hughlb

Agreed, people keep getting confused between camera tracking and camera zooming. Camera tracking - the whole camera moves position physically, camera zooming - the camera stays in the same location, but the lens elements reposition - zooming adjusts your field of view, the wider you go, the more distortion. Tracking keeps your field of view the same, but you can see more cockpit when you track back because the panel is then further away from the camera.

I thought I read about a leak, revealing Intel's Coffee Lake was going to be dropping clock speed for more cores, like Ryzen. What if there is a clock speed regression, wouldn't that be somewhat destructive for DCS if the fastest processor you can buy is like a 3.6 ghz?

My hope is that now wags and I have the same monitor - it will drive him crazy too, to the point of a fix ;) on a related note, the Hornet looks to have its camera positioned further back in the cockpit.

Does that also scale the HUD correctly?

Got a Rift and a 4K 42 inch monitor - the cockpit and closer objects look great in the rift, good sense of depth makes you feel like you are sitting in the aircraft, but it's incredibly low res when you compare it to sitting behind a 4K screen. 4K gets a bad wrap, I think because people buy smaller <32 inch 4K monitors and don't get the full benefit of the res, or they buy a 4K tv, which isn't a great idea for gaming on. A 42 inch monitor gets pretty darn close to actual cockpit size and at an optimal distance it almost completely fills your vision, like the rift. The rift gets more disappointing the further away you focus - and because 90 percent of a mission is spotting at distance, it doesn't play to the rift's strengths. Also, at distance, there is no real sense of depth, just like in real life. Having said all that, a VR set with the PPI of a 4K monitor will be amazing - just keep in mind it can also get a bit tiring being in VR for long missions.

I recently purchased a 42.5 inch 4K monitor (same as Wags). Whilst the monitor is impressive, it further highlights a criticism I've long had with the default cockpit camera position. By default, the camera is over the control stick in many aircraft, more noticeable in the A-10, F-15 and Spitfire, which looks ridiculous on a 42 inch monitor. Thankfully ED have included the RShift+RCtrl+* or / buttons to track the camera forwards or backwards, but when this happens the HUD doesn't scale, meaning it doesn't fit on the glass properly (see images below). People have said, "that's easy, just zoom out using the * or / buttons". The problem with zooming, is that changes the focal length of the virtual camera, so when you zoom out, you also get a fish-eye effect the further you zoom. This is just as bad to fly with as the default camera position The camera forwards and back controls works great, but is there a scaling HUD size algorithm that can be married to this function, to make it actually usable? Default camera position - smack bang against the panel The camera tracked fully back - absolutely brilliant on 4K 42 inch monitor - I can read every button clearly, have great cockpit usability and situational awareness, but I can only see half the HUD at best.

So here's a little narrative - I have been flying on a 24 inch gsync monitor for a couple of years, no real issue, I knew it was smaller than I would like, but it was workable. I picked up a Rift recently and have been using it in DCS, but after some time, I decided the positives didn't outweigh the negatives. I don't want this to become a "why VR is better" discussion, as I always have it there as an option later. Going back to my 24 inch monitor is really hard. I love gsync, the clarity, the colour, but it's just too small. So I'm looking for advice on something BIGGER. By BIGGER I don't mean 27 inch, I am thinking more along the lines of a minimum 34 inch ultrawide, but bigger would be even better. This opens the door to consider TV's - they are cheaper for the size, but are they suitable for DCS and gaming in general these days? Input lag and response time was never that great, but does anyone have any experience in current TV tech? The only other option would be to get a large ultrawide monitor, but 34 inches isn't actually all that large.

I second that, an email to those affected would be great. So to clarify, everyone is getting the corrected gimbal?

I take it VipPil are still working their way through the remaining orders? Can we still expect all tracking numbers this week? I'm keep my eyes peeled.

Interesting. It seems like packaging is the biggest problem - cramming modern day avionics and other systems into an aircraft that is still able to call itself a fighter, and fall into that pricerange. Why not just cut out the middle man and produce weapons platforms, carrying weapons that handle the dogfighting? Would that be the end goal - a long range hypersonic sled with an airborne laser?

That's a great photo some1. People have made some good points. It just seems like bigger, in this case, is better - cost being the main compromise. Is that correct? As a follow up question, what then is the advantage of slightly smaller twin engine fighters like the F/A-18C, MiG-29, Eurofighter, Rafale? It appears, at least on paper, that you either go small/single engine - Gripen/F-16, and keep the weight down, or you go a large twin engine, with excellent range and payload. In yet there are many fighters that fit somewhere in the middle.

