Johnny Dioxin

I've no real interest in naval ops, but at less than 20 quid I splashed and we'll see if I get around to trying it. There are bound to be campaigns that will require it, so it's in my virtual dockyard now. They should make a RN carrier to give the navops fans a real challenge, instead of these floating airports!

Sorry - wrong sub-thread

Please note that the C-101 kneeboard pictorial start-up guide, whilst not technically accurate, still works for both aircraft (EB and CC)with a couple of caveats: Instead of using the custom key to bring the GPU to the aircraft, use the comms menu to request ground power, as with other modules. The idle throttle setting button is halfway up the front of the throttle grip (the picture points to the base). These are pretty simple things and not a problem for anyone with a modicum of common sense and prior use of DCS modules, so I won't be changing it until I redo the whole procedure. As I'm busy with campaign translations, research and website expansion, I won't have time for that in the near future. I'm checking all of the older procedures as time permits, and I'll post about any other differences I come across. If the differences are major, I'll make time to redo the relevant guide.

I did have some problems initially, which I expected as it was all new and beta etc, but once I got a working solution it was sound as a pound. I keep reading of people having crashes and other issues, but I guess I've been lucky as mine hasn't missed a beat since I got it right. The only issue I've had with Quest is that it has lost full tracking on a few occasions - but that is without Link attached. A little worrying, but I'll see how it goes before I start talking to support. Edit: I suppose the good thing with the Oculus Link is that it gives people a certain sense of security - although people do seem to be having some connectivity problems, much as with the custom solutions. At least you cen expect some help if you have the official cable, rather than support being able to blame any issues on a 3rd party cable. It's also more flexible, so that's a bonus - mine has a woven sheath and is pretty stiff - but to me that just means it's less likely to be damaged! Probably will get an Oculus one at some point in the future - but only if the expected increase in performance is attained.

I just watched the latest video by Cas & Chary - uploaded 2 hours ago. Link is now available in Eu and UK (at 89 both - Euro and £ - so UK paying most again...) but their recommendation is not to bother. In their tests, they could find zero difference between the Oculus Link and the other standard USB 3 cables we have been using up to now. This may change later, but until it does, I won't be spending that kind of money for no or little difference. Apparently, a company is making a 16ft USB 3 cable for Quest, which the girls will test when it's released - so that will be my next point of interest.

No - I don't get that, either - I've put my head through the canopy to look at some things during testing and didn't have any similar effect.

There are some instances where things are not ideal - but this could also be said of the other VR headsets. I'm thinking of virtual cockpits such as the Mirage and Gazelle. Dark cockpits and small text are no friends of VR - it's hard to read the text labels and zoom has to be used, but otherwise I see no reason why Quest and Link can't be used to fly in DCS World. Bearing in mind the tests have been completed with default resolution as well. So afaic, the subject is dealt with - hope it's been of use to those who were unsure. If anyone wants anything particular looked at, I'd be happy to test it - if I don't have the relevant module, I'm sure others would help out, too.

I'll tell ya what, guys, night ops in the Ka-50 are considerably more challenging now, in 2.5 and with Quest. It's very dark! Quest puts a bit of a grainy effect on night time. That's without stuff lit up - just sat in the cockpit in the dark, at the airfield, with various lights on buildings etc - it looks pretty daunting. With the NVG on, it looks amazing. It makes flying a lot easier, of course, but because of the grainy effect, it actually makes it a lot more realistic than on the monitor, where this effect is missing. The Shkval TV and ABRIS are a bit of a problem - being like beacons of light, but whereas the IT-23 can be reduced and ajusted in brightness and contrast to where it is usable, the ABRIS can't (afaia). As for reading instruments and ABRIS at night (with cockpit/gauge lighting) - the gauges are not too bad at all, but I did have issues reading letters on the ABRIS. Digits were fairly easily distinguishable, though. So I had to keep switching the NVG on and off, to make sure I stayed within the bounds of the operation via the ABRIS map, whilst keeping an eye out of the canopy on the situation. Unfortunately, I had some engine issue on my first attempt at this mission, whilst searching for the UAZ (see picture below and understand why it's difficult to find) - the engines seemed to pack up whilst hovering in 50+ km/h winds - that was what my ASI was showing at a walking pace! This just makes me more keen to get back in there and do the mission, and any other night missions I can find - the extra challenge is extra fun! Here's that UAZ we are required to find (broken down on the road) - you can just make out the reflection on the windscreen, off-right of the picture centre: Couple of other NVG shots - cockpit and local scenery: **edit: just for comparison - I flew this mission in 1.5 successfully with no NVG in CV1 - that would just not be possible in 2.5 (unless the gamma was lightened to levels that could be considered cheating)

