Tinkickef

PD 2.2

I just returned to base at Sunrise and with the Sun low, the canopy scratches are there in VR and the Hornet. They are not full blown scratches, just polishing marks caused by a little dirt on the cloth.

Sorry, I have no experience or real knowledge of the Simshaker app. I think it supports in game telemetry for activating multiple transducers, but not sure.

Voicemeeter allows your audio out 3.5 mm socket ( green one that you plug buttkicker amp into) to be used in conjunction with the Rift USB headphones, which are the real culprit here. USB headphones cut all other audio channels out other than on the USB socket in use, including hdmi audio (which is why Oculus had to hurriedly introduce audio mirroring). Why Oculus went for USB headphones I do not know, but it was a bad move in my opinion. I have no idea what config the Odyssey has. Voicemeeter is two channel out audio - sends to rift usb and buttkicker amp. Voicemeeter Banana is three channel - can send to rift usb, buttkicker and monitor speakers. Both are shareware with free download and an optional donation page if it works for you.

Toe brakes required... Avoid Saiteks then, they don't work in DCS for many people, me included. I once got a single side working for a brief moment despite hours of tinkering and researching various threads on the subject. It's a known Saitek issue and a major factor in retiring them.

I use voicemeeter to run my buttkicker. Rift audio mirroring off (adds latency and echoes), voicemeeter as default audio device and Rift as default communications device.

If you have any relatives up here in Yorkshire willing to pick them up and get them to you, I can give you a set of Saiteks for free. They are just gathering dust in my man cave.

Bah! Was expecting to have it in my grubby fingers yesterday, but it is being held up by customs inspectors in the shed at Stanstead Airport for some reason ::(: Probably time for a teabreak....

You appear to have no concept of just how busy an aircraft cockpit can get. It is not steering the aircraft, that should be for the most part instinctive, it is the other stuff. I often felt like a one armed paper hanger. I have not flown a Cessna since 1996 and I can almost guarantee if you sat beside me, I would quickly and efficiently take you to the scene of a crash.

Absolutely. It must be reiterated that none of these shennanigans are in any way Banananimal's fault. He may during the ups and downs of this thread, have sometimes felt that it might have been better to have kept silent. If so this is not right. He has acted in good grace and with honour throughout and I for one thank him for stepping up to the mark.

+ 1 on the VR. I think Mover would have got along far better with it. It was interesting to see Mover also picked up on the drag characteristics in the landing configuration. It gives me hope that when ED finally fixes this I just may be able to do a reasonable case one recovery without porpoising around the pattern like a drunken buffoon.

Alpenwolf. Everybody on here supports ED and DCS. Despite the griping when something breaks, there is not one person on this thread that does not think that DCS is nothing other than a fantastic achievement and a technological tour de force that must be breathtaking in its complexity. Lex and Mover included. The only thing you did wrong was watch a video of a guy using DCS for the first time and being filmed doing it. It was light hearted fun which you and some others took exception to and thought it was being disrespectful to ED and this community. All it was was a video of a guy playing a game at his friends house. The fact that he is a steely eyed fighter pilot is neither here nor there. If he was a burger flipper, the result would have been the same... a bloke playing a game and laughing while being filmed. The expertise he possesses in the subject does not exclude him from having a laugh. If I were being filmed on a motorcycle simulator and having a laugh, would I be showing disrespect for the makers of the software and the community? I will expand on this statement... I have been in the automotive industry all my working life, even in an instructional capacity in the engineering, management and driving skill disciplines. I have the in depth knowledge and expertise, so again if I was having a laugh driving a sim bike or car am I being disrespectful? Mover is an expert in his field. I am regarded as an expert in mine. We are the same, however I doubt you would see that. What I think you see is that Mover has to be held to a higher standard than I. You then went on to disrespect the rest of the community who tried to bring a little common sense to the situation by calling us fanbois. That is where you earned your disrespect.

