VC

The author has fixed it and ot passes IC. Are you installing it correctly in the Saved Games folder and using the special option HB implemented to pick the custom cockpit? It means exactly what it says, the mod works in MP if you install it correctly. Been using it for ages without issues. As for FPS, in general I have no FPS issues in the F-14 in VR. However I do have occasional issues with random 5min of horrible FPS then back to normal in MP. I expect this is due to some temporary high server load e.g. lots of units moving at once rather than the cockpit not being optimised (after all it mostly works fine). But that does to me indicate that something about the F-14 is leaving me less system overhead to handle these situations, because this never happens in any other aircraft. One more thing, never fly the F-14 after another plane and avoid back to back sorties. DCS seems to store stuff in memory and is really bad at clearing it. I always restart DCS before a Tomcat sortie, because when I don't that's when I'm far more likely to get problems. Also loading the cockpit again after being in F10 map sometimes takes a while and tanks FPS for a bit. Again, this to me does not look like a "cockpit not optimised for VR" issue, more that the module as a whole is just a bit more of a system hog than others, which may be justified given the complexity.

Thanks. I'm quite tall, 188cm with big hands so in that sense I shouldn't have a problem but I looked at pictures of the T-50 side by side with a T16000m (my current) and put my hand roughly where it would be... yeah not ideal. The T-50 though is also a fair bit taller than TMs F-18 grip, if you're getting lifting with that, even ham handed as you say... hmm.

So is it a website mistake when it says "in stock", but only with "MCG Pro (EN)" grip selected?

Is the WarBRD base stable on a desk, not bolted down, with the larger T-50 grip on it? I know the T-50 is too long for true desktop use but I'm tempted by it and thinking of workarounds to use it since it's not practical for me to mount but I could e.g. have it on a coffee table. But the key point is I need to be able to move it.

Ah OK I see now, thanks. Seems it is already available in EU. https://flightsimcontrols.com/product/gladiator-upgrade-kit-lite-for-gladiator-mk-ii/

While talking about a joystick upgrade in another thread, it was recommended to me to get a Gladiator base and swap the KG12 for the SCG bought separately. I've read around though and it seems only the Gladiator Pro can swap grips. But, when looking on the EU seller website I only find this: https://flightsimcontrols.com/product/vkb-sim-gladiator-mk-ii-joystick/ There is no "Pro" anywhere, only Mk.II. Are they the same thing? Is Pro discontinued? Is the Mk.II compatible with the SCG?

I googled that now, looks awesome and a great idea but don't trust myself to do it :music_whistling:plus I actually use those buttons... Thats exactly the kind of thing I wanted to hear, thanks! I've seen some complaining about the "play" in the X56 stick near center, people say it needs a huge deadzone. If you say they are similar, is this true? That looks very nice, thanks for the recommendation. Shame the grip is out of stock in my region :( and they only sell Gladiator Mk.II, not "Pro", and I think only Pro can change grip. Will keep an eye on it! A bit expensive, do those guys ever have sales?

Heh, there's no such thing as "cheap" rudder pedals :lol: it's not just that though, it's impractical in my current desk setup (and other life reasons) to buy pedals and I've used twist for as long as I've had a joystick. I'm very comfortable with it and wouldn't want to re-learn to use the throttle paddles as they aren't realistic either (and they're already in use as my brake lever anyway). Pedals are one of those things on my very long term wish-list! In any case I'm not likely to risk buying an X56 at full price with the amount of negativity floating around it. I can't seem to find any black friday deals on this kind of hardware though... :(

Yeah the throttle is fine but the X56 can't be bought separately. In any case in terms of number of buttons the throttles seem equivalent. The CH doesn't have twist and that's a deal-breaker for me as I don't own rudder pedals and don't plan to buy them anytime soon. But is the X52 comparable to the X56 in terms of sensor accuracy and feel? That might not be a fair comparison from your side. I use a single modifier on all aircraft and it works, but I would like to create more realistic setups where more functions are just there on the stick. I looked at VKB and Virpil before. The Gladiator looks nice but isn't really an upgrade over the T16k. The Gunfighter and all Virpil stuff are way out of my price range :( Any opinions on the sensor accuracy and stick "feel" of the X56?

My current HOTAS is the Thrustmaster T16000M and their TWCS. The stick I've had for 5+ years, throttle more recent. Overall I'm really happy with it but starting to feel the lack of buttons on the stick. Also, the trigger on the stick is starting to go a bit so I may need to buy a replacement anyway, don't know how soon. I was looking at the X56, it looks gorgeous and on first inspection has way more buttons, on the stick at least but I think in total as well. The trouble is, I keep reading the stick spring is not very good, the stick has play, there's no force near max deflection, the sensor is not as accurate. After 5 years of the T16k I really don't want to spend several hundred £s only to find it feels worse and less accurate to fly. Am I right to be worried about this? Is the X56 a straight upgrade over what I have or is it more of a sidegrade?

