panton41

X-Plane was originally written as Macintosh System first (as in the vintage operating system coded in Pascal) with Windows as an afterthought later on and Linux as low-hanging fruit once MacOS X became UNIX. These days, with Vulkan as the target, I'm assuming macOS and it's Metal-only graphics stack has become the second-class citizen. Either way, the biggest single issue with a Linux port is support. One mid-level indie game company, I don't feel like looking up who, recently dropped Linux support because the Linux bug queue was so much longer than the Windows and macOS support queue, with such a tiny fraction of users, that dropping Linux support made more financial sense. It was squarely on the fact desktop Linux has less than zero standardization. It's easy to say "If it runs Steam, it can run this game" but the reality is far from that and the fact is if there's 100 Linux distros then there's 500 different versions of desktop Linux "in the wild" given different releases of a core distro and it's impossible to support all the weirdness that even one distro might exhibit over time, much less all of them. What desktop server should DCS use? The decades old XOrg that has a decrepit feature set, but no one can seem to stop using because it Just Works... kinda...? Weyland, that despite years of development is still barely past alpha in usefulness? Oh, right, nVidia graphics don't work with it. How about the one Ubuntu tinkered with for years and stopped supporting? What desktop toolset? Qt? GTK+? Which version of each? What if they roll their own? What if they choose to use one that might spotty support from a single developer, despite useful features? More than a few popular FOSS projects ended when their developer got a full-time job. Or a girlfriend. Or bored. (One tabletop RPG utility I like died last December for that reason.) Just because you can read the code doesn't mean you know what it does. What about sound? I swear for a while Linux distros change sound servers more often than I change my underwear. What about network stack? What about network security? Jeeze, what version of libstdc do you support? That single question can end a program's compatibility dead in one mismatched library. Needless to say, it's easier and cheaper to say "We support Windows" and hit 99% of the desktop gaming audience with next to no additional support needed.

I don't want to have to fight advanced avionics in order to learn basic stuff like taxiing, take off, landing, etc. I considered X-Plane briefly, but other than the Cessna Skyhawk it didn't have much that would work as a trainer. (Though being able to fly around my local region would be fun, but not $40 on sale kind of fun.)

For what it's worth, the Legacy Hornet took the YF-17 and shoehorned it into an operational fighter. Like the Super Hornet they couldn't deviate from the original visual design too much, for many of the same decisions, so they made oddball design choices. Orr Kelly's Hornet Inside Story of the F/A-18 (recommended reading) essentially says they designed a totally new plane that looked like the YF-17 and pointed out the odd landing gear design as a point of evidence.

I've waffled about getting the C-101 Aviojet as a trainer to learn basic flying skill (which I woefully lack despite decades of playing flight sims), but from what I've seen of it I'm not terrible impressed. I've had the F-5 for a while since I simply think it's a cool plane and it's fun to fly, but would it make a reasonable substitute for a basic flight trainer ala the T-38 Talon (which is shares a common ancestor with).

If you're looking in the budget range for VR, see about tracking down a Windows Mixed Reality headset. They frequently sell for $200-300, integrate into Windows 10 by merely plugging them in and letting Windows do some automatic downloading (and downloading SteamVR and its WMR addon) and make a nice entry-level into VR. The problem, though, is I don't think anyone is making them anymore (except maybe Samsung) so they're getting harder to find. I've been using an Asus Mixed Reality headset for about 18 month, but I wouldn't recommend them because of low build quality. (Asus has crap displays.) Samsung Odyssey+ might be your better bet.

Check the "for sale" category on this forum. There's some people (including myself) selling HOTAS that you might be able to snag for well under $200.

The information about the real world missiles that doesn't actually disprove what they're saying One person showed video of a Harpoon hitting an undefending Kirov class and doing 1% damage. By the chart it should have done around 20%. Though, I've read some studies about the effectiveness of anti-shipping cruise missiles and there's all kind of information about attrition-based damage models (cannons), but very little about pulse-damage (torpedoes and missiles). The studies I read can be summarized best as: Yep, one missile can take a destroyer out of action, but larger warships are a complete unknown. They're remarkably effective against undefending and defensible (but not defending) targets, but once a ship attempts to defend - even with just chaff and ECM - their effectiveness drops off rapidly. The best information against large ships is during the Tanker War of the 1980s and generally the large, civilian crude carriers could take a hit or two and survive. I seem to recall only a small handful of tankers (low single-digits) actually sank. Large warships are hypothesized at one Exocet-class missile (or 1,000lbs bomb equivalent) hit per 300 feet of length to have a mission kill. And the number of hits for a mission kill were substantially lower than sinking.

My experience with Track IR is it's something you have to do in their software, not the client program. DCS World does have a command for centering head-mounted displays, but it's more oriented toward VR than TrackIR.

Go back about 15 years to single-core Pentium 4 processors with HT and there was a good argument to be had about its benefits. These days with 8+ cores and years of software improvements it's generally accepted that SMT is a positive influence with about a 25% speed boost for most tasks. Though, a lot of the recent CPU level security problems that have cropped up have been related to SMT, which has lead Intel to disabling it on some of their newer chips. Meanwhile, those problems aren't nearly as pronounced on AMD processors, which still benefit from from SMT without issue.

