Gizmo03

I saw the discord post of Prowler and it's always the same. "WE did everything possible while ED is doing nothing"..... same sh*t, different day. I don't like Discord at all but i visit RBs discord from time to time and just search for posts from Prowler to see if he wrote something new. The one on thursday was no surprise in my opinion. The same attempt of putting pressure on ED as so many times since April '24. I mean come on.... yesterday someone was talking about all the other modules which were announced especially the MiG-23 and his answer was: "MiG-23? 2 months for being sent to ED for testing" .... the same user asked if that means that we might have had it right now already and he answered "most defintely".... Really????? Is there anyone here taking this guy still serious? The "statement" from thursday is just another move in his strange game he's playing.... But as i said - just my opinion.

It‘s been pretty long since i tried it on the right eye just to see, if it works. But when i tried in both seats i did it just as it is written in the manual. That worked perfectly for me. I‘m short in time at the moment but next time i can test it again with the right eye.

Sorry for my late reply. The right eye is not an option for me. The left eye is the dominant and the vision is a notch better on the left eye which makes it even more uncomfortable to use it on the right eye. I would do everything needed to change that if i would fly this aircraft in real life, but definitely not for a computergame especially if we have the option to use it on the other eye. But yes - of course i tried it on the right eye. Just to see if it‘s just me doing something wrong . Tbh: there is nothing easier in this aircraft than just boresighting the IHADSS and if you do it in VR on the right eye according the manual it works perfectly. But it‘s still sad. That was the „WOW“ - feature of this aircraft for which it was really famous and well known back in the 80s and it‘s not working (or at least not without a stupid workaround which doesn’t even work always) on the left eye in DCS.

I was talking about start of developement to start of EA because it took RB 12 years from announcment to start of EA for the Strike Eagle. If you are talking about the time from announcment to final release you might be right.

What i mean is that the announcement from 2008 doesn't mean they really started with the developement of this modules in the same year and i really doubt it was like that. They announced the AH-64A, the F-16C, the A-10A, the MiG-29A, the Mi-24P and iirc the Su-27 as FF modules. The plan was to realese these modules in a 9 month' cycle. That was more like a roadmap and not an official announcement. I also remember that there was a discussion about the other F-16 game and a couple of people said they would like to have the F-16 in DCS but the answer of "Wags" was something like that he also would like to see this module but at this time there were no plans for a Viper - and 2 or 3 years later the F-16 was announced. So i don't think they started with the F-16C already in 2008. I just had a look at the 2014's WIP screenshots of the Hornet's cockpit and i absolutely doubt that this was the work of 6 years - so i really don't think that the Hornet took a decade from start of developement to EA. Also there were all these discussions about redfor Aircraft and it was stated several times that they can't make them because of lack of availability of documentation about these aircrafts even though the MiG-29A was on their 2008's roadmap - and now it's available for pre purchase. Long story short: what i mean is that ED is always good for a surprise and we don't know what they are working on and what not. It might be like Gunnar81 said that they announced the F-15C as a FF module because it will be a top seller and a really good addition to DCS but also to make their own E model out of it in case everything goes down the drain. But it's all just speculation from me - not more - and it's also pretty OT now. I still hope they will eventually find a good solution or if not do their own Strike Eagle and at least keep the other modules working in DCS.

Are you sure they are working on the Apache since 2008? I know they announced the plan to do an AH-64A Block 49 in 2008 but the "D" model? The Longbow was brought to EA in 2022 - that would mean 14 years of developement (not even till final release but just till EA). The EA for the Hornet started in June 2018 and was announced in 2014 with screenshots which looked very, very early WIP. That means about 5 years of developement until EA. But 12 - 14 years of developement would mean they started with the Hornet even way before the first module - the Ka-50 - was released... And just because it took 12 years for RB doesn't mean it will take the same time for ED.

No problem at all I noticed that i might took the wrong thread for my question - there is another thread about this issue specifically for the use of the IHADSS in VR on the left eye and both eyes. And it's not such a big deal - as long as i do the boresighting as in the screenshot everything is spot on. But it shouldn't be like this in one of the most complex ED modules in DCS I thought the same already. Maybe it was always off for me because George is not boresighting the IHADSS with the left but with the right eye. I never tried to use the IHADDS on the CP/G seat without boresighting it while using the right eye. Only while using the left eye. When i use the right eye, the boresighting works perfectly. But i just prefer to use it on the left eye - that's why im struggeling

No guys - it's not the range setting. It has nothing to do with the range. I know how the range is calculated in Auto Mode. Engaging a target at 12 o clock with the wrong range would lead to impacts in front of or behind the target - short or long. But that is not the problem. The problem is, the impacts are all way off to the left (same distance). Also - as i said - the PNVS and the TADS are completely offset. The boresight procedure according the manual works fine..... as long as you use the IHADSS on the right eye. But on the left eye it just doesn't work - at least at the CP/G station.

