henhag

+1 for MG151/20 pods

+1 This would be a great feature for sling load pilots! Maybe there is a way to add a doors/ no doors option to the rearming menu?

I cannot confirm this, 6 DOF headtracking works fine in VR (Oculus Rift CV1)

The starter sounds are missing, they neither play when you spool up the flywheel or when you engage the clutch to crank the engine. Getting the M-62 radial to start is quite difficult at the moment, as there is no indication if the flywheel is ready. BR, Hendrik

Couldn't have said it better! :thumbup: While I really enjoy AIRIO for the startup and quick commands, I'm struggling to set up more complex things with Jester now. With the traditional Jester wheel you can see the important information in the hub of the wheel, such as current TACAN or radio channel, but also selected bomb type, ripple quantity etc. etc. You always see what your backseater is doing. IMHO, this is very important when flying with AI Using both input methods in parallel would be much more comfortable for me.. And for pilots who prefer pure immersion... well, they can just leave the "enable Jester wheel" tick box blank, right? :)

*push* Still an issue in 2.5.3.23954 (Nov 09 2018) Having a VR compatible sun visor would be awesome.. It's easily one of the best "little features" in RAZBAMs Harrier and Mirage.. extremely useful for Persian Gulf and NTTR where the sand is just too bright sometimes

DCS 2.5.1 OpenBeta - sunglasses are still incompatible with VR :(

The reworked cockpit lights in 2.5.1 beta are amazing! Thank you! :thumbup:

Did you change the default cyclic sensitivity, so we don't have to adjust the pitch/roll Y-saturation any more? :joystick: :)

@Kestrel @lemoen I barely use the trim function, only if I need both hands to write in the chat or sth. :) I'm used to reset the trim right after I take back the controls When flying in VR, my hand position on the joystick nearly matches the "virtual hand" on the cyclic.. this is absolutely fantastic for immersion and 'not getting VR sick'. If I'd use the trimmer, my hand wouldn't be where I (virtually) see it.. And I know my brain doesn't like it that way :D With the 12cm extension, the warthog stick is extremely smooth, and the recentering is barely noticeable. It does recenter, but fighting the spring is absolutely manageable. I prefer to manually keep it in place, instead of having it trimmed and centered. The most important aspect for me is that I always 'feel' the current cyclic position, centering the stick using a trimmer could make this less intuitive. Flying the Huey is an amazing experience, and you can do some really tricky maneuvers with it :music_whistling:

Please excuse that I didn't read the whole thread, but I just posted a short guide for setting up helicopter controls, especially pointing out curvature/saturation settings for the cyclic pitch and roll axis :) I use these settings with the DCS: SA-342 Gazelle and I never had any problems flying this aircraft :) Controls guide for helicopters... Or: Why you should avoid using curvature

