Notso

Interesting..... I was about to start an almost identical thread asking the same question. I was curious about whether there were many IRL pilots or former pilots here. Massive applause to those of you with little to no actual flight experience who dive into the something as massively complex as a Hornet or Viper in DCS. I can't imagine how daunting that must be. I have a related question: What is the background of the ED Mods and Dev team? Folks like Wags, Nineline, BIGNEWY, etc? I'm assuming you guys are former .mil pilots? And I'm assuming you have "guest help" of either current or recent drivers on the development team as advisors given the level of detail I see in the DCS modules. Thanks for all you do!

Quick question for you guys that have the MPDs but are flying with a VR headset - you obviously are having to find and touch the buttons blind, right? I suppose you get used to where they are, but how do you tell which button is which?

Yep, same for me. The only way I could get them to stop was to tell them to RTB and then rejoin once they disconnected. When I commanded them to rejoin before that, I got no response.

Great, thanks. I will do that the next time a wingman splats him or herself in the weeds. I'll work on that now.... ;-)

Awesome, thank you.

Wing loading certainly plays a part. But you are talking apples and oranges. I think if you took a Cessna 172 to 39,000 ft in a 100kt Jetstream + turbulence - it might feel a bit more "severe" than it would on an A380 in the same air mass. Just a guess.

I apologize in advance for the stupid question, but how do I do this? I'm still fairly new to the DCS interface. Happy to help if you can give me a quick explanation of how to record or access this.

I've noticed several times when flying a mission - the AI wingman has hit the ground while flying low level through the mountains. Not 100% of the time more but more often than not my wingman has morted himself in the dirt while flying a low level ingress in mountainous terrain. I usually have them in Line abreast formation so they are about a mile apart. Not sure why they can't avoid the rocks on their own. Is it because I'm doing inverted ridge crossings through saddles in mountains and they are somehow tied to my maneuvering and can't avoid hitting the ground. The only way I've been able to get them to not go splat in the dirt is to send them to a loose Wedge formation. Has anyone else seen this?

Given that the typical single engine prop A/C weighs around 2000 lbs (~900kg) while a typical fighter aircraft weighs anywhere from 25,000 to 45,000 lbs basic weight (~10,000 to 20,000 Kg) and flies 3-5x faster - you are not going to feel (see) the turbulence effects the same as in your light piston plane.

To the ED Team - I want to add my thanks as well. I know there can be a lot of bitching here - some valid and some not. But there has been not a single "Flight hour" I've spent on DCS that I didn't come away thinking - "HOLY Sh*T that was cool!" I spent a fair amount of time in the late 80s/early 90 playing flight sims - mostly Falcon 3 and similar. However, life pressures (mostly REAL flying) and boredom with the 2D nature of seeing the world on a flat screen combined to have me put away flight siming for a long time. I swore an oath to myself that I would not reenter the genre until VR was mature for flight sims. I had heard about DCS back in the early days and that it was trying to become the "end all, be all" of the combat flight sim market. It seemed promising and I liked where the vision was going. But it was still early days and a lot of "vaporware". However, back in 2011 based on some on-line reviews, I sort of cheated on my promise and bought the DCS A-10C game for PC from a brick and mortar store. I anxiously loaded it, fired it up, played probably a total of 45 min and gave up as I was right back to what I hated most - a flat screen 2D world, even though the resolution was markedly better than 1995. Just this past spring, I finally dove into a VR setup (HTC Vive Pro) to be able to play FPS games. I was not really thinking flight sim except as a secondary thing at this point. However, when I was downloading some FPS games on Steam - I saw that DCS was able to run in VR so I tried it since the DCS world and the couple of aircraft were free. AS soon as I looked around with the VR goggles in the TF-51 and could see as naturally as I do in a real cockpit - I was hooked. I went straight to the Hornet and the A-10C and have never looked back. In fact I have never even opened or ran any of my FPS games that I originally bought the VR kit in the first place for. Maybe eventually when I get bored with DCS, which is to say never. Anyway, this was a long-winded way to say thank you all in ED for your amazing efforts on this. I'm sure its a labor of love as well as a business. I for one, will do everything I can to support you all by buying more products so the business side continues to thrive. Win win.

