MikeMikeJuliet

You probably can't add a ranfom controller to the Thrustmaster TARGET, but you can use the script editor to achieve this with the Warthog, Cougar or the T.16000.... I agree with your wish. It could just be an alternate eject key that would be empty by default so you can map whichever control on it you want to. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Nah, I don't think so. We could all just stop this thread right now, since I bet this will turn into an F-16 wishlist / "I want X-block F-16" very fast, and there's no point in that. We already have abunch of those... Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

The mission editor is a good thing to check before flight to know where you are at. I just wish mission briefings contained that info, because sometimes you see things in the mission editor that you might not want to see, like which enemies are and where. It also adds to the waiting time to open the ME. Wouldn't hurt to have the kneeboard automatically show the airfield in question when you first look at it after starting a game.

Alright, thanks for the info M1Combat! It works, thought I didn't try this on DCS yet... but made my WT look soooo much better.

Okay, my steamvr -section says the following: "steamvr" : { "allowReprojection" : false, "background" : "E:\\Program files\\Steam\\steamapps\\workshop\\content\\250820\\651285679\\fallout.png", "showStage" : true }, There is no playaracolor or poweroffonexit... but I assume the "renderTargetMultiplier" : 1.5 should just be added on the line before the bracet, correct? Let's give this a shot...

It's a good thing we have the ability to use such workarounds, but the charts should be included in the game from the outset. Especially when DCS maps and the real world might have discrepansies, i.e. the infornation may not be accurate to the sim...

We also need proper ILS charts... you can get the ILS frequencies and final approach course from the VAC chart, but thats nowhere near enough. No point in having anything but clear skies when we don't have any IFR plates to go with. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

At least here QNH is given in the ATIS transmission for every airfield (with weather info as well). The pressure setting is verifield with ATC at the points you said, or at clearance delivery. Your efforts are appreciated at least by me. I for one am very keen on having proper atc with ATIS, TWR, APP and Area... on busier airfields even delivery and ground.... though for that you would need civilian traffic to have any point in having "secondary service frequencies". I wonder if ATIS could be integrated to SimpleRadio Standalone...

Im aware, yes. And I do not know if any of those airfields this side of the pond use anything besides QNH... if they do, It might be a convenience thing... playing around both sides of 0 alt is another hole in the safety nets. The only thing where I know it could be useful to use something else besides QNH is in airshows where you might want thr runway altitude set as zero for precise low level maneuvers...

I do. Some people just want to enjoy the combat side of things and leave out the rest. There are all kinds of people who play for different reasons.

Which aircraft you fly and with what kind of controls? It helps a lot to have at least a basic understanding of how to land in general and add to that a couple rule-of-thumb speeds to get most birds down safely. Which part of the landind gives you most trouble? Final approach, flaring and touchdown or ground run and getting the aircraft to stop? There are so many skilled people in the forums that can provide you with training aids in whichever kind of method suits you, that you can be sure you don't need a cheat to get an aircraft down safe. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

That might be a national thing... In Finland for example all we use is QNH on airports... and standard setting on flight levels (naturally). I believ e QNH for airports is the norm in most of EU. Of course there may always be exceptions in for example airports that are below the mean sea level... About the startup clearance.... I know it's useless. But it adds to the immersion. :D I would also like to hear the pressure setting way before I'm a-go on the runway. You have plenty of time to adjust during startup and taxi, not so much on the runway. I just hope the ATC system that's in the works has some common sense, unlike right now... It's not even close to a real ATC...

The things you need to know about SSDs are two: 1. You'll cut your Windows startup time in half if not better and your antivirus software (if you install it on the SSD) will never again slow your PC down 2. When an SSD breaks, it breaks completely. Physical drives might still work partly or be recovered, but an SSD is all or nothing, so don't rely on it as permanent storage. No problem with windows since you can just buy a new SSD and install your OS again, but your saves, music, videos, pictures and documents are best saved somewhere else. On a side note, my SSD is now 4 and a half years old and not a hitch.

As you might've realised, this is the only 3rd party software for DCS that DOESN'T require teamspeak or other voip softwares. The point is exactly to keep you from needing to fiddle around with multiple versions while playing the game. I don't know if any DCS-radio software is bound with discord, but many use teamspeak (such as the previous DCS-SimpleRadio, which required TS to work). The less programs we need simultainously WHILE FLYING the better.

Thank you. I need to give it a try.

