Redglyph

Here's what he wrote, punctuation was missing around "then" and we have to suppose that the first part (I noticed that) refers to the temperature being higher, so what was reported before. With the punctuation: Anyway, just messing around but on purpose: that's why using the correct preposition "than" is recommended to avoid confusion :D

But that would be normal for the temperature, to get lower in low power settings, no? ;)

Perhaps the "Early Access" tag is not visible enough on the store page, it's an easy mistake for who is not used to it and too enthusiastic about buying the plane.

It would be nice to see a list or a summary of the known issues and not-yet-implemented features, otherwise it's hard to know what to report :/ In any case, I haven't found that yet, have they posted something like that?

How would we know? Have you given your settings? No. Have you given FPS data? No. Have you even described your system? Not either, just some partial info later in the thread, after asking people how it runs without any point of comparison. What can I say, good for you if you have better performance and graphics with a 7-year-old laptop. In that case, you'll probably have acceptable performance on the Channel map, who knows. If you're asking blind questions then not believing the answers, what are you trying to achieve anyway? Seeing your state of mind, you should just wait a few months for the map to be optimized, and the engine to evolve. Performances are just not relevant at this point, and the map content is still WIP.

Oh, nice! Exactly what I was looking for, thanks!

I've already seen that results vary widely between "not-so-new" systems. I suppose that I must tune most graphics features down. I tried to tweak some of them but it wasn't convincing for the performances, or quite ugly to see ;) I could fly on this map when it was first released, and for a while after that, but since the latest "optimizations", it's near impossible for me to take off or land at most of the airfields, because of freezes (loading details, texture and objects probably) - the map has acquired more content since the beginning. Same with low-level flying, I suppose due to the collision detection system. With more planes, like some of the missions available with the Spitfire, it's crawling and in some cases I had to kill the process to regain control of the PC. So the campaigns are definitely out of reach. Turning all sliders down and having a low-res sim doesn't interest me when Caucasus and Nevada (or other sims) have good performances, so I prefer to wait until I change my whole system.

I'm sure it will be optimized in time, like it was for Normandy, it's just WIP now.

I'm using DCS OB 2.5.6.50321 I noticed that the lower wing was stalling first when climbing, which is odd. The same stalls first when descending, which is normal. Unless this plane has something special, the higher wing should stall first when climbing, but I'd be glad if someone who knows the aircraft better could confirm. EDIT: this was for a right turn, a left climbing turn had the upper wing stall first. I don't believe the engine torque would have anything to do with that though, normally it's pure geometry (I believe I had the turn coordinated as much as possible in those conditions). Again, I haven't seen any known issue list, so perhaps I'm reporting a problem that is known. If such a list exists, it would be fair to publish it.

I'm using DCS OB 2.5.6.50321 This is an old problem. Here is a screenshot of the default bindings for the controllers, as you can see, it's the same for all controllers and makes no sense... and I'm not even showing the non-analogue settings that would have buttons bound to the rudder pedals and other physically unrealistic bindings. I had the impression this was redone recently but those problems are still there. Or I'm missing something, which is possible, I read the latest DCS World document but didn't find any help for this problem. The main page settings, so from the DCS theme page, allows to change the settings of any aircraft, plus a "General" settings, what is it? I was hoping one could set the defaults there, but it's apparently not the case, I had it set up to correct bindings but it was never copied to any new module. DCS is quite annoying for this, each time one has to redo the settings, or do them the first time, everything on other controllers than the keyboard must be patiently cleared one by one. And I didn't check, but until recently at least, trying to do that before starting a first mission results in a crash to desktop. Why not have the user set their default settings with this "General" one, or a "Default" / other name, category? Or better, "Default prop", "Default jet", "Default helicopter" and so on? If I'm doing something wrong, please let me know (I did clear all my settings when the system was supposedly revamped a while back). --- While I'm at it, something else seems disfunctional, the analogue brake settings. Once they are set, one can clearly see the little bar indicator on the analogue (axis) settings page that grows left and right when applying the brakes (for most controls, BTW, this bar moves left when the value is increasing, which is perhaps not intuitive). So why, when those indicators show the correct behaviour, do we have sometimes an inverted behaviour in the aircraft? It's always guesswork to set those and obviously there's a random discrepancy between the indicator on the DCS settings page and the module itself, which shouldn't be. Was something not specified correctly in the API? Lastly, once the user is the analogue axis settings, how does he come back to the buttons settings?

