PawlaczGMD

Interesting. For me, 3-4 degrees DZ is sufficient to make it work. Is your WW the force-sensing stick, or a regular one? (I have the regular spring-based base). Do you have similar issues on the Hornet, if you have that module?

Yes, I know it is not completely centered without the deadzone, it doesn't mechanically center perfectly to 32768/65536, which is 16 bit resolution. This would be fine with me other then the A/P glitching. I just have curve = 10 on pitch and roll, and no other effects or saturation. You made me think that I am using joystick gremlin to control the mouse with my joystick ministick - I will check if switching this off does anything. Edit: ^ this wasn't it.

It's WW Orion 2. I have no other issues with it, and looking at the input in WW software, it's also all good. All other modules are good. It's just A/P on a few that's wonky. PS: my unconfirmed theory on this is that a lot of hardware has a default deadzone, so most people have a deadzone even if it's not enabled in-game, but rather on firmware level. With WW, you can set it to be actually 0 in the app, which I did.

Thanks. I see very similar behavior in the Hornet too. It would be good for ED to take a look at this track and give their take. It's definitely deadzone-related, because I can fix this by increasing the deadzone enough in both aircraft.

Agreed. Especially the 30mm is weak, but also importantly feels weak. Singular 30mm hits should be blowing sections apart. We've probably all seen that one ground test on a Spitfire photo, where the entire tail hangs by a thread after one hit. A fighter should be destroyed or made unflyable with a single hit almost anywhere. In DCS, the 30mm can destroy an engine with one hit, kill a pilot, or cause a fire if you're lucky (but the same should probably be true of the 20mm!), but otherwise the effects are quite unremarkable. This is not just that the DM is not fully reflected visually, which I can understand. I've had situations where I landed a dozen rounds in a P-47, and the only effect is to blow off some control surfaces, but he can still fly more or less fine. I almost never destroy aircraft parts with it. Very rarely a wing comes off on some targets, and semi-often the tail on the Mustang, but not others. I agree that machine guns feel really good in comparison. Spit's 20mm feels comparable to German machine guns, also on the weak side. It never causes any significant structural damage, you have to hit vital systems just like with a MG. I have never destroyed a wing or a tail with it, the best you can hope for is to start a fire or puncture cooling/oil lines.

F-16 shouldn't be leaving early access. Major features are broken. -Maverick in PRE mode is offset from the TGP for some reason, so it's impossible to use it effectively in this mode -JDAM/JSOW will miss due to INS errors or something -PUP attack or whatever it's called is also too imprecise to work - EW/jamming doesn't really do anything, and F-16 is supposed to be a SEAD platform - INS drift is huge even after just ingressing to target area, makes finding targets via JTAC coords frustrating. We have GPS on this plane, so shouldn't inaccuracy be up to ~5m at most? I'm probably the most frustrated and disappointed with this module out of all that I've bought. These issues show up in essentially every mission that isn't just CAP, and they have a major negative impact, it's not just rivet counting or wanting to LARP.

Reflected is right. It has nothing to do with tailwheel locking or new suspension mechanics. The Spitfire stands out with an effective rudder at low speeds, and it has no tailwheel control. It was like this since forever. Realistic or not? Not sure, but hard to see a good reason for such a large difference.

DCS seems about right, or even more responsive. Yes, the HUD had a pretty low refresh.

I would also naively think that a JDAM dropped on a STPT doesn't need to interact with the jet's INS at all, as it has its own GPS guidance that should be good to 5 meters, but it's not the case. The drop solution could be affected, but a JDAM has more than enough room to fix even a 200 foot offset when dropped from high altitude. Either way, I am also just interested in how to fix this in practice right now.

And to be absolutely clear, does taking a FIX (e.g. with the TGP) restore the accuracy? E.g. If I'm flying to drop a JDAM on GPS coordinates without a visual, and it will take me 40 mins to get there, if I take a FIX 5 minutes before the drop, will I hit with CEP ~5m? I've also experienced similar degradation after 30-40 mins of gentle flight.

Yeah, this sucks due to how flares are just rng in DCS. I'm not going to refly this after getting shot down once, I think it's a waste of time tbh. I did the maneuver right and still got hit. But I would recommend setting countermeasures to bypass, and spamming the dispense button as many times as you can. Each flare has an equal chance of spoofing the missile. Or even better, set CM to manual, and edit a manual program of choice to max out flares: drop all flares in one burst with a minimal interval of 0.02.

Going very slowly worked for me - you just clip through. I clipped through 3 times, and snagged 1 time, but managed to throttle up and destroy the fence with no damage to me. it's possible for sure. Alternatively, you can try to taxi the other way from the shelter onto the taxiway, and back taxi to the runway.

