zero2005

Yea, still a thing for me, though - it doesn't do it when I use Oculus link, or rather, it doesn't do it enough to effect actual frame times, the green line does blip in link, but not above the 72hz frame limit. HOWEVER in Virtual Desktop, its completely broken... I've defaulted to not using VirtualDesktop for now for other reasons (24h2 broke h264 for it, among other things), but I'm also kind of burned out on trying to troubleshoot DCS's minor problems...

Newest patch actually broke it for me... Logitech GPro Superlight... Haven't had this issue for a long while, but now its back for me... its random though, usually on first launch it causes the lag with movement, but if I select an option that force restarts DCS (ie full screen on/off or Vsync on/off) sometimes it makes it go away?

So, I've been doing some testing for VR for some other issues, but this popped up today for me as I was checking something in 2d/chasing down other bugs: Hind has 3 states for mirrors, "on" and "enabled", "on" but the reflective view is "disabled", and completely removed. When they are completely removed, they have the same frame rate hit/impact for me when they are on and enabled, which in 2d was about a 10% or more hit. at 4k and my VR settings (but again, in 2d flat panel), I would hover around 250-260 frames in the hind freeflight mission which starts you in active pause after you press OK, with the mirrors either on/enabled or completely removed. when having them in view, but the reflection turned off -> immediately shot up to 290-300 frames. Can we please get some optimizations for the hind? Can we get an option to disable rendering the front gunner seat completely or something, if we don't plan on using it? there's something else in the forward view that's causing additional load that doesn't seem like it needs to be.

I noticed this in the past, then it was fixed, but the most recent 30 sep patch brought it back with a vengeance... I'm using a Logitech G Pro Superlight, both wired and wireless it does it *horribly* in the menu, especially in VR. However, I also have a Logi M570 trackball, and that doesn't do it or at least its not noticeable (when in actual flight, I do see a minor burble, but it doesn't effect frames) Intel 14700k. I've tried with and without the old MT.lua (btw, what is going on with that?), i've tried with and without E-cores on, with and without hyper threading. with and without HAGS. I've tried disabling any and all overlays (Steam, Discord, RTSS). It does it both using Link and VirtualDesktop. I recently just reinstalled DCS, and this is a fresh install of Win11 24H2. my 14700k is brand new as of like 2 weeks ago, as I RMA'd my previous one, and I have set the power limits to intel standard (253w/253w/307a) and stock clocks. My questions are: is the MT.lua supposed to be used still? it does not come with a fresh install of DCS... If I don't use MT.lua my core 0 [aka, first core] seems to becomes the main thread and gets the highest load. using MT.lua moves it from core 0 to a random other core, but it still stays pegged at 100% or nearly 100% and the issue remains... also, why hasn't the in-game frame limiter slider been adjusted so we can use it with actual numbers instead of limited to 10's and 5s? I want to limit frame rate in game to 72 but cannot, editing the options config to 72 manually doesn't work, RTSS is a pain in the ass to deal with, and setting a limit in NV control panel is not ideal.

Having weird issue where the mirror texture and the "glass" texture that seems to have been applied over the moving map. There's also a few switches that have "missing texture" bleeding through on the left panel.

Baked in reflections need to die a horrible horrible death, or be optional. They look even more awful in VR than flat panel.

Can only hope, Deferred is terrible for VR, just a fact. Its not 2013, no reason to be using Deferred any longer, at least not in DCS which isn't even using the main benefits of going deferred shading in the first place. The shader bloat is real, just dig through the bazar folders. MSAA would benefit by going back to an optimized forward pipeline.

IIRC DCS switched to Deferred some years back, Can we please go back to strict Forward Rendering, at the very least for VR?

I took a bit of 1000 grit sandpaper I had lying around and gave it a bit of a buff and the roughness seems to have given it a bit more friction, then I applied a drop of lucas gun oil I had laying around and it seems to have got it to the point I find it acceptable. its like the angle is just so damn flat and the plastic is extremely smooth. to give some perspective of how easy it was to push through the detent (assuming I could even feel the initial contact point) was less than the pressure it takes for me to press the air brake button forward. If I ever get around to it I still want to 3d print a new design.

Yea it feels like the right throttle is just arbitrary when it hits the stop. always feels like I'm a few % off. The left seems fine. I've tried disassembling it and reassembling it a few times, tried tape on the detent. I don't like the shape of the detent to be honest, if someone were to design it to be more positive, like a "wing" shape like the TM Warthog detent I think that would give it more of a positive stop. Possible the spring isn't as strong as the left spring, but just looking at it, it seems like a HUGE pita to take apart to change that tiny ass spring. Overall I'm not impressed by this one feature so far, everything else is amazing, but the AB detent is kind of something that should have been nailed down in the early design phase. I'm going to try putting some Nyogel on it to see if that can help, but I think I might have to just redesign a new detent that looks more like the leading edge of a wing instead of this flat angle they have.