There are a few things you have to map that are not on HOTAS in the real thing, because they aren't clickable and in fact you can't even see the switches due to where they are. I'm talking about the PAL/VSL-HI/VSL-LO switch and the canopy controls. The flap lever is very annoying to click and drag because it's obscured by the throttles. I don't want to be staring at that console while turning downwind, or worse accidentally shutting off the left engine instead of pulling the flaps down. So I have flaps mapped to an axis. There's also a rocker switch to select which fuel tanks the quantity displays. It's a "hold down" and it's on the opposite side of the cockpit to the gauge, so you can't conveniently click it and look at the readout at the same time. Map that too. Other than that, I tried my best to keep it realistic but I ended up mapping the ACM cover to my HOTAS because that's something you need to flick quickly under pressure while potentially looking over your shoulder. Clicking it requires an unrealistic amount of concentration when IRL it's a massive switch that would undoubtedly be a muscle memory action. And boresight mode switch.

Well, Heatblur went way over the top with their F-14 teasing and pre-release hype but in that case I feel it was justified. Stuff like the MiG-19 and some WWII planes have, on the other hand, snuck in half un-noticed recently. Personally, I had no idea what a JF-17 was until recently but I read its design and history and was immediately very, very interested. Other people may not be so easy to hype up about a Chinese/Pakistani jet they haven't heard of and isn't already cemented in their immagination. Better to undersell and impress disproportionately, especially as a newcomer. The low-key release suits it in that sense. People "in the know" are quitely hyped, it will turn up and then everyone else will be rudely awakened by the sound of Thunder. ;)

The Harrier is not "top of the top" either and it's $70. The only things that are $60 or less are historical and/or fairly limited capability type aircraft. I'm expecting $70-$80 as well.

Well, I didn't want to gush over the "cool" factor but I definitely love the look and feel of the old-school cockpit as well. And everything in it seems so well placed, it's a cockpit that fits like a glove for me. The F-14 is one of the few planes in which I feel genuinely satisfied flying an uneventful sortie, just because of how nice it is to sit in (I use VR as well) and immersive to operate. The other would be the MiG-21.

As an owner of both, to me the Hornet is a great gadget that you spend most of your time playing with the smart weapons it has. It's awesome in that way, I don't regret owning it and I enjoy it, but it's soul-less in terms of how the actual flying feels. The F-14 feels like you're flying the plane by the seat of your pants, the way Heatblur have implemented shake at different AoA is just amazing. If you like WWII planes, the F-14 feels more like one of those turned up to 11 than anything more modern like a Hornet, Eagle or Viper. It's raw power and it needs taming, that's something worth specialising in.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4068582&postcount=15 Those textures look pretty finished, and very clean.

For me flying WWII aircraft in other sims, Flankers first in DCS and then the MiG-21 and Tomcat, it's the other way around. Now learning the Hornet, I find the lack of pitch feedback to speed/power change incredibly un-natural and frustrating especially in landing configuration. :joystick:

I for one am really glad that Deka, at least from the screenshots posted so far, are doing a super factory fresh and clean cockpit. I hope that isn't just WIP and it's going to get all scuffed and dirtied up for release. It's a recently developed plane so I hope the cleanliness is deliberate because of this and stays that way :)

You can't without a human RIO. Unless the server has no integrity check and you use the "pilot TGP" mod.

You can reduce it to a simple rule of thumb that holds at small angles - 1 degree is 1,000ft difference at 10 miles. But you need to be in the RIO seat to see the degrees elevation, the "high-medium-low" orders for Jester are far too coarse to be used for this kind of purpose. An additional question though, for RIOs. I know the TID tells you upper and lower bound of your scan area at the current TID range setting. That's often not very useful though, especially if the lower is 0. Is there any way to see the centre of the scan pattern elevation at a known distance e.g. at the TID cursor or hooked target?

I prefer the early A aesthetically, those white undersides and bright markings are irresistible. For actual flying I'd love to have both eventually to explore the challenges, don't have strong opinions personally on getting the B first. It seems like internally they'll look more or less the same anyway.

I imagine the decision to do the B first has at least something to do with releasing the one with more powerful engines before the one that may be a bit more challenging to fly. Call me cynical, but I assume this would draw more early sales from the types that want max capability, and satisfy the historical enthusiasts with the A later.

FC3 aircraft have a lot of button commonality. There are a couple of things the Su-27 has that the F-15 doesn't, and vice-versa. Overall you can use 90% the same profile and just change the few things that are different. Out of interest, why do you need everything on HOTAS? Flying in VR? The other option is to use a modifier to basically double your HOTAS keys. What do you have?

Technically the F-4E still has the tailhook, which was retained in the Air Force versions and could be used in emergencies (I guess some of the land bases had wires for this?!). I suppose depending on how they model it you might be able to flip a bypass and trap on a carrier, but you won't have ICLS or anything else like that to help you.

Interesting, aiming for fewer buttons to control the crew. How they handle the complexities of designating ground targets is definitely one to wacth (as we also eagerly await Jester to learn LANTIRN, which poses similar problems). Yeah, I agree with you on the capability of the F-4E, will make it versatile enough to be useful and competitive on "no restrictions" MP servers. Plus it's the basis for the exported variants so more widely used in that sense as well. I just have a thing for carrier ops ;) 8). And ever since I had a profile of it as a kid, with the story that made it famous, for me the Phantom will always be this one: