Raven (Elysian Angel)

Yes I noticed the same on my Rhino, so it’s not just the MSFFB2.

MiG-29 has no HOTAS in the Western sense of the word. So either look at the labels on throttle and stick if you want to keep it as close to RL as possible, or use whatever is convenient and easy to remember for you. Well yes of course: flaming cliffs uses non-existing controls for the sake of offering low-level accessibility. It has little to nothing in common with reality.

It is not.

This used to only affect the mission editor and F10 map. This change is a huge step in the wrong direction, since as MickV said, it doesn’t work the other way around which feels really weird.

Indeed. It may be “working as intended”, but it definitely isn’t “correct as is”.

Me too, hence me posting it in the Bugs and Problems subforum. ED saw fit to move it to Wishlist for some reason or another On aircraft helmets, or in general? I’ve ridden quite a few different types of motorcycles in all weather with every type of helmet imaginable and I have *never* had such reflections on my visor. A visor is there to *improve* visibility, not make it worse…

Hello, Can ED follow the example of 3rd parties such as Aerges and HeatBlur please, and add options for FFB tuning? Particularly separate force/strength options for pitch and roll would be very welcome. With the default settings, (perceived) roll strength is too high compared to pitch. I personally prefer to keep roll forces at 50% compared to pitch (at 100%). Thanks!

Hello, As mentioned before in other threads and on YouTube, *language* options should be independent from *units* in my opinion. With Avionics Language set to Native, Units set to Metric and cockpit in the special options set to English, gauges are calibrated in feet and knots instead of metres and kilometres per hour. We've had comments from ED staff that there is a way to have metric units in the English cockpit (such as it currently is in for example Mi-24 and Mi-8), but if Native Avionics, Metric Units and English cockpit doesn't do the trick, I'm at a loss as to what does...

Hello, Thanks for finally giving us an ED module with a working visor, but the current implementation is basically useless in VR as it makes me nauseous - VERY nauseous. There are reflections that are massively overdone and can't be turned off - they are not tied to canopy reflections. Even more so, in situations where there are no canopy reflections (I have the canopy slider set at 1.0), the visor still has those massive reflections. I don't have any first hand experience with pilot helmets from the '80s, but I have never had a visor on any of my motorcycle helmets that had ANY reflections, let alone such overdone ones. So I doubt real aviation helmet visors have such reflections. I hope this can be fixed...

Yes, I had to set "Saturation Y" to 80, same as what I have on the FC3 version.

Let's not bring more drama into it. The current internal situation at PolyChop is none of our business. But that being said, it would be nice to be kept up to date as to what a reasonable timeframe is we can expect progress on the modules.

Makes perfect sense to me. I'm not a programmer by any sense of the imagination but I had to debug a database made by someone else in an old job of mine, and that already gave me plenty of headaches... So starting a new job and having to work with someone else's code?... Have fun and good luck with that!

The Updater crashed twice for me, but now it's back up to my normal speeds. ED did well improving their patcher these past few years. No such thing!

Yes that overexposure is a bug that's apparently hard to fix. It's been around for a while now... When it happens I switch to F2 external view and then back to cockpit, and that seems to limit the time of the overexposure...

Got to love the condescending tone / gaslighting of that phrase in the patch notes... Anyway, it's just a band-aid for now until we get the new rotor model - this has all been announced before.

Someone didn’t listen to what Reflected said in his announcement video

Count yourself lucky then, total size for me is 8x as much…

Yes, ED hinted at the functionality coming to their other modules too, so hopefully we will get working visors for all ED modules on MiG-29's launch day! Yeah for ED modules I put gamma at 1.6 (during daytime missions) to put the colours and brightness of the outside world while looking outside in the cockpit, at the same level than external view is when gamma is at 2.2. DCS lighting is weird... With working visors such shenanigans will no longer be needed.

As a general rule of thumb, when not knowing what to bind (I agree it can be daunting), I’d recommend to take things slow and one step at a time. You said you’ve been away for a while, so it will undoubtedly take some getting used to, right? So what are you going to do first to get the feel of the aircraft (or DCS in general) again? I doubt you’re going to jump into a study-level campaign by for example Reflected, right? More than likely you’re going to do some free flights, some takeoffs and landings, … What do you need for that? Not a lot: flaps up/down, gear up/down, air brake in/out - that’s pretty much it. So start from there, and slowly add binds when applicable for the situations you’re finding yourself in. Happy flying!

Yup, we used to have measurements like that as well (for example the "el" - which was about 68cm) - it went out of date in the 1800s.

Neither do I, but surely you see that was not the point. A product was sold based on promised made (what’s listed on the product page), and those promised were not kept or only partially kept. The default F-16 looks like a plastic toy, at best. Anyway, I didn’t mean to start up that entire discussion again. There are already other threads about it…

I think it's safe to say we wish for ED to deliver on their promises, and what's listed on the store page: The most realistic model of the F-16C imaginable, down to each bolt and flake of paint, animated controls surfaces, lights, damage model, and landing gear.

IRL? That makes no sense. Metric is SI and used by 96% of the world population, and even the US is (very slowly) converting to metric - finally.

I believe you're overthinking it. You can add a speed (and altitude) for AI to fly at in the waypoint options. I think that's what Bignewy was alluding to.