I'm of two minds on this question. First of all - I think Lace asks a very valid question in his OP. Certainly worthy of discussion. On the one hand - so far, the level of detail found in DCS is what has drawn me in and kept me addicted to flying DCS aircraft. Especially as I think back to a previous life and I see a system or something that works just like the real thing. It gives me a chuckle factor but it also adds to the immersion factor. I personally would NOT want to water down DCS or where the dev team is going or trying to achieve. OTOH - there is something to be said for prioritization. For instance, the A-10C module is incredibly mature in terms of systems - but the cockpit is practically unusable in VR, which is the only way I fly DCS. So some earlier work on getting that "VR-able" would have been nice. As a result, I've given up on the A-10C until the new cockpit is out. In the Hornet, there seems to be a few very basic things that are not implemented correctly or at all - such as the various fuzing options for the weapons. For example, for a MK-82 AIR (MK-82YT) - to use the Free Fall (Low Drag) option - you would select Nose fuze only. But if you wanted the High drag option, you would select either N/T (both) or tail only. I believe in DCS, you still can only use the nose fuze. Maybe there is something unique about the Hornet that I'm not aware of as I've never actually flown it. But in most USAF fighters, that's how the fuzing mech works. So its little things like that that are annoyingly wrong. I personally have no issues with BITs that always pass - I WISH that had been the case IRL. There's nothing more frustrating that to have to call a MX Redball when you're already running late for takeoff. And then to have to step to a spare and start all over again. I have nothing against going through the motions with the checklists in DCS. Its fun to run them knowing the sim works just like (or very closely) to the real thing. If/when I get bored - I will just skip them. But my OCD nature when it comes to real aviation probably wouldn't let me. Haha. It would be a very bad habit to pick up. So I think the Reader's Digest version is: YES, we want as close to 100% realism as possible - even down to the minutest detail. And YES we want the most important stuff prioritized that relates to actual employment of the system as well as max enjoyment of the sim.

Thanks for the responses. I was not aware that there was a beta Steam version. I wondered why I could not purchase the F-16 early release. I've been wanting to try it, but it was not available on my Steam dashboard. I'm fairly new to this, so likely user error.

The CCIP (in theory, as IRL) should account for the wind that the jet sees based on GPS/INS inputs and extrapolates it to the surface. The lower your release point, the more accurate it should be - as there will be less variance in the wind from lower altitudes. If you are doing a HADB from higher altitudes and there are any wind shears - it will be somewhat less accurate. Having said that, I am not aware of how DCS models the wind and its effect on freefall ordinance.

Yes. And unless something changed recently - I don't see any reference to the new F-18 TM stick. Only the original TM Warthog set of stick and throttles.

Hi All, I'm currently playing DCS on Steam using Steam VR. So far no real problems and everything seems to work fine. My only reason I'm contemplating switching over is there seems to be no ability to access any of the Beta stuff. Also, most of the Youtube tutorial videos show everyone using a dedicated DCS server and file directory. I feel like I'm going to be limited in some way being stuck going through Steam. And as I progress to starting to fly in multiplayer mode, I wonder if Steam will be limiting in someway in terms of server access or speed if I'm going through the Steam pipe rather than directly to some of the dedicated DCS MP servers. I'm on Steam only because I started with them for some other non-flight sim games years ago. Now that I'm back into the flight sim world, it just seemed easier to buy DCS through Steam. Now I wonder if I made a mistake. IS THERE even a way to switch over without having the buy the aircraft and scenario modules again? As the Clash sang....."should I stay or should I go now?"

I've never heard about the increased roll rate, but the wingtip flutter issue to increase wing life was the answer when I asked a viper buddy of mine why the 120s were usually carried on the wingtip stations.

I apologize in advance if this is already addressed somewhere, but does anyone have any advice on the best ways to map the new Thrustmaster F-18 Hornet stick with the TM Warthog throttles. I love the new stick and I've mapped it to mirror the NATOPS manual as best I can. But some of the features are not clear depending on the mode. Also given the throttle is not the same as the actual Hornet throttle - there are always compromises on where to map buttons. For instance - what does the Sensor control Switch DEPRESS do? Where would be the best place to map the laser fire button? Or commanding point and area tracks? Does anyone have any good ideas or can point me to links where this is already addressed? I've searched but not come up with anything yet. TIA.

