PawlaczGMD

They must have updated the Orion, there actually is a virtual button for AB now. You must have it bound by mistake. Check Simapp.

Crash when starting a mission with Blur on (VR only). Logs.rar

Sorry, to be clear I have AMD now - that's why I was asking about improving FSR (AMD tech). I might play with it over the weekend to test DLSS, as I am relying on it to work with Crystal Super I want to get.

Interesting - I cannot even select DLSS in-game though. Maybe I have to install Optiscaler first? I'll check it out, thx. Although I plan on getting a 5080 or 5090 anyway in a few weeks.

Weird, I have the Orion2, and it doesn't have any button input for going into AB (unless you do something like that in external software). It also doesn't happen to me when flying the remastered F-5. Maybe your rocker switch has issues.

If this is correct, 1h+ at WEP is definitely too long. It shouldn't be a hard 5 minutes, but this is basically unlimited usage. I'm just getting started on the Mossie, I will try to test it. For comparison, the Spitfire has a similar limit and manual wording, and it would definitely get cooked in 10-20 minutes of WEP.

I have the 7900 XTX. Even with FSR4, I want to switch to Nvidia, because I will probably need CUDA for work. I also need more power for Crystal Super.

I'm not making the same mistake again, I'm getting a 5000

To be clear, I'm not a hardcore rivet-counter, and I hope that the F-35 will bring a lot of cash to ED so that the game can be developed in the future. It does however bug me that they have clearly changed their fidelity policy because of the revenue potential of the F-35. Many requested features for existing modules are shot down because there is not enough documentation, or even because the a/c they modelled can carry a particular weapon, but wasn't seen doing it at a particular date. The widely requested red planes, very needed to balance the "teams" to make DCS more of a combat simulator rather than cockpit or 1V1/airquake simulator, were also rejected because they cannot obtain the necessary documentation. But now youtube videos of airshows and pilot comments are sufficient to model an aircraft that is by far the most sophisticated and modern in DCS. I just hope quality, or other EA modules and core features, will not be sacrificed for this. And frankly, I don't really buy the argument that this won't detract from core because it's a different team. Assigning devs to teams is a choice, and it's not like some people can only code planes, but not core features. Prioritizing new EA modules over core features and existing modules screws over players who pay a lot of $$$ based on promises that are frequently delayed or never materialize.

This looks like a cash grab TBH. There is no way they can model the F-35 to FF standard based on airshow videos and pilot feedback only. But it will definitely sell to the crowd that wants the latest most performant planes at all cost. Imagine how much dev time this project will take away from much needed core improvements such as AI, dynamic campaign, VR performance, etc. Also, if proper documentation is no longer needed for a module, can we get some Flankers in here?

You can also fly it in HB's cold war, the most popular cold war server. But I would only recommend it when they're on the 60's loadout rotation, as otherwise you are at a huge disadvantage with better missiles.

you have to uncheck rudder/takeoff assistance in the "special" tab in options.

I understand that it works for you, I'm not trying to convince you to hate these modules. >on dcs each developer has the freedom to pursue the aircraft they are passionate about, ED is not forcing any given theater on them, in fact only one ww2 aircraft seems to truly be an ED child (the mosquito), all others are from either 3rd parties or salvaged from the kickstarter. And perhaps this is the problem, and why WWII is so niche in DCS despite general population interest. ED should decide on a theater and subcontract 3rd parties to do a specific plane set and map.

I'm not a hardcore purist, but La-7 being so far from the content we have will likely mean no one will make good campaigns/missions for it, and it will not be on any populated WWII MP servers. When I pay $60-80 for a module, I want to not only learn to start it up and dogfight some AI, but fly some immersive (if not necessarily historical) missions, and dogfight other players. None of these might be realistic for this module, so it's kind of dead in the water for me - Digital Cockpit Simulator. Just my 2 cents, but I know many players feel the same. DCS WWII could really benefit from some direction to develop a particular theater of battle instead of random planes sprinkled here and there.

I used to have this problem, and it was driving me crazy. The game looked like ass after some update, MSAA had no effect. Then, it fixed itself...

AMD's FSR3 is not usable in most scenarios. In any situation where you rely on spotting a moving target with your eyes, it causes a lot of ghosting and blurring. It becomes hard to tell aspect even at close range, and targets blend in with the ground. I would not recommend it for DCS. I hear that DLSS is better, but unfortunately I fell for the AMD meme. Well, if you only fight in BVR, it might work for you, it's better to have some blurriness than low FPS, especially in VR. I use FSR in MSFS, where tracking a target is not a concern, and it works quite well there, although it blurs the cockpit a bit. As there is no foveated rendering there, it is the only thing that enables me to play the game in VR. Sadly, it looks like the next gen of GPUs offer minimal improvements in terms of raw power, and the industry will rely on DLSS/FSR to play in high resolution. As I want to get the Pimax Super VR headset, I will need to use DLSS to make it work, no way around it. I am waiting to see how good DLSS 4 is before I buy. Optimally, I am planning to get the Super and 5080, and use DLSS4 +QV to make it work in DCS. Hopefully someone with a 5000 series can report how it works for DCS in a few weeks.

Does anyone know if a similar preset change can be done for FSR 3 (AMD tech)? I was getting very significant ghosting with it.

From a MP perspective: I almost never use the repair option, as: -it doesn't always work on some planes, leaving systems non-functional. In prop planes, you also need to warm up the fluids from zero, which takes extra time. -reslot and restart is faster. -there are no incentives to do it over the reslot. The only exception is when some airfields offer repairs but not a reslot. Reducing the repair time to be faster than a reslot would make me repair, which would still be just as unrealistic, but more immersive, as I wouldn't leave my original plane. It would be a cool idea to give this as an option to mission designers. Repair is an arcade option that works in more casual MP servers in some cases, and doesn't belong in realistic missions IMHO.

Are there any plans or communication about adding something to do with this airplane? La-7 is cool and all, but currently in DCS, we don't have: -any relevant maps -relevant AI assets -supporting planes or opponents That means that there will be no: -Campaigns/missions to fly this plane -MP servers with any population to fly this plane -or any options for players to make their own content that would be cohesive. I don't want to be a hater, but DCS WWII is all over the place. I'm genuinely curious if there is any plan to develop the Eastern front apart from this single module.

We need better turbulence modelling. The current wake turbulence is 1. wake only; 2. It messes with carrier landings. Auto land will fail a lot of the time because the effect is so strong.

Feedback from me on Pimax Crystal : 2 pixels setting works well. I would say it's close to ideal. The dots are not too large like a few updates ago when everyone cried about huge bricks, but also not impossible to spot at 1 pixel. I can comfortably spot fighter targets at a few (<5) nm, but not beyond that. Auto seems to be the same as before this update: Extremely hard to spot for me. I will be using 2 pixels for now.

Same, less than 1 fps in the F-5. It used to work fine before the December patch.

A bonus answer: you should switch on gun heaters if you're going to fly at high altitude. The guns can freeze and jam otherwise.

you got me...

The OP is wrong in that the SU-25 should not have TWO brake axes. Like most(all?) Russian jets, it doesn't have toe brakes, and instead uses differential braking with a single brake axis (the lever on the stick, not on the rudder pedals). But the OP is right in that the SU-25 should have this axis. Currently, it is only an on/off button. It should indeed work like the Su-27.