That's good to hear. I'm quite convinced that I'll have no issues with the rest of the Revanche campaign - and therefore in any normal A/G campaign - my next tests will therefore be with the full fidelity modules, starting with the Ka-50. I'll fly the Courier mission - I flew it in CV1 with no issues a few years back, so now I'll try it in Quest. I think it's a good test because it involves night navigation, followed by trying to find a UAZ in half light conditions and then trying to find a ship in the Black Sea. Finding both in CV1 was a challenge, but definitely possible - I got mission success twice (flew it again to record and upload to YT) - so it will be interesting to see how difficult it is with Quest.

Settings: Yes, I could probably run them higher - but that's for another test. This is how I have it for my Index so I thought I'd leave it the same. Though I haven't optimised for Index, either yet. PS - despite being set to use the inbuilt audio device as above, in fact I always have to switch it manually else it comes from my speakers. Audio is very reasonable, except for sometimes the "immersion" messages from the battle in Russian are too loud and bordering on distortion. Mission relevant messages and environmental sounds are fine.

That's great - thanks for the opinion. Will be interested to hear what DCS is like. As for me - today I did a test in the first combat mission of the Revanche campaign and I have to say, not only did I thoroughly enjoy it, but I suffered no negatives at all - in fact graphically, it was no worse than the two previous times I flew it on a monitor, and a lot better for being in VR. If the SDE doesn't bother you, it should be fine (and it doesn't bother me). So, some example screens. Firstly, all these weapons were employed in the mission effectively in the Quest: That's four S8 rocket pods, two S24 heavy rockets and two KMGU cluster bomb pods. Watching the Su-27s do circuits at the airfield - I don't know how far away they actually were, but they were easily recognisable... Flying over the airfield at 1500m, I would easily have been able to spot any target on it for an attack sortie... I was quite comfortable enroute to the target area at 4,000m msl - could see what I needed to on the deck in enough detail... Once the action started, the IR trails of the Strela where easy to spot as soon as they left the launcher... On an attack run on a convoy I was able to start at just under 4000m... all the way to 1,500m and get the heavy rockets close enough to do damage and indeed, lay the rockets along the length of the convoy, too I was also able to spot and identify my wingmen as they flew their own attack runs and also evaded incoming AA - no doubt on the aircraft ID here, which impressed me: This is with no mods running at all. Very satisfied with the performance, too - apart from one or two split second pauses on my way to the runway, it didn't miss a beat. I'll post my settings later.

Well, as I suspected, some of those people complaining are turning out to be user errors (and the others probably aren't admitting it! :music_whistling: ) Things like using USB 3.0 instead of 3.1 - apparently 3.0 just won't do it reliably. I just received a new powered USB PCIe card I intended to use for Link - now I'll have to go back and check the spec. Mind you, I also had to replace my Inateck card as 3 of the 4 USB sockets have stopped working - seems many people have this issue. Not good, as it was the recommended USB3 card for CV1.

I don't know what the percentages are, but the Oculus forum is getting a number of posts by people who have received their Oculus Link cables and are very disappointed. The majority (of posters) are saying the standard USB 3 cables were better. Of course, it's early days and some of the posts are a bit extreme, to say the least (as in attitudes), so probably best to wait until more people report in before opting out - or in.

