Tulkas

Feedback on the Forrestal IFLOLS: Finally improvement. It's much better, no doubt, you don't see from the sides and light orbs effect it is not so bad as it used to be, and gets better the closer you get. But I wonder. why it has to have bloom effect at all? Long time ago I used to mod the supercarrier with a simple texture and the IFLOLS became a sharp yellow dot and two sharp green lines, exactly as they look in dozens of real life videos. Later the supercarrier meatball was sharp by default, while the Forrestal's was almost unusable. And then the Supercarrier started to use the awful orb effect as well. Isn't it possible to have just a sharp texture for it?

I don’t wish to extend more the exchange on this subject, but I have to make note that the vídeo was not about an opinion, but about sharing “secret information”, something that requires credibility.

Well, I agree that if the person just brings content, tutorials… and that kind of value to the community it is unfair to bring that past to the table. But if the person gets involved in a highly divided and heated subject clamming to have “inside information” from “sources who wish to remain anonymous” it is only fair to warn viewers and possible viewers that could be a credibility problem due to past dishonest actions directed to increase popularity online.

Yeah, That's the thing. For me this never-ending discussion on the forums of who is legally guilty is futile and boring. Nobody here can really know. What I really want to know is: Did ED (the mother company to whom I bought Razbam modules) do everything on its hands to ensure the resolution of the conflict on a manner that ensures the continuity of the Razbam modules already sold? I just cannot understand how the disagreement on a non yet existing or developed module -the Tucano- can be solved by cutting the revenue from the existing and delivered modules, Particularly a brand new module years in the making which benefits I suspect were essential for the sustainability of the 3rdparty. That's not look to me like conflict resolution, that looks to me more like a war declaration. Was that really necessary? How far in development was the Tucano? What could anyway do Razbam with the Tucano without ED? Could they insert it by force in DCS? Could they do anything at all with a DCS Tucano without ED? I wouldn't think so...

The downfall of ED would affect very negatively to my paying customer interest. It is quite obvious, isn't it?

I have not freaking idea about who is legally right, like everybody else writing here. I am only sure that the actions taken after the conflict are not in my interest as a paying customer. Really the only leverage ED had was to stop paying Razbam for the work they have already delivered??Not to pay them for sales of the F15E which they have committed years of development and bring them to the brink of bankruptcy?? I don't buy that, sorry. How about just to say, hey Razbam, this Tucano module cannot come into DCS until you agree the terms. Period. That looks to me leverage enough and a much more fair approach for everybody, including the customers of existing modules. And better for ED itself I'd say. In the long run at least, in the short run we all know they have pocketed 100% of the gains of one of the most successful modules, made by others. Even if ED is right on its claims, which I don’t know, the way they have acted has made them loose my confidence as a customer. Until I see how the resolution of this conflict is, I only buy DCS modules in 3rd party shops, so I am sure that my money goes first to the hands of those who have done the work. And then let a judge decided if that money should go elsewhere.

Some weeks ago I started to enjoy the F14 with a new MOZA FFB base. Loving it to dead. But when I switch to the RIO station the FFB stick keeps the trimming position, making the TID cursor not centered. Does anyone have experience with this and knows how to make the FFB stick automatically center when switching to the RIO seat?

Did the F14B flight model finally received the same treatment than the F14A? I've been a bit disconnected for quite a while...

Well, even if it looks like the subject is not arousing the crowds, or even the developers I will press a bit further, This is how the RPS sounds like, difficult to miss and quite violent in the real sim, check also the sideslip indicator on the HUD: The sideslip indicator on the SVTOL HUD mode has two vertical lines: The vertical lines indicate lateral 0,09G The shakers will kick in if in certain conditions we reach 0,06Gs of lateral acceleration: We have this warning from the pedal shaker because at low speed the AC is either neutral or unstable in the vertical axis and excessive yaw rates can induce loss of control: Out of curiosity I went to DCS and forced the yaw with full rudder while hovering, the first thing is that the airplane will not depart, I can understand that maybe is not simulated and modelling the edge of the envelope and departures is a very complex thing. But also the sideslip indicator appears not to be working at all, this should be easier to fix (together with adding sound effects for the RPS ), is this a known bug? Cheers Tulkas

Anyone can confirm that this mod has stopped working with the last DCS version? It looks like it makes the meatball stop to show all together. It looks like the glow has been reduced in the last version of DCS, so now I can (barely) judge my altitude, but I still would rather have no glow at all, all RL videos I have seen show a crisp meatball.

I was wandering why it was not included a sound effect for the RPS? Could even be sent to the right-left headset loudspeaker to indicate what pedal to push. It is something that really catch your attention in the real plane, or in my case, in the real simulator. I remember one of the old Harriers in FSX -I do not remember if it was Razbam or Skunkworks- had the sound and it was really good, it took me by surprise because I did not know it was simulated and I immediately had a flashback to my experience on the real sim. Just curious and hopeful, I really would like to hear it when I force the yaw to the edge Other than that, I really love where the Razbam Harrier is right now and how in flies VSTOL

Thanks for the tip! I must be doing something wrong with the mechanisation because with TOO I only get to make targets from the AC present position INS mode, wished WP selected as current, press TOO, ODU shows WYP, MKP and TGP, TGP are selected, punch wished TGP number, and a target is created in the overfly position.

I've just upgraded to a new computer, 7800x3d, 4080, 32GB RAM 6000 so first thing was to test a little with the new settings. I use a Quest2. It was a fast test with the Harrier low over populated areas on Caucasus to test MFD crispiness and and instant action dogfight with the F14 vs Mig29 to test ghosting. My experience was: -Base line, all AA OFF. Quest2 resolution in OTT 1.8 and AWS off. At that resolution the cockpit instruments are crystal clear and crisp, some jagged edges on external objects, coast lines, clouds... not too bad for me. Very clear shimmering on 3D objects over the terrain, that was the most negative point. The smoothness was amazing, the first time in 5 years with VR that I had a BFM merge totally free of ghosting -DLAA ON, all shimmering gone, jagged edges gone. MFDs perfectly legible. The visuals were amazing, monitor-like quality. But the hit in performance was clear, the total smoothness was gone and there were some ghosting in the merge. -MSAAx2, bit more jagged edges that DLAA and a bit less performance hit. -TAA ON, visually like DLAA, amazing, no shimmering even on the net fences of the airports. MFDs perfectly legible. And the performance hit was minimal! I thought I had a winner, but then I tried the dogfight and noticed that the contacts appear and disappear constantly, impossible to fly BFM, no go. It was not an exhaustive test but just a first impressions. I don't want to give up any smoothness so I may swallow the shimmering and keep flying with all AA OFF. Maybe tinker a little with the settings to try to get MSAAx2 totally smooth. It's a pity that TAA smooths out visual contacts, I don't know if that can be fixed with some of the other settings. The positive thing is that I'm almost there to achieve monitor-like quality in VR, to see for first time free of ghosting or shimmering was really amazing

Is there a way to edit and convert waypoints to targetpoints? For example, if there are 4 waypoints in the flight plan that should be attacked, can I convert them to targetpoints to load them in the JDAM target menu?