Luft Waffel

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=258731 "[FIXED]" ������ Problem is that flat screen players (the majority of the playerbase) only effectively have one eye, positioned in the middle of the cockpit resulting in them not seeing angles of the HUD one normally could. To fix this issue, it seems that the view has just been shifted forward to an unrealistic location over the stick so that the player sits with their face in the HUD so they can see all of the symbology. For VR players, who have normal vision and can see all areas of the HUD from a realistic viewpoint, we now have to deal with our face being buried in the HUD by default. What is concerning is that this thread was moved to the wishlist section, essentially sweeping this issue under the rug. It seems to "fix" this, the strategy has been to go from one issue to the opposite and hope no one would notice, hence the move of this thread. This issue has not been solved, only reversed. I hope that this can be solved for all players, perhaps a simple option could be added in the special settings for the A-10 to be able to choose between a VR and flat screen viewpoint, allowing for the best experience for all players. VR is key to the future of DCS and should not be neglected in favour of what may appear more immediately convenient.

+1 this is a very easy to replicate issue and is very irritating

Currently the HMD renders in both eyes, I don't see an option anywhere to make it render only in the right eye like is possible on the hornet and viper. An option like this needs to be added to the A10C II and the default settings should be right eye only as that is how it seems to work IRL and looking at the in-game pilot model with the visor up. Is there currently any way to fix this, like editing something in a lua file somewhere?

I think this happens when the server starts in the morning and the sc starts off in CASE II/III conditions, it then doesn't change to CASE I when the time passes and it becomes daytime.

RAID/FLIR FOV switch not functional with AGM-65E LASER mavericks equipped I understand that with the AGM-65F TV mavs on board, the FLIR FOV switch toggles the maverick sensor FOV rather than the TGP FOV. The bug is however that with LASER mavericks equipped, the RAID/FOV FLIR switch does not toggle the FOV of the TGP. I assume the way it is coded is there is a check whether mavericks are on board and if true, the RAID/FOV FLIR switch will not toggle the FOV of the pod. Perhaps this could be fixed by seeing if its possible to specify that it has to be specifically AGM-65Fs for the condition to be true rather than any kind of maverick. I don't think that this is correct as is because I don't think there is any kind of FOV option on the laser mavericks so the RAID/FOV FLIR switch should still work with the pod as normal.

Won't this fail integrity check though?

I have attached pictures of the problem. There is an issue with the helmet and face textures on liveries that do not use the standard plain green flight suit and grey helmet. This should be easily solvable by just using the helmet and face textures from the normal green flight suit models on the liveries with coloured flight suit models. Could be done and solved in 5 minutes. It would also be really nice if the in-cockpit pilot body in F1 view was the same colour as the external pilot body. I have verified the integrity of my game files and it is clear that this is an issue with the build of the game not me having the wrong files installed as far as I can tell. This issue has existed since several builds ago.

Same issue here. I have no problems with caucus, nevada, or pg but when I play syria it quickly maxes out my 32GBs of RAM and not only causes the game but also my entire PC to be significantly slowed down and stuttery. Very annoying. I hope they can solve it soon.

No modules with more than 2 engines or 2 crew members is something they have already confirmed.

It would take extra development of more models but it would also be nice if it was possible to change between helmets with/without JHMCS equipped. Maybe also the ability to choose flight suit colours. The hornet module already has tan and green flight suits depending on which aircraft livery is chosen.

See title. I understand that the main reason for the amazing pilot model movement in the F-14 is because its multi crew and it needs to look natural from the back seat view looking at the pilot from behind but it looks amazing even from external views especially if both crew members are in VR. Could we see this on single seat aircraft like the hornet and viper? Maybe ED could introduce this with the Warthog 2? I understand that the animations for saluting and canopy hand holding are in development for the hornet, but I would like to see more options to customise the pilot, such as being able to raise and lower the visor, or put the mask on and off. The visor is already raised when the canopy is raised in the hornet so all it needs is a keybind to toggle it? I would also really like to see some hand gestures such as hang loose or kiss off, like the community has made in mods like the MB-339 and the now cancelled Superbug mod. If community modders can make these things on their own without the SDK surely it should be doable for ED. I think that if all of the pilot and aircrew models had the articulation and flexibility of the F-14 it would make the game a lot more immersive and make the pilots seem like actual people sitting in a jet rather than a cardboard dummy part of the aircraft model.

