Mr_sukebe

If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. After all, there’s probably very few who have bought every module. Just be careful to not get into the realms of potentially dictating what others should and shouldn’t buy or making wild guesses about just how informed ED is without asking first.

Far. With my first set, I made the mistake of assuming that as they'll be used next to a lens, that they should be suitable for close in work. Nope. They need to reflect the kind of distances that you'd use in reality (i.e. similar to what you might use for driving).

The amount of reduction is always a question of personal expectations and what is considered acceptable. Some might be happy with a really small central area in FFR, whilst others not. As I understand it, quad views by default has the central area set to the x1 for the number of pixels processed, and then an option of say x1/8th (which can be varied) for the outside area. One way of looking at it, is that with the savings on the low resolution area, you could deliberately oversample the central area, to for example x1.5 and still have used less processing power than with QV disabled.

As I understand it, both fixed and eye tracked have the options of varying the size of the fully rendered area (let's assume the middle) and the decrease in the number of pixels being rendered outside of that central area. So if the size of the middle area is the same and the decrease in pixels outside of that middle area are the same, from a performance difference, there should be nothing in it. The key point is that eye tracking ensures that if you move the focus of your eyes to a different point with the VR display, that the centre of that area fully rendered follows it. With fixed, look at a corner, and it'll be a blurry mess. With eye tracking it won't. The implications being that with fixed, you're likely to have a large "middle" area at full resolution. With eye tracked, you can run using a smaller central area and still see full resolution wherever your eyes look. In short, eye tracked, when configured correctly "should" result in not only a better performance, but also a uniform visual experience.

Does look interesting. As per usual, a few thoughts: That article links to the 75 games and apps supporting DLSS4 MFG. DCS is not among them. DCS is in the DLSS supporting list I wonder whether the texture compression will be conducted in software, or via the GPU. It "might" be something built into the drivers and available to older cards, though I'm personally doubtful The 50 series will have faster VRAM and PCIE5, which I'd expect to enable faster data being pushed from the CPU and also NVME storage. Again, that "might" help So sure enough, we're still in the lands of "too early to tell, but fingers crossed".

There's been some interesting noise earlier about the frame rates being lauded and how some of that is being achieved using the update frame generation tech, which instead of generating an extra frame, is with DLSS4 capable of generating 3. It's apparently great for smoothness, but does mean: the "doubled" performance is going to happen with games that supports DLSS4 we don't know whether there will be a visual impact of the tech will it be compatible with VR? DLSS3.5 frame gen wasn't (to my knowledge) there's mention of latency. Maybe that's far more relevant in FPS games In short, there's still quite a few question marks to be answered. On a positive not, prices for Founders Edition Cards have been released for the UK, and they're not quite as painful as they could have been (scroll down to the bottom of this link): GeForce RTX 50 Series Graphics Cards | NVIDIA

I have a Virpil collective (without the twist throttle) and use it with a Hawk grip. Works great. Other options that spring to mind are: The K14, which can be found in the for sale area. Half the price of the Virpil, if a bit less professional looking, and also has a fixed grip WinWing unit Komodo systems. This one is MUCH more expensive I've not used any of the non-Virpil versions, so can't really comment their build quality and similar. One point worth mentioning is that I tried a Virpil Alpha Left grip with the collective base and didn't really get on with it. The Alpha grip has an ergonomic curve to it's head, which works great when used upright as a cyclic, but is really bad for comfort when horizonal. Hence why I replaced it with the Hawk grip, which I really rate.

I tend not to fly them that much. After all, if I want to remind myself how to use the F18, I'll go fly it. Having said that, I do have a real soft spot for the cc101, which I think is very cool. For that matter, I think that the Mirage F1 BE could be used as a 2 seat trainer and is an excellent model.

My point was that it's in a very flyable state and from just that perspective, is IMO a great module. Having said that, you're not wrong about the potential for it to stop working as a result of the Razbam dispute, and purely on those grounds, I wouldn't recommended it to a player who doesn't yet own it.

