darkman222

The idea is great. Especially with finger tracking for communicating with non cooperative Mig28s, improving foreign relations But I think its much more needed than just switching it on and off with LODs. Hands and arms move and rotate other joints that involve complex kinematics. (trust me, I am a working in computer animation) Also penetrations with the canopy and fuselage in small aircraft like the F16 or even worse WW2 planes have to be taken into account. The head movement, we already have, is technically just a nodal pan, just using rotations but no translation. I would really love such a feature, but I doubt that the effort to create it is justified. What I could think of is that you could start pre-made pilot animations, like they have it for example in DayZ. You can push a button and wave to another player or show him, you know, the finger. Although I hate it when it does that But that could be a fair compromise.

This started to happen with 2.9. Looks like the FCR does not update the flight path of the locked aircraft. When it detects a change it just jumps into place. I am not sure if it happens all the time, but when youre chasing a bandit the updates are smaller and the lag becomes more obvious. Its at the end of track. Sorry I cant isolate it in a single player mission to the lack of time. I just do what I always do. Stop playing so the issue is at the end of the track and make a video of it. mobettameta's Dogfight Arena v1.76.1-20231025-223043.trk

I was wondering if it would be possible to bring the aerodrome window (Radio, Coordinates, ILS, TACAN) from the F10 map to the F1 Cockpit view? Like the warehouse, and coordinate window already do ?

Youre saying VR playback (terrain display) is affected too on your end?

I have posted this bug for 2.8, I thought it was labelled as "investigating" but I cant find that thread any more. I think the behavior was never explained or verified as correct. So I am bringing it up again. With 2.9 I was hoping for those kind of inconsistencies in the F16 being adressed, but it does not seem so. As you can see in the video, the slant range is calculated by steerpoint / barometric elevation in CCRP. As soon as the line of sight is blocked by a hill, it switches to FCR radar measurement which is wrong of course because it measures the distance to the hill now. At the beginning and at the end of the video (sorry in the middle its obscured due to head tracking) you can see that the "distance to steerpoint" is the same when in baro, and when its in FCR there is a difference between the two. Track attached as well. baro radar.trk

I am wondering if the jitter affects the terrain on VR playback too. On my Varjo Aero it seems like although fpsVR does not show any CPU or GPU spikes that the terrain stutters now too.

Sorry man. Already switched to 2.9 on my laptop too now. No use to stay on older versions as you wont be able to join Multiplayer servers

I feel that we need some audible feedback if someone stepped on a transmission pretty urgently in the next versions. Otherwise you dont get that a radio call was possibly truncated. I dont know how realistic it is for mordern radios but at least in the F16 its a thing. Same goes for the sound you hear in SRS when starting and stopping a transmission. It gives nice feedback if your finger accidentally slipped off the transmission button. And the deluxe version would be the option via slider to balance the different radios between Left and Right. Guessing that this could be the least realistic feature, but it helps a lot distinguishing between different channels.

You mean on 2.8 ? I just updated the laptop to 2.9 aswell now. But its no use to compare it to 2.8 as ED stated the onset in 2.8 was wrong. If thats the case you compare 2.9 with the wrong 2.8 version. My test was only about finding out how the new (no matter if "improved" to the better or worse) onset behavior of the Viper is now and how we might need to adapt to it for dogfighting.

Does it help to revert to the previous Nvidia drivers temporarily? I think the jittering just started when I updated. But not 100% sure.

I just did a quick test about that. Turns out, its not the replay doing that. Its a new 2.9 behavior. That mission is obviously just one F16 air spawning. I have 2.8 still installed on my laptop. If you do an air spawn in 2.8 the jet just starts off perfectly level flight. If you'd run the same simple mission in 2.9 the jet does that automatically. Like the FLCS gives a one second of pitch down command when spawning. Weird. Despite that, yes that initial nose down makes my test results little washed out. Not really sure if the g onset changes drastically with a 6 kts speed difference. But like I said, no criticism on my end. If that g onset is more realistic, its the way to go. I just wanted to see what "g onset improvement" means for us.

I am totally on your side, that the DCS F16 FBW response is slow. But comparing the F16s FLCS to radius fighters like the F18 or Mirage which rely on fast response, but not on out-rating the opponent as the F16, does not bring us forward. I dont know any other rate fighter we have in DCS here for a fair comparison. Unless we cant prove it to ED with declassified material its wasted time doing comparisons. Dont know about the input lag either. I have a traditional gimbal stick and the force sensing stick both and it feels fine to me using both of them. Comparing 2.8 with 2.9 concerning the g onset, it just shows minor differences. And dont get me wrong. If its that way in reality it has to be in DCS too. But what you can take away is that the point in time you enter the 9G regime is now a little later than before. ( see the video comparison when the blackout starts) So you have to pull even harder to get the same rate ( over time in average). What becomes more and more important now is the the g tolerance of the pilot, because this update is again a minor thing acting against the F16 concept of being a rate fighter. I was hoping that 2.9 brings an updated g modelling as well, but apparently no. I think its time to start a separate thread about it. I have gathered some nice in game footage to illustrate that with a more realistic g modelling the Viper would get quite some kills it just cant get because of the fainting pilot. Edit: The impression that one might get that the g modelling was changed for a better is that due to the slower g onset the time you'd reach 9 G is later than before in 2.8. ->

@GrandGI am also very close to do the same. Do you have some close up pictures of how the boxes with the shakers look like? And how you mounted them on your chair? I am still trying to get a pre used HF8 in the meantime. Might be able to return my new one instead. If I cant get a pre used during my returnable period I will need to cut my new one unfortunately. What material are the boxes made of? Can I just drill holes in them to mount them?

Afraid there isn't. If you want more confort and save several waypoint sequences you can use https://github.com/the-paid-actor/dcs-dtc It's not realistic to change the entire flight plan while airborne, but this software does a decent job

While I have not been able to test it myself, as I am travelling at the moment. I was wondering... What does "improved g onset" stand for. An improvement in Numbers which means quicker. Or an improvement to match real world data which also can mean slower but also faster.

Everything stopped working for me after installing the HF8. SRS, tacview. After I reinstalled both all of the three are working fine.

I found it. It is for some unlogical reason the damage/failure channel (tickbox) if I disable it, I dont have the stuck permanent vibration, when using the gun. Although sometimes after respawn, there is no haptic feedback any more. I have to close Sim Shaker and start it up fresh to get haptic feedback back. Does someone have a better fix? Just switching the HF8 off and on does not help.

-more performance for VR players. Also by to the cost to sacrifice eye candy for 2D player (by being able to disable it for VR). -realistic G-modelling, whithout pilots passing out after 5 seconds of 9G -modelling of pre-flaring (IR seeker will lock on flares) -modelling of IR masking behind clouds. ( hiding behind clouds will mask IR signature) ...dynyamic campaign, of course everybody whishes for that, but also for multiplayer.

Crashing the aircraft seems a part of the permanent virbation error. But also gun fire. Disabling gun feedback in the F16 does the trick. But I jumped in my F86 and it also has the two front motors stuck in vibration problem. Disabling guns feedback does not help here unfortunately.

Then you'll love my DCS F16 Strike Commander Retro Theme https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3326649/ (breaks IC sometimes though) Back in the old Strike Commander days, we did not have a TGP or JDAMS, pretty sure the Dos Gringos would have loved it too. Enough thread hijacking. But I think it was answered anyway already.

I would not be concerned about the G forces while landing. I would be rather concerned about damaging stores like bombs and the Pod by pulling 9G mid flight. Hopefully it will be modelled some day. At the moment its not. So you can over-g the pod with a smile on your face and have a successful bombing run after all. Slightly off topic, but felt the urge to add that.

Mine arrived a few days ago. Using Simshaker. HF8 software is still pretty basic. Can someone confirm that it seems to cost some CPU performance? And gun fire makes the front motors stuck in permanent vibration. F16. Any ideas? I disabled gun feedback for now.

What does 4_2 and 4_3 stand for? DCS 2.8.8.43? So you gained 30 fps between them then?! I changed to a better, or the best CPU on the market ( I13900KS) So I cant compare results anymore either. But most of the time DCS runs smoothly. Except for the heavy scripted servers like the 4ya servers. My expectations for 2.9 go in both directions. I wont be surprised either way.

1) Be sure to dial up the "Sybmbology Int" knob 2) TMS up does not activate or deactivate the elipse. Its long press DMS down 3) The boresight cross in the HUD is very reliable after the past updates. If its not locking the target it might not be in ACM range of 10 nm If that does not help, you should provide a video or track file. Actually its not too clear to me what youre doing.

I mean, ( sorry second hijack) the reset works fine for now. I just try to trim, reset and try again. But in the real jet the trim speed must be slower, as pilots talk about "one or two clicks of trim". Wich implies for me that its predictable and slow enough you could return the trim to center by just counting the clicks and trim it back again the same amount of clicks if you wanted the trim to be centered again, which I am afraid cant be done in our DCS F16 at the moment.