Extremely impressive work there. I salute your knowledge and dedication. I would not be able to do what you are doing in a month of Sundays. I will not show my lashed together efforts among such exalted company. :noexpression: The closest I got was about 15 years ago when someone gave me a free copy of Solidworks. I had fun with that, designing car alloy wheels and various enclosure boxes ect, but got bored after a couple of months because I could do nothing other than design on a screen. What we need now is solid hand tracking so your VR Hornet pilot moves his arms correctly when you go for the switches. Be nice to be able to lift the arm out of the way to see the consoles too instead of switching pilot off when starting the Jet and back on after fcs reset and obogs have been enabled. Keep up the good work.

Be interesting to hear about what people look for in a mission. I very, very occasionally put up a miz file if someone asked me to, but design missions for myself without much thought to what others want. I use VR exclusively and am in it mainly for the flight, not the fight; therefore my missions tend to be long full fuel types, usually at night because I think the terrain just looks better and more realistic in moonlight. I do usually put some bandits in to give a reason for watching the radar and rwr, but often my missions, which I change the timings of by altering waypoints, mean I can fly a couple of hours without getting an enemy return. I tend to spend far more time on eye candy, I never start up and take off from a base that is not populated with ground equipment and aircraft for instance, and I usually have other flights taxying and taking off to add to the immersion. The combat aspect, being a secondary consideration is rather simple. Most people would consider my missions a boring grind. Who would want to fly at 40,000ft to extend endurance as far as possible when you will be doing nothing but flying along, looking over the side, picking ones nose? When asked to put up a mission, I tend to alter things slightly to make it a little more in your face, for the sake of the prospective user, but my personal thoughts are it ruins the immersion and makes it unrealistic. Generally though, my missions evolve over a few months, with constant alterations until a bad save breaks something I consider essential, then it gets scrapped and another put in build So what do you think when designing a mission?

Wow. If I were to be charitable, I would hazard a guess that yeast and fermented Barley were doing the talking here.

Exactly the point I have been labouring over. I use VR exclusively in DCS, I cannot ever go back to flat screen again despite the resolution. I have the real world depth of vision, I have the real world scaling and when sat in the cockpit looking around. I am visually on a ramp, on an airbase, not in my room. I built a home cockpit for the Hog, way before the Hornet came along. It looks like crap because it does not need to look good, it is a placeholder for the physical controls, nothing more. The stick is at the correct height between the knees, the buttons on my TM Warthog stick and throttle are mapped as stock as far as I am aware, and I have several button / switch boxes made up with the correct physical configurations as seen in VR and set out in the correct locations. Even have a genuine aircraft landing gear lever. Every control location corresponds to what is seen visually, look for a switch and all you do is reach out and it falls to hand. I have all the switches and buttons to pretty much cold start the Hog, stick and console wise, with the exception of the avionics suite that would take more modelling than I am prepared to commit to. The stick also works for the Hornet, happily it and the throttles are in the correct locations as far as visual and hand coordination go, and the stick buttons that are the closest approximation to the Hornets mapped to the correct function. And that is as far as it goes. I cannot start the Hornet using switches as nothing falls to hand and there is nothing to base muscle memory on. Sure I use switches for testing the fire channels, the FCS test consent switch and engine crank, but I have to peer under my headset to seek them out. It is not the fluid experience I had with the Hog start up as eye hand coordination cannot exist. It is far easier to use a mouse click... Unconscious muscle memory is every bit as important as conscious thinking for efficiency. This includes control feedback as much as everything else. Hell, I bet even if a control knob were changed for a different one in the real aircraft and instead of rotating and locking with a fluid motion and a soft click, it was stiff and locked with a really noisy and harsh action it would really grate on the nerves. I am pleased with the way my Hog pit worked and it all feels very realistic to me, but a real Hog pilot would hate it, everything would look the same, but feel completely wrong. The best we can say is that we can operate a complex approximation of an aircraft using the best setup we are committed to making. How efficient would it be for a real life pilot to have to grab a mouse and move a cursor to click a switch....he'd be dead pretty quick in a real fight. It is unrealistic to expect someone who flies the real thing to come along and be impressed with it. Maybe if a Hornet guy built a Hog pit and learned to fly the Hog on that he would be much happier with stock controllers as he has no preconception as to how things should be, although I doubt it. I once had a try of a control yoke and throttle set up. Was not happy with it, it bore no relationship with a Cessna 172 yoke as far as feel and weighting went, it did not tighten up as airspeed climbed and did not fight back in pitch or roll. The owner was happy with it however, he had no preconception of just how much force is required to pitch up the nose of a 172 over 100kts.

