Mr_sukebe

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.

Nope, not yet, but they have mentioned it on their website

That’s how I’m using it. it was no more complex than loosen the locking nut, twist and re-lock

For reference, with DCS, the software currently has default presets for the A10c, F14, F4E, F16c, F18c, Mi24, P51, Spitfire. I've not found a way to enable the Moza software to auto-detect what plane I'm flying, so if you change aircraft in game, you need to open the software to manually change it. Probably a good thing in some ways as that makes it easier to use say the Mi24 preset with the other choppers. Having sorted the bindings for my warbirds, choppers and the F4, I took the Mi8 and F4 out for a fly. Yes, it's definitely VERY cool and at least for myself, worth the effort and expense. I have been using a jetseat for probably 4-5 years, and this nicely adds to the feel.

I wasn't sure if the software would allow it to work whilst turned 90 degrees, but once I'd swapped the axes, it worked perfectly. The extension had a few pros and cons: - Being a swan neck, it was easier to get the grip closer to my position, which I liked. Even with the base turned 90 degrees, I'm not 100% happy - Removing it seems to have improved the "feel" from the FFB effect It's worth remembering the distance between the mount for the grip, and the gimball is likely to be a good deal further than say a Virpil CM, so by default, the unit probably has by default the equivalent of a 10cm extension. Adding the 20cm to it did seem to make the range of extension overly large. I'm wondering whether I can angle the unit a little towards me, to help even further on the comfort levels.

Further updates. Decided that I didn’t like using it with the 20cm extension, which meant remounting at a higher point. That was fine, but as I’m using a car seat (without a cutout), the length of the base meant that the grip was uncomfortably far away. The solution being to turn the base amount 90 degrees. Happily, DCS was happy to recognise the axes being exchanged. So, happy with the updated location, back to mapping another 40 aircraft.

Attaching mine into my cockpit took some time, but got there in the end. I've centre mounted it and I'm using a 20cm swam neck extension with a Virpil alpha grip. The easy bit was the Moza software. Fire it up, upgrade it, select the game and an aircraft profile and jump in. The more time consuming job being the re-mapping needed in DCS. Not helped by DCS happily applying it's own ideas on mapping. "Hey, why don't I we use the mini-stick on your Virpil grip as a rudder? Sure, we can see that you have a dedicated set of rudder pedals, but let's do it anyway...". Come on ED, PLEASE give us the option to disable these being applied. Took a Huey and a Spitfire out for a spin. Using the provided profiles, both felt good. The Spit could do we some finessing, as the extension is effectively reducing the torque felt at the grip. Very amusing to see what happens when you stall in a vertical climb, as the controls just loose all weight. The Huey impressed me more, felt really natural (which as I'm NOT a real chopper pilot, is a bit of a weird thing to think). In short, as a unit, seems good. It'll clearly take some tweaking to get the best from it, and we're in early days. Oh, that's interesting, just turned the AB9 off and the stick goes all limp. That's actually really useful as it makes it easier to get in an out of my cockpit seat.

It's here. Can't say I expected that, but I'm certainly not complaining. Just going through the process of re-jigging the aluminium profile frame to be able to securely mount it.

Ooooooooh. Mine has apparently been dispatched today. No excitement here…..

It does appear that their internal comms aren’t the best. All they need to do is replace the statement in the store of “we will dispatch within 10 business days” to “currently unavailable, we’ll notify you”. Its just a point of management of expectations

Be aware that there are several types of SSD. The type you can use is dependent upon the chipset of the motherboard. If you’re running a 7800, chances are that you have at least a B650 chipset. It’s appropriate to check both the chipset AND how many NVME slots you have (the ports on your motherboard that you’ll mount the NVME SSD into). Most 650s have at least 2 slot and will support Generation 4 NVME. Do check the above first. If you have a free slot, the grab yourself an NVME Gen4 SSD. The newer ones have a throughout of upto 7500 Mbps. My suggestion would be at least a 2TB drive. For manufacturers, my personal preference is Samsung, which seem to be reliable. Installation is pretty simple. Download your motherboard manual and it’ll explain the process

nope, and I ordered on the 27th Sept. Probably worth mentioning that I complained about them not meeting their stated dispatch SLA. They gave me a £28 refund and promised to dispatch by the end of Oct.