I've just had this. For me, my anti-virus (AVG) quarantined the file HeatblurJester.dll. My solution has been: Conduct a FULL repair on DCS. That will on it's own not resolve the issue. It will however have attempted to add the file to your PC, and should allow you to go find it Open my AV, in my case, AVG. I've no idea if all AVs work the same, but they're likely to be similar Review the message relating to the inability to add the file into the DCS/Bin folder In mine, it specifically mentions the file Report this as a False Positive to your anti-virus vendor. Eventually it'll stop being classified as a Trojan In AVG, I chose the Restore option. That moved the HeatblurJester.dll file from the AVG Quarantine folder into the folder that the DCS Updater had downloaded it to Navigate to the folder //DCS World Openbeta/_downloads/Mods/aircraft/F-4e/bin For me, I was STILL unable to copy it to where it should go, //DCS World Openbeta/Mods/aircraft/F-4e/bin, even after adding an exception To resolve, I deactivated my AV, copied the file to the correct location, and then immediately re-enabled my AV Open AVG again, and specifically add the FILE as an Exception in the folder location mentioned above That seems to have worked. I've attached a copy of the HeatblurJester.dll file such that you don't need to conduct the full repair. HeatblurJester.dll

??? I’ve been flying the Harrier since release and still enjoy flying it.

To fly, the Mi8. Just so characterful. It’s a genuine handful to learn and will try to kill you in VRS, but it’s so much fun.

That’s why this community works so well, we actually help each other and share

What timezone do you fly on?

Could you please confirm the following: Size, i.e. width and height That all the the buttons, panels and switches work I assume that the MFDs are Thrustmaster units, is that correct? And they all work? What's the control board handling the various buttons? What's your rough postcode area? I'm in south west London. Just trying to gauge distance

I found that dropping (internal) Textures to Medium helped a lot. My assumption is that the snazzy new 4k textures are overflowing the VRAM on my 3080ti. I have to say, that I don't feel short changed by the Medium textures. Give it a try and see what you think.

Default> That's a very interesting graph to provide. Would you know if that's how ED have implemented it in the F16, or is that something that is recommended to emulate in the axis tuning?

VR isn't for everyone. My guess is that around 10% of people who try VR in DCS have gone back to a monitor. Of course that does imply that way more than average prefer VR. As TN states, it's massively more immersive, though it does require more grunt. The key implications being that you'll be trading off immersion against visual niceties to get a similar frame rate. Personally, I've never flown DCS outside of VR, and that's since 2016. I just love it.

One thought that does spring to mind. As I understand it, above mach .8, drag increases significantly. For a reason that I have no understanding of, drag decreases again above mach 1.2. To get over that "hump", my usual method is to get to above angels 30, climbing at mach .8, then put the aircraft in a shallow dive and hit the burners to get over mach 1.2. Once that's been hit, then start climbing again.