I didn't realize how large the Su-27 is until I 'stood' next to it in VR. Then I looked up it's dimensions and came to realize it's about the same size as an F-111, and larger than a MiG-25 - that's huge! I always thought great size came at a great cost, in terms of maneuverability and structural integrity - at least it's true with the F-111 and MiG-25, and to a lesser extent the F-14. Firstly, why was the Su-27 so large? and why aren't more air superiority fighter aircraft developed at that size? It seems full of positives - better range, more payload, whilst still retaining excellent performance.

Thanks for the update. Any idea how long the shipping window will be? - if the first orders ship on July 1st, when will the last orders ship?

It has a deal-breaking stutter problem in 2.0 and now 2.1.

Yes, I provided some feedback on the forum when ED released 2.1 - frame rate was constantly jumping around between 40-100fps, regardless of which shadow preset or lighting settings, or detail on screen. Only solution was to turn shadows to flat only. Now with 2.1.1, the framerate has returned to how it used to be before 2.1- 100-120fps steady, with shadows medium. I will do more testing, but I noticed a marked improvement last night. I'm sure ED are still doing lots more optimising over the next few months.

2.1.1 - I Can fly with shadows enabled again - With 2.1, I had to turn them to flat only due to erratic framerate. I can run them on medium again, which adds so much to the immersion. Thanks for the update fellas!

Brilliant news, thanks again for your investigation :)

Can't thank you enough for doing this, Tane. We needed a dialogue channel and you found one. Obviously there are ongoing concerns, notably not letting this sort of communication breakdown happen in future. But this eases the concern over our investment. We await a direct response from VirPil. Thanks again, pal!

PayPal and Visa offer pathways for getting your money back - all is not lost. But it would be mighty disappointing if VirPil just disappeared all of a sudden, especially with such promising products in the pipeline.

Looking at that optimistically, dburne, one might reach the conclusion that cyph3r had a circumstance arise that keeps him from the forums for a few days - in the meantime, .... hits the fan. He sorts out whatever he was doing, returns to the forum, picks his jaw up off the floor and hurriedly types a response. We will see.

I am trying to contact them through Facebook/Email. But I don't speak their language - so if Cyph3r is absent for some reason, I may not get a response. If Cyph3r is their only English speaking contact, is it possible the other members of the company are not aware that we are concerned, because we are posting on English forums?

I've been watching this unfold - VPC are supposedly sponsoring/exhibiting at the Oz Flight Sim Expo later this year in my country, their grip just got reviewed by Ars Technica, but more importantly they have products in the market, and an established supply chain to produce those products. Not to mention various videos, and threads on flight and space sim boards, a website etc, support forum. History of good dialogue. My point is that if this were a scam, why now? What would they walk away with? Why bother with getting the grips or mounts to market, why bother with the web presence and sponsorship of events - you could argue that it's to get people preordering the base, but the base is only half the investment, the other half is the grip - and that's being produced. Also, they are not going to make much, if any profit, from the base preorders anyway - not when you consider development and material costs, general business admin costs. At this stage it would be easier and more profitable to follow through on the production, right? Let's consider they have run into production problems with the base - big enough to warrant a redesign - that's unlikely, but if it were the case, we'd be talking components - boards, materials, sensors. Perhaps even layout, or gimbal shape. But rectifying a problem with a component or changing suppliers wouldn't warrant just taking the preorder money and cutting their losses. There's just not that much money changing hands at this stage. All that being said, here's the thing - There is no quicker way to lose trust, than to take people's money, not deliver a product, then break contact. That's the part of this I don't understand - why destabilize your customer base? Obviously people here are less concerned about a product delay, and more simply concerned about losing their cash. And it's really easy to stop people being concerned about that... by telling them not to be concerned about that. That's step one. Then you explain why they shouldn't be concerned about that. Honestly, I can't see this being a scam, but I also can't see why they would not simply make contact... well, anything really. Just contact. An update. We are used to delays. I feel like we need to keep bumping this thread to the top of the list. Can our forum moderators do anything with a situation like this?

What impresses me is how clever Heatblur are with their texturing - look how efficient the Viggen is. Would love some quixel/substance tutes, or whichever process they are using.

Bump! Does anyone have any ideas? It seems only mmtaraval and I have this issue - but we do have the EXACT same issue.

I did the same thing - 970 to 1070. What I did see was a higher minimum framerate in built up areas, like Vegas. Less stutter as well, thanks to 8 vs 4 gigs of video RAM. My average framerate has been largely exactly the same. As you probably already know, DCS framerates are more CPU-bound than GPU. Also it depends on what resolution you're running on - I'm running at 1080p - I would say you could push to a higher resolution if needed, and still maintain performance, whereas the 970 will drop off the performance curve as resolution increases.