Czar

Just go with it without kicking out the crabbing. Timestamped 2:04 and 12:07 further on. The tires will take some sliding as it is usual with fighter jets. The only source I got is practical experience with DCS + Briefing Room, as sometimes that app generates crazy winds, and some videos.

Ahh, apologies. Hmmm, perhaps a few performance passes on the map are incoming. The details of the autogen are higher than in other maps, so is good to keep that in mind. I think you'll have good results with Visibility Range in 'Ultra', SSAO to 'OFF' and ground objects shadows to 'Flat'.

Lord have mercy of my wallet if that Nakajima and Zero become full fidelity modules one day. I still have a few peripherals to get this year. ED is really dragging me to WWII with this. Sensational.

The performance you're getting is pretty rough. This is the Performance I get over Baghdad. Timestamped 5:16.

It puzzles me as well. It is not the first time I see your posts in the forum. The best I can offer is: Check your memory health with memory tests (If everything else fails, because this can be bothersome and a lengthy task. Put it at the end of the list). Reduce or remove overclocks back to factory defaults. Disable ingame SSAO (it causes stutters on my end on some heavy scenes without GPU load reaching 100% for some odd reason. I guess is saturation or something). Use 'flat terrain shadows'. You have it on 'default' which is a MASSIVE hog on performance with autogen in view. If you haven't used 'default' before it may be a good experience. It removes cast shadows from external objects such as hangars on the cockpit, though :(. Visibility Range to 'Ultra' instead of 'Extreme'. Especially on Baghdad, the performance will be MUCH better. Same as SSAO. No 100% usage on nothing but a significant degradation of performance. Disable any RGB managing software running in the background. (some folks were having weird CTDs a while back that were caused by them). Make an exception of the whole DCS rootfolder on your anti virus especially windows defender. (Anti viruses usually monitors files being read from the storage drive and that can cause crashes): Usual path for files and folder exclusion management (windows 11 in english): Search for "windows security" in the search bar Virus & Threat Protection At 'Virus & Threat Protection Settings', click on 'manage settings' Bottom of the page click on 'add or remove exclusions' Add the whole DCS root Folder. Hope it helps. SSAO OFF and Visibility Range to 'Ultra' can be good. Don't worry about aircraft spotting with visibility range settings. It only adjusts city autogen at distance. Ground units visibility range will be unchanged as well.

I fly every two days in the Iraq map since 4 days after its release and I had zero crashes in it. Researching about your GPU didn't get me promising results on its rendering power and your crash log indicates an issue towards the GPU side. 2025-02-01 04:02:55.913 ERROR DX11BACKEND (9984): Failed assert `false && "failed to create vertex buffer"` 2025-02-01 04:02:55.913 ERROR DX11BACKEND (9984): failed to create index buffer. Reason: DXGI_ERROR_DEVICE_REMOVED 2025-02-01 04:02:55.915 ERROR DX11BACKEND (9984): Failed to create shader resource view for /textures/asphalt_6l_color.png.dds. Reason: The GPU device instance has been suspended. Use GetDeviceRemovedReason to determine the appropriate action. 2025-02-01 04:02:55.915 ERROR DX11BACKEND (9984): failed to create vertex buffer. Reason: DXGI_ERROR_DEVICE_REMOVED 2025-02-01 04:02:55.915 ERROR DX11BACKEND (9984): Failed assert `false && "failed to create vertex buffer"` Sure, above Baghdad it does need quite a bit of GPU power because of the autogen but here is more than manageable with only a 3060. I dislike to bring it up but, maybe is it time for some components upgrade? Cheers, best of luck to you.

If ED made configurable presets of cockpit configuration for ground hot, ground cold and air start this would be easily fixable. I don't mind turning the TCN knob down, but again, I don't fly quick air spawns on dogfight servers over and over again. Configurable presets and also a random function for some stuff that can be in the 'wrong' position to get the flight pre check worth doing. The knob detent for ILS knob should be reported as a bug or missing feature indeed...

Is this the same thing? If so, it is reported.

First one is already wrong. Man people fully trusting in AI is scary as f&$#... The Phantom II stabilators/elevators should droop because there is a counter weight on it, regardless of hydraulics. Airflow will balance against the weight with speed resulting in a more neutral position. But of course, any photo evidence can be dismissed by arguing the pilots are pushing the stick forward when taxiing. Only reading about its IRL systems of be in one yourself could serve as proof. Source: see the threads about FFB and how Heatblur coded the phantom controls. Or own the module and you'll see the stick going forwards by itself. F-16s: It is not as straightforward as droop or not. Depends on other factors. F-18s... AI got completely wrong. Their elevators should droop with no power. FBW has nothing to do with it. Just don't trust AI with your life. Mirage 2000Cs should droop too. As so it does in DCS: Which crazy AI was that gave you these wrong answers?

I'm seeing the same discrepancy with the Hornet against all my jet modules. F-15E, F-16C, F-14A&B, F-4E, A-10C, M-2000C.

That can't happen, I fly the viper often. Any chance you have a mod installed? Visor down and up needs a few seconds to finish an animation until you have the HMD back on or off. DMS AFT needs to be pressed LONG or it does something completely different. Check your stick or controller if the input command is indeed constant on that long press. We need a track to see that happening. If you have any steps to reproduce, will be faster to fix if there is a bug.

I guess OP meant the Warthog HOTAS as the peripheral Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS. I think that was my bad, actually. Sorry. I posted based on the Warthog module but it works with any module. The hornet also has a too far back default POV and its HUD has no zoom functionality either. @Vol4Ever any steps that are easy to reproduce the issue? I flew recently with the A-10C without issues but haven't flew the Hornet in a while although never seen such bug if there is any.

