Willie Nelson
-
Posts
549 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Willie Nelson
-
-
I was previously thinking that the LOS reticle was meant to be representative of a Flight path vector in its relationship with the horizon line but it is not. It is a pitch indication with reference to the horizon line. I get it now. Thanks again.
-
1 hour ago, bradmick said:
A set pitch attitude with a level vsi will result in a set speed. 90 knots is approximately “wings level”, I.e. the horizon line is level with the horizontal lines of the LOS reticle. 40 knots is about 1/4 of the way up the bottom vertical line of the LOS reticle. This equates to approximately 5 degrees nose up. This attitude is important because it is also the attitude of the helicopter sitting on the ground and while it’s at a hover. 70 knots is about 3/4 of the way up the bottom vertical line of the LOS reticle.
I can be looking 90 degrees up, left or right, or even have my head rotated and still be able to Any of these attitudes because the horizon line reference is the LOS reticle. This allows me to look anywhere and everywhere and still maintain a constant pitch attitude, this is really important at night, when having to constantly look ahead or up/down to find the horizon line would be insanely disorientating.
Long story short, set the pitch attitude and adjust the collective for a level VSI. Pitch is super important for a helicopter because the pitch determines how much thrust is translated to horizontal acceleration.
Thanks that makes it much clearer. Of course I’m forgetting how much pitch varies for level flight in a helo.
-
5 hours ago, Raptor9 said:
The horizon line isn't a 1:1 scale ratio in pitch. When in Cruise mode, the horizon line/pitch ladder is a 2:1 scale ratio in pitch, and when in Transition mode the horizon line is a 4:1 scale ratio in pitch.
Thanks for getting back to me. Yes, I read that but the horizon line is still the horizon line and while I’m looking through it at something on the ground for example, how can determine whether or not I’m climbing or descending without reference to the VSI, in other words, is there a flight path vector equivalent that relates to this horizon line? If not, I’m not sure what it is useful for……
-
I am still completely confused, not by the reason they have a fixed horizon line. I get that you need to be able to know whether or not you’re diving to the ground or climbing too fast while you’re looking around for targets.
I’m confused because the so called horizon line isn’t on the horizon. If you place your flight path vector on the clearly visual horizon as perceived by the your eyeballs and thus achieve zero feet per minute rate of climb then the flight path vector isn’t sitting on the horizon line……
What am I missing?
I am thinking/ guessing it’s got something to do with the “waterline bias set” on page 104 perhaps? I know that in my fixed wing assessment of whether we are going to pass over the top of a static cumulonimbus while we are in unaccelerated flight, we can use a transparent water bottle to see if the steady waterline is above or below the cloud tops.
-
On 7/5/2022 at 11:47 PM, BIGNEWY said:
Hi all, thanks for the comments.
While some initial BFM AI changes were released earlier, much more extensive ones are currently in development that we hope to release later this summer.
thank you
I’m really happy to hear that, hopefully this will include the new and improved general flight model so that we can practice formation with AI aircraft as Wags discussed sometime back.
-
1
-
-
@bradmick any updates on the Feb 2022 posts?
I can vouch for the Joytokey app. To but a registered version is only US$7.99 as of July 2022.
-
I’m looking for a wide FOV G3 too, that would absolutely be the way to go in my view and I’m not alone:
I believe the FOV on the Pima is excellent but I think many other aspects are a compromise from what I understand.
-
1
-
-
Thanks @fagulha
-
1
-
-
I guess I’m a bit surprised that an update comes out with a bunch of new features that they’re trying to show off and I have to go and build a mission for each one to use them.
Seems a little odd.
-
1
-
-
I can't see the frequencies in any of the Hornet Supercarrier Case III mission's. Just the blue tittle. Is anyone else having this problem?
-
I just attempted the Case III Supercarrier Hornet landing mission and went to bring up the Shift-K kneepad and there was no frequency for the SC.
I also have another couple of general questions:
1) I notice WAGS sets 250 feet for the Case III, is this for a 250 decision altitude?
2) Are these data link comms sent manually by the controller or are they sent automatically upon a XPNDR update?
3) Is there a night cold start mission available so we don't have to learn the intricacies of the mission editor to see the new roof features?
4) Will there be any personnel on the carrier to provide parking marshalling in time?
5) Also, I cannot see the option to switch shadows for the Supercarrier.
