Nedum

Hi, every system from Pimax will be better, as long as it has local dimming and Eye Tracking. You can lower the resolution of the HS if needed, and you will always get a much better image the Q3 can handle too you. And with the 72 FPS mode and Eye Tracking, it will always run as smooth as the Quest 3. The question is more like: "How much are you willing to pay for it?" I'm waiting for my Crystal Super 50 PPD. Nearly 130° horizontal FoV. Can't wait for it. Better local dimming than my current Crystal, much brighter, better colors, smaller, less weight, without any battery, I am so excited.

@NineLine As far as I can see, there was no fix for the F16's problem with the pitch behavior during the landing, which you yourself confirmed. My Question is: does the internal fix actually make it into the patch? If so, why wasn't it written into the notes? DCS: F-16C Viper by Eagle Dynamics Added AIM-9 seekers tracking flares prior to the missile being launched. Added Throttle OFF/IDLE Mouse Click on the throttle (key command/binding no longer required). Fixed: PDLT cycle with EXP causes freeze/crash. Fixed: Using GMT causes a game crash. Fixed: Special key bind for parking brake / antiskid not working. Fixed: Damage model - Pilot cannot survive any explosive hit. Fixed: Dogfight mode gets stuck in NO RAD. If not, why is a new track needed for a known issue that has not yet been solved? What exactly would change with a new track?

But it isn't! Can one explain, how ED is simulating >>not<< to align with the first viewed right target after the hand off? The interesting part is, at first the Mav tries to align and picks the right target after the auto hand off, but the Mav cross never closes. And as soon I try to get a lock with TMS up (Mav cross should be closed) the Mav tries to lock another target! Auto hand off -> Mav picks the right target, but one didn't get a good lock (no closed cross) TMS up short -> Mav switches to another target, even so hast the right target in the center of the open cross, and one gets instant a closed cross. TMS down and TMS Up again -> Mav switches back to the right target, but the Mav cross stays open. Repeating procedure till 4-3 miles., and then the "Magic" happens: right target, closed cross. I am really interested in to know how is that the right way to "simulate" how a Mav would behave with an auto hand off? And what I can't understand, why is the Mav switching to another target with TMS up even so, it is looking at the right target after an auto hand off, but only hasn't locked it. And if it auto-switches to the wrong target with TMS up, why do I get instant a closed Mav cross now? So, no, I don't believe, even If I am drunk, that the current behavior of the Mavs is any near a RL behavior! Not a tiny little bit!

Is there only a guessing of how often, and when, the pilot has to start to "fix" the GPS/INS drift? Is there no documentation about this procedure? Like: After a flight time of yy minutes, you will get a shift of xx to xx feet. To minimize the drift, you have to start the "fix" every yy minutes of the current flight time. Till now, I have the feeling, even ED doesn't know the answer! Would be nice to have something more than guessing! For me, it's hard to believe that CCIP bombing (if it would work ;)) is the most accurate and less dangerous way to drop bombs with the F16.

Ich glaube, ich hätte den Sarkasmus besser herausstellen sollen.

Das mit der F35 ist doch mal gut! Dann steht ja auch nichts mehr einer SU27SM Su35 oder MiG29 ++++, MiG 35 im Wege! Wenn ich es noch richtig in Erinnerung habe, war der Hauptgrund, weshalb keine modernen Varianten dieser Muster entwickelt wurde, dass man einen extrem hohen Anspruch für die Technik (RADAR, Störsender, etc.) hatte. Man wollte nicht raten und spekulieren. Mit der Entwicklung der F35 ist das wohl eindeutig hinfällig. Dass für das RADAR oder das IFF-System oder gar dem Helm der F35 genauere Daten vorliegen als bei der SU27, SU35 oder MiG29, glaubt doch wohl kaum ein Mensch. Es wird Zeit, dass endlich "Rote" Kampfjets in diese SIM Einzug erhalten, die die Kämpfe endlich wieder auf Augenhöhe ermöglichen! Warum sollte das beste geratene Ergebnis, was bei der F35 möglich sein wird, nicht auch bei den russischen Jets funktionieren? Hoffentlich wird sich eine Firma finden, die das umsetzen möchte und kann!

Du achtest ja gar nicht auf die Signale und ignorierst sogar die Richtungsanweisungen. Was ist deine Erwartungshaltung, an die Crew, wenn du diese ignorierst? 1. rollst du viel zu schnell 2. bewegst du dich weiter in eine Richtung, obwohl die Signale aufgehört haben (Minute 2:58) 3. ignorierst du die Signale der Crew (Minute 3+) Mein Vorschlag: 1. nur so schnell rollen, dass du jederzeit die Bewegung des Jets stoppen kannst 2. wenn du keine Signale bekommst, immer stehen bleiben. Das ist sicherer als weiterzurollen. 3. Erst wieder bewegen, wenn du den Signalgeber und seine Signale klar identifiziert hast. Die KI hatte in dem Beispiel, was du gezeigt hast, überhaupt keine Schuld. Wäre ich KI-Crewmitglied an Bord des Trägers gewesen, hätte ich dich zur Sicherheit der anderen Crewmitglieder vermutlich aus dem Jet geschossen. ;)

As a VR user, the Helmet alignment fail will now happen if the lines are not overlapping or the angle of the two crosses is too big. With one of the older patches, you have not to be as good as possible to overlap the crosses in the middle, the lines of the crosses have to be as parallel as possible. I can always align, but I have to move my had in such a position that the lines are in the best way parallel to each other. A little angle doesn't matter (as you can see in your screenshot where you can see the Align ok text), but if the cross of the Helmet and the HUD cross have a too big angle, the alignment will always fail, no matter if you have centered the crosses or not. Try to move your Head so the Helmet cross lines and the HUD cross lines are as much parallel as you can get, and your alignment will always be ok. Edit: but I don't know if this is the same as in RL. That's the way it works for me by 100 %!