When entering target area, press "cover me". The wingman will then call out targets. When he has called out the target you want him to engage, tell him to do so. This works on BVR air to air engagements I can only usually pick up targets on radar at 40 miles or so in the hornet at present. He has superpowers and will call them out at 200 miles plus.

I heard this was being implemented, but obviously it is low priority. Anyone whe ever ejected on the ramp after a mission in NTTR or PG and takes a walk around the base will know the breathtaking detail in areas you don't see. Try ejecting on the Indian springs ramp for example and take a walk behind the flightline. This detail is wasted currently. Imagine, you design a mission and put a briefing together. You appear in the briefing room and get briefed by the boss, alongside your SP wingman or MP squadron mates before walking out into the sunshine and catching a ride to the flightline. You walk down the line to locate your assigned aircraft and climb aboard. OR you eject over enemy territory. A squad mate or AI asset flies to your position in a Huey and you climb in the back where you get a ride back to base. I see no need to have to actually own the Huey module to ride in the back. I think it would be pretty neat. Obviously low priority though. Vulkan implementation ect are more important.

Looking at those parts you singled out, I can confirm that one thing stands out on my own crashes and uncommanded restarts recently. ERROR EDOBJECTS destruction shape not found AVIASHTAB_CRASH I don't have a clue what any of it means but I saw that one enough times at the bottom of the list to remember it. I did a clean installation of Oculus API and a clean installation of Nvidia. I no longer have crashes, although I did have a near crash yesterday. The failure in VR all had the same symptom. The headset would go dark and audio would fail for a second, then it would come back. About 3 seconds later it would do the same. On the third time the PC rebooted. Of course because the PC backed out of DCS, a crash log was not generated. I just had the notepad log to view. Yesterday I lost visual and audio and got ready for the restart. It never came, just got vid and audio back as if nothing had happened. I put it down to a failed Windows update 1803 at the time.

Some on Hoggit asked me to put a mission or two on here so they could try something new. Soo..... PG map, Hornet. Night mission, long range fighter sweep over Iran. Fuel conservation measures required to complete. Length of mission engine start to engine stop around 110 mins to a couple of hours. Mission is based on timings, to alter these, go into mission planner and randomly move various AI waypoints. altering timings randomly means sometimes you have an exciting time, sometime its a little tedious...just like in real life. You will never know. You may be fighting in moonlight, in complete darkness using your instruments, RWR and radar only, or in the blue sky of dawn,..... or not at all. Informal briefing included. EDIT. some slight changes made to make it a bit less "in your face" and some changes to flights. For some reason, after I uploaded it, it was impossible to take off without someone burning and blocking the taxiway. Rift users, best viewed with gamma 1.5. Strike CAP Al Minhad.miz

To continue on a theme.. Indeed. Very sad. It seems a lot of people want to hear that flying the Hornet in DCS is just like the real thing and they could jump into a cockpit and blow the enemy hordes out the sky with their superior skill. Life is not like that. We all fantasize about it, but most realise that's all it is and don't need the fantasy propping up. Hell, I can't do a regulation case one recovery to save my life. If any real life pilot did it how I do it, the CAG would rip the wings off his uniform and toss them over the side. Then again I don't need to because it is just a PC game. I do what works for me.... Then they take a hapless fighter pilot who poked his head above the parapet and present him with a screen and a sidestick setup. A stick that isn't a Hornet stick, it is not between his knees and any corresponding buttons aren't. The paddle does not disengage autopilot / nws, the pinky button does not engage nws hi gain when held down, or disengage lock. Instead they do something different. This is fine for the owner of the setup, he designed it and has got used to it. It works well for him. Now put that same owner in a real military sim cockpit and tell him to operate the jet. Confusion reigns supreme. The reason for this disparity is most likely not that the owner is lazy and didn't do his research, it is likely that he owns several different aircraft modules and has standardised his control setup across the board as far as possible. Nothing wrong with that. It's efficient and something I can never understand is why the military doesn't do the same. From the steely eyed missile man's point of view however. It's like being invited to appraise and climbing in a home built replica car the same make and model as your own original and finding the pedals are on the right, the steering wheel is on the left, switching on the wipers to find the boot (trunk) just opened and when topping up the washer fluid, finding you just filled your crankcase with water and alcohol. In the meantime you are unable to move your head because of a weird head restraint and you are looking out of a letterbox instead of a full windscreen and Windows. Then when you laugh and climb out shaking your head, the owner takes offence and expresses his disappointment because you didn't take it seriously or say it is absolutely like the original. The best introduction for Mover would have been with guys that build replica cockpits, he would have been able to give some accurate feedback as to behaviour ect. As it is now, he cannot because he is concentrating on things that should come naturally. This is frustrating, and this will colour his perception. I hope, as do the vastly silent majority reading this thread that Mover and Lex have broad shoulders and don't abandon us. They are an invaluable source of advice and I personally would like to hear some tall stories...

