Hawkeye_UK

We need to get past this copy paste response Bignewy - I wouldn't post a message if i had Mod's running or if i'd not already done a repair to test first. Not everything needs a log or track file. The issue is not my PC, or mods, or anything else apart from game resolution (i normally fly in VR so dont have monitor setup at 1440 as pointless). If the weapons table is too long to display in 1080, then you cannot select the weapons on the bottom of the weapons table (aks GBU10, 24,MK84 Air etc) You can test this yourself on the F4 module with station 2 and 8. The issue is very much an ED issue, not Heatblur, as Heatblur themselves have indicated in the above response. DCS needs to have a scrollbar in the weaspons table, as pure and simple as that. Please submit to the dev team.

What about having it on a special weapons adapter then it would appear at the top of the list in station 2 and 8 ? Or having a template (that is selectable no matter what role the aircraft is configured to in the mission editor) that appears in the list so could select a loadout that says has 4 x GBU 10 and a centreline Fuel Tank? The player could then select and change the outer pylons if they wanted additional fuel tanks etc? Seems a win possibly? EDIT - OK so i did change my 2D to 1440 and can now see the list - can now select. That's so dumb though @ ED

Oh good lord - yea so im in VR, pimax crystal original version with eye tracking. I've also not been able to select in 2D which i will have set to a 1080p (given i only fly in VR but sometimes boot into 2D just to work on the mission editor etc) So what we are saying they are there but because the list goes to the bottom of the screen that we cannot select , wow that is dumb played DCS since lomac days and never knew this was an issue - @BIGNEWY @NineLine This needs to be looked at, this is a real issue and a massive limitation, especially as the amount of weapons increase.

Problem still exists, mission 1 Cajun will not leave the tanker until full, perhaps set him to unlimited fuel and just get the player to refuel? Meanwhile your sat in formation burning fuel that you don't have.

Yep i've just had this also, passing down from FL30 and passing around 18k ish (sorry no track was just on a fam session with the module again). Jester called it out, was like yikes what.

Guys, Dial on front dash above the bomb fuse selector that controls "Flight Instrument Brightness" works opposite, as in the more you turn up the dial it decreases the lights (generally blue ones on say a2a pylons and CL link etc). This is with either axis command or just using the mouse. Also it seems like the full range of the brightness is limited to about 5% of the bottom of the dial. Please can you review when get chance. Thanks.

Guys, Back from a break and just looking at the F4 again, i note that the GBU10's are no longer available to load onto station 2 and 8 for some reason? If in any doubt if you review the dash one (5-35 of the Feb79 manual widely available and used as one of your sources no doubt) for the weapons table you will see they can be mounted on all hardpoints except the centre station. Note station 2 and 8 could also take the GBU11 (an older 3000lb class weapon). Please can you enter this back in as its quite limiting at present as taking GBU10 means you cannot select wingtanks. It also limits other loadout capabilities. Thanks

Dawger as per my earlier post in this thread, about 4 above my reply to you, was until they sort out having an adiabatic lapse rate modelled its not really going to work. I think we both understand the met. As an interim, the ability to set "local" fog within various regions of the map would at least be something. My point being the implementation of weather in DCS is poor at present.

Yea i'l just put this bluntly, that's absolute nonsense depending where in the world your operating. I'm guessing your rather extensive experience does not include the UK or Europe.....It can be very localised and a reason why our main airbases often have a satelite divert, some can be literally 15 miles away and clear from back in the day when there was no tacan approach/ILS. We have alot of river systems and relief variation, and as you will be aware these are primary factors.

Yep but the point is why bring in a new weather setting without the basic grasp of adiabatic lapse rate, or at least have a cheat mode to be able to set it around an airfield without using triggers. The ability to not be able to set local variations in fog at different parts of the map at the same time, is poor and "half a job"

And tumbleweed blows through from ED lol......

Guys, Title say's it all, a tad frustrating that you would map all the circuit breaker switches, yet leave out the buttons that are used constantly, being all the MFD's and CDU. I do wonder when writing out the development map how this would ever get higher priority, it literally makes zero sense or logic. Please can you have one of the coder's get on this please, im guessing this cannot be too big of a job that we dont have to wait another 6 months.

@F18mech Same problem as you, cannot get my head around the local dimming, its now on a slider in pimax play, with a number - what value should it be set too not get the nighttime horrible light saturation? Thank you!

Guys i have read up, and still confused about the local dimming option, which is now a slider. On the Pimax Crystal (original) i have the same issues at night, almost like looking through into a foogy cockpit, gamma at 1.5 in game, brightness at 0.90 in pimax play. I have local dimming set to 0.999 as believe this to be the best setting?> Can someone explain how do i get my blacks to be black at night in the cockpit and not suffer the horrible looking light blurred and over saturation (in plain english also and idiot proof as i need both lol)

Pimax crystal original ( so eye tracking - quad views etc) i have Gamma always on 1.5, never more than 1.6. Headset brightness 0.90, dimming level 0.9999 (although i note i've had some odd looking light blurs inside cockpit and saturation issues on night mission last night so need to look at that (note not iraq map as not flying on it at present)

I could be wrong but i rather suspect this will fall within ED's parameters. I could be wrong but i believe that the IR signature was never really resolved or implemented, this is evenident on so many things on all the map's, i rather think they just use a "image filter" and for certain units have added in different image parts. But terrain has never been looked at as far as i can see (or buildings, or tree's etc etc or anything that makes the landscape)

@BIGNEWY @NineLine Guys i note we are 3 pages in, on what is a relaunch module and no response or acknowledgement as yet on this game breaking issue with the F5E remastered. Whatever code adjustments that were completed for the Christmas patch literally in terms of FPS performance broke the module. Also copying you in @Chizh as i note important threads are not alwasy being fed directly back to where they need to be. Many thanks hope you all have a good festive break, I'm guessing this could be the reason for this not being answered (re the Bignewy/Nineline) however just an idea perhaps post something saying we are on a break until after the New Year (or equally if your working to Eastern Orthodox holidays next month)

I came purely to the forums to look for this issue, ran the F5 when the remaster patch launched at the beginning of December. All seemed ok (well except some visual's that I thought would be better such as night time dial illumination etc) Last night was the first time i have had chance to test the latest Christmas patch. The performance is shocking since they launched less than a month ago, a 30% drop in FPS and spikes in frame times. I don't know what ED have done but they have literally killed the FPS and i would go as far as saying its now unflyable in VR. Note i am not a noob, yes i have cleaned out all shaders, done a slow repair and no mod's installed. Running same drivers for PC and window's for both patches. ED have clearly dropped the proverbial ball here, my question is how do such obvious issues get past testing - once again i am minded to think that the testing, is not to a standard acceptable for what is now a "stable" branch.

Think of it as a third party within a third party. The map is principally developed by Spectre, who works for Obyx for his day job (aka flight sim scenery and probably no surprise that they are officially involved re Kola). Nothing has changed except that at the time, and it was years ago when work first started on this it probably made sense for him to launch through an existing third party, thus razbam given their interest in developing pucarra etc and other assets (back before they went public and lost all confidence). The map update today was fantastic - some of the very best scenery we have in DCS. So the map is being actively worked on, will continue to get developed and is very much a going concern is my understanding.

yea alot of VRP's are missing. My favorite however for comical value of how not to implement is the Victory Arch crossed swords in Bagdad (swords of Qadissiya), have a fly down and a chuckle at the narrow dirt track, lack of those huge lighting towers and instead of the salute platform half way down its some kebab shop, its about as bad as it gets and thats before we get onto how the swords themselves look like made out of stone! And yea trees everywhere (even in the euphrates let alone route Irish). The only part of the map i enjoy at present is the elevation mesh in the mountains along the Turkish border. The cities need a huge amount of work and i cannot understand the mentality to include alot of the Northern airfields and cluster them when miss out H3/H2 on the initial release. I think we will need once again clever community members to implement the LZ's - its a pity this map wasn't done by Urda media, as yet im very unconvinced this low quality sat image stick on buildings is the way forward. Happy to be proven wrong.

Questions I've already asked, many many years ago re PG and NTTR, at one point i said to literally even if just put a runway there and spawn area (to give width for MP servers), no joy alas. I think part of the problem is that ED devs and producers are not making MP servers, and have little exposure on how gameplay develops due to this.

No do not slide the map up in Iraq, the airbases in Qatar, Bahrain are very much needed!! If you said extend to the North, given the new mountains look great then yes but not shift.

Aware but limited use and this should be for an exceptional circumstance. Heaven forbid we use a wet variable and adiabatic lapse rate and weather engine. It would have been better if they were going to be so limited in it's application to at least have it changeable for each airfield zone. It's pretty useless in it's current format given we are talking about drowning out an entire map. It's a nice visual, really nice, not performance killing unlike rain (STILL) for some reason, but it's been poorly designed in it's ability to be implemented.

Looks good for content creators and you tube shots though doesnt it. Also nice for single ILS approaches from airborne start into one airfield. Totally useless for actual gameplay and setting up weather for campaign making or MP. Does smack of once again let's make something look pretty without actually speaking to people that make flyable mission content for the product.

Nineline, there is zero point giving exact coordinates as its not just one spot - basically spawn at Al-Qa'im (major border crossing with Syria and an area that is strategically important) air start and just fly South East along the Euphrates (the main river) it just goes on its easy and obvious to find and see all the trees so should not have any difficuty for the devs to spot.