MikeMikeJuliet

That is true. I actually considered making a single target script with all the switch positions as DX output, and after that just bind keys as normal. That said, it still means fiddling with software. And it is sad. Why have all these controls if you cant use them out of the box? I don't understand what is the benefit of not having all the keys recognized... The more accessible the sim is, the less frustrated newcomers we have in the hobby.

I use TrackIR5 and I have no complaints. No pro-clip either. It cost, yes, but you will be using it so much that the price per hour is nonexiatent in the end. It gives you a way better way to look around the cockpit and around obstacles like a canopy arch. It also frees up a hatswitch and the finger using it to other tasks besides panning. I have not experienced any judder or tearing with it and it sure works out of the box. Go for it. You won't regret it. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Finally someone who gets me :D As long as I'm forced to go into fooling around with luas to use my controllers fully I will rather use target. Besides now that the game recognizes controllers on the fly, I can actually change skripts and modify them on the fly. Plus some suboptimal control logics on the fc3 aircraft made me want to create some advanced functions into the skrips. All the hassle, be it luas or target, could be entirely avoided by having all button, rotary and switch states available in-game from the getgo... and to have aircraft functions have alternatives for the simplified toggle controls (i.e. instead of toggle gear you would have separate controls for gear up and gear down) to prevent control-to-switch mismatch. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Brilliant. I have to take a look.

Grand! Good to know. Too bad the streams are on difficult times for me to reach mostly. Any vods available of the streams? Good luck with the project. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Thank you! I'm glad the work was not a waste of effort. I have already identifield some things that need more clarification or examples. I will revisit the text once I have good time to do so.

Also note that when you first start the F-15, the nav system is bugged. It looks like its on NAV, but it really is not. Cycle the nav modes to approach and back to nav and it should work as intended. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Wait... Does the pixel density slider in the options work for Vive now? Or are you running forced pixel density through the config file edit?

Indeed. It should just be a list filter. Not something that forces incompatible units out of your mission.

There is a thread here about this made some time ago. simple idea was to have an option to have the mission editor filter aircraft and weapons out depending on the date that the mission takes place, as per introduction and retirement from service. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Thanks! I consider the document a "1.0" version. There are definitely things that I might revisit later down the line, and mistakes that I need to correct. I just did a small correction and added a changelog to the first post. Anyone interested can go and see the latest updates there. And thank you for everyone else for the positive response. If you find anomalies in the document, please let me know! Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Hello fellow simmers! During my time simming I've come across people from different backgrounds. Some know close to none of aviation but wish to learn. Some hail from a military background flying combat aircraft for real. And of course everything in between. Whatever the background, there are those who just want to take their aircraft and go blow things up. On the other hand there are people like me, who wholeheartedly enjoy the whole flight from startup to shutdown. I've written a guide for those enthusiasts who wish to know and learn how aerial navigation works and how to get an aircraft down safely following a procedure. I'm not suggesting this as any sort of "must read", for this is a hobby for all of us, and you should enjoy your hobby as you see fit. Still, I feel flying "seriously" from the beginning is a definite immersion factor and something at least I personally get a kick out of. You know... that hair-raising IFR approach in minimum weather after a close-call combat scenario. Something that truly is an experience and something you want to tell your co-simmers about. I've tried to write the document to be as easy to follow as possible. This way even those unfamiliar with the whole concept should be able to follow and understand. Long story short, the link is here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ojtrhuRSTYv5x0gXlxBAqcz-c00RR0D2tUvLLtIkJpo/edit?usp=sharing Those who may be interested, the guide is made completely by me from personal experience, pictures and all. If you have any question regarding the document, please feel free to comment down below. I sincerely hope this document helps those interested, and does NOT annoy those, who just want to go and blow thing up! Let's enjoy the hobby! :joystick::pilotfly: Regards, MikeMikeJuliet EDIT: 30JAN17 - added clarification for the abbreviation GS, that could also mean Ground Speed - added other abbreviations of localizer in addition to LLZ (now: LOC, LLZ and LL) 17DEC20 - published v2 of the document. The whole document has been rebuilt from scratch. Enjoy!

