BlackLion213

I think the issues are well covered in this thread and the other similar threads on the topic. As someone who just started using the Oculus CV1 3 days ago, I can confirm that it transforms the experience and is a DRAMATIC change from using a monitor. This is one of those pieces of technology that leaves me in awe of what we can see and experience in a room of our house. It certainly is the sort of thing that we only dreamed about during the 90s. The concept capitalizes on the existing interactive features of DCS (6 DOF cockpits, clickable cockpits), but pulls them together into a totally different experience than using a monitor. In terms of realism, VR will get better an additional features could improve it (haptic feedback for hand interaction, Simshaker/buttkicker, etc), but I can't imagine a more complete experience in your house without building a giant full motion/cockpit based simulator. That said, the realism and limitations of first generation VR will hinder some activities compared to using a monitor. So the decision to upgrade depends on your desired use and willingness/ability to acquire the best hardware. Case in point: I am running a i7-4790@3.6 GHz with a GTX970 and 16 MB of RAM - VR runs with decent graphics and a pixel density of 1.7, but ASW/ATW are clearly working often and I need to upgrade. If buying the latest graphics cards is not reasonable, then approach cautiously. If you try it, you'll probably love it, but it will be frustrating if DCS runs poorly. Also, if your primary interest in DCS is multiplayer kills, then losing the rapid head mobility of track IR for actually turning your head will make things tougher. Also, it's harder to see objects at a distance with the current resolution (though model enlargement and zoom really help to offset). I've heard someone say "the cockpit looks great, but everything outside is a blurry mess" - I would call this a gross mis-characterization (IMHO), but seeing objects at a distance emphasizes the current limitations of VR. But if your primary interest in DCS is experiencing realistic air operations and realistic (meaning challenging :)) combat, then no better tool has been created for simmers since the computer....it feels that significant to me! -Nick PS - when you first try VR in DCS things won't look too good, but once you adjust the headset, pixel density, and general settings - things get way better. Day 2 was much better for me than Day 1. Keep tweaking and you will get there.

I hear you on that. Though the MiG-21 was LNS' first module (and the first module from a 3rd party), so there have been growing pains. That said, it's still my favorite and it looks amazing (and seems to fly beautifully) in VR (got my CV1 3 days ago). I think that the Viggen and Tomcat will be a better indicator of their long-term potential (we'll see soon), though I still view the MiG-21 as an excellent product (and my favorite DCS module). I have high hopes for the future, but everyone has ups and downs. -Nick

Well, Nick Grey is a real Spitfire pilot from The Fighter Collection and he directly participated in development. I think the real problem is the complete lack of sensation - in real life lateral movements can be felt much earlier than they can be seen. In the Spitfire, this is exacerbated by poor forward visibility during the take-off roll. It can be hard to detect yaw and damp it before there are fairly big moments occurring. I've had similar experiences the few times I've tried driving simulators (and of cars that I've driven a fair bit in real life). At first, I generally feel that oversteer is way over done and that the chassis feels too unstable. However, it is because all of those subtle cues of oversteer are missing (early G unload, reversal of lateral forces, changes in vibration, steering weight changes) - generally the only cue is visual and changes in engine sound (not too alarming since oversteer often occurs during throttle application). Once I start to pay attention to the cues that are present, things make a lot more sense and better match reality. With the Spitfire, I am really focusing on my line-up references to catch early yaw and it is really helping. It does interrupt my instrument scan, but I'm hoping as I grow used to the necessary control inputs that things will get much easier. So far things are steadily improving, but I too was pretty frustrated at first. I wonder if VR would make the take-off easier as well.... -Nick

Thank you, excellent video. :) It also seems that the Viggen is relatively easy to get started and into the air. -Nick

That's remarkable! Is it the new lighting? Things certainly look different than 1.5/2.0 - even my wife noticed (and was very impressed actually :))! -Nick