The previous responses about using Auto are all correct, you can switch to CCIP once you are tally target. However, the one thing that is confounding me about the Hornet that other IRL fighters DO have is that you can still have a target diamond on the ground while in CCIP that gives you range to the target. I don't know how the real Hornet is mechanized - hopefully a Hornet driver will weigh in here..... This (having the TGT diamond) is really important when you are doing a pop-up attack, or doing a dive bomb say from a CAS wheel. Your action points for the Pop or when to roll in from the CAS wheel are all based on range to the target. If you have no target info displayed in the HUD - such as it appears in the DCS Hornet HUD in CCIP - it makes setting up for the roll in really difficult and more of a TLAR maneuver (which is still valid. of course, but not ideal). Also a common scenario with dumb bombs in a CAS scenario is a JTAC may give you the coordinates to a centroid point in the middle of or near several targets. On the roll in, you would use the TGT diamond to get your eyes into the area and then pick your actual discreet target to put the pipper on in the dive. So again, not sure why the Hornet would not have this feature, i.e. have the target diamond visible in CCIP as well as AUTO. Speaking of CCIP..... Back in the day before JDAM and LGBs - CCIP dive bombing was typically the most accurate delivery method with dumb bombs like Mk82/84. It was far more accurate than AUTO if done correctly. So in certain situations where precision weapons are not available or the scenario drives you to an Old Skool delivery method, CCIP is still a very accurate way to get warheads on foreheads.

Hey @Maverick, thanks again for a very helpful video. After watching it, I was able to get into the basket after a couple of tries. Everytime I ignored the mantra of "Don't look at the basket, don't look at the basket, don't look at the basket" and peeked at the basket - my attempt went to "sh*t. And the other thing that spot on was once you're in to immediately transition to looking at the KC-130 itself using the canopy bow reference points. Anyway, great tutorial? Well done and thanks. I could never get plugged in before until I watched your video. "Don't look at the basket, don't look at the basket, don't look at the basket"!!

Perfect, thank you!

RE: IPD.... I will try that. Thanks Don.

Thanks Stray Wolf. I'll give those a try. Most of my "Stutter" I described earlier is gone once I went to Flat Shadows. Couple of questions on your VR settings: Why do you use 512 for the cockpit resolution? Is it to see the labels better? What does the MSAA setting do? What does the Anisotropic setting do? Thanks!

Wow, very cool! Is the kneeboard builder included in the mission editor section, or is it a separate download?

Thanks Don. Yeah I try to be pretty pedantic about adjusting the Goggles to make sure they are the most clear. Great idea on the AMPCD brightness. I'm not sure why I didn't think of that. Its what I would have done in the real jet. :doh: Finally, I try to be really specific about adjusting the seat height. In the Hornet, it's fairly easy to set and I can get a good view of the HUD at the correct eye height and all works well. But the A-10C is driving me absolutely mad. Maybe I'm just not used to that particular style of HUD, but is seems no matter what height I set the seat, either high, low or everywhere in between -I can't see all the symbology very well. Either the Top is cut off or the bottom is cut off at what I would consider a normal distance away from the instrument panel. About the only way I can see ALL of the HUD is to scooch my seat forward until I'm practically up against the instrument panel. It works, but turning around to reach anything on the left and right panels is practically impossible because they are well behind the seat at that point. Not sure if that makes sense. But it feels like I'm well forward of where the seat would be IRL to be able to see whole HUD. Anyone else have this issue? I currently have "Force IPD" unchecked in the VR settings. I wonder if checking that would help?

I had the exact same issue when I first got my VR rig. The issue is looking at dense objects like a city off the 3/9 line (wingline) I played with all the settings but the one thing that seemed to have the biggest effect on frame rate was the shadows (believe it or not). As soon as I set the shadows to FLAT, the problem went away and it's a really smooth now. I have Shadows and Terrain Object shadows both set to Flat. I also Have MSAA, Depth of field, Lens Effects Motion Blur and SSAA all OFF Those settings seemed to have the biggest effect on eliminating that issue.