I think the carrier ops in DCS also really shines and is best experienced with the super-carrier which a newcomer wouldn't have access to leaving their impression of carrier ops to that with the basic legacy stennis carrier.

Both aircraft are derived from the hawk T1. That is probably where the similarities between the T-45 and hawk T2 end. The hawk T2 is used by BAES for the RAF for advanced fast jet training which is where pilots are taught everything they need to know that they will use in combat. Once pilots arrive on their front-line squadrons they more or less just need to be taught where the switches are and how to use the plane and are combat ready. They are already fully trained combat pilots when they arrive at their final aircraft training (Eg Typhoon). The training runs like this because the hawk T2 is a lot cheaper to fly and the RAF doesn't have extraordinary amounts of funding unlike the US Navy. It brings down the training cost of a fighter pilot significantly. This means that the hawk T2 needs to be able to train pilots on literally every concept and mission type a multi-role fighter pilot needs to know. To do this it uses a data-link driven synthetic training suite made up of synthetic radars, rwr, EW, bombing, etc. It does not need to have any of these system on-board, it just simulates it using data-link, saving money. Because of this is is responsible for a very large scope of training. I don't know a lot about how the US Navy trains its pilots but they have a lot more money and can afford to do much more training on the front-line aircraft, not needing to rely as heavily on trainer aircraft. My understanding is that the T-45 is used more as an a slower and easier to fly aircraft to get pilots used to and trained on carrier ops while a lot more of the tactical training and missions can be flown when the pilots start flying the super hornets for example. Looking at the T-45C mod is doesn't look like it has any of the advanced synthetic systems that the T2 has and won't be very useful for showing newcomers how to use a radar, rwr and EW for example. The T-45 and hawk T2 are completely different aircraft both externally and internally, and have much different purposes and are developed by different organisations. With the T2 in my opinion having a much larger responsibility for a much broader scope of training. Video of some T2 training, the instructor inserts a virtual SAM site for example. One thing I can tell you for sure is that the T-45 isn't just "a hawk T2 that can also do carrier landings".

The hawk T2 is designed to deliver tactical training whereas the T-45 is intended for practising carrier ops and procedures. The super carrier is also not going to be free meaning that new players would just have a trainer to land on a basic carrier and don't have a platform to practise every type of mission carried out by fast jets. The T-2 offers a much larger scope of training than the T-45, so I think it would actually have a lot more to offer.

In the recent GR interview Simon revealed that ED were potentially looking developing the hawk T2 for DCS. The other suggestion was to redo the hawk T1. Personally I don't think it makes sense to re-make the T1 since it doesn't do anything that can't already be done in the C101 or L39. He also mentioned that there was an issue with players not having an engaging option of aircraft to fly to start off with as the only options are the overwhelming and confusing low fidelity russian Su-25t and the unarmed and therefore boring TF-51D. I think that the Hawk T2 could be a perfect candidate for a new free module to introduce players to DCS. The hawk T2 can do all mission types carried out by fast jets such as A/A bvr, bfm and A/G missions. It is built as a trainer so its simple yet has modern avionics that would familiarise new players with systems like western HUDs and MFDs. It is built to be conventional and easy to fly with the FCS like the hornet or F-16 that most players are interested in. The rear-seat instructor can also add and remove targets from the back seat meaning that it would be ideal for squadrons to use to teach and train new pilots, similar to its purpose in real life. Current trainer aircraft available in DCS are not very suitable for training pilots onto the hornet or viper since their avionics are either simple, outdated or both and don't have any systems like FCS in common with the popular aircraft such as hornet or viper. Introducing a new player to DCS in the first few hours of the game, an AI pre-scripted instructor in pre-made tutorials to talk to the new player and introduce them to and talk-through different types of threats and missions in DCS, while adding them into the synthetic system from the backseat. I would much prefer this to my experience of my first few hours of DCS where I did the Su-25t tutorials where it was all russian and was just being told to enter random key combinations to do different things. It could be an instructor sitting in the back telling me to hit different switches or do things in the physical cockpit which I think would be more engaging and relevant to the actual modules that the player will hopefully go onto purchase and fly. Since the hawk T2 is synthetic and doesn't have afterburner or the performance of a front-line aircraft such as the hornet, viper or upcoming typhoon it would still encourage new players to go and buy the "real deal" high-performance aircraft, so they can dogfight and shoot down enemies and bomb targets with live weapons. However I still think that since the hawk is a jet-engine powered aircraft rather than a prop and flies with 420kts in low level it would still have enough performance to thrill new players while not taking away from the thrill of flying in a high performance jet like the hornet or viper for the first time. Perhaps the T2 could also be made as a standard payed module but I don't think it would sell that much when there are options like the hornet and viper available. But I think if ED are looking for that entry module that new DCS players will fly for the first time and flatten the steep entry barrier into the game this awesome aircraft could the key to doing it, just like what its used for in real life.

