M1Combat

Well... you just made it to mine too. Don't be a dick. Also... On the subject... Shark 100%.

That was exactly the point I was going for Skate :). I'm not sure how I was mis-interpreted :). NVidia was great... Until they turned the corner. Now they're all about proprietary crap. Also... at the time when 3dfx and nvidia were trading blows OGL was the open API and DirectX was "windows only".

Yes exactly. Proprietary tech is bad. I don't care how good it is... it's bad. I've been around for far too many of these to jump on the pop bandwagon that just prioritizes possible frame rate gain over all else. There are more important things... like consumer friendly API solutions :). It's quite ironic that NVidia basically gained their superior market position by espousing (and acting) the virtues of an open API type ecology... But NOW... now that they're the top dog... They change their tune :). Yeah...

Mine always has... Also SteamVR is great... WAY better than any of the other solutions like the oculus and WMR crap. Super dumb that we have to run SteamVR and WMR with a Reverb. No real need... Just samsung being jerks.

Fine... but I've made that comment in other places and had several people mention that it is their experience as well. I'm not trying to say it shouldn't be attempted... UNLESS it's still NVidia only. If it is (and I run a 2080 for reference...) then F that use the AMD solution. Even if it's a little slower. This industry needs specific competition. Not all out competition. I know... seems odd right? I've been around long enough to have watched what proprietary tech does to the gaming industry. It's not pretty for the consumer. I get that it can't always be avoided when it comes to hardware implemented solutions... I understand. But it STILL hurts the consumer and the better side of competition in the industry even when it's unavoidable. Funny thing... Back when NVidia was the underdog in the graphics industry... they made their name by being on the open side of the industry... My how times change eh?? Not sure but it's a current thing with a very popular title I play to shoot tanks... And it's not World of Tanks...

All the implementations of DLSS I've seem suffer from ghosting in a moving image. In one case a source at 160FPS looks like complete A** with DLSS because of the smearing/ghosting of dark objects over light backgrounds. No... it's not my monitor :)...

Another thing about the owl head issue... I can't move my eyes much in DCS VR before I lose clarity due to the lense type. Look at the guy in the 109... His eyes are doing a great deal of the angle work. I have to turn my upper body just like the pilot in the vid but FURTHER in VR... and I STILL can't get as good of a view as a real pilot. IRL I can turn and look out my rear window as long as I care to back up... No probs. No need for BS limits there trust me. Regarding the same issue on a flat screen... I feel like it mostly makes up for the lack of vector awareness. By that I mean it's easier in VR (IMO) to see where an opponent is going to be in a second. Making it slightly easier for a monitor user (assuming TiR...) to keep track of where an opponent is currently AT, when they have a slight disadvantage in knowing exactly where they'll be, is a good trade IMO.

This is super great news. EF2000 wasn't my first sim but it was always my favorite up until DCS :).

Good choice Grit :)... Good choice :).

I suspect Newy meant that once you "burn through" it likely acts like it was never being jammed. I suggest some science to prove... Regarding Q2... I'd think since it only says Aim120 in the patch notes that it's probably only for the Aim120. Regarding Q3... I don't know. I do know that jamming and EW in general is somewhat rudimentary in DCS (and all other titles...) relative to real equipment and capability so... Just go test stuff and see how it works and then you'll have the best answer possible.

First post eh?

Yeah in general the replays are useless. Try "TacView"... but that's basically a different animal for a different purpose... but if analysis of a flight is what you're looking for... that's what tacview does.

"not much difference between the two system wise or flight model wise." Ehh... OK Now I see where you're coming from... Thanks for clarifying. Also LOL.

Do I know any that aren't much faster than a platter drive? Not off the top of my head but there are some... Generally the VERY off brand cheap ones. I'm not sure I've ever seen one that was slower...

Well what brand and model of SSD as well... Some aren't "much" faster than a platter drive. Most are... but some aren't.

I'd love to see it... BUT... We're going to need a petition to declassify the thing (all of it) first yes?

You're missing the point... "Romeo hellfire's are not compatible with the AH64D and that is understandable, I was not asking for that. APKWS is totally acceptable since there are still AH64D block 2 today flying around that could be using them given a doctrine change." ED have already said what they're doing. Maybe let them get somewhere near the finish line of what they said they're doing (subject to change) and then drop a hint or two but I can guarantee you... saying BS like... "I would expect nothing less than the 4 variants and all the other weapons " will only make them ignore you AND it's rude. Stop please. I would love to have the APKWS as well... As would many others. But there are much better ways of "making demands" that are "not making demands".

