Thx

Except R-73 Archer with HMS. That was a really big stick they brought to the fight, as it took like 20 years until the Aim-9X was fielded.

This is one of those difficult areas to simulate. But I think either adjust the NVG’s so they are default set a little bit higher on the screen. Or make it dynamic. When you look down, you sligthly push the NVG fov up in Y axis on screen. Sort of simulating a glance under. Use the same tech as with the JHCMS on the F/A-18C, but adapt it to make the NVG’s animated dynamicly.

Issue is that Eagle Dynamics has not made NVG's adjustable yet. I rather have NVG's set up at HUD height to not interfere with reading gauges and instruments. I still think NVG's are the way to go since the FLIR is also a bit problematic atm. Set up everything you can on ground and have a toggle button ready for NVG's off/on.

What type of GBU is that?

Oh. That is rather simple to not do. No need for special options :)

DCS is not reality. Very, very far from it actually ;) While I don't like cut corners, this is one of those special occasions when "close enough" is good enough. Just like the RWR and other sensitive and classified systems are handled within DCS, this is also one of those "more important to keep functionality items". It does what it is supposed to. Age of map should not be a limiting factor useing this aircraft mainly flown in the 1960's. Im with Zeus67 on this one. Maybe add as a special option for the real hardcore simmers, but I think that this is a good decision for most of DCS MiG-19P flyers.

It is a great module! Perhaps a bit too forgiving at times compared to real life. Amazing climb performance, heavy hitting cannons... F-86F has more gizmos to play around with, but MiG-15bis feels more accurate in my opinion.

Sounds like you are making it more difficult than it is... DCS config is really straight forward, powerful and easy. I would suggest binding everything in-game to avoid any issues.

Good news! I have been in contact with an ED tester. If we somehow can provide detailed and concise reports (including synopses, sources, hard data, steps to reproduce, tracks, etc.) he will submit that to ED. So sharpen your pencil boys. This issue might be easy to change via .lua edit, but we need some documentation to back up how it should be, before they (ED/BST) will make an official change to the current behaviour.

In DCS, missile detection cone / lock is module dependant until it is launched. It is just how DCS is coded and functions. There are probably ways around that with additional coding. Like Aim-9P5 and Aim-9P on the Tiger II or Rb-24 and Rb-74 on the Viggen. It takes more coding to get mixed IR missiles to work correctly. Good example is R-60M missile. Rear-aspect on L-39ZA and all aspect on other aircrafts and modules such as Su-25 and MiG21bis. Why? Because L-39 uses rear aspect R-3S. Same functionality is then inherited when R-60M's are used on the same module.

I think more or less everyone on ED forums are very patient compared to other games or sim titles. Some like to think that DCS does entitle a form of "holy grail freepass" where players are supposed to fork over 60-70$ and be quiet and grateful if bugs are eventually fixed. The majority of DCS users are well behaved and giving constructive criticism all things considered. English forums are (in general) well moderated nowdays. The russian side actually has a much "tougher" climate.

I dispute that. While I agree the FM in general is good, and the hover effect is really well made. - There are still issues with uneaven loads! No jet that behaves like DCS Av-8B does would be put into service as it is too dangerous. I drop one measly Mk82 and the whole airframe turns into something that is a really uncomfortable and difficult to fly. The effect is greatly overdone and should be tweaked/fixed.

Looking great! Still hoping to fly this bird in 2019 :)