If the DMS AFT long Button Press doesn't work, look for the visor toggle and/or up and down Button. Perhaps you have bound one of them without knowing. In RL you would see that, because the world would become brighter if you would raise the tinted visor, but not in DCS (so sad). So this can have the same effect as the DMS long after press. And you don't have to wait. Go into the controls section and search for visor. Then you will see, if there is an active binding for your controls, or what key bind is activating it.

The Kola Map is by far the worst Map if it's about FPS! I can play all other maps with 72 FPS at ground, and here and there a few short FPS drops lower than 72. But the Kola Map gives me steady 60 FPS low flying and on the ground 50-40 FPS at the lower end. I will stop playing this Map, after I have finished the F16 Campaign. I thought about buying the F18 Campaign for the Kola Map too, but no, that would be a pita. The funny part is, the Buildings' or models of other Planes or Helis are not the FPS eaters, and it doesn't matter how many of them I can see. It's all about the trees! So, RIP Kola for me and >>any<< Campaign or server with this Map!

Die 5090 wurde in China zum erste Mal mit 2600 USD als Preis genannt. https://www.guru3d.com/story/rumor-nvidia-rtx-5090-and-rtx-5080-pricing-details-unveiled-for-chinese-market/

Das Log zeigt mir an, dass du neben einer Pimax Crystal auch ein Varjo XR am Start hast? Sind die beide aktiv? Hast du wirklich eine langsame Reparatur durchgeführt und den Haken aktiviert bei der Suche nach extra Files nach der Reparatur? Es ist schon seltsam, dass erst die kompletten Treiber und Settings für die Varjo geladen werden, und am Schluss dann die Pimax Crystal als Open XR Renderer. Edit: hat damit nichts zu tun. Es gibt keinen besonderen Fehler im Log File, was mich vermuten lässt, dass der Fehler eher von der Hardware kommt, als vom Spiel. Kann es sein, dass du deine 4090 irgendwie verändert, übertaktet hast oder mit geringerer Spannung laufen lässt? Am häufigsten tritt so ein Fehler auf, wenn die CPU oder GPU nicht vernünftig, bzw. außerhalb der vorgegebenen Spezifikationen laufen. Falls das der Fall ist, mal diese Änderungen rückgängig machen und es wieder probieren.

Und obendrauf kommt noch das inside outside tracking der PIMAX Air. Das ist ein gewaltiger Kostenvorteil. Mit Micro QLED und dafür größerem FoV wäre mir das HS lieber gewesen und ich hätte das gekauft, aber dann wäre der Formfaktor wohl nicht mehr möglich gewesen. So wird es die PIMAX Crystal Super mit QLED. 57 PPD, wir brauchen dringend eine 6090+. :)

How you try to compare the big sweet spot and so a nice sharp image of the Q3 with the more limited sweet spot of the Pimax Crystal Light leads to wrong assumptions! It sounds like, because of the smaller sweet spot of the Pimax Crystal Light, the image quality and sharpness of the CL is limited to the smaller sweet spot. That is wrong, and we should say that. The Pimax Crystal Light, once in the sweet spot, will always give you over 95 % of the whole lenses a way sharper picture as the Q3 can ever do! There is no question about that! There is a big difference if we talk about edge to edge clarity of the lenses (here is the Q3 the big winner), the sharpness (here hits the CL the Q3 like a bus) or the sweet spot. What's right is, the Q3 has the bigger sweet spot, so you don't need to struggle with the headset to find it, but the Pimax has a much bigger sweet spot than the G2. And If the player has found this sweet spot, the overall sharpness of nearly the entire lenses of the Crystal Light, is much, much, much better as the one of the Q3! The Quest 3 can and will never compare with the Pimax Crystal if we talk about sharpness, colors, and brightness! Not a tiny little bit! I own the Quest 3, the G2 and the Pimax Crystal (not Light), and I can compare all of them. And one should know, the new panels and lenses of the Crystal Light are now better as the ones of the old Crystal. I could test the Crystal Light, and I was impressed how good they are. And if my old Crystal is so much better than the Q3, how could one try to compare the Light and the Q3 if we talk about sharpness? No way! I think people try to compare apples with oranges, if they try to compare a Quest 3 and a Crystal light if we talk about visuals and sharpness. If we are talking about features, then the Q3 starts to shine! Leaving aside the thing about the sharpness, the rest of your posting is spot on. At the end: If I had to choose between a Q3 and the Light, and it's only about Sims, the Light would be my favorite. Would I also like to play other VR-Games, like Beatsaber, or do some social gaming, or AR, I would go with the Q3. The Q3 has the better features and the controller tracking is much more precise. Are visuals the main thing, then again the Crystal Light. The tracking of the controllers is good enough for most of the games. Even Beatsaber is very playable if you play only hard mode. Personally, I would never buy any new VR-Headset without eye tracking anymore. If one has the money, one should go for a VR-Headset with eye tracking. It's unbelievable how much more GPU power one can use for better image quality. But it's expensive if you want to buy a new VR-Headset like the Pimax Crystal Super.

Hi Nik, this Thread, page 2, my posting. Take a look and try my settings. You should get mind-blowing results.