Yeah, I used to have one until the start of this year. Now every time I try to make one - even a brand name channel - Google keeps putting my real name on it. When I tried to resurrect my old brand channel Google made the channel as a standard one, but wouldn't let me do anything with it other than viewing functions. So I followed their simple instructions for deleting the channel with my real name and making the other channel my brand name channel, and found they deleted it and gave me a channel, again, with my real name. At that point I lost interest. PS - ah, you mean use a separate account? Yeah, I could do that. I use Waterfox for my normal browser and administering my Google account, but I also have Firefox portable on my PC - if I use that for a new YT channel, there won't be any chance of cookie interference, either - good idea. On topic - I flew the thrid mission today with Quest and the S25L performed just as it should and there were zero issues with graphics, visibility etc - just a dodgy ATC again. Seems the longer you wait before requesting start-up permission, the more chance there is of getting a response. Update YT: Yeah - the alternate YouTube channel didn't work - must be some ID or data files somewhere on my PC other than cached - it keeps telling me to log in with my current Google account, even though I never used that browser for Google.

Another issue, although a very minor one, is the ATC and range control. Most times it works as it should, but on occasions you are left 'talking' to yourself. If you want to refly a mission, it's probably best to leave the campaign and then go back to it and fly the same mission if you want to get all the correct calls. After having the problems with the S25L, I found that reflying the mission from the end debrief screen caused ATC to not respond when asking permission for start-up. though they do give you taxi and take-off instructions if you just pull away of your own volition. Similarly, on the refly, range control went silent after my first run, for the rest of the mission. Still got the mission result message on touchdown, so as I said - it's a minor thing, but an annoyance, nonetheless.

Flew a range mission with the S25L. Unfortunately there seems to be a problem with launching these guided rockets, which isn't good for campaign points, but was good from a testing point of view. The orange smoke marker for the target was easily visible from well outside the range of the ordnance carried, though red smoke was slightly less easy to spot under identical conditions. Targets were barely visible at the 7km distance of the pre-launch waypoint, though the surrounding scenery and FARPS were easily visible and recognisable, which allowed me to get the Shkval TV onto the targets without much trouble at all after the smoke had burned out, on second approaches. I thought the smoke from burning targets (a BTR80 in this case) would be sufficient to mark the target for me, but at a height of 4,000m msl it was difficult to spot - but not impossible. I actually found that it's appearance was highly dependant on the angle of view. Some angles it stood out easily, others barely at all. An important issue with Quest was the lighting. After running this mission in the Index and needing no adjustment, I found that in Quest it was far too light (at 2.2 gamma) and I reduced it first to 1.8 - which was far too dark to see things well enough through the top half of the HUD in the Su-25T, so I upped it to 2.0 - which was a reasonable compromise - but it was just that, a compromise. On RTB, I found the runway very difficult to spot through the top part of the HUD from the IAF (this was Gudauta and runway 33). It was better in the lower part of the HUD, but I really needed to be a few km closer to have a clear view of the runway. I put this down mostly to the SDE. I took some screenies, but as they are from the monitor, they are not really an accurate representation - but they do demonstrate the circumstances. I just checked the screenshots and I actually think it was easier to see stuff in the headset than on the monitor! Probably due to the screens being in front of my face... So - target marked with orange smoke... You could see this quite well in the Quest with no zoom... here it is, zoomed in: Unfortunately, on the screens I took of the target burning smoke - you can't even see a thing on the monitor image - not even when zoomed in! **EDIT: Yes, you can - circled... This was the point at which the runway was clear... So it's not all plain sailing - but still say it's very much doable in Quest. Will be interesting when I get to the proper combat missions. Targets were visible at reasonable distances (by that I mean in time to set up and engage them) but AFV were not identifyable - things like hangars were. Flying without any mods.

Unfortunately, it seems there are still issues with the S25L missiles (or guided rockets, if ya like). On one out 4 run-ins, they launched correctly - on 3 they didn't launch at all. Identical approach, procedures etc. So not good - but as it's a practise mission (in an Su-25T for an Su-25(A) campaign) it's not the end of the world. I think these weapons are only loaded once for the campaign, iirc, so I think I'll fly the missions individually instead of as a campaign, so I don't have to start again after losing points to this problem.

