PitbullVicious

My humble contribution. My first kill(s) on-line on F-5E vs MiG-21 server.

Thanks, Dojo. I do have a rug kind of carpet under my chair. The video was actually very enlightening, I always imagined a buttkicker to be more of a superwoofer kind of solution, but that seems not to be the case. Unfortunately, from the video it is very difficult to judge low frequency vibrations that usually travel well through the wooden construction (as my apartment is) quite readily. Hmm.. I am very tempted to give it a try, though :D

Interesting podcast once again, thanks! I just have one question (I don't think this came up in the podcast, but as I listened @ work I may have missed that part): Does my downstairs neighbour want to kick my butt, if I install a buttkicker into my office chair at home? I.e. I'm wondering how powerful these are and how much they "leak" to outside world? I'm living in a Japanese apartment, which are generally not known for their great sound insulation...

BTW, here's a video of the test mission, before I changed the APCs to BMP/Ds:

As the L-model came out, I created a test mission, first with 5 infantry and 5 unarmed APCs. The mission was basically flying low through a village, with some trees as cover in the end and then popping up behind those trees and running in aggressively with guns blazing and rockets flying. Great fun, especially with Oculus Rift. Later as I got a bit more confident, I thought I'd try a little more challenging target and changed two of the APCs to BMP-1 and BMD-1. On the next run I again flew around the village, skimming the ground and finally going to my final hideout behind the trees to check that everything is ready. As I start my pop-up, a Sagger missile (which I had completely failed to expect) comes screaming from behind the trees and as I'm gaining altitude just misses me from below. All this in glorious 3D with OR. As the missile went underneath my helicopter, I for the first time understood literally and very physically the term "pucker factor".

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2834997&postcount=78

This problem was introduced in beta. You need to unbind the WSO's missile launch button, IIRC.

Question about the cyclic stick functionality between L and M models: From this thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=166310 I've understood that the trigger in M model is used for radio, as in Huey, but in the L model it is used to fire weapons. If this is true how is the radio operated in the L model (in the real Gazelle)? Would it be possible to implement separate bindings for L model and M model in the future, so that us who want to emulate the buttons as close to the real thing as possible with our HOTAS (I think it's not possible to bind the trigger for two different functionality at the moment.. I'm thinking about adding this to the enhancement thread, if my current understanding proves to be correct :) )?

One thing confusing this discussion might be that the "real" CCM for S530D are only in the Open Beta version currently, along with other changes on how the CCM operates, I think. Although, I think that as jojo describes you can "misuse" (=contrary to what has been described in the manual) the CCM in the stable release version with S530D. 104th is using the stable release version, right?

Ah, indeed. I interpreted the original post wrong (or didn't read it properly.. shame on me). The edit makes the aim of the poll clearer.

Maybe the results will be a bit skewed in this particular sub-forum?

I'm just wondering if there isn't more efficient (anti-aliasing?) algorithm to come up with similar results... I'm sure someone will come up with one at some point, as consumer VR is still very much in its infancy. Now that VR has shown its commercial potentiality, I'm sure we'll see some improvements on both hardware as well as software front, and I will be definitely looking forward to them :) The VR settings and pixel density in DCS are first steps to this direction, I believe.

Same with me. Airframe clipping seems to be better, though in the internal views (used to lose parts from wings and ailerons). In external views some plane parts (e.g. pylons) seem to pop in and out still.

I'm just glad I pushed back playing the UN Pilot campaign until now that I've got OR. Fun campaign to begin with and really becomes alive with VR!

"PayPal does not currently support Donation Payments from buyers in JP. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause." :/

Works for me quite nicely (x2.0) in the instant missions at least, but only in 2.0. In 1.5 I get really bad performance and I'm kind of hoping this is due to the transition to 2.5, and not only because desert vs Caucasus, and things will get better. BTW, Elite supports supersampling natively, so no need to set it from the debug tool. And so will DCS at some point (verified by Wags, among with "other enhancements") :)

Pretty much just install Oculus' software and configure with it. And then start DCS and check "Auto detect Oculus Rift" from the settings menu and it should work (requires a restart, though). P.S. NumPad 5 centres your view once in DCS.

Edited: Misread the post above.

About performance difference between 1.5 and 2.0. 1.5 has been lately performing much worse than 2.0, especially with Rift CV1. Graphics settings for both are the same: Everything highest setting, apart from Visib Range, which is Ultra. No Lens effects or DOF. For example, comparing the M2000-C instant action missions Caucasus Missile Combat in 1.5 and Constant Peg II 2.0: In 2.0 the frame rate drops at worst around 45, which is still playable with ATW, and is usually around 80-90, which means that lowerign settings I can easily use 2.0x "supersampling" ( ). In 1.5 the frame rate is around 20-40 and dropping to 14 at worst. I'm hoping that is due to some engine / map optimization and not just the inherently more complex nature (more trees, mountains and buildings) of the Caucasus map, but does anyone at ED have any reassuring words about this? I.e. can I expect improvement on FPS with the Caucasus map when 2.5 will eventually be released?

Thanks!

I'm sure this must have been mentioned somewhere, but as I couldn't find it even with advanced search: How much ammo does the Gazelle carry for the gun?

Good to hear my intuition wasn't completely off then. I'd also imagine that a "simple noise jammer" isn't the only jamming technique used and that in reality situation is more complex. As also the video, while being rather old material, demonstrated (thanks for that QuiGon).

Very interesting discussion. Thanks everyone for participating. P.S. I ended up ordering this book to understand radars and jamming a bit better: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B017HXE81Y/ref=docs-os-doi_0 Might take some time to go through, but seems interesting. Most good looking books about ECM seem to come with a hefty price tag, like this series: https://www.amazon.com/EW-104-Electronic-Warfare-Generation-ebook/dp/B010G7GJRE/

Thanks for the reply, Azrayen. To be honest, I'm not at all knowledgeable about the details of how jamming and radars work (the basic idea I understand, but is jamming effective from beyond the "field-of-view" of the radar and other details are a bit shady). I guess I need to read a little bit more into how jamming works to figure out if it makes even sense in terms of physics if narrowing the beam would mean faster burn through. Intuitively it seems so (the more focused beam could be distinguished from the noise created by the jammer earlier than a beam which energy is spread over larger area), but my intuition has been wrong before :) I'd imagine things like signal processing etc comes into play when discussing the details, and as you wrote, the actual performance is most likely classified information.

As we are on the topic about jamming, two questions: 1) About being jammed: Should narrowing the radar beam (both lines and azimuth) and pointing it manually towards the jamming target mean faster burn through IRL? And if yes, is this currently modelled in DCS M2k (I got the impression that it doesn't from both PvE and PvP)? 2) About jamming the enemy: Does jamming also hide my altitude information? Especially, if jamming, is it possible for the enemy still to estimate if I'm above or below him, for example by changing the elevation of the radar (or is this also plane / radar dependent)? Cheers! - PitbullVicious