TOViper

Considering your writing, I have to say that I have the same problems with the F-16 and its displays. Could it be that the "new" display programming (that was introduced with update 2.7.11.21408.1) creates that kind of problems (it was labelled as "Added a new FLIR rendering system for AH-64D, F-16C, F/A-18C, and A-10C/A-10C II"?

@BIGNEWY Hello BigNewy! What about preparing a survey/poll regarding "top requested features" for the mission editor. I very liked ED's idea for a poll regarding the priorities of the F-16 functions during the earlier days. Why not doing this for the mission editor? E.g. let's say 20 features to be implemented for the year 2022? Anyway, thanks to you and ED for the continuous improvments of the mission editor! Kind regards, TOViper

Hi Spirale! I gave your track file a view. I see: .) A too shallow approach (not steep enough) .) Radar returns of the vehicles past your designated target make the wings appear later most probably > the radar doesn't know which target you like to hit My suggestion: If you have an target-rich environment, turn OFF the radar ranging and use QFE as only source of information AKAN OK.trk edit: here is my track showing that the bullets hit the target right on. I just waited for the pull in order to see the bullets impacting where they should

Hey spirale! Can you provide a track, otherwise things might get complicate. Increasing dive angles lead to more and more precise triangulation. Take two examples to extreme: 1. If your dive angle was 90°, there is no triangulation necessary, since the bullets just have to follow gravity. 2. If your dive angle was 0°, the triangulation needs to compensate for a) air density impacting the drag of the bullets at max b) the current aircraft's speed at max c) gravity at max So the steeper you dive, the more accurrate the results would (should ) be. Which speed are you flying in the moment of triangulation? Which altitude are you flying generally? I don't say that there is no problem with the triangulation in the current build, but as stated in the Updatelog from March 17th, HB repaired this issue. Anyone else have problems with AKAN aiming? Edit: Just did a test, works fine at 0 MSL at 29.92, dive angle 20°, speed about M0.8. See track file attached. 2022-04-09_Viggen_AKAN_training_at_0MSL_1013hPa_M08.trk

I usually tend to use about 20° dive, and with the "big" Viggen update on March 17th it became really usable. Be sure to switch the HÖJD CI SI switch back to RHM once you are below 2500m (it automatically switches to LD once aircraft is above 2500m). I am not sure if this is really helpful for your certain situation here, but usually it should be done anyway as normal procedure.

According to RC2, the TMM is disabled by default. When RR is disabled, the solution is calculated by triangulation using the QFE. The QFE value therefore must be as precisely as possible. IMHO the calculation then assumes a firing distance of about ~1500 meters, so the wings should appear one and a half kilometer before the aircraft hits the ground.

INDEED & OF COURSE!

Hey spirale! I will try this tonight and see what's going on. Do you have a track of your flight? A few things for you to test meanwhile: .) Disable Target Motion measurement by TAKT > IN > typing 221 > LS (should not make any difference, but just to see) .) Radar Ranging disable by TAKT > IN > typing 253 > LS (maybe some other targets in the very near vicinity have impact on radar ranging) See RC2 page 284 if you need more infos.

Yesterday I noticed that a new entry.lua was added for the suspension, which makes take-offs much more "smoother" and "reliable" / "predictable". This topic was discussed years ago, and I remember having RagnarDa scratching his head about this (my) "issue". The guys at HB still are increasing the quality of this model. Not in the tempo I personally wished, but they indeed do! This, and 1 million other small things make this module/aircraft so exciting, and still, after 5 years of flying it, it is a joy to ride each and every single flight. I am convinced that you learn a lot about the aircraft, and have fun flying against other cold-war era jets. And even in modern environments, this aircraft is a blast when it comes to destruction of ships. Recently, I saw a youtube video of a "6-ship" of Viggens flying above water ... man, that's got something! If HB eventually fix the hitbox problem of the Rb-04 (currently it is an indestructable weapon), it would be a bit more realistic, but things take time obviously ... Have fun!

Hi! Today I wanted to fly on Buddy Spike Blue Flag Syria 80's today, but stopped and made a short video instead: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abZIOFS9SeI In the video you see, that when I turn the TGP and WPN pages ON by switching from NAV to A-G mode, the utilization of CPU and GPU don't change much, but fps fall down to 40. DCS and the 1920x1080 screen (60Hz) are synced together using NVIDA control panel setting "Vertical sync Adaptive", the DCS option "Vsync is OFF. I would have expected that the utilization goes up in order to keep constant 60 fps, but actually I don't understand what is happening here ... VRAM is at 100% utilization (NVIDIA 1070 GTX with 8GB). Processor is a AMD Ryzen 5 5600G. DCS Openbeta 2.7.11.22211 Windows 10 Pro / 21H1 / 19043.1526 / Windows Feature Experience Pack 120.2212.4170.0 DCS settings below in the picture.

What about turning OFF both "Shadows" (not the "Terrain Shadows") ? Yesterday I found out that the Apache has about 2.3 Million triangles when "Shadows" are set to anything but OFF (in norhtern Caucasus with no 3D objects other than the Apache itself, sitting in the rear seat). If I turn OFF "Shadows", I the scene only shows about 1.4 Million triangles. Edit: the LOD is in that way on my machine that if I use F2 to view the model from outside, I have to use the mouswheel 37 "clicks" to zoom out. Only then the number of triangles reduces to 1.7 million. This is far away ... according to a quick measurement on F-10 map this was about ~6km. Fun fact: if the rotor is spinning hither than about 85% rpm, the 3D objects are replaced by a sort of animation, and this saves 400.000 triangles!