Just got my Orion 2 Stick/Throttle (F-16EX stick, F-15EX throttle) with the finger lifts. My only real annoyance right now on initial impression is the afterburner detent is not very positive, I've tried the different positions and it just seems like I can't bump against it and know exactly where mil power is, which is frustrating. Is there an aftermarket detent that is more "positive" in nature? or is there a way to increase the tension on the finger lift mechanism to have a more positive mil-power stop? I still want push through, but its like the friction to push through, especially on the right grip, is basically nil. I tried even putting a few pieces of scotch tape on it and it kind of helped until it started to wear down.

Then we can have a bunch of missions with the 10 getting Consol'd by 135s, just to offload 6klbs to an A-10 9.5 hours later. lol Also, accurate oven model for booms to bake dick shaped cookies when?

Any chance we can get the DLSS option "unlocked" somehow? so that we can push REAL FSR2 through the DLSS option? (The current iteration of FSR is *not* FSR2, its FSR v1.2 with TAA locked and not the same, unless you are doing some sort of black magic hiding the FSR files...) I'm able to run DCS through a vulkan compatibility layer via DXVK, and have replaced the dlss files, however there's no way to select the DLSS option. IF I were able to force select the DLSS option, it would be interesting to see how actual FSR2 runs... The above method is the same way Cyberpunk and other games were modded into using actual FSR2.

Got a mk IV, wanna see some of you out there with damper setups. I have a set of 3d printed "dry clutch" that go on the bearings between the pedals, and they're OK but not stiff enough for just removing the spring.

So, I noticed that in the cockpit of the Hind, I'm getting a weird frame limitation, usually around 60fps, I am in VR (Reverb G1 @ 2800x2800 using the OpenXR mod, 12700kf @ 5.3ghz and Powercolor 6900xt @ 2700mhz) Most other modules, getting a pretty solid 90 fps offline. The I hop in the cockpit of the hind and it suddenly drops to 60 frames. I go external and its back to 90 frames. I've tried the optimized English cockpits from Sundowner, but to no avail. I've tried several other aircraft and haven't run into any issues: F-14, Mig-21, F-5, Huey, and Hip all run great. I suspect this is likely due to it not being optimized? Unless someone has any other suggestions. I tried clearing out FXO/Metashaders already (I do this often anyways). But I also don't see anything listed in the bug report?

Is there any way to accurately set this without just mashing the buttons or guessing values? Whenever I have VR zoom enabled, especially at the higher zoom level, I feel a little fish-eye/offset? and generally have to close one eye. I tried playing with the swap top/bottom and left/right and just can't get it to feel "right" -- this is on a Reverb G1. I am using OpenComposite (not SteamVR). as well, any overlays like the WMR home menu/screen, or the OpenXR tools overlay feel really weird, like I'm crosseyed trying to view the menu vs the world.

So what's the consensus on Motion Reprojection vs Radeon Chill/standard frame locking? I've tried both, Chill seems more stable at 45 and no jiggle/jello effect, but seems it has a bit of ghosting on fast movers in the merge where as MR is just jello jello jello? I don't know if there was some update in the past month or so, but I was able to hold a pretty stable 90 frames most of the time, but now my CPU is capping out (12700kf @ 5.3ghz) Not sure what's going on, and its holding me back to 60'ish.

Nothing? Anyone?

Anyone know if there's a way to output MFD's, while in VR, for external view on another monitor? My 9 year old son likes to watch me when I fly, and I'd like to output the MFD's to my second monitor so he can more easily see what I'm doing. I tried the drop downs in the settings menu, but it seems like its just broken (it overlays inside VR like on the dash) so I'm looking for another method. Would also be nice for recording now that I think about it.

Yes, there are ways to make FSR and NIS work inside both SteamVR, as well as using OpenComposite/OpenXR.