For all the old and new rotorheads: DO NOT USE ANY CURVATURE FOR HELICOPTER CONTROLS!!!!!111! :) --> Detailed explanation below ;) So... why is curvature a bad thing for helicopter controls? It works so good on the fixed wing aircraft... Yeah, but on a trimmed fast mover you will have your stick centered most of the time. Curves are always applied regarding to the center position. And this is where we have a problem... As you already know, a helicopters cyclic stick is off-center most of the time during flight. The cyclic position where your helicopter will fly in a straight line might be 40% forward and 30% to the right... but as soon as you increase collective it can be 45% forward and 25% right... I hope you understand what I'm trying to explain here... Your stick is almost never in the center position from which all curves are being calculated in DCS. In the attached drawing, the green dot represents the currently required cyclic position to maintain your flight attitude, on an axis that has a very strong curvature applied. The horizontal red lines represent an equally strong joystick movement to either the left or the right side, something you permanently need to adjust your flight attitude. In normal flight or hover, you apply small corrections, but you always stay near the sweet spot (green dot) If you take a closer look on the vertical red lines now, you will see that the left line is much shorter than the right one. This indicates that moving the stick to one side will have a much stronger effect on your helicopter, than moving it in the opposite direction! In a hover situation where you need precise and really small movements on the cyclic, this will lead to oscillation, unintended movement and failure. So... what can we do, if a curvature is actually making it worse? We have to find a way to reduce control sensitivity, but keep the in- and output as linear as possible. Fortunately, there is another axis setting called "Y-saturation" - that's the one you should try if the cyclic feels too sensitive :) It will take the full deflection of the joystick on your desk and limit it to whatever percentage you have selected. A roll axis Y-saturation of 50 means that you can only move the ingame cyclic stick 50% to the left and 50% to the right. But you get these 50% deflection when your real joystick is already fully deflected, so you might have just increased your input accuracy by the factor of 2??? There is a downside.. as always... 50-80% cyclic Y-saturation is enough for most normal flight operations, especially if you are new to helicopters and struggle keeping the bird in a stable hover. ATTENTION: On the Huey and Mi-8 (maybe Ka-50, too), you might not be able to reach maximum airspeed or maneuverability, as this sometimes requires a cyclic deflection near 100%. But this setting is a great pair of training skids! ???? It will limit you in speed and performance, but it really helps you improve your flight skill and hover precision! Once you get more familiar with the flight behaviour of your rotary wing aircraft, increase the Y-saturation step-by-step back to 100%. You don't need to start as low as 50%, even 80% will give you a noticeable improvement for training. The setting you feel comfortable with depends on several parameters like joystick type, spring strength, stick length, hotas mount/ desktop use, how you sit in your chair and lets not forget about the DCS helicopter module itself :D On the Sa-342 Gazelle, you may want to keep it at 60-80%, as this bird is very, VERY sensitive on the cyclic and keeping the Y-saturation reduced will have no real disadvantages at all. On all the other helicopters (Huey, Mi-8, Ka-50), there is no point in keeping the Y-saturation lowered forever. It is a great method for flight training, but as mentioned above, it comes with a price. I really hope you liked this guide, if you have any recommendations or comments, please post them below :) Feedback is always welcomed

Yesterday I flew the Harrier with two inboard tanks (empty) and about 45% internal fuel (loadout page) I think my fuel gauge showed about 1800lbs and it got filled up to 7700lbs (TOTAL). No 'transfer complete' message, I disconnected about 30 seconds after the fuel meter stopped at 7700lbs. The external tanks did not contain any fuel afterwards, at least according to the display. I flew for a while until my fuel level allowed for a vertical landing... and dropped like a stone. The external fuels weight was there fore sure Today I took the Mirage for a ride, and the same problem exists there, too. - I started with 5% internal fuel and three external fuel tanks (filled) - The fuel was successfully transfered to the internal tanks (got three RL external tanks empty warning lights and internal fuel level was raised) - I successfully refueled on a KC-130 - 'Transfer complete', internal tanks filled, but no fuel went into the external tanks - Double checked and successfully refueled on a Il-78 - 'Transfer complete', internal tanks filled, but no fuel went into the external tanks - Jettisoned the external tanks and the internal fuel instantly dropped from 3160kg to 50kg.. I had to eject :( I'm extremely bad at A-10C refueling, but I gave it a try... external fuel tanks and 100% internal fuel. During the flight only external fuel was used. When I connected to the KC-135 it instantly replied 'Transfer complete', so I assume it has the same problem (not filling the external tanks during AAR). Pretty confident that this is a global bug affecting all DCS modules :(

Try to push these buttons :music_whistling: I promise, they are working fine :thumbup:

With DCS 2.5OpenBeta released and after checking this issue in several different lighting conditions, I have developed a stronger tendency to see this as a bug :( This is not a major problem though, and it is not making the module less enjoyable in any way.. ...but I think it looked much better before :noexpression: Some older screenshots (Oct. 2017) I found on my hard drive... the difference is literally night and day Edit: Please note that the UV lights are used on the older screenshots, so the red instruments light and blueish UV blend into white. When you use only the UV lights, the pitch ladder on the artificial horizon is light blue. Use only the red instruments backlight and the pitch ladder will look yellow. Use both lights at the same time and you will see a white pitch ladder on red background (as seen on the screenshots)

