Harlikwin

Yeah what GPU? Cuz I went from a 9700k at 5ghz, to a 12900k at 5.4 and my overall CPU frametimes went down significantly and my framerate went up pretty well. Previously my 3090 was only being utilized like 60-70% and now its a full 100%.

Its the same set of problems. I'm mostly hoping that Vulkan can let ED offload a bunch of that CPU intestive stuff onto other cores in some fashion which should enable these larger maps/scenarios. I mean even syria these days is pretty unpopulated if you need halfway decent performance.

Some folks have to flight sim on the road...

yeah just hack the lua, you can taka look at the JF17 lua find the SD part, and you can add it to the J11.

@Aerges So, out of curiosity. 1. How is the Cyrano modeled in "look down" per documents it wasn't particularly good as it was an MTI type radar system 2. IFF, does the Mirage F1 have the ability to IFF targets and how does this work? It doesn't seem to be integrated into the radar 3. 530 Missiles, these were famously bad, how "bad" will your implementation be, i.e. do they work in "shoot down" modes at low altitude? How about the IR version with limited all aspect capability (i.e. only really supersonic targets like the red-top).

If they did, they likely got giraffed, and the iranians claimed it as bird strike.

They have been teasing radar pics on their discord for some weeks, so I assume FM is being worked on too, basic system IIRC they said are done. So its down to complex stuff now.

Maybe. But I also want Pave Light... Something actually fun to do in the backseat.

I think we will be in good shape if we actually get half of that this year. But I think you are being wildly optimistic. I for one would expect to see "some" flir improvements (early access/WIP for sure) Mirage F1 (remember it was supposed to be out Q2 last year) MB339 Apache (remember it was supposed to be out Q4 last year) Probably see F15E South Atlantic Maybe see Dynamic weather (hey what about clouds blocking IR and AI vision, where on the roadmap is that a year later?) F4 depending on how far along it already is maybe put this in the probably category, I mean HB is rather famous for looong timelines F4U, maybe, I've been expecting for 2 years so hey maybe this is the year, and really it needs a map and assets to go with it. A7 (they look like they are making progress but who knows if anything is actually up to DCS standards) BS3 At a guess won't see Kiowa Bo-105 Mig23

Cool, I mean alot of that stuff is pretty well documented, and while some of it was like reliability/poor maintence, and some of it was "user error" there was still alot of it that was just the weapon not being that good in the first place.

Yeah it seems that they are "Trickling" it in with various updates. Frankly the whole vehicle stuff is a bit gimicky IMO as you won't see that level of detail from any real distance and what will matter most is how they model actual background IR images, and how they tie that to things like time of day and environmental conditions, cuz those are the big ticket things that actually matter. But I get that its hard to show that, so we get some nice hey look the gun barrel or engine is hot images.

Yeah with the FLIR update, people will be sad if ED does a more realistic job. ED's original FLIR/IR model was "very optimistic".

So yeah, thats probably pretty realistic especially for a D mav. IRL IR sensors have a bunch of problems like this. I.E. not super clear, issues with finding proper focus. Honestly you are lucky there isn't more thermal clutter in that image tbh. IR sensors are not magical predator vision. ESPECIALLY early mech scan stuff like the Mav-D seeker. IDK how much of the IR rework is in game, but you might try it with more IR favorable conidtions, i.e. night and cool weather.

Well, seeing the recent phoenix fiasco, thats not really an accurate statement.

What about pave knife... We need pave knife.

All good points, thank you, and yeah didn't think of the clearance issue. I fly with a desk+mounts, so that might be challenging.

So out to curiosity, how are you guys gonna address stuff like the early sparrow "reliability" issues that are well documented. Is that gonna make it into DCS in some form or fashion?

I am tempted. But so far point control is 100%... Where is a good place to get leap kit?

Can someone give me a quick rundown of this in DCS. is it like usable in all modules, does it work reliably/decently, do you see your hands in the pit? I'm currently using point control, but always on the lookout for something better.

I finally got my rig up and running and in VR it seemed like I was getting a signficant frame rate reduction for CPU frames. Like on a clean mission from like 8ms to 5ms. And framerate wise I was getting like 60-75 on the old rig (9700k), and with the 12900k its often high 80's-90 frame wise on simple missions.

Very glad we were right about it being heatblur. Guess the win-win-win-win was a bit obvious.

The Dev has mentioned it will have the Kh-23, as to how useful it will be... Up for debate. As for period AAM's it was an interesting placeholder time wise, the MLA came out in 78 IIRC, so right at that moment it would have been pretty good against the rear aspect winders everyone was still using, but by the early 80's when you actually had 9L's ariving at units it would have had to fight 9L armed fighters and that is a far superior missile to the R60m. Then again, by then the MLD was out and had R73's. So back and forth. Plus even in the early 80's the bulk of nato partners still were using older sidewinders.

Honestly alot of this is not hard to implement. And in fact for example the Mirage 2000 radar has alot of these features already implemented as does the JF17, the issue is higeldy pigeldy level of "fidelity" within DCS itself. And ED's unwillingness to do the heavy lifts for things like AA radar, or to force some level of standardization of modeling amongst themselves or 3rd parties, which then leads to community frustration esp within the MP community.

wasn't replying to you. Unless HPRF or MPRF was somehow rude.