WOW! Between the new lighting and new map - things look incredibly realistic. I'm blown away! -Nick

Yes, I agree. I certainly think there is a place for the F-15E in DCS - it fits perfectly with the existing and planned maps (and it is my favorite USAF jet). However, it would be unwise to release the F-15E anytime close to the F/A-18C. Their missions are similar as is the experience of operating a high-performance fighter with MFDs and a HUD. Much like humor, the critical part is timing. If these modules are spaced ~1.5-2 years apart, many will want a new version of a similar experience simply to refresh their favorite parts of DCS. Most things don't stay new/exciting forever and adding a new module with a similar mission is a great way to keep players engaged. But if launched at the same time - the 2 modules share sales and there is a real loss of revenue for the developers. I think that Razbam's plan for the AV-8B, Mirage III, and MiG-23MLA is a really great balance of different eras and experiences. By the time those modules are complete and on-sale, it will probably be a good time for the F-15E (IMHO). -Nick

At one point LNS had planned to include the theater for free as part of their modules (small map), but I think those plans changed a while ago. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2333049&postcount=1 Also, from what I've heard only the Pacific maps are awaiting new terrain tech. The other planned maps and tons of content for their maps are well underway (with their team in Poland doing much of the work - as you said :) ). But the huge scope of work means that the maps won't be ready for a while. Though, since most of these details have not been stated explicitly, it is subject to a fair bit of interpretation. But I agree, we are pretty much on the same page concerning these topics. :) -Nick

Though I think the Tomcat may actually come out first. :) https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2875032&postcount=36 Both Cobra and Rudel have mentioned some new terrain technology that is needed for their Iwo Jima map (no idea what). I have the feeling that projects that are new map "dependent" will be released after projects that can work with the current maps (even if a specialized theater is later released for the project). Also, from what was said during the Viggen AMA ( ) - the plans may have moved away from "bundled" theaters to more of "optional" theaters. Given the enormous effort to create a new map, it seems unrealistic to include it free with an aircraft (IMHO) - unless it is fairly small, which may limit it's usefulness. There has been little mention of the upcoming Viggen map since September of 2015. From the AMA, it is still underway, but I wonder if plans have changed. Maybe the new plan is for a larger theater, but not bundled. I still think that the new theaters are among the most exciting of upcoming projects and I'm hoping to learn more next year. But I doubt that it will be a standard feature, more of a complimentary product. -Nick

I was referring to the Aerosoft Tomcat released in 2014 (FSX/P3D). It is a good product for those who use that sim platform, though the overall detail is far less than what is expected for the LNS Tomcat. -Nick

I finally got to watch it after the even on Hook's Twitch page (still going for those who haven't visited yet). It was a ton of fun to watch and the first time I've watched an event like that. As a long-term MiG-21 fan I was glad to see it put up such a strong fight despite several technological advantages on the opposing team. It reinforced the ACEVAL/AIMVAL maxim that fighting as a team and using the right tactics will overcome tech - nice to see that DCS manages to recreate that so well. :thumbup: I also loved watching the Viggens streak in on the deck for their first launch of RB 04Es (even if the group launch feature was bugged) and fight their way out. Even in A-A it put up a solid showing against the MiG-21 (even carrying those big centerline tanks - can they be jettisoned?). And clearly the Viggen is functioning pretty darn well even at this stage! Thanks to all who made the event possible and I can't wait to see more from the Viggen! -Nick

