fjacobsen

Seems no. 2 is correct as it is. Castle switch selects SOI for the Pilot and the Coolie for the WSO.

There are some possible bugs to the key / button assignments between the Pilot and WSO controls. 1. As the WSO The TDC works inverse for UP / DOWN with the LANTIRN, but works fine for the Radar cursor. 2. Using the Castle switch to select MPD SOI as the Pilot works fine, but as the WSO (having assigned my controls exactly like the Pilot), the assignments for selecting the MFD SOI seems to be the Coolie hat. 3. With a 4 way switch as the TDS, controlling the LANTIRN is hard, since movements are very course. Zooming the LANTIRN in helps, but is still a tad to course.

No - there are no indications - only the 2x2 lights on the Autopilot panel

For me the Sinai map is way better FPS wise than the Normandy 2 map. Draw distance is far better on the Sinai map. In most Aircraft / Helicopters i have >45 Fps (normally I have it locked at 45) with the Quest 2.

Autohover does work. Ensure that any movement fwd/aft - left/right is zeroed out (use the NADIR). Also ensure thst V/S is zero. Activate AP and Hdg hold then Avtivate Autohover. The Gazelle should now remain stable in a hover. But it can be twitchy - any control input might get it into instability. Note that there are two rows of CVS and ALV lights that can be toggled - what each mode is doing I don't know. A more thorough description of thr current AP would be nice.

I had a flight over Cairo in both the AH-64D and the F-16 yesterday (Offline mode since servers where down). I´m really surprised to see such great performance with the high detail and density of objects. Compared to the newly released Normandy 2.0 map, performance is better, view distance much higher and, objects density seems also higher (especially over Cairo) and lot's of details. On the Normandy 2.0 Map objects seems to pop in from a much closer distance and textures only get's detailed at much closer distance too. On the Sinai map, even flying at high altitudes, objects and details down on the ground is very high. Is the Sinai map made with a different technic than Normandy 2.0 ?

Hmmm - seems not: "Access to this product is allowed only for beta testers at the moment"

Flying in multi threading mode, I have experienced alot of uncommanded rolls, sometimes making me roll 360° I thought this was due to some FM work in progress. Shifting to Non MT and now I don´t have this. Even manhandling the AH-64D quite alot, is possible without loosing control at all.

Just like mentioned in the "Normandy 2.0 and multithreading performance issue" thread, I want to point out that I find there are too many Trains running around on the map. On many railroad lines, there are Trains running in rows with only a few kilometers between them. Seems excessive to me.

Maybe due to the extreme amount of trains driving. I have set civil traffic to low, but I find there are too many trains. I´m not able to take a screenshot right now, but on many railroad lines they are driving in rows with only a few kilometers between them.

The Normandy 1944 map runs smooth for me in VR (see my specs in the signature). The Channel map though, despite it´s much smaller size, has never run smooth. As far as I have heard, this is due to the Channel map using splat textures. I also have the Syria map from Ugra Media, which also runs quite smooth in VR. So I´m confident that the new Normandie 2.0 map will run smooth too, especially with MT (at least once the most prominent bugs has been fixed f.ex. some lighting issues). Something I would like to have answered is - When we have the Normandie 2.0 map, is there any need for still having Normandie 1944 and the Channel map installed ? As far as I can see, will the Nomandie 2.0 map cover both areas.

I do press CZ after having set the first Mark point (26) and set it as Steerpoint by pressing M-SEL. After that I set the other Mark points (27-29). After having set Mark points with the TGP it shouldn´t be necessary to CZ the TGP for them to b accurate, since the Coordinates has already been set to each Mark point. Maybe it´s map dependent, since it seems to work on the NTTR map for You, while it doesn´t on the Caucasus map, where they fall short.

Here are two tracks. Both are with airstart inorder to rule out any misalignment. This one is when going straight towards the target: F-16_TGP_Mark_1.trk Here is the outcome: Here is one with an appr. offset of the target 20° to the left during setting the Mark points: F-16_TGP_Mark_2.trk And the outcome:

+1 Jup... Just wanted to re-assign the issue, since the quoted post had been locked.

With Open beta update 2.8.4.38947 (released 13. April. 2023) the setting of Markpints with the TGP and subsequent attack with JDAMS (GBU-38) are still bugged. Setting Mark points with the TGP and then afterwards cycle the set Mark points, put´s the TGP way off the Mark point targets - appr. 10-20 meters. Also dropping GBU-38's misses the targets by a large margin, mostly serveral meters. This is by following the exact same procedures as shown in this video (and other videos showing the exact same procedure: I do put the TGP on the base of the vehicles. The outcome is the same regardless whether I use laser ranging or not.

Wow - thank You ! I got the same problem. Have not tested it yet though.

With the new MT update I get the following in VR with Meta Quest 2 using OpenXR and OpenXR Toolkit: AH-64D Apache on Syria Map: Before MT: ~41-46 FPS After MT: ~52-56 FPS F-14B on Super Carrier Caucasus of the coast of Batumi: Before MT: ~40-45 FPS After MT: ~52-56 FPS F-16 On Caucasus Map: Before MT: ~44-48 FPS After MT: ~57-60 FPS

I guess it´s only for the range finder.

There is an option on the weapons page to set whether the laser ranging should use the first or last reflection i.e the closest or the farthes object reflection. Maybe this also helps for designation.

I thought the same until I saw the animation of the front lid.

These features are already there. You can go to the navigator seat and use the equipment operated by him, e.ex the DF radio. See this video:

Any chance that You will share those with us ?

This only occurs on the Player Mirage F1 - AI F1's has "normal" Heatblur.

I have this issue even if I make a new mission, only consisting of the Super Carrier and my F/A-18. Carrirer have 1 waypoint with a speed set to 25 kts. My F/A-18 is 40 nm behind the Carrier at 6000 ft, 350 kts with 1 waypoint set to land on the carrier.

@timtierney I did not notice, but it seems very possible, since the behaviour is exactly like You describe. I got it to work once I lowered my weight below 33.000 Lbs, but only made single attempt.