Mr_sukebe

Latest software update to the Moza cockpit has just arrived. In addition to support for that well known Civ Sim, that's currently impossible to load, it also appears to have added: - Support for a well known WW2 combat sim that is currently being expanded to include early jets - An "expert" setting tab, allowing dead zones to be added - A "special" tab, that appears to allow "trim support for games that don't support FFB"

I watched Wag's video about the new deck handlers yesterday. That looks seriously cool, can't wait to try it. There was just one point that felt a bit jarring, i.e. the 180 degree teleport at the end of the video. Bearing in mind how awesome the rest way, it felt a bit out of place. My is that at some point it'll be possible to add the capability for deck crew to use one of the deck tractors to turn the aircraft around. I'm hoping that it might be a set of development down the line. Clearly it's hardy a priority item, but would be ace.

I so far it’s been extremely solid. Hasn’t crashed yet whilst I’ve been flying.

Very relevant point, though it would be interesting to understand what reality is like, before going full on Hollywood

Great feedback, thanks

FFB is now here, if in early adoption and I have to say that I'm impressed. What struck me is that I'm looking at the variety of different settings that I could play with, and in most cases, I have no idea what they "should" feel like. Sure, we're read how a helicopters collective doesn't generally self centre, but that's only one part of it. If I think of say an F18, with fly by wire, would a pilot feel through the stick: changing stick forces dependent upon speed? I'm guessing that maybe a level of feedback is built into the stick What level of self centre exists? Do you feel the undercarriage, flaps, air brakes being deployed? Does a change to the trim of the aircraft, as a result of say the flaps change the feedback responses from the stick? Are there deliberate points where the force required on the stick has a step change, e.g. at 6g, to help avoidance of ripping off stores? Does dropping a bomb produce a feel to it? And that's just for the F18. There's going to be significant variances between aircraft. Does anyone have any suitable sources that we can draw on to collate this stuff? Moza have provided a set of profiles for some aircraft, but I've no idea if they're even in the right ballpark. My assumption is yes, but maybe it's all deliberately over done. I do wonder if we should pull together a matrix with the aircraft type as a row, and the columns capturing a level of feedback from say 1-10 for each of the variables that we can think of. Thoughts?

That does look lovely.

I believe that the Virpil firmware is applied to the controller board. In the Virpil world, that exists within the base, not the grip.

Doesn't seem currently possible to map even buttons to the analogue hat. I knew that before ordering, and have another analogue hat on my throttle, so doesn't really bother me if Moza take a while

you sure about that? I fly in VR with a 3080ti and task manager shill shows the primary core as being maxed out for my CPU. My assumption is that further splitting of CPU loads across additional cores will help.

I use a Virpil Alpha on my AB9. The analogue axes don’t currently work via the AB9. The wheel brake axis currently operates as a button. Moza have stated that the capability to use the axes will be added, but there’s been no timelines stated as yet.

Just been out for a 90 min spin in an F18. Again, not a high intensity flight. The case of the AB9 is stone cold.

none so far, though I’ve not flown for my than 90 mins at a time, and those have been fairly relaxed flights, not fighting with the controls

+1 In addition, could we also have a filter added that auto-deletes any post with Temu in the title

Just conducted another test. Still the same, though I did find some interesting things: For me, FPS seems to go to pants at around 800-900 feet altitude Doesn't seem to matter if you're over land or water. Even on an open sea with no land for miles, it still does it From looking in Task Manager: It's NOT a GPU issue. My GPU load dropped down to 30-40% It does appear to be very related to the primary thread. That core was for me at 100% So it would appear to be some calculations being conducted below a certain altitude within the primary thread. No idea if that helps, but hopefully. As this is only true on the SA map, is it possible that the map has a configuration setting where the sea level is different to other maps and maybe the primary thread believes that our aircraft are below sea level and is trying to decide if we've crashed or not?

That's interesting. I have all of the axes and grip buttons on the same Moza column within DCS.

Quick update. Mappings are pretty much complete and I'm happy with it's re-positioning and orientation. Have to say that the combination of VR, the AB9 and jetseat make flying a good deal more immersive. Just quote a certainly fast food place, "I'm lovin' it".

Did you disable it in DCS or windows?

Don’t take my word for it, read this example: https://billingsflyingservice.com/ultimate-heavy-lift-helicopter/#:~:text=CH-47 Chinook%3A Lift Capacity at Altitude&text=For example%2C at 5%2C000 feet,level maximum of 26%2C000 pounds.

Are you sure that the connection cable is correctly plugged into the MOZA base?

That’s very normal for helicopters

My understanding is that no, more cores don't help. From what I've read: AM4 and AM5 chips are manufactured such that each chip has two CCDs. Each of those CCDs has 8 cores In the 7800 and 9800 versions, one of the CCDs is disabled, hence why it has just 8 cores available The x3d versions has it's special v-cache, but that's only provided for the primary CCD,, the other CCD doesn't have it. This results in a performance variation between each of the CCDs. In addition to that, if both CCDs are in use, then need to coordinate with each other, which can induce latency Not having the 2nd CCD in the x800 version means that the non-used CCD doesn't need to be powered, which saves power and reduces heat dissipation requirements for that CCD In short, the benchmarks I've seen show that the x950 variants are actually slower than the 8 core versions for gaming. So save your cash, buy the x800 version. Hopefully AMD will at some point start offering 16 and 32 versions where all cores have access to the V-cache. Unfortunately, we're not there yet.

Personally I really feel for ED. They're damned if they do and damned if they don't. The reality is that they have a finite amount of time to conduct development. As for where that is then focussed, we as the community are the people who influence it. Quite clearly there's a multitude of "asks", from "give me a new module", to "improve performance", to "finish X" etc. ED tread a fine line, attempting to balance their workload, such that it meets the majority of customer wishes, whilst hopefully not doing it inefficiently. Clearly, the you-tuber in question has his own specific set of "asks", and that's his prerogative. Question is, should we de-prioritise getting say Vulkan ready, or introducing the upcoming Mig29? About the only way that I see to help manage expectations is for ED to run a poll every year, such that they can show how they respond to customer priorities.

agreed! Moza does seem to have created a good starting point by picking an aircraft of a type, eg one helicopter, a warbird with a radial engine, one with an inline engine etc. Thats how I’ve been using it so far. So for example, I fly all choppers using the preset for the Mi24. It is very easy to create a new profile, though I think that some of the preferences will be personal and dependent upon the rest of the flight sim gear used

Mine is much faster. Questions: - do you clean out the FXO and Metashaders are each game or video driver update? If not, do it. The first new run will be slow, but post that, much faster - Are your terrain texture settings High? If so, try Low. That really impacts upon the size of the textures - hoe much VRAM do you have? DCS uses a LOT.