Raven (Elysian Angel)

Yes you're correct there is something fishy going on here. Performance is horrible for me too, not just in the F1 but in the OH-58 it's even worse (though the latter improves after a little while). I doubt it's the module itself (or many others would be posting about it including myself), but it must be some weird interaction between the module and some aspect of your specific mission... Let's hope Aerges can figure out what's wrong...

1. This track requires a mod to replay (civilian asset pack), which I don't have so I can't test it on my system. 2. Did you perhaps forget to clear FXO/Metashaders this time? Performance for me is just fine - better actually than the other modules you mention.

Yes auto fog works very well: I have been using it quite a lot. Obviously the conditions have to be correct: think of when you see fog in real life. Obviously there can't be any wind (fog would just blow away), so I have been setting my missions just after sunrise with 0 wind at ground level - just a bit of turbulence (at value "12" which I think translates to something around 0.1m/s).

5x actually. ‘Increased by 10%’ = 110% so ‘increased by 400%’ = 500%

This is exactly what I was getting at as well, when I said it would have to be something that's bindable to DCS to a quick toggle on your HOTAS- or it's useless for all of the reasons you describe. Aka the most elegant solution is for ED *and* 3rd parties (looking at you, Heatblur) to implement a sun visor into their modules - and preferably available at launch.

As far as I can tell it's all related to the trim hat on the cyclic, and the CD REL button actually works as it should now (as a force trim release). Sadly there is no separate option yet for pedal trim in the Special Options...

Happy the radio bindings are fixed. I never had an issue with my binding for REC/ACK, however.

Yes for me it's sort of the opposite: I'm more of an A/A fan than A/G but the Strike Eagle is special to me. I don't know why... Perhaps it's because Microprose's F-15E series is what got me into simming, but other than that it is indeed a beast. Incredible engines, more fuel capacity than you'll likely ever need with the current size of DCS maps (though that looks to be changing with Afghanistan and Iraq), ... I love it, both the aircraft itself and the module.

Many people would love a Su-22M4 (and there's plenty of countries operating those)

Это вопрос номенклатуры. Русские никогда не использовали обозначения типов по западному образцу

Yes of course but that's not DCS's fault, isn't it? Theoretically ED could implement a Special Option to disable that behaviour, but it is such an edge case scenario one could wonder what people would expect next? Tshark called it an "interesting feedback effect", and didn't ask for a fix.

Good, that's what I would expect in a multi-crew aircraft If this were not the case, the transfer of control - for whichever reason - could end up being quite messy indeed.

Well that is where I disagree, then. I think the future of DCS is definitely Cold War as others have stated before (Enigma made a very good video about it). It's a very realistic timeframe to expect full-fidelity BluFor AND RedFor aircraft (shame about the Razbam stuff since the MiG-23 was apparently in the final stretch before release), and it's where most of the assets are as well. We'll have a Fulda Map soon-ish, and we'll have Iraq to re-enact Desert Storm on (from both sides). If enough Iranian bases are added we can re-enact the first Gulf War (Iran-Iraq). We have a Syria map for Syria-Israel stuff (which Heatblur will even make a campaign about), ... (oh and when it comes to CW, you can even use the Normandy2 map for '80s scenarios for us rotorheads - I think using one of the included airbases as a FARP works quite well) A modern-ish RedFor fighter has been highly requested for years, and since this MiG-29 is likely the most advanced we'll get for a time (though an early Su-27 is most likely a matter of when not if I'd think). Exactly! There are a decent number of people who treat DCS as a virtual museum, so for those people and many others the MiG-29 will be a very welcome addition!

Many of those questions have been answered already: we'll be getting an '80s-level aircraft, so think more of the initial production batch. That means no datalink (only the MiG-31 had that at the time), and certainly no R-77s. Obviously it's not going to be competitive on post-CW airquake servers, unless you're clever and resourceful. But in the proper timeframe it's plenty competitive: with its R-73s and R-27s and HMS it will be going up against F-4s, and F-16s armed with AIM-9L/M only.

Count yourself lucky we even got a Ka-50 in DCS, that was just a happy coincidence that ED and Kamov were able to cooperate at exactly the right time to make this happen.

No such thing as a MiG-29A And no, since we don't have a full-fidelity Su-25 and likely won't in the foreseeable future. FC "systems modelling" (if you can even call it that) is VERY simplified by design, and thus a properly modelled SPO15 ("This depth and accuracy of the simulations will make our new implementation of SPO-15 in DCS the most realistic and detailed simulation of this system of any PC simulator." is completely meaningless marketing speech) is completely out of the scope of Flaming Cliffs.

Bugfixes for what we already have would be great I for one don't constantly need something new. Sometimes it's enough to have what you already own working properly And besides, there are plenty of bugs that have been around for 5-10 years. Getting those squashed would be great, or simply things like a proper implementation of modern RWRs would make a lot of people happy as well I bet.

The 9.12A looks good: the rivet counters are going to be very happy! Is there a patch planned still this year, to include the OH-58 fixes that have been ready for release for a while now? And I bet the F-16 drivers are eagerly awaiting the take-off/landing ARI fix as well Happy festivities for everyone in the ED team and their loved ones!

Might as well have put your report in the Game Performance Bugs instead, then there would have been no need to add the [ performance] tag https://forum.dcs.world/forum/483-game-performance-bugs/ Nothing changed when it comes to trees as far as I'm aware: the last change was the switch to Speedtrees, and that was quite a few years ago.

I ran your procedure twice. First in 2D, then in VR. - In 2D the VID renders correctly (green); - In VR it's bugged (black). Same as speed-of-heat reported, basically.

My wish, aside from very obvious things such as Vulkan, AI A-6E, Early F-14A and Iranian F-14A, is fixes for longstanding helicopter issues such as the excessive sideslip, and lack of friction for skids...

We agree, then. That was the point of the post I made after all. Both ED and Heatblur have already said they’d get working sun visors for their modules, but knowing both that could very well take “2 weeks” (aka 5+ years). I'd prefer to light a fire underneath their bums - in the nicest way possible of course

We're not on a beta branch any longer. There is a reason ED employs a large team of closed beta testers. This is such an obvious issue it should have been caught during the test-cycle PRIOR to releasing said patch. That's what KungFu said.