Raven (Elysian Angel)

I’m not claiming it’s a problem. I just find it curious to be “cpu bound” even with a 9800X3D. That tells me there’s something else going on, irrespective of users’ hardware. My frame time graphs are basically flat lines so I’m not complaining

In VR or 2D? Personally I am “CPU bound” 100% of the time in VR, even in a free flight mission on an empty map. This was the case with my old 5900X and still is with my current 9800X3D. GPU usage is 93-94%, and I can indeed push visibility range without affecting framerate. When I test a mission in 2D, I’m “GPU bound” 100% of the time.

I actually 100% agree with that. The sound quality by itself is splendid. My issue is with sound levels compared to everything else around you. That was the case at initial release (prior to the E19 work) but is still the case today, IMO. That's also a general issue with DCS tbh: the sound levels of say Heatblur modules (or the F-15E prior to the adjustments they made) are quite a bit different from other modules, and the Kiowa is on the opposite end of that squale. Again, not quality wise but definitely volume/level wise

I have my rudder pedals (TPR until a few weeks ago) simply on carpet with their backs against the wall. No need to bolt down anything, as this is good enough and they don't move around. If you can't put them against a wall, yes then you might need to bolt them down and a piece of wood seems plenty capable for that.

DEFINITELY wear socks next time!

Economy of scale comes into the play here. If VPForce can provide one at €800 (prior to taxes and shipping), much larger companies such as Virpil should be able to make their model much more affordable. Anything non-FBW really. And we have plenty of Cold War FW modules either released or in the pipeline.

I am VERY much looking forward to taming this little bird, but I’d rather not have another Chinook launch so if it takes extra time to polish it up more, by all means… The plot thickens

Current mirrors cost me 5 fps, regardless of which fps the game is running at at that time. And they look so weird I’d rather keep them off. Obviously if they’d work properly AND have an acceptable performance hit, I’d love using them!

I don’t remember where exactly, but a while ago someone on the forum wrote a very technical post on why mirrors in VR are actually some of the most difficult and performance draining tasks possible in 3D graphics.

If they’re broke, consider paying them more. No wonder they refuse to work

I remember the F-18 having that problem too when the effect was initially introduced

Yes, that was my plan too if not for the lack of 2x 64GB kits with proper timings as you say: CL30 and decent enough secondary and tertiary timings. I heard 24-48GB modules are “easier” for the memory controller to deal with but I have no clue if that translates into real-works benefits and if so, how… I am curious, however.

Your chosen equipment's software takes care of that: TelemFFB or whatever it is your brand uses. Everything you could possibly want or need is there.

I agree

Sure, but it's been well established by ED that you can't have Vulkan (in DCS) without multi-threading so the one who made that video likely knew that? Also, DCS still has a main/synchronisation thread that should benefit from single-thread optimisations I'd think (or at least the reduced overheard), but perhaps I'm talking out of my behind

Yes it is. I went from 32 to 64 5 years ago, and my new system (since 2 weeks ) has 96. Even non-simulation games these days can benefit from having 64GB of RAM. Just as a side note to hopefullly help with decision making: sitting on the ramp in a Chinook in one of the presupplied IA missions makes my PC sit at 42GB RAM in use. That’s just sitting there, with very few other units in a mostly empty map. 96GB is best for future proofing so you’ll be safe for the next 5-10 years or so, imho.

Indeed, but until DCS supports it there’s no point. Yes that’s what I hoped for: I noticed the first flight of the day things are a lot stiffer than later on. If I don’t forget, when I sit down in my simpit I move the rudder left and right a few times before the actual flight, and that does seem to help (a bit).

I know the new fuses are not supported, but the ballistics have remained unchanged as far as I am aware? I don't know about JDAMs because I don't care for them and it's been well established by Notso the implementation we have is *VERY* WIP. But I have had zero issues with LGBs The iteration we have at the moment is pretty much a '90s version so that's how I use it. I have been dropping Mk84s on ships and hangars just fine, and yes the pod is quirky but it's an older model so that's to be expected. *edit* I just made a quick mission to test if something changed very recently that I missed, but nope: I dropped 2x Mk82 and 2x GBU-12 (self lased) and all 4 were spot on.

That's a smart way to get extra revenue with a limited amount of work (compared to making a new module from scratch)

About a week ago my new R1-Falcon pedals arrived, replacing my Thrustmaster TPR - which are not that great for helicopter flight even with the spring removed. I also got the damper kit so I ended up removing the spring, attaching the no-centre cam and putting the damper at around 40% strength. The one major downside to this setup is that there is too much static friction so very small movements are quite jerky (the virpil CM3 base had the same problem). I haven't found anything that can fix that. So when you use the damper at minimum strength, the static friction is much larger than the dynamic friction which makes you overcorrect all the time - quite annoying that. The best solution I found is to increase the damper strength so that the dynamic friction matches the static one as much as possible. It took some getting used to after that, but in the end I am quite happy with the result: it is a serious upgrade for the TPR for helo flight, and for fixed wing it is also much better (though for primarily fixed wing use I'd use either the soft centre or hard centre cam instead, for obvious reasons). It also takes a lot more strength to use the toe brakes compared to the TPR but the movement is smooth and thus it is very easy to dose the exact amount of braking you want. https://virpil-controls.eu/r1-falcon-rudder-pedals.html

Could be my imagination but I experience even more smoothness than usual. The only graphical glitch that I noticed it clouds turning off and back on in the distance depending on where you look, but I’m pretty sure that’s been a general DCS problem for a good while now. Overall I am very happy with this setting, and glad another post reminded me to enable it again after trying it years ago.