Alright, time for a comment. First off: I do not like this feature. I can easily live with it and this is not an issue that kill sthe game, but it certainly is an annoyance. Now. The playerbase of any game, sim or otherwise has a wide variety of different hardware configurations including displays of varying sizes, aspect ratios, resolutions and a host of different ways to look around a control views. Also every single player has their own preference on performance vs visuals, their preferred field of view and wether or not they want to zoom in and out for different tasks or not. By forcing this feature upon us, firstly, as stated, we have to fiddle around with controls to get going. This is especially problematic in instant action dogfights where you lose valuable time of the fight waiting for the zoom to settle or otherwise tapping controls. Secondly, the end result of the zoomout will not serve most players because of different hardware and software setups and personal preferences. "This is a sim, expect to be fiddling with luas" just seems an excuse. The developer has done a poor job on a feature if most players need to go fiddle around in luas or ini files or anything of the sort. And if have view controls in the game, why have the zoomout in the first place? More options is key to giving more players the ability to enjoy a game. I do not understand why some of you think more options is a bad thing? DCS graphics options are mediocre at best, and the only overwhelming options tab is the controls menu. You honestly believe more options spoils your simulator? You are flying fully modeled military jets are you not? Surely that is way more complex than seeing an FOV slider in the options menu? Speaking of which. The only way for ED to cater to as many users is to stop forcing the zoomout/default field of view, and providing users with the tools to set their own... without a hassle. That is what the options menu is for. Having the ABILITY to go and tweak luas and other files is a good thing and allowes awesome mods and custom setups, but having that as a requirement to enjoy the game (exaggeration here!) is not good design practice on any software. Also. Please explain why this would be difficult to fix? It already is for the Vive and the Rift. The fov is stable from the start. Finally. I am at a loss when any one points out fixing this issue breaks other features. It is a forced transition from one fov setting to another, calculated with the display aspect ratio/resolution in use. That is most likely literally one line of code, and I very much doubt a forced zoom breaks a game. It is a rendering issue and does not have anything to do with in game logic. And if it does, and I am in fact wrong, please show me. We have already moved away from the age of locking game speed to framerates, so why would a zoom break DCS? Unless it was coded in very poorly. If it does break the game, then how come our manual zoom does not. And before someone points a finger: yes, I do infact understand programming and have done some myself. That said I would very much like to see how this is actually coded in. And just to make things clear: hard coding something does not mean it can't be changed. On the contrary, it can be. Very easily. It is called "coding". Again, this does NOT mean the issue to be such a game breaker that it needed to be addressed here and now at the expense of a plethora of actual bugs, missing or broken features and new modules. I only wanted to provide for an actual reasoning for this since there seemed not to be any other than personal distaste. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

A very good idea!

Interesting. I guess my knowledge was limited. In Finland only special strips are used that are in practice just widened roads, but never a standard road width. I guess we are just more careful here then. There is a real risk of running to either side and crashing the aircraft. The linked video shows the kind of strips used here.

Correct. This was still possible some around six months ago. Not a big issue, but it was in fact more flexible as it was previously.

Yes, there are a lot of more important considerations. But does that then mean we aren't allowed to report the minor ones? It's not like we are urging to fix this as the first thing this friday.

This has been discussed somewhat on the viggen forums. I would Imagine we would need a complete road-airstrip, since in real life the aircraft will not use just any road, but a specifically created long straight that is at least twice the width of a normal road (if not thrice). Landing on a plain ol' road is all fine and dandy in still air in a sim, but add a little crosswind and simulate even the smallest turbulence due to winds passing treelines and you'll wish you had that extra 8 meters to work with! Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Earlier you could select the season independently from the month you selected. So if you simulate a warm winter and wanted the ground textures to look like autumn, you could just set the season to autumn and still have the game display January for example. Now the season is determined only by the month. I'm all abord the OP with this. In Finland it is nowadays very common to have little or no snow at all in the south until mid winter, and we are way up north compared to the Caucasus region. Also if you fly a campaign that spans over the season change, it feels very odd to have sudden snow if the mission designers never intended that to happen. And vice versa during spring. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Me neither. But given the recent announcement on RAZBAMs new sub-team and not being able to do the Flogger for interfering with established plans I am curious to hear about it. Not expecting a module on the next few years. ED has their hands full at the moment.

Correct. Aircraft-wise the Mirage2000C, F-5 Tiger II and Spitfire Mk.IX are out. Leatherneck is finishing up the AJS-37 Viggen and that is to be released in a week (was it 24th of january..?). We are awaiting the WWII Normand map. 2.5 version is pushed further down the line and so is the F/A-18. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Yes! Something along the lines... Then it would be viable to have actual high & fast recce aircraft in missions that actually do something instead of just being there... and a good reason for players to try to shoot them down.

Yes, your modules are working fully. The missions are made only for either the 2.0 NTTR map or Caucasus. So until someone creates training missions for said aircraft using NTTR you won't be able to play them... or until we get the 2.5 version with both maps in the same install. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

On a side note: does leap motion support using multiple sensors? I got to try it a couple of weeks ago and it felt less than optimal as a handtracking solution for tasks requiring precision. Also you can very easily block the camera from seeing your full hand, resulting in glitchy behavior of the virtualized hand. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Just one point. Using QNH is very much a regional thing. Saying that all military pilots only use QFE is a blatant lie, since it very much depends on the country and operating procedures. Here in Finland QFE is never used except on airshows (to know the exact height above the runway for vertical maneuvers). Here the only 2 settings used are Standard and QNH even in military ops. Otherwise a great explanatory post. Very well formulated. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet