Wali763

Hi. I found the log-files. They were in my saved-games-folder and not the game-folder, where I suspected them to be. Should have known or searched for that. Sorry for being stupid. Also uploaded the files from yesterday. Thx dcs.log-20191124-142541.zip dcs.log-20191123-200050.zip dcs.log-20191112-130356.zip

Hi. I was not sure, where to post (is it a bug or not?), so I did it here. I flew the mission three and four of Operation Exigent Riviera the last two days and DCS crahed three times. Twice in Mission 3, once (at the first attempt) in the night-Mission 4. Im not sure now, but I think it was always, when I got shot down by a SAM. But I got shot down once or twice, when DCS did not crash........ I already did a repair of DCS but it did not change a thing. Can anybody point me into a direction, how to solve this? After the crash a checkbox, if I want to send a crashreport appeared and after confirming a command-box with a few lines showed up. Is there a seperate crash-log? Could it be, that Im missing some crash-files like (sound etc). I had that on the F-14 shortly after release in March IIRC. Thx. PS: BTW I love the Campaign Exitent Riviera; there are so many and diffrent things you need and for this Ive learned quite a lot from it. Even SAMs havent been nice to me!

Is my "installation" correct? I put the file in the DMS-folder of the zip (nato.lua) into the speech-folder of DCS and overwrote the existing one. The next time I started DCS it worked with the F/A-18. After the update this week, I did the same, but now it does not work......

Thx for the link. That really helped. One thing is still strange for me though. When I put in the coordinates on the UFC (dd:mm:ss), the data of the WP in the MPCD is displayed in dd:mm,mm. The strange thing is, that even the format of the WP is mm and decimal-minutes its still the same numbers as entered above. So E 56:16:40 on the UFC becomes E 56:16,40 on the MPCD which is quite a bit different. From what Ive seen and read the ss should be recalculated into ,mm. Plz see attached pic where I reenter the lat-data because I put in 52 instead of 54 in the ss-section. So either the recalculation is not done at all or the format shown on the MPCD is wrong for showinga a "," instead of a ":" Or the data should be entered in dd:mm,mm in the first place, but then the mod would only help half way.

Hi and thx. When I went in with the gun the SA went my way.... :-) On the other hand, dont have Jdams a 3 min warmuptime? I guess I ignored that. Hence the inaccuracy... Anyway: those coordinates from the JDAC are of no importance, right? One more thing: great campaign up to now. I learned quite a lot from it besides the fun.

Coordinates Hi. I got a problem with JDACs in Mission 2. When I contacted the frist JDAC (Whiplash11) I got the info [6. Coordinates: ]DP278608 I made a WP out of the lat/log coordinates provides by magic and made that into a WP and target-designated that. I then dropped the GBU-12 onto that WP and the Laser guided it to the target. At the second Target from Axeman I used the JDAM (since I did not see info what weapon was preferred) on the WP offered before. Again lat/log-coordinates. In the 9-line from JDAC (Axeman11) the info was [6. Coordinates: ]DP221511 DP221511 seems to me MGRS-Data, but 15-11 would be pretty unprecise, since that would mean 15km on x-axis and 11km on y-axis. Can anyone give me help, what coordinates to use and if MGRS is needed how to input it? I thought, that was not implemented yet. By the way the JDAM missed its target from the offered WP-data and I got by a SAM...

KC-135 Slowly Im getting to grips with the KC-135. One thing, that helped me quite a bit in comfort (and therefore less shoulderstrain) is, that before refuel I raise my head about 10cm higher than normal and recenter my TrackIR (I use monitor/TrackIR). That way, when I go back to my normal (lower) position Im already lower in the cockpit and looking out of the front is much less tiring, because you dont have to lower your head. Compared with visibility in the F-16 and F/A-18 one can see the age of the Tomcat though.... I also did the last mission in Cage the bear and refuelling there was much better since the tanker was doing something like 300KIAS. I think, the low speed of the tanker in the seventh mission is just wrong and does not need any special consideration.

Pain OMG, Im in utter agony right now! Mentally and a bit physically. Overall Im fell ok doing AAR; KC-130 quite easy and S-3 ok. The big problem for me is the KC-135. In the QuickMisson in Caucasus, its just going a bit too fast for me and I usually only manage to fill up half the tank with quite a few disconnects. I lowered the speed via ME by about 100kts and then it was easier, but still hard and unsatifying. But I just did the 6th or 7th mission in Cage the bear ("Clear the sky"I think its called) and to me the KC-135 is just undoable..... It travels with only ~190KIAS, so I have to stay at max wingsweep and my plane is constantly pitching up and down a few meters. One tiny push up on the trim and its going up too much, one down and its the same way around. And every correction seems to get exaggerated.... I also tried to go to 40deg wingsweep but AOA started to climb pretty fast and a stall was rather likely, so I went back to 20deg. Some might be due to my setup (Warthog on the desk) so my hands position is rather high, which also helps my musceles getting tense (hence the physical agony), but right now (after 100+ refuels according to the Log in DCS) this special refuel was rather frustrating for me. I guess there will be better days again! Especially after more practicing;-)

Yes, but sometimes its hard.... Right now I just "hate" the KC-135 in the Caucasus IA-mission. Its for me just soo much harder to refuel than the KC-130 or S-3. Doing it in the Nevada-IA its all so smooth and usually after 6 min Im full. With the KC-135 it takes me up to 25 min! The wake turbulence makes it just that much harder to connect and keep the plance calm. It also seems the windows where you can stay during refuel is smaller. But that might be also due to the fact, that I dont have a usable point of reference on the KC-135 yet... Right now, Im pretty happy with my (beginner) AAR-skills, but I guess it will need some real patience to master the KC-135. :) Funny thing is, that the comments of Jester usually dont bother me, but hearing them over and over again beneath the KC-135 can get annoying! :lol: PS: BTW I havent switched off the HUD in the F-14 since it offers no help in AA-mode anyway. Havent done the Hornet recently, but Ill try it next time in the Hornet.

Thx, I will try turing off the HUD next time, also in the Hornet. I still need to work on the speed control a bit more, since (because im a bit tense) tend to oscillated back and forth too much for the fear of disconnecting. No HUD could definitly help improve...

Im sure, only a few will be interested, but today is a great day for me in DCS after some hardware-related frustrating days. Finally I think Im getting to grips with AAR. After a long time of avoiding, I finally put in the hours and its starting to pay off. For quite some time, I did only position-flying with the Tanker, often for 30+ minutes (Nevada, instant Action until the Tanker turns to the east), but when I tried to connect it did not work. I then turned to the Hornet, that is supposed to be easier and since a few days Im being successful. I just took some 9000 pounds without disconnect. Still I have to say, that I did disobey to recommendations to not look at the basket; Im looking at it, but just to see, if the projected flight line of the probe will eventually meet it. I also dont do those throttle push-forward and backs. I just do tiny increments up or down, usually countering a speedrop or gain in advance and it seems to work fine for me. Coming back to the Tomcat, I also made some connects today and I got 6000 pounds without disconnect. Slowly getting there. The key aspect to be successful with the Tomcat was going to bomb-mode, as many people suggested. I tried that before, but did not like it for the required trimming, which always seems to give me a unsatisfactory result. Still the plane feels way less sensitive in bombmode and is therefore easier to steer into the pod. Airspeed indicator in the HUD of the Hornet is to me a big help, also by talking my focus on the stick-corrections away to the throttle; this way "my" autopilot is controlling the plane better than if Id focus on the controlling. Seems this automatism already has developed! On the Tomcat without speed-indicator (I dont want to use Ctrl-z) I soley have the tanker, which right now is ok but not comfortable. Still a lot of heavy and deep breathing and back-and-forth going on! ;-) But Im very positive that within a few practice-flights it will be ok too. A good sign, that Im getting there is, that Im taking the jokes from Jester much more relaxed now! "Feel the force, Luke!" :-)) One side-note: I at first had a Saitek X52 and went to a Warthog three monts ago. Also with the better sensitivity for AAR in mind. But actually the Warthog made it worse in the beginning, because its spring in the stick is rather hard. Finally I went to a softer spring (from Sahaj), that at frist I did not like too much, but now Im very happy with. Still the "pay to win"-aspect in my case did not seem to do the trick. Even the soft springs are in the Warthogs-case for sure of some help, its the time you put in, that gets you the success and also the X52 or the harder springs of the Warthog would have done. I hope, someone new to AAR and frustrated as I was in the beginning, can take away something useful from my lines.

I never claimed flying DCS on monitor is immersive, but many people here claim VR is immersive. Thats why I pointed out the things the break my "immersion" Since I feel this statement to be rather offensive I decline to answer it in a constructive way. Even though I were able to and could explain my point. Reading quite a lot in this forum, I somehow had the feeling, that for some VR is like a religion, that cant be questioned. Thats why, after the Rift S, I thought I have to be wrong if most people like it, so I got the Reverb, which didnt do it for me either. Regarding BFM it is for sure correct, that Id needed much more time to adjust to it. But turning your upper body to check the 6 is rather intensive and makes it hard to maintain controlled inputs. Also (but thats a Reverb-specific situation and could be solved somehow) the stiff cable of the Reverb is limiting my movements. Nevertheless I still firmly believe, that spotting is easier on a monitor and thats essetial for me. VR for me just has too many shortcomings to reach a level, I could enjoy it. Thats also why, I stopped testing the Reverb more. Even if thorough tweaking would have giving me better visual results, there still would be some shortcommings that I am not willing to accept. Coming back to the topic, even if for 90 out of 100 people VR is superior, Im one of the 10 that prefer TrackIR.

After owning the Reverb for only one day, I will send it back on monday. Ive already repacked it. There are just too many things, I dont like about VR, like small FOV... What I did not like about the Reverb was the obvious chromatic abberation, that started right at the loading screen, when it was not away and showing the Steam-background like mentioned above. The blue loading-status-bar was only 80%blue with the (I think) upper edges being yellowish. In the F/A-18 the DDIs to the left and right showed yellow edges on normally green ones. Actually almost everything in the outside 50% of the FOV had more or less coloured edges.... One thing, that did not bother me too much compared to the cromatic abberation, was the drop in clarity towards the edges. Still the FOV is way too small for my liking. Maybe my IPD of 66,5mm is too big and makes the FOV for me even smaller... WMR is also rather annoying, especially since you have to install three different programmes to make it work in DCS; the recommandations in Thud's VR4DCS -guide for correct start of VR-DCS do feel not much more complicated than a cold-start in the Hornet! :smilewink: But Ive tried to just doubleclick the DCS-icon and everything actually started up well. When I tested the RiftS I was disappointed but thought, that this might have been due to the moderate resolution of the headset. With the Reverb some of those "problems" have gotten better because of the higher resolution (SteamVR recommanded 122%, which was about 2500x2200 IIRC), but other still persisted and overall VR-experience was not better than on the Rift S. Overall I think, the Reverb in the current situation of VR might be a good headset with some limitations, but for me right now VR just dont offer that much for me to feel any kind of immersion. By the way, the SN of "my" headset is xxx936xxxx.

I could have just edited my above post, but I didnt, so someone interested could follow my line of thought. This also is a bit of a self-therapy, since Im quite frustrated now. After that post, I tweaked quite a few settings according to Thud's VR4DCS-guide, but it did not make me anything like at home in VR. After only testing it for one day, Ill send the Reverb back. Playing DCS on a monitor is a game, but a nice looking and challanging game. Playing it in VR to me is just painful. To me its not becoming a sim by moving to VR as some mentioned. Where is the immerson, when you look through diving googles? Where is the immerson, when you still can see the pixels even in the max resolution-headset right now? Where is the immerson, when its still hard to spot a Il76 2 miles out? Where is the immerson, in moving around in the cockpit with a cursor, clicking things? Where is the immerson, when many things shimmer unnaturally? For a game on a monitor DCS looks really nice but for VR its just not nice enough for me to feel like the real thing. Maybe im picky and maybe Ive not invested enough time both in the Rift S or the Reverb, but for me, this just aint enough. Maybe, once we have headsets with 4K-displays per eye and 150degree FOV and a sharp image even if we look towards the edge of our natural FOV and general image quality has been notched up even more. But thats Im sure, still pretty far away... Everybody has got his own expactations but right now VR isnt just doing it for me. Needless to say, that could be very different for someone else. I tried to leave out the things I did not like about the Reverb (WMR and cromatic abberation), but as things stand right now VR is dead for me.

Hi. I was the one, claiming above BFM is not good in VR. Well I got my Reverb now, and tried to BFM. Yes, its possible, but from the tiny bit, Ive see up to now, its much harder than on a monitor. First overall experience with the Reverb is not great, but I did not start to do any tweaking to get the full potential of the headset. But I already found a few things, I do not like.... I will of course do more testing but from my first impression, its kind of like my experience with the Rift S, that I gave back within a few days. When I got the Rift S, I was afraid, it might ruin normal DCS for me, but it did not. With the Reverb Im not afraid anymore right now. But Ill try to stay open minded, even our start today was rather poor. Coming back to the opening question for me its cleary 2:0 for TrackIR... But thats not a final judgement.

Thx for supporting me. I did not mean to say, you cannot do BFM in VR. But its probably harder and less effective then on a monitor. Its kind of like this: I now played for about one week "Call of Duty mobile" on my 5,5 inch smartphone and it was fun. Until I tried it on PC via a Android-Emulator and as good as you play on the smartphone, every decent player on a PC just OWNES you! In my first MP-game up to 50pts I made 40 pts for my team and just because I ran out of ammo a few times and had to die.... Only then I understood, why some players would kill me within a second with no chance at all. I guess most of them sat in front of a PC, where its soo much easier to get a headshot! And thats why I quit COD yesterday! I think it will be kind of the same in BFM monitor vs VR. But Ill will find out soon, because I ordered a Reverb earlier today and hopefully will find out next week. Or maybe already this week! So my chances of getting BFM-king one day, will only be intact, if I keep my TrackIR, which Ill certainly do. :megalol:

When I tested the Rift S I thought the same and send it back. Still I cant let go of VR and if it werent not for some obstacles would have a Reverb already. But that still would be for testing purposes, since im not sure, if VR is for me. Lately I changed to no-labels in BFM and its VERY hard to find the other aircraft, once youve lost it, while looking briefly at some gauges. Even if you have Jester in the backseat helping you. I just cant believe anyone in VR is capable to do decent BFM without labels. Even on my 1440p-monitor its hard to judge the directon the other aircraft is aiming. But turning on the labels (anlong with the looks of the ground, which is actually nice, but still far from realistic) would kill any immersion Id get in VR.... Still I remember getting shot out of the sky above Shiraz and falling to the ground felt absolutly real! I guess, in some parts you loose, in some parts you will gain. Its up to you, which parts are more important for you. But if its BFM or spotting tiny targets on the ground, Im pretty sure VR wont do...

Thx for the info!

Hi. Tried that last week (german holiday on Oct 3rd I believe) on the german HP-webpage and it did not work, since im from Austria and only german-adress-based people can buy from them. Austrian HP-Shop on the other hand does not sell stuff directly but only links to some sellers, that in the Reverbs- case actually do not offer it. I contacted the shop, I usually buy from (and that offers the Reverb actually quite cheaply) yesterday, but they could not tell me, if the Reverbs they sell, are the updated version, since they just receive the items from their dealer upon someones order. Is there a way so see from the outside of the package (therefore not opening it), if the item is an updated one? Like production week higher than XX, etc?? It somehow seems, that HP dont want to sell me their products! I contacted them some time ago via their webpage and they did not answer and I cant order from the directly to get a revised Reverb for sure. Along with my general uncertainty, if VR is the way for me (after only a mediocre frist impression of the RiftS), this does not help me decide. I will contact another dealer this afternoon and if he supply a updated Reverb. If he cant, I will postpone the whole thing for another month or so... Edit 2hrs later: dealer has only old stock. So Ill wait...

Ok thx for your quick answers. Im going to give it a try. Just need to wait for my dealers answer, if he still has the old or the new verrsion in stock...

Im a Tomcat-fan and like the module very much. But its FM needs mastering. With the Tomcat its more about flying whereas with the Hornet is more about electronics since the flying is so simple. Also the flying of the Hornet is no fun, its kind of what I imagine pleasing the missis with five condoms on! :lol: The different A/G-weapns of the Hornet are great but the Tomcat is overall much more interesting to fly. Cant compare it to other modules though;I do own a few, but have only little time on them. A definitve "buy" from me!

Reflections Hi. Just a short question: Do the reflections of the sea in the Reverb look anything like the ones on a monitor? I tested the Rift S some time ago and found, that the sea looks very boring. Reflections of the sun were almost non-existent and general look of the sea was far from realistic. On the other hand, the view on a monitor looks pretty much stunning and coming back to the boat from a flight with the sun being very low is always a bit of a highlight for me. That was one reason, why I preferred to give back the Rift S and that would be a reason for me, to not go to VR if I had to give that up... Thx.

Added to post above, I case someone was doubting me...:smilewink:

I kind of understand, why there is EA and I do accept it and also do see the benefits of it. But looking in the DCS-Shop I wonder, if all of those EA-modules are going to be finished one day... Id suggest, that EA should set a standard, which level a EA-module should have to be released and also give more specific info, what still is missing in the module and what can be expected to come in the future. Also Id say, that there should be a date given, where the module can be consideres finished (like 95+%). And if its EA, my understanding would be, that it should be a bit cheaper. At least if there is no given date in the forseeable future (1year??), when we can consider the module to be finished. Right now, its kinda buy a EA module at the full price and hope, that its finished some day. After all, we pay MUCH money for every module. The ordinary PC-game does not cost that much and after one year can be had for a fraction of the initial price. So I do think, that we also do have a right to get a close to finished product. For the current Viper-Situation I think, ED had a reason for the very early release. I hope its not the money, since quoting one post from above, the rubberband would be streched quite a bit now with all those open EA-modules. If money is the reason, maybe ED should think about a different sales-strategy. Sorry to bring this up, but Id be willing to pay a reasonable monthly fee to fly DCS with some extra content. Since there is no such system, Ill now by the F-5, that I did not plan to buy at all, to support ED. But for that, ED hear me out: Do your job and finish all the modules you've started. Dont let yourself be distracted by the people bitching 98% is not enough, but listen to the people, that complain, that 60% really is not enough!

Pic from post above.