The auto hover is working fine, but sometimes it is tricky to engage it. Set the NADIR so it displays your ground speed (TERRE on the lower and V.S./ DER. on the upper dial). You can only engage the Auto Hover when ground speed is below 16km/h, vertical speed is almost zero and pitch/bank angles are not excessive. If you turn the artificial horizon knob (ART./ VIS /VHF/ DOP) to the DOP position, it will give you a nice hover assist. The knob is located on the right side of the instrument panel, above the battery, alternator and generator switches. SA-342M Gazelle » Gazelle change log 11/20/2017

This sounds like having both 1.5openbeta and 2.2openalpha installed is the smoothest/fastest way to get DCS 2.5? I have enough free space on my SSD for all three clients (unless 2.5 exceeds 200GB ;) ) 1.5openbeta to be part of the inital rollout (1.5beta -> 2.5beta patch) 2.2openalpha to reduce download time (files beeing copied between versions)

The modification nrgy posted looks very useful, but it is still just a mod :( I'd prefer a sun visor that is included in the module and 100% MP compatible :thumbup: Link to mod: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=187824 (Saw his reply on my cell phone this morning, but didn't have the time to answer before it was removed. I hope it is okay to repost the link)

DCS 2.2.0.12843.297 Update 1 (01-05-2017) The instrument flickering is still present :cry: (DCS 2.2 + Oculus VR) This is a cold start on Aerobatics 2.2 Nevada, the only thing I did was BAT, ALT, GEN on and UV lights set to full brightness. It seems like the instruments in the shade (RPM indicator, NADIR/ADF gauge) are the most affected ones. Compared to the video in the first post, the number of affected instruments is much lower now :) No mods installed, maxed settings in DCS, Oculus VR + 1080Ti with latest nVidia driver (388.71), nVidia control panel at default settings, except for energy management (max performance) and texture filtering (high quality)

Set the NADIR knobs to TERRE and VS DER, this will give you a ground speed indication on the display. I think this is the best way to create comparable speed tests. However, there are elevation differences between Caucasus, Normandy and NTTR map. Las Vegas is about 2,030 ft (620 m) above sea level. This affects all helicopters, but maybe the Gazelles design makes the difference more noticeable than with a UH-1 or Mi-8.

The helmet sun visor (sun glass on/off, default key: G) is a very useful feature for bright Nevada days, but it doesn't work correctly when you're flying in VR... From what I see on the screenshot (and inside the HMD), enlarging the tinted area might already fix the problem :) DCS 2.2.0.12448 with deferred shading enabled + Oculus VR Edit 12/31/17: The tinted rectangle is not moving with the VR headtracking, so this might be a more complicated issue :/

When the Position Lights Switch, DIM/BRIGHT is in the DIM position, the position lights are on high intensity and vice versa. DCS 2.2.0.12448, yet this is a rather old bug.

I was mainly thinking about helicopter gameplay when creating this thread, but in the end I adressed civil aviation in general. The DCS map sizes and cities would be more useful for rotary wing aircraft, imho. Airliners could be a nice addition to AI traffic, for player controlled vehicles I had helicopters and small to midsized aircraft (single or twin engine) on my mind :) A learjet, Twin Otter, Cessna or maybe even a DC-3 (bundled with a C-47 for WW2 :smilewink:) could fit in quite well

