Raven (Elysian Angel)

No worries at all If I can find something like that, that I can bind to a HOTAS button and works as a toggle switch, of course. I don't know if that exists, and I had to look up what LUT means Funnily enough HDR screens tend to have a *lower* overall brightness, not higher. Sure, the maximum brightness can be higher but not necessarily. I already lowered the brightness of my Aero, but I need to be careful with that since I obviously want to see what I'm doing at night as well. At the moment, sunvisors work perfectly well for the modules that have them.

This is not about accessibility. I just added my own personal reasons alongside the others which have already been brought to ED's attention for years. I have also briefly mentioned it in my initial post (and linked to a few examples or requests here or on other platforms). Again, for me this is a much bigger issue than for most others who wants sun visors in DCS, for the reasons I stated. And you know what they say: one is never alone with a particular question/concern. There are always others (who don't speak up), so I bet there are other people here who have this particular "accessibility issue" as you describe it - which never prevented me from accessing DCS in the past before the lighting was overhauled (again, as I mentioned before). her Why not? I described the reasons why *I* can't fly modules that don't have a sun visor, which makes it a critical issue for me. You say I am imagining things? I also mentioned the reasons the other gazillion posts about this topic talk about. Why repeat what others have been asking for for years? I am not interested in starting a new thread only to bring up the very same arguments again. I could have chosen to bump an existing thread instead, but I didn't. They do, but with varying degrees of usability. Some are far too dark, and they also only protect against sun glare in the HUD, not when looking outside of the cockpit to the sides. In fact, this is the reason why Heatblur's F-4 is the only aircraft without a sun visor that I can fly for a while without issues: there is so much real estate in the way that it actually helps me, as long as I don't look around a lot (which you should be doing in a fighter for obvious reasons).

Please read the post before commenting - properly this time. Thanks.

Hello, Before I start this post, let me be clear that I am well aware there have been several wish list threads about this topic already, and that there are several modules with this option present and working properly - luckily - such as the MiG-21, Mirage 2000, Mirage F1, AV-8B (broken but hopefully this can be fixed later as it used to work), F-15E, OH-58, ... But this seems to be a VERY low priority item for ED and some 3rd parties (Heatblur have announced all of their modules will get it but that has been announced years ago already with nothing to show for it so far). For me personally (and I bet for some other users as well), this is in fact a CRITICAL item that determines me flying that particular module or not. Now before someone starts accusing me of being particularly dramatic, allow me to elaborate: IRL I have very sensitive eyes. Indoors I need glasses with a special filter that automatically darkens based on ambient light, which gives the lenses a brownish tint. I don't particularly enjoy the world around me always having that brown tint, but it is what it is. You can compare this to photography with an improperly set white balance. Outdoors during the day I wear sunglasses pretty much 100% of the time, even when it's overcast and/or raining. Even clouds can really hurt my eyes (it physically hurts but doesn't damage my eyes as far as I know). So while other people's opinion on the need for a helmet visor in DCS visor can range from "it's a useless gimmick" to "it would be nice to have to combat sun glare when flying straight into the sun so we can read our HUDs", for me it is more than that: bad things happen if I fly a module without sun visor for longer than 5 minutes. A few years ago, before ED overhauled the lighting engine, this wasn't much of a problem, since with low enough gamma setting in DCS (I flew with gamma at 1.6) I could fly just fine. But now with the revised lighting (which is obviously a huge improvement and much more true-to-life), lowering the gamma messes up all colours and the in-cockpit visibility. I'm sure that people can remember a few years ago when ED started overhauling the lighting, people commented on being able to set correct lighting inside the cockpit OR for the outside world, but never both at the same time. Since then it was especially Heatblur that has been stating that they colour correct their modules for Gamma 2.2, since that is the "correct" setting in DCS if you want colours to display correctly (there have been lots of people complaining about cockpits being too dark (recently in the F-4), those were likely using too low gamma). Now allow me to explain what happens if I fly any visor-less DCS module for longer than a few minutes in daylight conditions. After about 5-10 minutes, I start developing a headache. If I continue flying, that headache gets worse. After about an hour, nausea kicks in and that gets so bad I need to throw up (I mean really run to the bathroom and physically throw up). I have been flying in VR exclusively in DCS for about 7 years now, and never had an issue with the motion sickness some people complain about, so my headaches and nausea are purely a result of the outside-of-the-cockpit world of DCS being too bright for my eyes to handle. This results in me exclusively flying DCS modules with visors. Sure, I might take out others for a quick spin but only for a few minutes at a time unless I set the mission time-of-day at early morning or late evening (or night obviously). So with this post I'd like to politely ask ED and 3rd parties to consider bumping up the priority for working visors in their modules. RL pilot helmets have it, for the much of the same reasons why we need it in-game (particularly in VR, I can imagine this not being such an issue in 2D). And since the in-game pilot models often are shown with lowered visor, this should be by default enabled (including shader effects) for all DCS modules - at least those more recent than WW2 with the latter probably using a sunglasses option instead. In more recent ED modules, the keybinds for raising/lowering the visor are there, including pilot animations but they don't actually do anything. When people point that out, their posts get moved from Bug Reports to Wishlist instead... So why not complete that work that has clearly already begun? Cheers for reading and considering. Kind regards, Raven. P.S. I'll leave you with a few examples: https://steamcommunity.com/app/223750/discussions/0/1643167006282305800/?l=turkish