It's actually a pretty hard question to answer because the perceptive experience is really different with these binocular HMDs compared to a normal monitor. During a normal day, our eyes and brain spend a lot of time "signal averaging" and dismissing visual bits of info that our brain feels are irrelevant. This is probably why the screendoor effect disappears for most rift users - the pixel lines are not aligned between the 2 images so you have to actively focus on the screendoor to see it. I am not yet a rift user (Christmas gift :D), but I tried it out at the USAF Museum in Dayton OH. They had a spacewalk experience using the Rift CV1 and it was really insightful. If you can try a Rift even for a few minutes it will probably answer a lot of your questions. The actual Rift demo wasn't the best use IMHO (almost no near objects, no "body" for the user, just floating in space, etc), but the sense of depth was really impressive. When I first put the HMD on I saw the screendoor, but the moment I focused on anything it disappeared. Actual objects where clearer than I expected. If I focused on something with one eye, screendoor was more noticeable and some jagged features (the stuff that AA handles) was more obvious. But the binocular image smoothed out some things and really hid the screendoor in my experience. I think the more telling bit of info is the lack of people on this forum who tried the Rift (or Vive) and either returned it or still use their monitor most of the time - I can't think of anyone! (maybe I didn't look hard enough...). If you are wondering when the Rift will be good enough that the vast majority of players prefer it to a monitor despite a few pros and cons - the answer is now. Wondering when the Rift will have little to no drawbacks compared to a HD monitor - probably soon, 2018ish as Hansangb said seems reasonable. When will VR be good enough that there will be no suspension of disbelief....probably a long time. The good news is it's probably not a big deal, because what is available now is already better than a monitor for nearly everyone who tries it. Still I am excited to see how things change over the coming years, it looks really promising! -Nick

I think that flushing out a reasonably complete BattleGroup is likely between the Tomcat and Hornet projects. Luckily, we do have an Aegis Cruiser and Perry class FFG - which is a good start. The Aegis cruiser is VLS equipped, the first of which deployed in 1987 (to the Strait of Hormuz actually...) with Battle Group Echo as seen in this photo (USS Bunker Hill). It might be helpful to also add a non-VLS Aegis cruiser as it would give more flexibility for creating Battle Groups on the mid-80s. Also, at least one destroyer would be great. I vote for Spruance class given how common they were during the late-Cold War in the USN. Support ships will hopefully come along as well, but I'm thinking some of these will be created for Hornet as well. Lastly, some aircraft AI is really necessary for a mid-80s Tomcat - namely the A-6E/KA-6D. That aircraft, especially in Tanker form, was a central partner in Tomcat operations till the Intruder's retirement in 1995. I pretty sure that LNS realizes this (the other Tomcat module for a 3-letter sim(s) even chose to include it). The EA-6B is also pretty important as it provided SEAD support (especially for USS Ranger which lacked HARM equipped A-7s and whose A-6s weren't HARM equipped till ~1990) along with a source of HVAP missions for Tomcats. I suspect that if LNS is taking the time to create a Forrestal class carrier, they are also aware of these other AI needs. Fortunately, a couple of ships and two aircraft that are pretty similar (A-6E and EA-6B - could possibly share an SFM?) would get us most of what we need (plus backdating the E-2 in sim - I don't think there is much to change). In any case, there certainly is hope for something similar to what you described. We'll probably learn more during the spring or summer of 2017 from what has been said. -Nick

I'm not that well informed, but judging from yesterdays Grudge Match where Viggens were seen reaching ~797 KIAS on the deck (with rockets loaded)!!....I'm pretty sure that it will be flyable straight and level at very high speeds. However, the Viggen gameplay video does show some less than elegant pitch response at transonic speeds (section while firing rockets). My guess is that it will fly beautifully straight and level, but fight back a bit as you load up the airframe in the transonic region. Just I guess from what I've seen thus far. -Nick

That's a great looking R-24! :D -Nick

Yes....but isn't all of this because of your project? :) -Nick

Is this the book? I suspect so since it contains the same 10 you mentioned. :) It's still a great book to thumb through and I remember having the same thought as you - ED and 3rd Parties are creating an awesome collection of aircraft that are very much to my taste (late Cold War - aircraft of my youth). Glad to see I am in good company...:D -Nick

Very impressive! It's clear that the Viggen was a very ambitious module and it's awesome to see it nearing release. This kind of analog tech looks like a lot of fun and is the sort of thing that I want in DCSW. Thank you for the steady flow of info and I'm excited to see more! -Nick