I think you didn't understand the problem. If i do it as you said and as it is writen in the manual it just doesn't work at all. The impact point of the rounds is up to 50m to the left of the aimingpoint. Furthermore the PNVS and TADS are completely offset. The screenshot doesn't show the way i'm doing it while wondering why it's not working. The screenshot shows how i do the boresighting in order to get it working. Only if i do it like in the screenshot i have the canon precise as it shoud be and the PNVS picture fits exactly with what i see outside. I always switch to the Auto mode after boresighting - otherwise it wouldn't make sense . That's interesting because if i did so in the past my IHADSS wass completely offset and useless. That's why i did it always again. Was there a change? Maybe i have to give it another try - thanks.

I have to say i'm really fed up with this. I mean even though in the real aircraft the IHADSS is monted on the right side we have the option to use the IHADSS on either - left or right - or even both eyes which is great for everyone whose left eye is the dominant one or whose right eye has poorer vision and i really appreciate that but it doesn't help if it doesn't work. I am using VR and the IHADSS on the left eye. Starting in a cold and dark cockpit i can boresight the IHADSS in the pilost's seat according to the manual and when i'm aiming with the IHADSS the gun hits almost perfectly on spot. On the CP/G position it's just a disaster. I had a nice little workaround which seems not to work anymore. Now i always have to be offset while boresighting the IHADSS which is really annoying. I even don't fly very often with the Apache just because of this. And this makes the whole situation even worse because after one month not using the Apache i always forget how much offset i used the last time. So everytime i want to use the Apache i have to do one flight just to find out the offset again by boresighting - firing - observing the impacts - boresighting again ... until it works. I did that just now and noticed again how annoying it is. Then i decided to make a screenshot everytime i'm boresighting and the final one - which worked goes to my AH-64 kneeboard now. On the screenshot you can see how i "boresight" my IHADSS in order to get it work properly. But this can't be serious, can it? Another question is: if "George" uses his IHADSS already properly during a flight, why do i have to boresight it again when i switch to the frontseat? Shouldn´t the IHADSS be aligned already?

But that's what i mean when i ask "what if they don't find an agreement at all?" They either have to focus on other platforms or to shut down the business. But anyway i cannot imagine that they will continue developing DCS content without payment. Additionally he now said he will not release the source code to anyone else. And if they don't continue (in the worst case) and they will not give the source code to anyone else - what will be the result? And i think no one is willing to keep working unpaid for 18 months. That's why they stopped working already 12 months ago, or did i miss some updates to their modules?

Because they don't get paid?? Taking off the modules from the stores is not a step in the direction to stay. I would appreciate if they find an agreement. But what if not at all, or the solution is not to their favor? By taking off their products from the store?? Yes i know - it seems like they don't receive the money from the sold modules at the moment but if they find an agreement they should get it afterwards. But anyway..... we will see what happens.....

Ah come on. You know exactly what i've meant. It's only STILL available because it takes more time to remove it from the steam store. "Our development pipeline, including all source code has never been - and will never be - released to any distributor or third party." Maybe i'm wrong but this sentence means exactly that he's not willing to give / sell the source code to any other developer in order to keep the modules in the game in case they will leave DCS.

Yes you are absolutely right. No one appart from the parties involved in this dispute have the whole picture. Don't get me wrong - i'm also still hoping for a good outcome and i will not refund the F-15E. But what i said about the source code is not an assumption done by me since prowler by himself mentioned that in his last statement as he also said repeatedly that ED is not able to maintain, support or continue developement of their products without them. That also sounds to me like "Guys: there is no hope for our modules if we loose." This may be part of the game and the way prowler is playing it but it also underlines the hot headed attitude of him. And it also shows that prowler is not interested in an agreement for a future DCS with all the RB modules but without RB as a developer. And what else can we do than building our own picture with these little fragments of information we get occasionally. As i said: 5 weeks ago prowler was pretty optimistic since he got all his accounts back. That sounded very good. Yesterday ED removed all the RB modules from their store on request of RB. Is there anybody here who thinks that this is a good sign? Try to buy one of RBs products now..... But again - don't get me wrong. I'm still hoping for a positiv solution and i really like your optimism which you always show. I really do but unfortunately at this very point i can't share it. The Harrier is one of my absolute favorite modules as the Strike Eagle will be hopefully in the future if they could find a solution. It would be really sad, if this modules wouldn't survive the dispute. But due to all the current ups and downs at the moment i think i will take a break - from the RB modules and maybe even from reading this thread and concentrate a bit more on the wonderful modules we already have and the improvements of them like the already mentioned pilot body for the A-10C.

From day one of this public dipute i thought there are just 2 options. The first one is a resolution where everything goes back as it was before the dispute and the second one will be no or a negative solution where we will loose all of the RB modules (sooner or later). Because in my opinion this guy (RB prowler) with his hot headed ego would rather burn down everything than giving in and sell the source code of their modules to ED (which would be my favorite solution). Since yesterday i have the feeling that prowler just took a canister of gas and pulled out the lighter. It's really sad. 4 or 5 weeks ago, when he said that he's got all his accounts back it sounded to me like they are about to find a good solution. Now i'm pretty concerned. Yesterday i thought how can it be - shortly after this dispute went public a lot of people where asking how ED can continue to sale the modules while RB_prowler several times said that he asked ED to take them off from the store..... if that was true the modules should have disappeared already months ago. I can't stand this drama anymore. Time to move on and concentrate on looking foreward to the A-10 pilot body