The Hornet HUD has no zoom function. It is projected into infinity as collimated HUDs are in real life. I'd suggest you to place the default POV where you find the most comfortable with the outer HUD information in mind. RALT + Num 0 (zero on the number pad) is the keybind to save the default view in the current position. Num5 is the default to reset the view but I don't remember if it is useful with track IR. source: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3320507/ Missing from this sheet it seems: RCtrl + RShift + / or * -> cockpit view forward or backwards. Good for the A-10C because the default is way too aft. Move it forward a bit and save with RAlt + Num 0. This is the default center point I use Did you check the box to use Track IR in external views? If you haven't, maybe is you physically moving out of the center position. TrackIR center command would bring you back to the default position.

I own all 3. 16s and 18s don't make the 15E superfluous. Neither 16s to 18s and vice versa. Reading the list of advantages as the larger payload, fuel, A2G radar, etc... that you wrote, one by one as individual advantages is one thing. The actual practical effect is all those things together. The 15E is a BEAST without comparison to the 16 and 18 with its capability of time on station and payload combined with its avionics. You're basically inside a medium bomber without having to think about fuel for quite a while with also being a self escort platform with those huge engines and Aim-120s. F-16s doesn't have the legs to do that with such heavy payloads, and the 18s doesn't have the ordinance capability for the amount of different tasks in one go the 15E takes. So, the question of: I'd say it is combining the advantages in one instead of knowing the advantages separately. In practice they stack impressively. I love what this plane can do. With a full load of CBU-97s, you can basically delete anything remotely hot in a town size radius like if a platoon of explosive Predator Paratroopers dropped from a plane above. "But F-16s also have the 97s" Not in this payload size. The thing is wild, man. Although I prefer LGBs and some Jdams.

Yes. It was called "Strait of Hormuz". Product name changed.

Yep, around the same horsepower here too. SSAA is a no-go for me and likely will continue that way. I'm happy with DLAA and can live with the ghosting that, at least, doesn't affect combat here. Maybe a card that has DLSS can be a good bump in image one day to enable DLAA.

Thank you Perhaps you would be looking for SSAA (available in DCS) instead of MSAA, as the later is a lower budget solution as always been. SSAA weights are much higher than MSAA over the GPU side, keep it in mind.

For comparison, these are with DLAA only (recent, un-edited), perhaps it is what's been expected MSAA to be:

Hi. I've been following this thread for a few weeks now and I think some complaints about MSAA at 4x are a bit unrealistic. MSAA is a 'not so great' anti aliasing method. It is expensive and, since DCS pre World, it produced shimmering. All these images you're running with MSAA on. Notice that MSAA can't cover some angles with geometry, while others, especially the shot on the tower, MSAA successfuly makes a smooth diagonal line on that lower rail section. MSAA has been always like this. Its algorithm makes that effect. I can't speak about the lower center shimmer on that lens rim in the Apache cockpit, as I don't own the module, but the rest is on par to what MSAA had provided throughout the years. The method is quite old, although one of that preserves image quality best, trading a few shimmering here and there. SSAA in the other hand is much more powerful than MSAA, if I remember correctly. What I wrote is not related to be unable to turn MSAA on. Either 2x or 4x. I didn't had this issue. What I point out is how MSAA lacks in the anti aliasing department. It is still good for pixel perfect spotting dots, but you're not getting Temporal Anti Aliasing or Downscaling solution like images. Personal preference, I'm running with DLAA, even in 1080p with the sharpen slider just on the right spot. It produces a better image that what it would be with MSAA 4X, imo. If you apply any sharpen filter on MSAA the problem of aliased geometry worsen. This is a good read: https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/31801/what-are-the-differences-between-the-different-anti-aliasing-multisampling-set https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Glossary:Anti-aliasing_(AA) A few examples un edited with MSAA 4x. Old shots, circa 2020-2021... I never played DCS without MSAA before DLAA arrived.

I think it would help that you post this on the FC2024 bug section and link this thread there instead of necroing this one. Visibility wise.

You mean this shine effect? Perhaps you're right! They are pretty rugged to have this effect present. (the best reference I could find of the bomb I have it on the screenshot.)

Not my opinion. Read it right. I disagree on the overlap issue. What I wrote was to show the discrepancy between arguments and the difference between products. Knowing well the general public entitlement, going as far as wanting discount for owning something released 14+ years ago. This is easily predicted.

One product ownership shouldn't warrant a discount on another product for completely different goals, like as stated that FC and FF levels crowd overlap very little. If the customer base overlap very little between these two levels, means the products are for very different for different purposes with very different characteristics, making weaker the argument of owning one would warrant a discount on the other. Before you notice, things will be like: if that plane has the same radar as the one I own, I should be offered X amount of discount because I already paid for the module that includes that radar. You only need one module to enjoy this game. I'm not saying everyone should pay for everything developed here. There is a tragedy of people with too many modules and overwhelmed by them unable to enjoy them at their best depth. As long as content licenses are not removed from customers because of another product existing, I see no issue here. You'll be able to fly your older Su-25A regardless.

Oh, heavens... the empire. We're about to blow up... Seriously, though, this is likely a large star shinning through the sky even though is daylight. The object/sprite/effect seems the same to the one that portrays starts on the night sky in DCS, but I'm taking it from memory. I don't own Kola so I can't see it from myself with the date and time posted. I don't know if planets are modeled in the night sky, but this thing needs adjustments (the whole night sky in DSC perhaps) as it looks too big.