Nah for sure I'd LOVE to know all the details as well... For sure. I do know that this specific issue has been brought to the attention of the person responsible... And they didn't say "We'll look into it to see if it's correct"... and that particular person would have if they thought it wasn't correct. As far as how the performance arrives where it does... whether physics based or canned... I'm not sure... but I would like to be sure

Understood :)... Just trying to put everything out there. I've also found that closing the coolant rad, then opening for a proper 4 second hold to be good... but that's on a dive into a racetrack at top speed. You may need a 5-6 second hold to keep it cool enough at ~330. This will also make the aero more consistent for your test if you weren't already doing it. It looks to me like maybe you were just closing it?? based on your coolant temps being pretty high. Oil rad doesn't affect enough to matter... Kinda... I always started closing that one in tight races too. Just in case it did something... but never really found anything in testing it. Anyhow... I think the auto prop pitch will increase the prop pitch to keep resistance on the manifold pressure at reduced RPM... so it ends up finding more thrust at lower RPM because there's still enough HP to max the MP at higher blade pitch. Basically... If I'm remembering my thoughts correctly. I wrote a post about it a long time ago... 2015 maybe??

Yeah us racers have been trying all kinds of things with the TF-51 for a while... I have a complete theory as to why we would get more speed at 2700... but most people just say "Nah the .gov says 3K is fastest so it IS..." So yeah... I personally think it could be right... but I'm not certain. Keep in mind though... the lower you go below 3K the longer you're exerting combustion pressure on the con-rods and the less long your engine will last. I always ran 2830 for endurance races, 2750 for sprint races. I would reduce to 2700 slowly around the last 1/2 of the last lap if it was going to be close. Also you're a little too close to the ground for low alt max speed.

"I would expect nothing less than the 4 variants and all the other weapons " Disappointment is nothing more than failed expectation. You can't set ED's road map. They've already done so (and even put a big "Subject to Change" sticker on it... FYI) so... Just go read what we're getting and then sit back and quietly wait for it. No sense in setting yourself up for disappointment dude...

I use English cockpits as well. I feel this is MORE realistic... Because if I was Russian I'd be able to read the cockpits of the Russian planes... If I was French I'd be able to read the French in the Mirage... So... Since I'm English I'll switch them to English so I can read the labels... Just as the real pilot would be able to. On the mappings... I have some fairly "divergent" opinions on that. I don't really think the USAF, USN or Russian military do it correctly. Sorry :)... I set all of the things that I likely won't need in combat (aside from launch/pickle/drop/fire etc, and a few other things like cage, NWS, G Override (and I f*****g use the S**T outta that... BTW... And I sleep like a log at night...), counter-measures on the STICK, and the controls I likely WILL need in combat (radar modes, TDC, weapon select, Trim for Shark etc...) on the throttle. I do this so I can generally fly and deploy weapons with one hand, but operate the systems needed to get weapons on target with the other. I learned this long ago in EF2000 with an F16 FLCS+TQS. I feel it reduces work load to some extent but it might just be that because I started out this way using a stick and aircraft that weren't made for each other... that I've just stuck with it and it's easier for me...

I would do the Shark hands down... If you do a second... I'd do the Mi24 for various reasons... those being that since you'll also have the shark you'll likely be on RED side in various servers and if you want to troop transpo you'll do that with the HIND, along with some CAS... but you'll clear threats with the KA50. the other reason is that the Mi24 feels/flys/fights with a very nice feel. I still prefer the shark in every way myself... but the Mi24 is a good one. The other way to go would be to do the Huey now, and wait for the Apache for the CAS part. But... Honestly... Just get them all.

"These are my settings (I run 50% Steam VR resolution, so pretty much the G2´s native resolution):" How so?? 50% SteamVR benefit is bunk sir. Run 100% everywhere as a base. Adjust from there.. preferably with Steam VR because it adjusts as a percentage of total pixels instead of a multiplier of HxW... So is a more linear representation of the performance you would expect.

No... It's a setting in DCS. Change your avionics language like Volk said.