(I'm new to the forums, I hope this is the right section for this topic) Fellow DCS players, I know that you probably don't want to hear this again and again, but I think that DCS could be a great environment for civil simulation. Shots fired, so please allow me to explain it: (What follows is just my personal opinion as a DCS player, who is flying "just for fun") Eagle Dynamics simulation engine allows for highly realistic flight models, some of the most accurate in the flight simulation world. When looking at the Nevada and Strait of Hormuz terrain modules, they are huge and include multiple cities modeled in an outstanding level of detail. Considering current simulators, DCS combines both accuracy of simulation with pure eyecandy. While I agree that some maps might be rather small for fast fixed wing aircraft, a helicopter ride between two airfields can take several hours. Back in 2011 Bohemia Interactive released "Take On Helicopters" that featured a 3800 km² piece of Seattle metropolitan area. ( http://www.armaholic.com/datas/users/tkoh_pre-order_1280x800_5_4.jpg ). I've used this simulation for a while myself, but the flight models aren't even close to DCS World. TKOH is based on the rather old ArmA2 engine, so we're not speaking about eyecandy here... Then there are several other simulators (P3D, FSX, etc.) in which you can sometimes even fly to every location in the world. But when you arrive there, well, you might be disappointed by the way it looks. These simulators aren't focused on looking great or entertaining the pilots/players, the main intention is to simulate an aircraft in a high level of technical detail. Some simulations even use flight models that are inferior to those used in DCS, but the whole point is that you can train specific procedures and tasks you would encounter as a real life student pilot/ pilot. So therefore, I might refer to these simulators as "educational software" (please take it with a grain of salt). And then we have DCS World. We all know how great this "game" looks and how accurate and detailed the flight models are. We have maps of several hundred thousand square kilometers, some (DLC) maps include famous cities with great architecture and landscape. Comparing the graphics, DCS stands out from the whole flight simulation branch. The flight models are at eye level with the competitors, most of the time they are even superior. Everyone in the DCS community is asking for more modules, more aircraft, more maps, more features. And at the same time, we're constantly nagging for faster releases, faster bugfixing and faster updates. Understand that DCS developers are rather small. Go to the flight manual of your favourite module and read the credits. Sometimes you'll see twice as many testers as actual company members. To provide updates/ new content faster, every business has to grow. And to grow, they need revenue. As Eagle Dynamics themselves stated in their recent open letter ( https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=196539 ), the development of the P-51D was twice as cost-efficient as the A-10C. Let me compare this to a car manufacturer, the Volkswagen Group. Volkswagen owns brands like Lamborghini, Bentley and Bugatti. But the real money is made with the affordable brands like VW, Seat, Skoda, Audi. Without the "everyman car" brands behind them, these luxury manufacturers couldn't exist. The Christen Eagle II and EDs Yak-52 were developed for internal reasons and then released to the public as a bonus. A bonus for us, the players. And a bonus for the developers. Buying these (civil) modules actually benefits the development of new combat aircraft. With the income generated by these modules, the developer can hire new programmers and artists, thus speed up the release schedule. What would be so wrong having civil aircraft and helicopters in the game? I assume that there would be five types of players in the community, if ED decides to open the doors for civil modules: [TABLE]A) The milsim players, that only fly combat aircraft B) The milsim players, that fly civil aircraft for fun C) The civil sim players, that fly combat aircraft for fun (and might become members of group B in the future) D) The civil sim players, that only fly civil aircraft. E) The "I just enjoy flying" players, that use all aircraft in both combat, aerobatics and civil scenarios[/TABLE]Group A,B,C and E are already existing and there is a peaceful and harmonic coexistence. Group C+E will usually be found on the aerobatics servers, while A+B populate the combat servers. Speaking of the supposed "Group D", we would either find them on the aerobatics servers, or on civil sim servers with missions created specifically for their likings. And before someone says "this will split the community" - no, but it offers plenty of room for an expansion. Highly accurate combat flight simulation is a rather small niche, the market for civil simulations seems to be much bigger. With civil aircraft included in the outstanding DCS environment and the strong companies and communities supporting it, we can attract many players of both civil and combat simulation. This could make DCS the most attractive platform for 3rd party developers. :) Best regards, Hendrik

(DCS 2.2 as released on 12-8-2017) When flying in bright daylight conditions, the red instrument backlight appears pale and almost pink, as you can see from the attached screenshot. I'm not entirely sure if this is a bug, or part of DCS 2.2s improved lighting. At nighttime the red is only as intense as it used to be during the day in 2.1 and older versions. Some panel lights are a little dim, but this has already been reported in another thread. The roof lamp seems to be affected by this issue as well, at nighttime the light is barely reaching the instrument panel :( (tried both red filter on/off, and all positions of the brightness knob) best regards, Hendrik