Very happy to. In my case I searched for PDF documents that summarised the wars (Iran/Iraq, Desert Sheild, Storm and then the invasion). I found around 15. The "area of opportunity" being that each was 100-700 pages long, so probably close to 5000 pages in total, i.e. rather a lot to go through by hand. That's when Notebook LM came to the rescue. Notebook LM is a free AI tool that allows the user to upload circa 50 docs at any time and then interrogate them as you would whilst using say ChatGPT. That allows questions such as how many troops, aircraft, SAMs, their locations etc. It's a whole bunch easier that trailing your way through the material. My findings were: SA2/SA3 units were sited to protect cities SA6 units were sited at military/strategic sites SA8s, and AAA units were rather spread about Specific locations for units in say Kuwait were not fixed. I assume that the Iraqis changed their positions I did find which divisions were most involved in the assaults into Iran and also in Kuwait Tanks units included T55s, T62s and T72s, with the Republican guard getting most of the T72s. They also had some T59s, i.e. Chinese copies of T54s. Lastly there was mention of them having upto 130 Chieftains, that they'd captured from the Iranians. No idea how accurate that figure is. My assumption is that a good deal of them were not very well Tank brigades seemed to have around 30 (ish) MBTs, and then a similar number of APCs (BTRs) some artillery (15-20 ish) and some air defence (e.g. Shilka and SA8s) Soviet procured jets included Mig 19s (or the Chinese equivalent), Mig 21s, Mig 23s, Mig 27s, Mig 25s, Mig 29s, Su25s and L39s. Interestingly the 25s were stated as primarily recon, or as escort aircraft for senior military staff Soviet helicopters were mainly Mi8 and Mi24 None Russian aircraft included were the Mirage F1, Sa342 I could see no mention of AWACs capability They did have a small navy, but that seems to have been nothing bigger than a corvette and some missile boats. I seem to remember reading how they tried sailing them to Iran and having the whole lot sunk en masse in a single engagement during Desert Storm For my Iraq mission I've: Included at least one flight of each type of the above aircraft mentioned Every city has an Sa2 and Sa3 site along with some AAA that blind fire when a coalition unit is within a trigger range All airfields have an Sa6 and some AAA. I'm conscious that the amount of air defence is "light" when compared to reality. However, the scenario is likely to be only be used by myself, so making it a little lighter helps balance I put together a standard kind of tank brigade with 30 MBTs, 30 APCs, 15 artillery a command group and some air defences, layered in a sensible type of defensive position. With the new copy tool, that allows very easy replication of the brigade, such that I was quickly able to duplicate and put several in Kuwait, one near Iran, and some more in Iraq Added CSAR and CTLD for the choppers Added some other target types, e.g. Scud units A single allied carrier group including a supercarrier, Tarawa, Invincible and supporting ships Some F10 triggered recon flights and defensive flights There's a lot of units, but it seems to run fine, which rather surprised me, but in a good way. Going forward, my intent is to build that out when the rest of the map is updated with the intent of: I'm hoping that we'll get some Iranian airfields in the north east. If you look at the map view, Tehran and other major cities are shown. It even includes airfields. Unfortunately, they're currently just on the map. Take a flight and it's just rolling terrain with textures showing the locations. If we get some airfields, I'll be adding some Iranian gear for the Iran/Iraq war and redeploying the units I've put into Kuwait into Iran. If don't get airfields, maybe I'll mock up some simple towns anyway I get the impression that the south will include not only additional Iranian bases, but also some in Bahrain and Saudi, both of which housed allied gear. When that happens, I'll build out the allied ground units to be stationed. Exciting times. I've already flown every relevant aircraft that the Iranians had that we have in DCS. Great fun.

I wonder if there's a simple way to extract the data directly from the files. Probably so. Would be good if it was added as a standard feature, i.e. that each map has a KB page with a full list of frequencies for airfields. Personally, my list includes all the data that is shown when in the F10 map and you click on the airfield.

I love flying on the Kola map, it's ace. Just been out to conduct a night time bridge strike in my Harrier. The visuals are stunning at night. One re-request. I see that the frequencies for some existing airbases have changed (again) with the introduction of the 2 new airfields. Can you PLEASE stop changing them as I like to include them in a kneeboard for the map which is manually maintained, and therefore a real pain in the butt.

I’m waiting for the southern part of the map to be implemented before even trying to work on Desert Storm. That will hopefully include much of what we’re looking for. In the short term, I’ve put together an initial version of Desert Shield, including a bunch of Iraqi units and a single US carrier group, which is vaguely representative of the status around a month after the invasion of Kuwait

The F18 has an info page available via the MFDs that provides the optimum speed and altitude. Check it out.

Every so often, I wish that the group behind IL2 call it quits on what they’re doing and create a series of FC3 style WW2 releases with a bunch of period WW2 aircraft for use in DCS