Cab

But of course this isn't about realism. It's about mitigating already existing unrealism.

Really? Pilots don't ever start getting tunnel vision at about 9 to 10g? Pilots have never GLOC'd snapping to 11g? They would start blacking out at 8.5g and GLOC at 9.5g

I agree with this. I recommend a two-tiered over-g model. First, the player starts experiencing gradual gray out starting at 1g over limit, culminating in GLOC at 2g over limit. This would allow the player to use the resulting tunnel vision as a sort of g meter, helping them stay within the limits. The second tier of the over-g model would be instant GLOC for an extreme, instantaneous spike. For example, a Tomcat or Eagle pilot yanking the stick back to 11 or more g's. To discourage this behavior, the resulting GLOC could even be permanent for that sortie, meaning they would stay blacked out and crash. It could be called, "Tournament Mode" Just a thought.

This Also, nice fighting you yesterday, darkman222

Maybe people are putting too much credence in the comments of real pilots who have flown or flown against both jets, and almost universally agree the Hornet is great at slow speeds, but the F-16 is otherwise one of the toughest opponents. Anecdotal, certainly. But maybe in this case the consensus of opinion is pointing to the truth.

There is plenty of information posted already, and still people cannot agree. So, I prefer to not waste my time. But I'd offer the F-18's complete BFM dominance in DCS is the biggest indicator there is a divergence from reality. No one speaks about it that way in real life. Not even the Hornet pilots themselves. And its dominance comes from using the paddle. I have a lot of time dogfighting in the DCS Hornet, and the difference between paddle and no-paddle is night and day.

This is the one thing I agree with you on. Personally, I have no idea if the F-16 is underperforming, but I have no doubt that the F-18 with the paddle is severely overperforming. This assumes, of course, that we are comparing them to their real-life counterparts.

What? Seriously, it's probably me, but I have no idea what your point is. Also, your assessment of the paddle is just plain incorrect. The dominance of the Hornet in BFM is directly attributable to using the paddle.

It just seems like a strange omission.

I'm thinking the OP's point is that the island of Bahrain is not shown. The attached picture shows where is should be with the red circle.

Yes and no. More accurately, it MIGHT break the plane or it might not. Either way the jet is assumed to be broken until an inspection proves otherwise. Also, yes, use of the paddle is allowed IRL if considered by the pilot to be necessary to save the plane. That's exactly why it's there. However, in DCS that is not what's happening. People are not using it to save the plane. They use it routinely under all conditions as if the jet were designed to fly that way.

Try the Esc key. That works for me

Yep, it's good to have options

Here you go. F-5 wing demo.trk

I went to them with a problem a while ago and they fixed it right quick.

At this point it might be better to submit a ticket to the support staff on the DCS World website

Fair enough

Nope, sorry. I must be a cheap date and easily satisfied because I still love flying the Mig-19.

PointCTRL solves this problem (for me, anyway). VR would be a lot less enjoyable without it.

There can be no true competitive play in DCS in its current state. There are way too many exploits available to players to make it work, not to mention the out-right cheats the really clever ones come up with.

I remember they said Vulkan would come after multithreading. This is lifted directly from the Jan 6 newsletter: "Implementation of the Vulkan API continues in parallel with the multithreading effort. Our Vulkan renderer is integrated with the new render graph, and it benefits from multithreading by using render graph mechanics of background loading of textures and geometry, rendering objects in parallel, terrain streaming, etc. As a result, many rendering tasks submitted to the graphics card will no longer need to wait for each other and hence be processed simultaneously. In our endeavor to unify DirectX and Vulkan renderers, we have developed a mod state where both backends produce identical results. We now have two fully compatible implementations that run under the same API. This means that all our applied graphics modules (the code that renders our skies, clouds, models, effects, etc.) will work the same way on both renderers. To achieve this, we ensured that all our shaders could be converted into Vulkan format in addition to implementing a shader converter available from within DCS permitting to compile any shader on the fly. It is interesting to note that the shader conversion has taken an inordinately large amount of time. The main achievement in 2022 is that DCS now works under Vulkan producing the same visuals as under DirectX. This result is fully ‘transparent’ for our graphics programmers, allowing them to write the same code for both platforms without the need to have separate code paths for Vulkan and DirectX11 and beyond. The next step is to provide our graphics programmers with the new Vulkan features compared to DirectX 11. These include new types of shaders (as per Shader Model 6 and further), ray tracing, some advanced rendering techniques, such as GPU driven rendering, and similar."

Enigma Cold War server is waiting!

I believe this is correct. If I remember correctly the original requirement resulting in the A-10 was destroying Soviet tanks invading Western Europe, not CAS.

No, you aren't the only one.