Sorry to work against, but this patch is a nightmare in terms of VR performance. I never had that low fps. Since days I am figuring out which config works better, but I already have lowered down to in fact low or lowest for each settings. E.g. F-16 spawn cold in Adana on BuddySpike Blue Flag Syria 80's with about 15-20 people on the server shows 2.7 million triangles in the scene (visibility Medium), which gives me only 30 fps. When flying above 10k feet, the triangles reduce to approx 1.9 million, which gives (more or less stable 45 with ASW). I hate to say, but it became no joy playing this game. What a mess.

same here No PNG (for briefing) and no WAV (for trigger actions SOUND TO GROUP" can be imported to a mission. Double click works, but OK button doesn't work.

What about changing the file dcs_variant.txt in the DCS installation folder? You could there write instead of DCS.openbeta something like DCS.openbeta2 Running DCS.exe from this second installation would then create a DCS.openbeta2 folder in SAVED GAMES, so the dcs.lock should not be a problem anymore. Edit: I use DCS_openbeta_2.5.3, DCS_openbeta_2.5.6, DCS_openbeta_2.7.x for my installations, since I have multiple installations on my system, each using its "own" configuration folder. Works like a charm.

Most probably yes, but I have no more detailed overview what he did in the nights without having us joining his "bugfixing party". But I sent the link to this thread to him a few minutes ago, and I hope he can jump in here soon and report back. I am happy that I found a thread covering these effects ... at least he is not alone in the dark now.

A friend of mine has this problem too whenever he joins BLUE FLAG Syria 80's. He basically spent hours, and together in our squad we tried everything from mainboard driver update to BIOS settings to windows settings to DCS settings to hardware settings to new CONFIG directory in SAVED GAMES to DCS REPAIR etc. In no way this works on his rig, and currently, he is not able to fly there. I am looking forward for any hints, but can only add that we ran out of ideas (4 experienced people in our squad).

Hello Donglr! In VR a second cursor filled white appears, which is not at that exact location than the blue cross. Are you seeing a white one too?

Yes, that is what it should do. If you take-off and level AND trim out at e.g. 350 km/h, THEN accelerate you have to push the stick forward more and more until reaching M0.85. On the other hand, if you are at trimmed M0.85 and start decelerating, you have to pull the stick back further and further to keep the nose up. Once above M0.85, the center of lift (C.O.P.) moves backwards. That means that the C.G. lift now "pulls the aircraft upward" at a point far more behind the C.G. (center of gravity) - or other way seen - the C.G. is now more in front of the C.O.P. Because the aircraft was trimmed before, now the nose dives down therefore. "In DCS I need to pull aft during acceleration." .... are you sure about? This sounds very odd to me... Are you sure you are below M0.85 and started with a trimmed aircraft?

Hey, do you have a link where to download this for the APACHE? Another question: does a cockpit mod for the HIND exist with lower res textures?

I understand your statement. Unfortunately yesterday was the day I stopped flying in VR, due to low fps. Its not related to the HIND only, which really "eats" my GPU, but also the APACHE. In BuddySpikes BlueFlag Syria 80's I had a nightmare at 20-30 fps with very low graphic settings, which made me have a little headache after approx 1 hour of flying.

Yep, we have this effect since the DCS Viggen came out. Does it? I always wondered what this is all about ...

I think turning off SPAK would make them follow your commands at any time. With SPAK active, it tries to stabilize. To avoid over-rotation, use 6° Nos upp and SPAK active as a good & healthy take-off trim. In fact values of 5° to 6° should help for a smooth rotation (for most load-outs this is a very good value, but depends on load-out AND density altitude). edit: sorry, I was on aileron, but oubaxx talked about rudder. Changed my reply accordingly. Sorry!

Additionally a new general option would be fine: If this option was selected ON, the mousecursor (after it automatically became hidden) comes back in the center of the view field once the mouse was touched to (make the cursur visible) If this option is selected OFF, the mousecursor is on the place where I left it before it automatically became hidden.

That works for the CV1 - as one my expect - very well too. Commiting the sacrileg of rendering both eyes is the best way of getting it boresighted. Its very interesting that even the slightest offset has great impact on the precision when using the gun then ...

Using Rift CV1, I can only underline your statement. It is: - Very difficult to get stable 45 fps in VR > , but - Easy to have stable 60 fps on screen (1920x1080) > Shadows still have greatest impact, and Supercarrier until 2.7.10 simply speaking was *pita* (have to try it with 2.7.11 very soon). I found no ways of improving fps, except for flying with pixel density set to 1.0 (but not more!); then, I mostly have more than 45. Problem is, that I cannot read anything on the screens of e.g. Apache, F-18, F-16 etc. without zooming in all the time or bringing the cockpit nearer than in reality it would be. I am happy that at least the IHADSS is readable ... and for flying this bird this is currently enough information for me, since George (or a human CPG) is doing the clicky-clacky-display-chunky-thingies The GTX1070 is located on the lower side of the specs. Im not happy about, but that's how it currently is ...