Shrimp

Then a subsection called FFB.

... and Brunner.

The ending of the Open Beta branch was one of the best decisions ED has made recently. Brave move!!! Hope 2025 is the year of Vulkan and GFM, along with hundreds (thousands) of bug fixing, optimizations and module updates (… most modules coming out of Early Access). Also, in the DCS doctrine department, staying away from Frankenstein modules! Just keep the right track. Cheers!!! Oh, what’s that Lightning doing over there?!! …or Mitchell, whatever…

Well, by integrating weapons the A version actually operated. If you so say it is a fictional feature why even think about it?! I am all for new features but only those that exist (or existed) in the real world. That's the scope of DCS. Even if not taken as an absolute, it should be a master guideline. Cheers!!! Cool, I am willing to pay an additional $9.99 for the inclusion of the C variant that can operate those missiles.

Why? "Although this is a fictional feature for the A version, it could be an interesting addition to expand the module's operational capabilities." Why Not? AMRAAM and ASRAAM? Also Why Not? Tie Fighter Lasers?

The answer is in the very first comment. The OPs CPU is 18C/36T.

The OP would like to know if this is still valid: ” Should I enable HT / SMT in my motherboard BIOS? Currently, users with more than 32 threads should disable HT/SMT, but for everyone else we recommend enabling HT/SMT. ”

The real F-16 stick has the following characteristics: Fixed force Trim does not move stick Rotated slightly cw 1/4 inch (0.635 cm) both axis Up = 25 lb Down = 16 lb Roll = 17 lb The RealSimulator FSSB-R3 Lighting: Sensibility control for Pitch in 4 levels 4, 6, 9 and 13 pounds. Sensibility control for Roll in 4 levels. 2.5, 4.5, 6.5 and 13 pounds. Full scale control with 4 levels, 1:1, 3:4, 1:2 & 1:4. Because virtual pilots are not fully physically engaged in flying the virtual aircraft as opposed to real pilots who must endure physical forces as g´s, vibration etc... and more easily apply extreme forces on the flight controls it is, in my view, a balanced compromise for immersion that the virtual flight controls are 2/3 of the total force of the real counterpart. In this view the R3 is on the light side for my taste, needing to have a 17 lb rate on the Pitch axis. It moves very similarly to the real F-16 stick. Please understand that this is my concept on this subject. The RealSimulator FSSB-R3 Lighting is a good device.

Yes, FBW, thanks. Already edited. I have the Brunner CLS-P and the F-16 profile is very realistic. There´s only one small issue that the (CLS-P and E) force near the center has a bit of slack (does not immediately bite) and the travel has to be just a bit bigger than the real F-16 so that it is not too sensitive, leading to overcontrol. Overall the effect is very, very good and in the CLS-P, because the max torque is perfect (50 Nm), the virtual stop is as good as a mechanical stop because it is close to impossible to overcome the torque, even with two hands. A dedicated F-16 base is good for nothing but the F-16. For the sake of versatility, a high torque FFB is the the facto jack of all trades for virtual pilots wanting to fly everything. As a side note I have handled the real F-16 side stick, the RealSimulator FSSB-R3 Lighting and the Brunner CLS-P with a proper F-16 profile (still tweaking it) and the CLS-P has only the above mentioned limitation. The R3 is too soft (low torque) even at max setting of 13 pounds.

Even FBW aircraft benefit from proper FFB implementation. For the stick travel limits (usually nose down travel is smaller than nose up travel) and different forces vs displacement from different FFB aircraft. Examples: F-16 having a very small stick travel; Mirage 2000 having a very steep force increase from 80% to 100% nose up travel. With Brunner CLS2SIM it is possible to do all this. Brunner CLS2Sim DCS Profiles by Shrimp (2024-08-29).zip