I tried the "Instant action" with the Spitfire on the Channel map, cold start. It's simply impossible for me to do anything, if I turn my head the view barely follows, it's below 10 FPS, sometimes doesn't move for 1 second or more. Starting in the air with the free flight instant mission was even worse, it would regularly freeze for ~10 seconds or so. This map, like Normandy, requires a very high-end system. I bought it for support but I'll just ignore it until I can buy a new PC.

Hello, I'm using the updater 2.9.17.9. Would it be possible to add a bandwidth limiter to this already great tool? I don't think it's already implemented, I tried to see the program usage but it doesn't seem possible (no -h or anything of the sort), I had a look at the info page and found nothing related to that (but then it's probably outdated, 2015...). DCS downloads tend to get quite big, with maps, extra uncompressed wav soundtrack files some 3rd parties include these days and whatnot. And Internet bandwidth has to be shared, especially in this lockdown period. It would be nice to be able to update and not to throttle down everyone else's access to Internet for long periods of time :)

OK, the answer was no clear (there was no answer actually) but so I understand that this sound fix will remain as a separate mod we'll have to apply after every update, and not be integrated. I thought M3 would take it, weird.

I thought Magnitude 3 would integrate this into their module, did they change their mind?

Right, I forgot about this one. And as usual, not reported... I'll probably have to make another thread for them to see it.

It seems to confirm a high-end PC is required. If I try a simple stand-alone mission, I see those problems (crawling below some altitude, and so on). I tried one of the quick missions with 10-20 aircraft, but I had to kill the process manually because I lost any control over DCS.

Let's not discuss that here. You can choose to believe what you want, that wasn't the point of my post.

I had the opportunity to test it thanks to the free trial programme. When I first bought the P-51D years ago, I was so impressed with the quality of the cockpit and the exterior model, which was my first contact. Then with the flight model of course. The sound was good, included the famous whistle, but the Merlin's music was not entirely there yet. I'm impressed again with this module, the high resolution textures, the sound - even the engine's, the handling gives an increased feeling of realism - hard to explain exactly why, less distraction from the immersion I suppose. Perhaps the sound is especially important (at least for me). For example, now that the Spitfire has a great set of engine sounds, it's much more enjoyable too. And that'll be amplified even more with the damage model, I'm sure. Well done!

I understand that ED took the opportunity to bring this module to the public since they had developped it for a customer already. It's strange to see how quickly it has been discontinued, there were a few fixes right after it was released by autumn 2018 and since then, absolutely nothing, it hasn't mentioned in the logs anymore. It has just remained in early release, and it will probably remain unfinished longer than the Hornet (if it is finished at all one day), yet the F/A-18 is at a completely different level of complexity. There was also an interesting video by an actual Yak-52 pilot (John Knolla) with very relevant remarks on the flight model, but I haven't seen any reaction to this. And it's coming with 3 training missions... It's hard not to feel there is zero interest for this module, which is disappointing. It could have been an interesting and fun little module to learn flying. Just because there is no weapon or because it's not as sexy to develop as a Hornet doesn't make it worthless. I can't help but speculate what they could have achieved in DCS World or for the other modules instead of spending time to (half-heartedly) bring this additional one, that will require some maintenance now and then. That's just my impression of course, only what I, as a customer, perceive on a purchased airplane.