If it was an A model it would be a bit of a shame. Would really have enjoyed the unique capability the lonngbow offers with its radar especially now that ED has their a2g radar system working

I think it would make more sense if it was the pilot saying it as a bonus "111, roger, holding angels 3"

I mainly fly in VR and on the supercarrier the physical IFLOLS ball indicator datum lights bloom out way to much with obstructs the meatball and I can't see the position of the meatball until I am more or less in-close. This wasn't nearly as much of an issue on the legacy Stennis carrier. I tried it on the flat screen and there weren't any problems with the lights blooming out and it seemed the lights were perfectly tuned for flat screen players rather than VR. I don't like using the overlay in VR because it ruins the immersion. Perhaps a solution could be to add a brightness or light bloom setting to the datum and meatball lights in the Special tab of the settings along with a IFLOLS overlay toggle. At the moment at 3/4mile the meatball is just a big smear of light from all of the lights blooming into each other. It is slightly worse at night but generally unusable at any time of day. Again this is only an issue in VR and not on the flat-screen for some reason.

I get some form of (EGIW), EGIW, _EGIW_ almost every time I land. I always go to MIL and sometimes do it right before touchdown and I still get it. Sometimes it doesn't say it and I can get an OK but this is a pretty rare. The other thing I have noticed is the aircraft floats like crazy when in close and I have to intentionally come back on the power every time to not float over the wires. I don't think this is meant to be the burble effect since its always exactly the same effect and I would expect a turbulence effect to be much more random. Any answers or fixes to either of these issues would be great.

Tornado GR4. Heatblur has already done wing sweep, multicrew, AI rear-seater, and their own air to ground radar. Probably the hardest things about simulating this aircraft. This is the perfect project for them. I really hope they do it.

ah ok thanks

I read the planned features list for early access from June last year, it said that the in-cockpit pilot body would come very soon but its a year later now and when I use RShift + P still nothing happens. Has this feature been cancelled or is it still planned? Idk anything about DCS development but surely they could just remove the head from the existing external pilot model and use the rest of that for the pilot body?

I'm aware that this is an issue with almost all DCS modules with afterburner detents. The detent on the warthog is a bit earlier than on most of the aircraft especially the F14. I think its at about 95% throttle. The reason this sucks on the F14 is that the F14 has some nice automatic functions that occur when reaching MIL, such as speedbrakes and DLC automatically disengaging. This is very useful when landing on the boat since I usually prefer going to MIL in the wires rather than AB since if I do bolter I find the AB too powerful and the aircraft rockets up in pitch very aggressively, especially if I land without any stores and low fuel. The annoying part is that I have to manually disengage DLC and speedbrake when I hit the deck, at the same time has going to MIL. Sometimes this also causes me to get a no-grade because of "EGIW" even I'm going to MIL as soon as I hit the deck. Are there any work-arounds to either change the position of the in-game MIL/AB detent or to change the required throttle position where the speedbrake and DLC automatically disengage? It also means that I lose a bit of potential engine power if I climb on MIL instead of AB.

Hi I'm getting random game crashes at random intervals while playing. I will attach logs and dxdiag. dcs.log-20200414-195306.zip DxDiag.txt

This weapon is on the planned features list for the Hornet, and is one of the few weapons that we still haven't got yet on the Hornet. Has there been any news or updates on this weapon? Or is it going to only be added after receiving AG radar?