From up high the map looks incredible! Down low it depends, but it's WiP so that's fine: certain areas could use more clutter to hide the low resolution terrain textures. Performance seems to be pretty good so far, but I ran into 1 area where the performance tanked: in the F-16 runway start IA mission, around SP1 close to the Iranian border, there is a certain type of bush there that seems to need optimisation. When flying close to the ground in that area, my framerate dropped by 50% and the in-game frame graph showed "CPU bound main thread" (red). Climbing to higher altitude restored the framerate.

Hopefully we get access to the Kiowa fixes asap then.

Sure, but let's hope that will be fixed. Afghanistan didn't have that issue. I didn't buy "DCS: Iraq North", I bought "DCS: Iraq" so I don't want to end up with 2 different maps listed

null

For me, in VR with DLAA, those lines only appear if the MFD is not directly in the centre of my FoV. If I'm focussed on it, it's completely fine. Sure a fix would be nice, but it's not a deal breaker for me. The KW is just too awesome to let that spoil my fun with it

I don't remember by heart what the switches are called exactly, but they have NARROW/WIDE in the name. Wide is up (4-way), narrow is down (same 4-way). Just do the training mission. It is all explained there.

The KC-46 is much too recent to fit with any DCS aircraft, but a KC-10? Yes please!

Do we know already what the architecture of the 9900X3D will be like? Will it again be 1 CCD with V-cache and the other without, or will it be a different architecture? DCS MT scales with more cores, so I'm keeping my eye out on the 9900X3D when it releases. But I haven't made up my mind yet. I am currently on a 5900X but will very likely replace that sometime next year by either 9800X3D or 9900X3D depending on how the latter performs.

Oh for me it's very basic too: I use Barthek Caucasus textures and Taz trees, but other than that it's just some files I made myself: my own main menu backgrounds, I replaced some liveries (especially the default plastic toy F-16 ones by ED), better PDL lights and my own countermeasure programmes. That's it. Possibly, but also a lot of extras that I don't need. I don't need "my community" (whatever that means) to decide which mods I use or don't use, I'll do that myself. Also, using Taz trees triggered OMM to uninstall Barthek terrain textures...

Then by all means keep using OvGME: I will as well since OMM would mess up my Caucasus mods. I tried it, noticed it's confusing and doesn't do what I want it to, so I removed it again

I didn't know that, thanks! I'll look into it...

Oh absolutely, including overspeed damage and stores falling off Sweet! Which one are you getting? FFB is incredible and you'll wish you got one sooner

Indeed. The Mirage F1 one also suffered from over-the-top asymmetry for a while.

I came here to post about this myself. Here's a track. F-5 remaster seat.trk

Thank you!

The music in that clip is so much better! Also, it’s all fun and games until the Viggen “accidentally” engages its thrust reverser

The new centre position? Yes obviously, that’s one of the best things about FFB!

I personally think it has more to do with quirks of consumer sim hardware. I never ripped the wings off when I had my Virpil base, and especially now with FFB the chances of something like that happening are basically nonexistent.

Apparently, yes. I'd like to see a direct comparison as well, but the differences are likely very subtle as I can't tell just by looking at the aircraft in-game.