It's the mods who reply to posts on here, but I have heard it said a few times before, that the respective department devs look on here very regularly and take note of all the bugs and add the new ones to the list. It's just that some are higher priority than others. From what I gather goes on in ED Manor: 1. Bugs that crash the game. (Red lights rotate and sirens wail throughout the building). 2. Bugs that break an aircraft system. (Phones ring in the respective departments and devs wince while holding the headset well away from their ear as the air around the earpiece is scorched). 3. Bugs and optimizations that directly cause performance issues. (Much cursing in Russian, Prozac is washed down with fresh tea from the samovar and sleeves rolled up ready to do battle). 4. Graphics and effects problems. (I'll have a quick look at that while the tealady is getting my cuppa ready). Just because you have not been acknowledged does not mean you have been ignored. I don't think anything I reported ever got acknowledged apart from game crashes.

Having reinstalled everything and Windows finally managed to fully install the update, the restart problem has gone away. Out on the internet, it appears that a lot of people are getting install failures on this update. Good old Microsoft. How I clap my hands in glee when I start up my PC and it says it's updating Windows....not.

You put on the headset at lunchtime, tweak a few missions. Fly a mission or two and are surprised to find it is dark outside when you take off the headset....and your dinner is in the dog.

Some thoughts having watched many of mover's vids in the past in relation to this one. 1. MC Trev had it right before the vid was posted. It's about managing our expectations. 2. This community is devoted to DCS, Mover is not. This means a vast difference in perception. 3. Mover was on an unfamiliar control setup, this is a major immersion breaker for him. 4. He was looking at a screen. Maybe it would have been better if his original foot in the water was a track ride in VR where he could take control of the throttles and stick up in the air before anything else. His perception may have altered a little. You would be surprised just how much a simple thing like a seat shaker ramps up the realism in VR. 5. Mover is not a gamer. This is just a game to him, much as the likes of beat saber or tomb raider is to us. Nothing in his experience added any level of immersion or reality to what he was doing. Not knocking bananimals setup, it is a good one, but not the best way of introducing a RL Hornet pilot to DCS if you expect him to be impressed and take it a little more seriously. Even his view was in 2D without depth or scale and without one to one head tracking. Basically, he was visually still sat in front of a screen in someone's living room, not on an airbase. I recall the first time I sat in the Hog cockpit , on the ramp in VR, I could not believe how high off the ground I was or how large the ramp was. Everything he touched and saw was completely wrong. How could he possibly be expected to take it seriously? Lex, bless his cotton socks, loves DCS, but some have an affinity with gaming and easily become immersed and others cannot without more substantial visual stimuli. Even I don't take flat screen DCS or other sims seriously any more and am unable to get immersed, even though my first sim was flight unlimited in win 95 days. In this respect, for me; VR is a dream realised and also a curse. I thank Mover and Bananimal for taking the time to do the video. His reaction may have been disappointing to some, but cannot have been unexpected. Once again I am not knocking anyone's setup or how they do things, I'm just trying to walk a step in Mover's shoes.