Thanks, I didn't know that. I deleted them and tried again, but I couldn't see any difference, and the performances made it impossible again to do anything. I've waited for 2-3 minutes without moving the aircraft, just looking left and right, it would move for 10 degrees then freeze for 2 to 10 seconds. It was slightly better after 3 minutes, but still happening randomly. I checked Caucasus and Nevada, smooth. Normandy just needs a lot of optimizing, apparently. Or a powerful system.

Thanks for testing! Perhaps the 8GB of memory on the 1070 help. What type of SSD do you have? I'm testing that first still on the runway too. Then if that looks possible, I'm taking off and doing a pattern, but here it was just impossible. I tried again today and it was better, but the weather was completely different. I know there are remnants of the previous flights and that the state is not properly reset between sessions, but I though it was only for the state of the aircraft, nothing else. Strange. In any case, I tried different settings but the results are so inconsistent from one run to the next, even with the same parameters, that it's hard to pinpoint. With low-res terrain textures it seems to be much better standing still on the runway, but it's still stuttering a lot when flying over the country below 1000ft or so, to the point the sound itself stops now and then for a fraction of a second. => this looks to be due to loading too many objects and/or textures from disk It's inconsistent alright. I'm OB too (see the version), but it's been like that for a while, it's not just the latest updates. Since the update of Normandy I would say, it really made it much worse for me, and also quite different from one flight to the next, even if they're in the exact same conditions.

You must have a high-end system to be able to support Normandy. I don't know which part of hardware is not fine with me (actually I rather think it's the map), but since this update I can't even get 1 FPS, it freezes all the time when I turn the head, then sometimes I have 20-ish FPS for a fraction of a second, and it freezes again. As an example, I just tried with 2.5.6.47224, instant mission / Bf109 take-off. I suppose it loads information all the time and that it's blocking the whole rendering process. Or it's because I'm on the ground, other DCS maps have also a performance hit at low altitude, but far from this. In the air it's less dramatic, but it still freezes regularly and it's nothing to do with smoothness. If I go below 1000ft it becomes hazardous again, so as far as helicopter flights are concerned, it's certainly not a good candidate. It's simple, I couldn't even exit DCS, it remained completely frozen after I clicked (painfully) "Exit". Had to kill it. It was already sluggish and very demanding at the beginning, now it's become an impossibility for me. I'll probably try it again in a few months if I upgrade to a latest RTX 2080 Ti and an NVMe memory, I think less than that just won't do it. Nevada and Caucasus are fine, except a few slower spots but even then, it's nothing close to the problems I have with Normandy.

It's not OK right now, DCS remains stuck at different stages. Might be of interest as a fix: once the user opens the module manager, there is no way out but to kill the process, it keeps looking for data that it can't get from the server now, but the CANCEL button is disabled or inoperative. Same with the login, if it can't login to the server there is either no time-out or the value is so high that I decided to kill the process and try again. The second time it decided to switch to offline mode seamlessly though, strange.

In DCS 2.5.6.45317, in the Mission Editor, at the NTTR airbase: - if I add an aircraft "start from runway", it is placed in the middle of the runway, not at the start. - if I add an AI aircraft "start from parking hot", no matter where the parking is, it will correctly roll to the the runway threshold and take off from there. The choice of airplane doesn't seem to change anything. So there is a discrepancy, and mainly, it is not expected to start the take-off from the middle of the runway. The required rolling length to take off may vary, and even if that particular runway is long, safety would have such aircraft use the regular threshold ;) I'm providing a basic test mission, with - the user airplane showing the misplaced take-off starting point (start from runway) - two AI airplanes near the middle of the runway and near the threshold. Those two AI airplanes correctly roll to the threshold. bug.startfromrwy.miz

Hello, In DCS 2.5.6.45317, I have cracking sounds for uncontrolled AI aircraft. In this instance, this is a TF-51D, I'm providing a small example, there is no trigger to start it so it just remains on the ground, engine not started. How to reproduce - start mission - F2 twice to see the immobile aircraft with cracking sounds I made a DCS_update repair, just to make sure, and moved all the mods away, it didn't solve the problem. bug.popsound.miz