Raven (Elysian Angel)

As of today's patch 2.9.16.10523 this is still happening

That's the question, isn't it? Personally I'd love to see early heatseakers behave more like they did in reality, though. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's been hit in the face by an R-3S while I'm manoeuvring and pumping flares in my F-4 - and that's just preposterous.

The "2G rule" is well documented for the AIM-9B and every single pilot interview that talks about the missile says the exact same thing: you shouldn't fire when you're pulling more than 2G. I'll send you a link to NAVWEPS OP 2309 Vol. 1 third revision: AIM-9B GUIDED MISSILE (FORMERLY SIDEWINDER 1A) DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION (U) Appendix B talks about the 2G rule. It says: "The rule was developed when the firing envelopes for this missile were determined (see NAVWEPS OD 12663)".

Seems to: TechPowerUp lists it as the most recent version. The real-life limit for AIM-9B was 2 (two) G. Why not stick to that limit to make that weapon more interesting and realistic?

No, I'm not going to create yet another thread about a bug that's been around for years and discussed plenty already.

Off-topic here but does that also include the bug that causes the F-14 FFB to not work if it's not the first module you fly in the current DCS session? That one is also quite annoying - and has been around forever.

Someone didn't read the FAQ

I was referring to the fact that the DCS website/store uses the wrong unit, everywhere. Either you keep the unit, but then all the numbers are 8x too low, or the numbers are correct, but then it's MB and GB instead of Mb and Gb. And yes, it matters.

Except it’s megabyte and not megabit

Yes, it’s tricky. Thanks for checking my track despite its length. This is how this issue presents itself to me these days: I used to be able to see it instantly after spawning in, but now it only happens after a long(ish) flight. I’ve had it happen again in helicopters yesterday but only after flying for 30+ minutes and then coming in to land. Perhaps, but it’s a different issue then. I make regular long flights and for me it only happens in the SA map. I haven’t seen it anywhere else (I world have mentioned it if I did).

Alignment after startup takes significantly longer when the mission date is set at a pre-GPS year, that would indicate it is not active

How is that a surprise?

No more mention of "certain issues with closed-loop system stability will be corrected", then as per announcement post here ?

That's indeed how it works. The difference between DLSS4 and the default DLSS3 (and an older version of it at that) is VERY obvious, so you can tell immediately if it worked correctly.

Just as a side note: you can use W11 perfectly fine without M$ account: I have an offline account for my W11 and have done so since it launched. Sure, M$ makes it harder with every major patch they release but there will always be backdoors.

The video where Wags talks about that is linked on the previous page.

Oh and here’s me with specific profiles for: - warbirds; - up to 3rd gen fixed wing; - 4th gen fixed wing non-FBW; - FBW jets; - light helicopters; - heavy helicopters; - and a default profile I use as baseline. I wanted to simplify my profiles too but in the end I decided using these 7 profiles works best for me. I am quite happy with that, but as you said it depends on many factors such as grip weight, extension weight, total weight distribution of extension + grip; mounting points, … Yes but as Hiob said be careful, especially with friction and inertia: I’ve had very weird interactions causing oscillations. DCS only uses the spring force and by default overwrites any software setting. I keep friction and inertia to an absolute minimum and instead put damping to what feels natural and doesn’t interfere with trimming. Oh and I also use the default 100% on both pitch and roll for the F-4.

Or you can install nvidia profile inspector and you’ll automatically have the latest DLSS, and you only have to do that once per driver install, not every DCS patch.

Frame generation (the way it is interpreted here) is incompatible with VR, so that’s one problem. You also need to be CPU limited for it to be worth it, and with Vulkan incoming the chances of that happening reduce drastically. In VR we have asynchronous space warp / motion reprojection or whatever you want to call it, but it’s not that great and I personally never use it.

Nevermind: I just had it happen again... At the end of a pretty long flight (the F-15E IA take-off mission), so I took off again after landing (I had plenty of fuel remaining) so I flew around the area dipping below and above the 900ft mark to make some screenshots. I'm not sure how useful the track is, since it only happens at the very end but I'll share it anyway: First screenshot is while flying slightly above 900ft; 2nd one slightly below it. Behold the difference: Malvinas 900ft performance problem 20250518.trk

And for many others, how "competitive" a new module is has zero impact on our purchase decision. I for one find Soviet aviation incredibly fascinating: what's going on in the designers' minds is so completely different from Western designs it leads to completely different solutions to sometimes the same sometimes different problems because of completely different doctrines. I think it's very promising how active people are in this subforum since "pre-purchase" dropped and I hope it will sell so well ED will have $-signs in their eyes and make many more RedFor modules!

If it was that easy, people wouldn't have so many problems trying to reproduce it with the problem appearing one moment and then disappearing the next I myself for the longest time didn't have the problem, then I did, and now I can no longer reproduce it. As with many performance issues in DCS, the cause is likely a very obscure combination of hardware, bios settings, dcs settings and perhaps even windows version and drivers... If I were to hazard a guess, the issue is somewhere in BIOS but I could be completely wrong...

The same animations exist already in other ED modules, but yes the fact that they chose to emphasise it in the trailer is hopefully a sign we'll finally get one…

Agree to disagree. You can get better/on par cockpit textures for free from the User Files. The only thing the free ones don't have is the improved canopy glass. Nothing changed in the cockpit except for textures. No corrected proportions for VR (even with in-game IPD at 75 it's still too large), no improved resolution mesh. And as I said before, I have watched the new and old external model side by side and I can't tell the difference (except for the textures, but I'm talking about the model itself). I personally don't care about the ability to open the gun bay doors on the ground ED clearly stated it's not a purely cosmetic upgrade, while that is clearly a lie...

Well, you can't really turn off data-link, can you? To be fair I haven't tested the extent to which "historic filter" removes all that modern nonsense, but even if it worked perfectly then you'd still have an APG-73 instead of -65. You'd have none of the older TGPs, and you'd still be able to ask the ground crew to equip the JHMCS, no? Also, you'd still have the more powerful engines... Note to self: I should really test that at some point...