Sorry for the noob quesitons.
-
Welcome to the club, sounds like you'll never be going back either.
-
1
-
-
36 minutes ago, DeltaMike said:
Optimum? For what?
I think you have answered your own question and mine too:
38 minutes ago, DeltaMike said:Of course I'd like to have it all. 60ppd and wider FOV. But how do you brute-force that problem?
The optimum PPD and FOV compromise for CPU and GPU power that is available this year without making the new standard a multi GPU requirement.
Varjo has incorporated some novel ways to improve PPD in part and with greater performance than the Reverb but I am think better value would be the same PPD in the sweet spot as a Reverb and yet a wider FOV than both of them. I think it will be available one day but I am 48 years of age and I'd be hoping to see something that doesn't look like either a Rift CV1 or a scuba mask before I am dead.
-
-
We hope? We’re sure? We suspect? None of us really know.
I understand they don’t want to commit to an indeterminate timeline, sure but the $64,000 question is the general process of integrating old and new that I think is key here.
-
8 hours ago, SkateZilla said:
to Answer the question directly Regarding "Vulcan",
- In the Prime Timeline Vulcan still exists and was re-named Na'Var in 3129 where Vulcan left the Federation of Planets and Remerged with the Romulans after the Dilithium Burn Event.
- In the Kelvin Timeline, Vulcan is the location of the 3rd of the 4 Black Holes remaining caused by the Narada
As for Vulkan, Developed by Khronos (which is also a re-spelling of Qo'Nos, the Klingon Homeword),( Ironic isn't it?)
Vulkan Integration is a large task, and it's being done side by side with the Multi-core recoding,
Both Tasks as stated by ED have their own teams,
Building a Graphics engine from scratch is a huge undertaking, even after the base / core of the engine is done, everything assets wise must be converted or rebuilt for the new engine as well.
You can't really give weekly/monthly/quarterly updates as it's all coding until they are ready to publish screenshots and performance numbers, which requires nearly 100% completion of the task at hand.
Hope this helps.That was a question I had and it seems that you may have answered it perhaps. Every asset/module needs to be converted or rebuilt.
Seems like the timeline is indefinite almost by definition because we’re still seeing new modules and current module updates at fairly regular intervals. That’s the aspect that a lot of us are interested. How are Vulkan/Multicore remodelling in very general terms being done side by side existing upgrades. It almost seems counterproductive to be doing both at the same time but I appreciate that given I know nothing whatsoever about ED’s strategy and even less about coding I’m probably wrong.
-
1
-
-
Outstanding is all that is worth saying, well done ED, well done!
-
2
-
-
Perhaps someone (maybe @TheSniperFan or @Lurker ) who knows something about the coding DCS is likely to be moving to versus what we’re currently on as they progress multi core could answer the following question for me:
Will the continued rollout of new mods and various other changes to DCS be likely to impede the transfer to multicore and or Vulcan?
I don’t ask by way to criticise, there’s always so many things that need to be done especially if you wish to keep the income stream rolling in but I am, like so many, speculating about what sort of delay we may be waiting on. I’m really happy with the direction or DCS and just keen to see what’s next.
-
3 hours ago, Gunnars Driver said:
I had the Reverb G1, and decided that I needed the Pimax 8KX when it was revealed. Waited long time.
When I got the 8KX I found that the resolution, (pixels per degree) was much lower than I could guess on the 8KX. I could not longer see the displays and visual combat in DCS got very hard.
In my friends game setup Hueys vs Hueys I started loosing every time due to not being able to see the enemy.In racing games, Asetto Corsa for example, the low resulotion isnt a problem and the wide FOV give a lot of extra speed feeling, which is nice.
But DCS with 8KX is not good enough for me, saidly enough. ( I have a RTX3090, i9 9900KS@5.2Ghz and even with high settings to maximize the picture quality it is not good enough and the framerate suffers.I would have liked a much higher resulotion in the KX, to be on pair with the Reverb. This is not possible with the CPU/GPU calculation power of today, I think. So my conclusion is that even if I would like better FOV, I need to sacrify FOV at this moment.
Ive just used my Aero briefly due to work away, but the resulotion is VERY good. The FOV is smaller than G1/G2, and the man issue is that the FOV looking down is much smaller than other headsets. Its disturbing to not being able to see downwards (lowwr psrt of instrument panel etc) as with most other headsets. I need to tilt the head down where with other headsets I would se it without tilting the head.