So far this is working "OK" for me, but needs more tweaking. Overall I like the picture better. I'm on a 12700k (OC'd to 5.2ghz all core, with singlecore boost up to 5.6) and a powercolor 6900xt OC'd to 2725mhz. I'm still on a Reverb G1. with SteamVR I had two "settings" Using FSR I would go from a SteamVR res of about 2800x2800, and FSR requesting DCS to render at around 2200x2200. This worked surprisingly well. I also had reshade on top of it for some color fixing/removing the "DCS Cataracts" blur. The benefit here is that it was generally smooth, and fairly easy to spot contacts. my other setting was to just run without FSR and run native 2100x2100 (ish) via SteamVR, which looks better (read: less pixelated), but wasn't quite as smooth flying. Again, reshade applied here. Now comparing that to OpenXR? OpenXR is giving better performance. I'm able to run somewhere between 2800x2800 [80%] and 3100x3100 [100%] (per the OpenXR Tools for WMR "runtime" page) at 80-90fps in offline -- I use the A-10A CAS mission on caucuses as my initial "benchmark". HOWEVER I noticed all the eye alignment errors that seem somewhat common with us WMR users is even more exaggerated. Smoothness and Clarity are far better here, though they come at the cost of spotting pixels as they get smothered by not having the "reshade laser eye surgery" My biggest complaint is not being able to properly re-center. I cleared my environment, but I traditionally used the VR recenter as a button my my HOTAS to adjust my head position sort of like adjusting a seat. This leaves me usually trying to stretch into a position, adjusting my real-life seat more than I like, or doing other funky things to try and get a proper "picture". If I use the VR recenter, it causes the VR zoom to be all jacked up and zoom off-center, as if the VR center between OpenXR and DCS aren't talking to one another. If I could get Reshade, a non-cross eye feeling (I tried the DCS tool, and what worked for me in SteamVR did not work here -- usually I just have to swap top and bottom and make symmetrical from the left eye and I'm good to go, didn't work for me in OpenXR), and the ability to properly recenter, I'd be happy.

Yes, the DCS manual says that, but the DCS manual is also not what I'm referencing. What I'm suggesting is that the statement in the manual is potentially incorrect (for example, maybe they're citing the ARN-84 A/A mode instead of the ARN-118) and that the game could also be incorrect. Lower half of the first image (Tacan system An/ARN-118) "a. Complete navigation information (range and bearing) with an airborne TACAN station" and the second image A/A T/R -- "Transmitting and receiving. Provides bearing and range to selected airborne station." The only reason I could think of is that they would likely not be equipped with a rotating antenna, and I'm not sure when non-rotating "solid state" TACAN antennas became available, however that wouldn't make a ton of sense, as you have both AA REC and AA TR modes, and why bother having to TCTO a new radio if it doesn't offer some capability upgrade? There's reference to the navy upgrading their ship-based TACAN units to non-rotating antenna in the early to mid 80's, so it wouldn't be too far fetched to see fighters installed with smaller non-rotating assemblies. See this, cut from the 1F-5E-1 flight manual: (https://archive.org/details/F5EFFlightManual/page/n101/mode/2up)

Can anyone confirm that TACAN in A/A mode isn't working as far as player->player (ie player controlled F-5 -> F-5), like it should? Last time me and my buddy both had to set 29Y [which is wrong, in this case one would need to be set to 29Y and the other at 92Y, 63 channels apart] and it was *only* giving distance [which from my days as COM/NAV, is likely also broken/wrong?] I'd like to mention that, the F-5 modeled has the An/ARN(C)-118, which *should* give both bearing and DME in A/A, unless I'm missing something. The E/F manual I have mentions that it should give both bearing and distance to other similarly equipped aircraft. It was the earlier ARN-64 and ARN-84's that had DME only (except to tankers) from the manual: (1F-5E-1) "ARN-118 TACAN is operationally similar to the ARN-84 with the following additional capabilities:" "Complete navigation information (range and bearing) with an airborne TACAN station."

I was wondering this as well. I have everything mounted to my chair and was looking at the MFD panels and was wondering how I could set up. I have an HP Reverb, looking under isn't an easy option I've found. I was thinking of mounting at least 1 panel one forward of my throttle similar to the control panel on an X65F, then I can just move my hand forward until I find the panel then use the rubber pads like mentioned for tactile feedback. My question is, is there an easy way to switch or "shift-key" the panel? Ideally i'd probably set up a 3 way switch that dictates which MFD I'm working with? ie 3 way switch for F-18, position switch left = left DDI active, switch right = right DDI active, switch center = MPCD active. also, anyone using the panels for the JF-17? Curious how people are setting those up, if they're using shift keys or what?

Not only do I wish they would do the N-model but also give us some more trainer aircraft, the T-38C would be ideal, even if they only made it single cockpit. Most of the work would already be done, at the very least give us a cockpit upgrade option that can be locked out by mission editors or something, where we could get the T-38C avionics for training. I wonder if it would be possible to mod the cockpit in a way to get something close?