Thank you for the update. I am also quite excited about the systems videos and hope to see them soon. The Grudge match also sounds cool, though it will be starting at the same time as my Mother in-laws Birthday lunch....I am now considering a serious case of "gastroenteritis"...:music_whistling: -Nick

Yep, these look awesome! Both the MiG-23 and MiG-19PM are among my favorite Soviet aircraft. I'm particularly thrilled about the MiG-19 since it didn't seem like a fighter that would make it into DCS (though with the Mirage III on the way...it would have a dancing partner!). I hope both projects move forward and you can absolutely count on me buying both! -Nick PS - both will fit nicely into a variety of Cold War scenarios with the F-14A as well...:D

Glad to see everyone in such a great mood on a Friday night....:) I'm willing to bet that the Tomcat's TCS spent nearly all of it's time looking at F-5s, A-4s, A-7s, and other F-14s - given the nature of intercept training/DACT. Most of those are small aircraft and 10 miles makes sense even with 10x zoom. I haven't heard about effective ranges for larger aircraft. I don't doubt TurkeyDriver's claim, but I've never seen it written for the TCS. I have read that the F-14 was pretty easy to VID at longer ranges than nearly every fighter. In any case, it is also a subjective tool and many operators may disagree as to what constitutes an adequate VID. Though I think we can conclude that the useful range is at least 10 miles. :thumbup: -Nick PS - Read TurkeyDriver's link ( http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-EO-Systems.html) Nice article - reinforces that F-5s were probably the source of the "10 mile VID on a fighter" while a C-130 is reliably ID'd at 35 miles.

The range often quoted for a reliable VID on a fighter sized target is 10 nm (not just spotting, but determining aircraft type). Larger aircraft can be spotted much further, but it depends on size. I'm not aware of a reason that the F-14 module would not have IFF as the real F-14 did have it. Though nothing is certain till release. :) Though it's worth mentioning that the TCS wasn't viewed as a replacement for IFF, but a tool that could expand the envelope for reliable long-ish range shots before the day of NCTR. -Nick

I doubt that ED has forgotten this issue, especially with carrier ops on the way. It doesn't seem logical that serious effort would be placed into a new CVN only to populate it with less detailed aircraft models. Aircraft are crammed so close together on a carrier deck that it would be hard to hide old models. With that in mind, it seems likely that the S-3 and SH-60 will be updated. Plus, I'm pretty confident that the rest of the airwing will be fleshed out (more or less) including an AI Super Hornet. Without other members of the airwing, the ability to create realistic scenarios falls a bit short. Seems like a worthy effort if so much time is invested recreating all of the F/A-18C's systems. That said, these things probably go in waves. Currently, the Normandy map is up next among map updates/releases so you can bet that most (if not all) of ED's 3D resources are going into those objects and AI units. Once Normandy is more or less done, then the Caucasus map is up and 3D models for that region will be a priority. Strait of Hormuz and the Hornet module would be the impetus to upgrade these USN objects, so I wouldn't expect to see those updates till SoH and Hornet are nearly done or in Early Access. Lastly, the CH-53 seems like a pretty important upgrade for the Strait of Hormuz map given the historical role of mining and anti-mine operations in the Strait. The CH-53 and the F-4E (for the IRIAF) are probably near the top of the list as needed 3D models for that map (IMHO). So I bet it will happen, but not before a few other things are done first. My 2 cents. :) -Nick

Yeah...pilots don't like to ride in the back seat, especially when they think they are famous. :) (Or know they are famous - like Chuck Yeager). I still think that redundancy and points of reference are helpful, plus good for safety. Just my 2 cents. -Nick

Cool, thank you! Even without registering the ignition of each stage, it's still a handy and novel feature for the throttle. I'm not aware of any other aircraft that has it, most pilots rely on the "feel" to tell when each stage lights. -Nick