Probably I will lger used to this quite fast but I think thatis the main issue/disturbance during the first hours for me.The sharpness of the Aeros isnt compatible today with the FOV of the 8KX so one needs to decide what to sacrifice.
Yes, I hear what you’re saying. The 8KX pixel density combined with the enormous horizontal FOV is simply too ambitious for the PC power currently available. That’s the rub and that’s why I am wondering if the aspheric lens technology that the Varjo Aero uses could be implemented elsewhere.
For example in the case of my Reverb, I have 2160 x2160 per eye x 2 x 1. 4 that’s more than 13 million pixels to push. If that 1.4 factor that is there for the purposes of lens distortion compensation (not needed with the Varjo Aero) could be used instead to increase the horizontal FOV, then you would necessarily have 40% wider FOV for exactly the same clarity (still just over 13 million pixels to push) and PC power requirements would remain exactly as they are.
Make no mistake, my current specs do struggle sometimes on the Supercarrier and in Multiplayer yet for the mist part, I get pretty decent performance and hopefully with multi core arriving in two weeks it should all be blue skies and tailwinds
-
Thanks for that guys.
-
Can someone clarify what benefit there is to RWS? I have been wondering if the only use is simply for AIM7 missiles? For everything else it would appear that TWS is the way to go...
-
7 hours ago, Mr_sukebe said:
Look at the specs for the proposed flagship Pimax. Huge field of view, very hires and eye tracking to facilitate foveated rendering.
if only I had any confidence in them really delivering a quality product that not only lived upto the specs, but was also reliable and easy to configure, then it would be spot on.
100%, nevertheless you have to admire their scrappy determination to become leaders in the field even if they haven't yet delivered a high standard implementation yet. I was blown away by HP for just quietly appearing, at least from my limited perspective, out of nowehere with their amazing bang for buck Reverb but I don't see any FOV improvements from them in the pipeline as yet.
5 hours ago, dburne said:I have found the Aero to be a pretty sweet headset for me. Have over 200 hours in it now and absolutely loving it.
It looks great but again, it's the horizontal FOV that I'm persoanlly most interested in tbh particularly for DCS. The sensation of speed and the improved situational awareness can't be underestimated. I just can't justify that price for a similar FOV to my Reverb, neverthless, I am really impressed with what they appear to have done in terms of reducing the SS requirements of their competitors with their aspheric lenses. It is possible that this type of tech could be quite a gamechanger going forward as can be seen by the higher resolution and yet greater performance of the Aero compared to the likes of the Reverb. I am wondering if that tech can be pushed further laterally than they have at this stage, it does seem like aspheric lenses may have this as a limitation but I will continue to watch this space. Glad you're enjoying it so far.
-
On 2/24/2022 at 4:31 AM, Nodak said:
Than you'd be wrong.
I think the Dutch may be using AR also with a full scale Viper cockpit but I could be wrong. Didn’t look like DCS but it was definitely integrated Full scale AR.
-
I had almost exactly the same specs as you , albeit a 2080ti up until recently and I had Steam Supersampling turned down to around 100% from 150 which to be completely honest on a Reverb G1 which is among the highest specs available out there was perfectly fine. To demonstrate that point, if you have the Hornet module for example, you can read the milibar settings easily enough on the standby altimeter down above your right knee.
I now have a 3080ti a 12900KF and yes I have turned the SS back up to full (I forget whetehr its 140 or 150% by default) It does look a little crisper but it's a pretty marginal benefit if I am completely honest, I don't thin you would have aby real troubles. I would suggest you pick up one of the many second hand Reverbs on the market and dip your toe. The biggest trouble is not likely your specs but rather the learning curve and your ability to be patient and not assume that because it doesn't all work percectly well as soon as you switch it on then it must be terrible.
VR is the best. Good luck.
PIMAX Monster 12k, Eyes tracking, INSIDE OUT and Much more !!
in Virtual Reality
Posted
I’m really interested the Pimax Crystal specs but I’m unsure as to how well DCS (in its current form) will be able to run. I’m also interested to know whether my 3080ti along with the XR2 processor will be an advantage or whether in fact I no longer need a 3080ti…..
Any ideas?