With a stronger FFB base (50 Nm Brunner CLS-P) it is possible to make software stops (shorter stick travel). Even an F-16 with very short stick travel is possible. Some (most?) aircraft have a shorter nose down stick travel (push) than pull that can be configured properly with a stronger base. Because of being so strong these software stops are like mechanical stops, for any practical measure. In this view, I think FFBeast may become the best for price/force/quality as it is quite strong (35 Nm) and not prohibitively expensive as the CLS-P. And, if software evolves… CLS-E (now Mk II) is weak and was only good when there was nothing else. Rhino is very good if we don’t want software stops or stronger stick forces, especially with extensions. And has great software. CLS-P is almost perfect hardware wise, but has a ridiculous price tag. In terms of software, Brunner should enhance the DCS plugin to make a proper displaced neutral trim functionality and have the possibility of programming rudder shaker (C-101, F-4) in addition to the stick shaker for the FFB rudder (maybe this last one is possible and I haven’t figured it out yet). The FFB behavior is better in CLS2Sim mode (more progressive, discrete and nuanced) as opposed to DirectInput mode (more zeros and ones, sometimes the effects being way stronger than the natural stick forces - way unrealistic) if not for the trim mess.

In my opinion the zoom function should be replaced by simulated binoculars (correct model for the aircraft timeline) that a real pilot would take onboard. Historically, many aircraft/pilots did carry them for search and ID purposes.

Persistent BRAA not visible in map. Lately the BRAA line never appears in the Tactical View. Is this a bug or is there any new wrongly selected setting that I am missing? Thanks!!!

That setting could be scraped altogether in DCS, for the sake of also easing and simplifying development.

Also, some way of finding updated files. Previously any updated file would appear again at the current date (on top). Now the reference date is always the original and we must dig into the whole file list (usually I search the user) to find if any file has been updated.

Latest Release (Stable): all but one Module, all Maps and about one quarter of all Campaigns. => 567 GB

Official tournaments in Open Beta?!!

… of the AB detent in the Special Options.

What is missing in the F-15E is an independent setting for each throttle axis.

Hi, Try to running 'Configure vJoy' and check mark whatever needed to have the effects active, namely 'Enable vJoy', 'Enable Feedback' with all the checkmarks. I personally have all check marks 'On' and total 32 buttons. After that in DCS you may need to 'Load' the vJoy profile again for every module (must browse to proper folder for each module). Normally no button or axis reassign is needed. All this to operate in CLS2Sim mode. Cheers

Probably this.

Brunner in DirectX mode should work fine in all modules. I haven’t tested it thoroughly to give you a definite answer. I haven’t touched any of those settings yet. Some modules (like the F-16, F/A-18 and Mirage 2000) can be used in CLS2Sim mode with a proper profile because the forces on the stick (in the real aircraft) do not change across all the flight envelope and the trim has no effect on the stick but only in the flight controls logic. If the CLS2SIM profile is done correctly (in these cases) my guess is that it outperforms the DirectX mode, but again I haven’t tested it yet mainly because I don’t have time and also because one needs to plug the devices in different ways (I have both the Brunner FFB stick base and the FFB rudder and they must be connected differently in CLS2SIM mode or DirectX mode) and I kind of ran out of USB ports. With CLS-P (extremely expensive - prohibitively expensive) even the F-16 profile almost perfectly mimics the very little movement amplitude of the real F-16 stick with the proper forces and the Mirage 2000 extra (extra heavy) force required in the last 20% pitch up stick deflection that overrides the normal g limiter. It is near perfect. Also in DirectX mode you may have to switch direction of the FFB effect in the axis settings inside DCS for it to work properly. Some modules have better FFB implementation than others. Hopefully in the future all will be up to standard.

Hardware trim is only (partially) useful when the normal trim does not work (normal CLS2SIM use). The real F/A-18 trim does not move the stick (just like the F-16 and Mirage 2000). So, the Brunner DirectX mode is working as intended. … and BrunnerDX is no longer needed, although it is a very fine piece of software nevertheless.

ED should consider updating the Release (stable) branch with the non-MT executable only, if the MT one is taking too long to reach Release status.

Hi @Chuls I'm having an issue with BrunnerDX v2.7.1 that says a new version is available and halts. Is there a later than v2.7.1 version? May I suggest that on future versions the version number appears on the BrunnerDX window? Edit - the program does not halt. Everything works OK except the warning that it is not the latest version. Thks Cheers