Let me add: I'm asking about $150 for the entire X-55 setup and half that each. For CH Products it's $120 for the full setup and half that each. (Again, I'd rather sell the sets.) Also, I can only ship to the USA (and probably only the lower 48 at that). The prices to even cross the border to Canada or Mexico are too high. To the Old World or South America are right out.

That's not a DCS question, that's a Windows question and the answer is "yes." DCS probably doesn't even know whether SMT (symmetric multi-threading, of which Hyperthreading is Intel's branded name for) is enabled, but Windows does and it assigns the resources that DCS uses. Generally speaking, SMT improves performance though under super specific circumstances - that typical consumers never run into - it can be a problem. If you're asking about the newer Intel chips that don't have SMT because of market segmentation and security problems, just buy AMD Ryzen.

I'd suggest looking into AMD Ryzen parts. They're consistently benchmarking faster than Intel in nearly every measure for about 2/3 the price. You might be only talking saving US$200, but that's still money you can apply to something else. Hell, AMD is shipping a laptop CPU that runs faster than a high-end Intel enthusiast desktop CPU. Meanwhile, Intel is bragging about a laptop part that pulls around 140 watts at peak draw which is a joke. Essentially, Intel dropped the ball on transitioning to a newer node about 3 years ago and have been iterating on the same architecture and node for 5 years now. AMD is using superior transistor technology from TSMC on an efficient architecture and the only answer Intel has is in the marketing department, not engineering. Not to mention, AMD is benchmarking faster at lower TDPs, which means lower costs in the long term running and lower requirements to cool it. (Your air conditioning bill will thank you.) For AMD 65 watts TDP means 65 watts balls to the wall maximum, while 65 watts for Intel means at the lowest power state, while maximum performance might mean 2-3 times more power even at otherwise stock settings. The heatsink/fan AMD processors ship with are more than enough to cool them even at maximum performance, while with Intel you need a third-party cooling solution for similar capability. I'll just add, I go with what works. I'm formally educated in a field that teaches you to avoid fanboyism in favor of looking at real-world performance and judging that way. If Intel was comparative I'd be all over them, but they dropped the ball and AMD is eating their lunch.

Change your link to BB Code, not HTML.

I use a program called Link Shell Extension for similar things. It's a simple right-click based system. I use it to put my Sims 4 save folder on One Drive to synch between my computers so I can play the same families no matter where I am. (Which these days is sitting at home.)

Run a repair.

The tech news site Ars Technica mentioned DCS World in an article about what people are doing during the lockdowns. The author of the section describes flying the F-14 in VR as " injecting an entire lifetime's worth of '80s wish fulfillment directly into my veins." The article also links to the "Free For All" video. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020/04/the-games-getting-us-through-covid-19-blocks-animals-whatever-death-stranding-is/

Map it to the two-wat switch on the back of the throttle.

As it stands in April 2020 there's no such thing as a single-card solution that can play high-end games, at maximum settings, in 4K at 60fps. Technology just isn't to that point yet.

The F-5's my favorite plane to just fire up and tool around the map in. The startup procedure is quick and straight forward, she's a fast and easy plane to fly and works well as a stand-in for the T-38 Talon if you're wanting to learn basic handling in a fast jet. When it comes to fighting in I'd definitely have more fun with a Hornet or a Viper, but just sight see around Las Vegas and learn some basic flying skills she's pretty fun.

To add to what Deano87 mentions, it's not that the 5mm of gimble is the full range, it's how much pressure you exert. If you put, say, 1 foot-pound of pressure on the unmoving stick it registers differently than placing 5 ft-lbs. I think the basic idea was to improve pilot control under heavy G-forces (which is the reason for the laid back seat as well). There's also the simple fact General Dynamics simply liked showing how ultra-modern the F-16s design was by including oddball details that would be impossible or impractical on older aircraft.

But, what I need to know, is whether there's going to be a way to play shirtless beach volleyball in multiplayer. It's important to immersion.

I think I'm looking forward to the ground crew. Rewatching Top Gun some of the fun of the intro scene is watching the ground crew go through their insanely dangerous ballet. Also, watching them dance after a Tomcat takes off. Also, does anyone remember F-14 Tomcat for the Atari VCS? At the beginning of a mission the stick-figure ground crew would turn their finger for you to increase the throttle. That was fun times. (Weirdly, my memory of playing it comes from when I was in a mental hospital in October 1990 during the early morning while preparing for a sleep-study my doctor had ordered.)

Yeah, 3GB of VRAM is extremely anemic these days. I have a 1070 with 8GB and frequently run into problems with too little VRAM, though not from gaming.

For the first question, there's probably a volume knob on the left console that can adjust that. /Ninja'd For the second, yes. The stick on the F-16 barely moves.

VR is, quite literally, a game changer. It's a totally different experience to flying on a standard screen even if you have something like TrackIR. Once you get used to the fact you can't see the outside world for those times that you might need to, it becomes a much more natural way to fly. My only complaint is how my VR headset is a lot blurrier than a standard screen which makes reading some of the MFDs more difficult.