I have a question about JDAM accuracy, as I've been having issues with hitting them. Let's say you are dropping on a preplanned STPT target - due to INS drift, you can't just drop on this STPT, because you will miss. What is the best action to correct this? When I used my TGP to move perfectly on the target and TMS UP, I still missed a building. Do I need to take a fix on that steerpoint instead to actually hit the target? That is, is INS drift still affecting the JDAM if I'm designating a target with my TGP?

Interested to see how much of a difference GPS and fixes make!

Not sure that this is a bug. You should switch to INR AREA with TMS RIGHT when you're going to lose sight. A point track is trying to track a specific object, so if you mask the view, it might not be able to hold a contrast lock and jump to a different point. Point track works best if you are able to zoom in close on an object that is resolved from other nearby targets and not mask it. So just change tracking to INS AREA if you can't satisfy these conditions, you don't really need a point track for far and stationary targets.

Ok, thanks - but your video shows that the way to correct the steering error is to just manually realign the mav with TGP. If I could easily do that, I would just not use the TGP and use the MAV in VIS mode. Is there a simple way to just realign the TGP and MAV perfectly? I want to designate with TGP and auto handoff, which is the point of carrying the TGP. Ideally I don't want to touch the mav display directly at all.

Thanks, I will try taking a fix next time! Out if interest, any idea why INS is not automatically updated by the GPS, which is available? the Hornet doesn't have this issue, for example. You just switch alignment to IFA, which is INS+GPS. In this Gamblers mission (8?), I might need to do the in-flight alignment, as you are flying to the target at 25k ft over dense clouds, so there is no visual of the ground at all. Or I might try to do it via radar if I can find a landmark that shows up... Yes, I would normally do it, but I experienced this in exactly a mission where there is no option to see anything on the ground due to clouds.

As per the title. This makes handoff impossible. I will try to make a track, but it doesn't happen instantly, only after some time in flight they desync - might be related to INS drift??

I know ED modelled INS drift recently, but I've just started using the Viper, so didn't experience it before. Anyway, as the title says, INS precision is not good enough for an attack via STPT after a reasonable ingress time. I have experienced this in the Gamblers campaign. JDAM can miss the target by dozens or even 100 meters with a good drop. Don't have a track, as it would be too large after this time. I also saw preplanned STPTs drift from targets during the mission - initially they were a few meters off, after 30-40 minutes - 100 m off. Question 1 - is this a correct amount of drift? It makes a preplanned attack impossible. Question 2 - is there a way to increase the precision or align in-flight? My procedure - stored alignment, switch to NAV when align is flashing, then MIDS on, all before taxi. PS By preplanned, I mean that you drop a JDAM on STPT coordinates without looking what's there.

Thanks a lot! Unlike vanilla Reshade, this mod ALMOST works for me in VR. Unfortunately, the dehaze shader does nothing for me. Color correction and sky deband have immediately visible effects, but dehaze does nothing. In your YT video it has a huge effect. Here are SS showing my VR mirror with haze =1 and =0. It looks the same in the headset. It is Pimax Crystal. Here's another question that maybe you can answer: The problem for me is that vanilla reshade shaders only work in my 2D VR mirror, but NOT in the headset. Do you have any idea on how to fix this? Asking this, because looking at the 2D mirror, I quite like the curves and levels shaders, that I don't think are in your mod.

Did anyone check if this breaks IC?

It depends on the airplane, it might not be on the Spit, but some period gyros have a mechanism which I think is called pendulous vanes, where they can "know" where down is due to a weight bob, and self-align in stable flight. I'm pretty sure it's on the Mustang, which also has an AH that drifts and doesn't correct. The artificial horizon is not the same as the directional gyro, which has the knob you speak of. This instrument doesn't seem to drift at all in the game (on the Spit), and the knob is used to set magnetic variation only.

I learn the full procedure for some jets, and do it when I feel like it, but most of the time I start up with the bare minimum. In MP public servers, I just quick start with the cheat - I just want to get in the action, I might die in 10 minutes, so it would be silly to do a proper start with all the tests that might take longer.

I can do the same to fix the issue, but this deadzone is noticeable and undesirable for me on a short/normal stick. Especially messes with precision for AAR, WWII gunnery, etc. I just think and suggest that A/P should ignore up to 3% inputs or whatever. On the matter of realism : I imagine older planes with direct linkage actually have 0 deadzone. I know the Viper has a deadzone, but it's a force-sensing stick, which is a special case. I don't know about FBW aircraft, but the F-4 implements a separate breakout deflection for A/P, which solves the issue - it would be great to implement it on other aircraft with A/P. Or I might just get a FFB stick when the WW one releases and hope it can center itself perfectly...

works on my machine