Bagpipe

You must be new here... If you want to pick at a FM you have to provide real solid evidence, not just "feelings". Don't get me wrong I mean this respectfully and only say this to try to help you get your issue dealt with effectively. No snark intended. I am curious now as you have irl experience and most do not but without "evidence" it won't get looked at too hard...generally speaking. What folks tend to do is chart real world test results vs. in-sim testing and compare and point out to the devs where it is wrong. Without this the answer will generally be "correct as is" In terms of your twist stick issue, you generally will never use 100% twist/rudder except from on the ground and even then it can be avoided. So what you could try is reducing the "Saturation" of the axis to around 70-80% and dial in a curve of, say, 20-30%. This will allow you much more finite control for those awkward moments. All the best dude.

They are working on the 2022 and beyond video as we speak. I have a feeling there will be some sneaky peaks then potentially. Who knows. That's my best guess though

Yer tellin' me!

First dude looks like a 40k Space Marine......heyyy waiit a minute....!

Oh the hypocrisy is strong in this one. This has got to be the most cringe thread I have ever read on these forums! Give respect, receive respect. Simples. Fine for me

I would definitely turn v-sync off. I have a 60hz 1440p monitor and do not use v-sync. Never have and do not get head track stuttering. I remember some issues years ago when I first got into DCS but I can't for the life of me remember what it was that sorted it out for me in the end. One thing to check is the general "health" of your rig. With your hardware you should be holding good enough frame rates with higher settings than you have. Have you checked that your RAM is running at the correct setting in your BIOS. CPU-z is great for telling you what is actually going on with your rig. A massive one which could really help is your paging file needs to be set correctly. If you have 64gb of RAM I would be setting at least 32gb aside on your windows drive and assigning your paging file to "custom size" to allow it to use this space. https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/news/how-to-manage-virtual-memory-pagefile-windows-10,36929.html You have to remember to keep that space free on the drive going forward though and deselect the "Automatically manage size" box in the settings window. As Bossco says, making sure that the USB isn't being suspended by Windows is very important too

Can you share your system specs please and is it TrackIR brand or another head tracker you use?

Could we have the instant action HARM missions updated to include the HTS now that we have it? Well, maybe once it is stable anyways... no rush

oh err, I have 32gb...must not have updated my sig! Nice spot Like I say I am streaming in multiplayer on these settings in a full server and have very decent frame rates so I feel it has to be related to the carrier. Unfortunately I don't have a track so probably not a very useful report... EDIT: It's possibly a combination of the Syria map, the carrier and the mission. I will try at night on an empty caucasus map and see how she fares

Didn't grab the track replay unfortunately and have moved onto a different mission now later in the day. I have attached my settings and spec is in my signature. Please note that I use these settings successfully enough to fly on Storm of War and Hoggit servers regularly while streaming also. The issue is either confined to the Supercarrier module or possibly just the unit intensity of the mission though culling was set to 100km and the campaign was rated as 2/3 for cpu intensity iirc.

Just spawned in on the supercarrier at night and the performance is absolutely terrible. It is a Liberation mission on Syria so it is fairly busy but as low as 9fps when i generally maintain 55+ is pushing it a bit. Is there work being done to improve this or will it come with the Vulkan improvements? I can't remember it ever being this bad

wow, totally forgot about this. It's very unusual to perform this action sequence and encounter this bug but it does exist and it is inaccurate so yeah

Nice spot! First the AMRAAM nerf and then this what next...lol *sarcasm* *just incase you missed it*

Sounds great for added flexibility, can't see why it should not be supported really

accidentally finding a module bug and "blaming" the mission maker...priceless thanks for reporting this dude

ok fair enough xD

Hello, F2 view has the info bar locked and cannot be removed with the usual ctrl+y keys. Also the player's unit is called "Ataribaby" instead of user's own profile name? Enjoyed my first mission though, nicely done

Not an expert in any way but I doubt that with that much RAM installed it will really matter what size your paging file is to be honest. https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/virtual-memory-low-heres-fix/

Stuff that helped me with random crashes lately; 1. Deleting all shaders including metashaders and all shadercache folders in terrain module folders etc. 2. making sure my paging file was exactly the right size for the amount of RAM I have on board 3. creating a new saved games folder 4. running a slow repair of DCS 5. cleaning out ALL the dust from the gpu sink etc. You could give them a bash. Hope it helps

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pQgUJ8XKYE_QRC78MwhpTiRjiI4vzLok/view?usp=sharing There you go, it is not the cleanest of tracks as I was messing with bindings and screenshots at one point but it should have what you need

Hi Reflected, Sorry to break it too you but it appears that the formation flying in, at least, mission 2 of the big show (channel version) is broken. The pic shows the mess of the formation as they desperately try to follow the leader on an insanely steep climb to who knows where. On a hunch I am gonna say it is the new AI formation handling that ED recently implemented on the last OB patch which has done this though it could be a waypoint issue though I am no mission editor myself so I could not say for sure. I have attached tried to attach a track so you can see what I mean, even over the airfield some are a little all over the place but the majority stay grouped. The file is too large even compressed. If you really need a track let me know and I will share it some other way but I am assuming it should be the same for your install as it is mine. Not sure if you can fix or if you would have to take it up with ED? Cheers!

Yeah it really isn't good enough especially not when you look at the P-47 and the Mossie already having more accurate system simulations than this module which has been around for far longer. In this respect, the carb heater is pointless and the fact you can control the cowl flaps may as well not even be implemented for the amount of good/accuracy they offer. As per my startup track and the one I removed before hand proving that it also does not matter how you prime the lines and cylinders because you will get a successful start and an overheating engine regardless of operation or ambient temperature. In essence what we have here is something akin to a "default" 172 in any civil sim when we have been sold "payware quality"... What is the point in reading the manual, following the checklists or anything else when none of it is going to make a blind bit of difference? @Eagle Dynamicsisn't it about time you at least weighed in here with a definitive timeline and roadmap for this module to leave early access? Why is it even being allowed to fester for this long? The DCS community are very forgiving, in general, when they are offered reasonable and just explanations. Unfortunately, the whole "it doesn't sell very well so we can't afford the resources" isn't going to cut it in this instance as it has gone on for far, far too long already. I REALLY do not enjoy complaining about your products and I rarely do but this one really sticks in my throat, worse than the Anton, because it is so non complex in comparison to the others. What gives?

Yes, that is about right. The issue here is not the time to get to 40, the issue is the fact that the checklist tests should not raise the temperature beyond 75 but the temp rises to 150+ regardless of what you do, tests or no tests. It cannot be correct

You can watch my track replay and speed it up in dcs replay mode to see what I do but yeah the oil takes a while to come to 40 before I begin the run up checks

yeah the rest all work fine, if you manage to work something out share here and I will copy, maybe ED could too