I agree with a couple of exceptions. First off, I like the requesting of startup. It serves no practical purpose for the simulation, but adds to the immersion. You might Alma want to request clearance, and it should be provided prior to clearance for take-off. When you near the runway you should be able to report that you are at the holding point and ATC should either 1 - deny access to the runway, 2 - clear you to line up and wait (for example an aircraft just landed and has still not cleared the runway) or 3 - clear you for line up and takeoff. Also I wish the ATC would order you to contact the GCI or which ever agench you have. This could be done by allowing players to create a com-plan in the editor, or just make the ATC say "contact fighter controller" after departure. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

First thing that pops to my mind are the pictures from Desert Storm where the oilfields were burning. All in all I completely agree. If you want to create a mission where you engage in an area that has already been under fire these effects are necessary...

This might reflect the design philosophy and intended use of Soviet fighters as well. GCI guides the aircraft to the right spot and gives permission to activate radar. Shoot, evade and leave. Eastern tactics have been different from western ones for a long time, and it might just be that the designers never saw a need to display the limits. Then again it could just be that the FC3 HUDs are lacking.

Thought as much. Thanks for the reply.

I wonder if the "walking around the carrier" might one day translate to walking from airbase OPS room to the aircraft as well...

To be fair, there should be a way to reduce the interval that the AWACS reports. Now it's nonstop at worst. That, and the terms and labeling the AWACS uses should be reworked. Now it just seems to report single targets instead of group labels. Btw, if I fly FC3 aircraft, does the radio menu allow me to leve the AWACS frequency? Or is it just with DCS aircraft? Regards, MikeMikeJuliet

Indeed. Or the Vive... I just wish pixel density worked for that already...

Has anyone got any clue when the pixel density is supposed to be patched to work with the Vive. I just tested last night and the pixel density does nothing... I thought someone here mentioned they had it working... Am I missing something? Thanks, MikeMikeJuliet

;) DCS-forums is the premier meeting place for working people :D On a side-note, the first attachement on the first part of "the explanation" is slightly distorted... I drew the lines badly. In case of the "human eye" the lines should converge in the middle of the ball... I hope I still got the point across.

.... aaaaand continue! Now. Picture any FOV in the game. For starters, assume constant FOV between the cockpit and the environment around you (i.e. as the game is now). Take a look at the first attachment on this post. You see I've projected a FOV (the two lines running via the corners of the chevrons). You see the lines are straight and go through the same points on both the cockpit and the environment. You also see, that I traced a line to a target that you might see on the environment (a cloud, an aircraft, ground target, what have you). The traced line is at the same location on both chevrons (cockpit and the environment). Okay, so no problems there. Where do the problems come in then. Right, take a look at the next attachement. Now the environment has a larger FOV (hence the chevron is squashed, as you have to fit more of it in the same space, so the world seems to look "tighter"). This means for example that you see a larger portion of your environment within your HUD area for example, or between the canopy arches. On the picture is also a target, stationed on the environment as shown by the black arrow. The target appears to be on your 1 o'clock for example (because you determine directions in relation to your aircraft). BUT! As shown by the red markings, when we trace the targets location on the environment chevron, to the same location on the cockpit chevron, you see, that the target really was at your 2 o'clock. Now this is VERY bad when you fight in visual, and especially when you are getting ready for a gunshot, because you can't accurately measure the enemies position. Finally, let's look around the cockpit. Open the last attachement and you see what happens. Again the FOV of the environment is larger (so the chevron is smaller to represent the squashed image). No problems when you look straight in front of you, but when you look around, the environment seems to be "following the view". This happens, because what I showed in the previous post: The focal point (i.e. the point in the center of the screen) is the only point at which the environment AND the cockpit views line up. Thus when you look around and the focal point moves in the virtual space (physically still in the center of the screen), the rest of the environment seems to follow suit. Looking at the attachement, you see this movement drawn as the red chevron. The diamonds represent the current focal points, which are always at the same point relative to each chevron. So if you look to your 12', you see your HUD and the environment in front of you. And if you look 45 degrees left or right, you see (in the middle of the screen) the point of your cockpit that is 45 degrees to that direction, as well as the environment (at the focal point). But anywhere else on the screen the positions do not align. Now this was a highly technical explanation, but I feel I've made all possible points to show, that inconsistent FOV in games where the relation of the cockpit elements to the environment DO matter, it is impossible to separate them without causing issues. These issues are greater the larger the FOV disparity is. Regards, MikeMikeJuliet