I'm currently flying the Su-25 "Revanche" campaign - done the first missions in the Index (which is great) - they are non-combat missions, though. I'll fly the rest of the campaign in the Quest with Link - that should be a good enough test for it, with mostly A/G and having to avoid quite a bit of AAA plus a little A/A action against other Su-25s and helicopters. It also includes a night time SEAD mission in the -25T. That would be a good all-round test of the performance and target spotting.

You must be talking about a different campaign - the first one in Revanche is a movement order, the second and third are training on the ranges. If you let me know what targets you are trying to destroy, I can tell you what I would use. edit: If you follow the link in my sig to the kneeboard files, look in the Su-25T folder and there are some munition sheets in there. It's for the 25T, but the munitions you get for the -25 are listed there, too. The sheets describe which ordnance is best for which targets.

I've flown this campaign twice before - once in FC2 and again in FC2 with DCS World 1.24 - enjoyed both times and wrote up some AARs for different forums at the time. Now I'm flying the full campaign in VR for the first time. I've done some testing of the first movement and training missions, just to see how I got on with them in VR, without being able to easily check references like I can when flying on the monitor. So far, it's been really great. Despite having a number of issue with performance in the Caucasus in VR since 2.5 was released and mostly with the full-fidelity modules, it has run very smoothly, with no stuttering or hiccups, despite the often large number of AI active. My only disappointments on the graphics side so far are the light, or gamma, don't really know - but this tends to be the case a lot, at least for me, with DCS World 2.5 in VR - and the aliasing. I'm reluctant to increase AA as it tends to be a performance killer in VR, but outside of the cockpit (which looks The Business in VR) the jaggies can be really bad - and then combined with the lighting issue, it can make airfields and the objects on them look pretty dire. But I tend to just overlook those things and try and concentrate on the good stuff! The missions themselves have been fine, so far (big thanks to Winz, yet again, for his work on updating the campaign), though there are some issues, such as flight timings and getting your flight to actually land when or after you do, they are not game-breaking. I do exit the missions with other aircraft before I would like to, due to the landing issue - don't want to lose aircraft for later missions or get a lower score because they run out of fuel and crash. I'll continue to report as I fly through the campaign and mention any important issues that may appear. Otherwise, I would recommend this campaign - especially for those getting back into the sim after not doing much, or wanting to try a campaign in VR for the first time. Not too much to think about with this aircraft - pretty simple (though interesting and fun) steam gauge technology at it's best, here :)

OK - in my attempts to make these easier to read whilst wearing a VR headset, I've gradually made various changes and these are the ones I'm currently using. I should say that I now only label buttons and switches that are different to my default set. All views, comms, engine starting and other actions that every module needs are what I class as my 'default set'. I will always remember what those are and where they are - so to save having so many labels on a diagram, sometimes making them appear very full and busy, I no longer even print the controls that they are assigned to. So with that in mind, here is my current T50 stick diagram: This is not the last one - I have just taken some new photo's of my stick and throttle - which I then convert into these diagrams - and intend to make some simpler, clearer ones in the near future. Once I've done that, I'll post the diagrams for all of my modules, along with the profiles themselves, so that anyone who wants can download and use them and change them to suit themselves. I'll upload them as an archive, in the user files section. - That will be a little while, yet, as it all takes time to do. Here's my current throttle (v3) handle diagram: I also don't print the modifier buttons any more - same reason. My defaults are like this: PS - use as you like ;)

OK - made a short and unplanned video on the Quest VR Cover - **sorry - I've deleted my YouTube channel for the fourth time this year, with Google repeatedly trying to force things on me that I don't want - such as having to use my real name. I wouldn't have an issue with that if the same applied to everyone, but why should I have to if no-one else does? I don't plan on starting a new YT channel.

My current USB 3 cable will do a good enough job for now. Actually, this is probably a good thing as it means I will get to hear how much better the optical cable is and whether it's worth getting it rather than just continuing to use a standard cable. It probably will be better, but I don't have many complaints as is, so we'll see how things develop.

You need to post in the problems thread - I'm afraid I can't really help here.

Seems the rest of us will have link available next year. 2nd class customers. Now I know how the Canadians and Aussies felt when Index was denied them for months.