Nedum

I think we both have different documentations about that behavior? Please show me in what situation I can get a yellow hollowed square like in all me known documentation for the DCS F16 C in game? Till today, I wasn't able to see that kind of symbolic. No matter what kind of IFF status I was using. What I can see right now are green fulfilled circles in a big white Box in the FCR Screen. In what section of the document we can read about that behavior? Really, I want to know what happen on the Screens, and why this happens. But if I read the documentation, I can't find any kind of that behavior and even so not one word about why the symbolic is so, like shown in DCS. Why is in the TWS expand view of 2 tracks with the Datalink on, one target a yellow fulfilled square and one a white on? And why can I only make the white one to a system target and bug it (all in TWS)? Where is the documentation for this behavior? But as I said before, please show me, how I manage to get a hollowed yellow square, in game within TWS mode and Datalink on, like shown in the DCS F16 documentation! No matter what I have tried (and I've tried a lot), I was never able to manage to get a yellow hollowed square (system target). Right now, I am u n a b l e to see if I have made the tracked targets during TWS scans to systems targets, like in the actual DCS F16 Datalink Symbolic documentation. I have shown in a track (and that's why I have to mix things up), that because of the TWS Track Bug and the not working symbology, most people can't even notice that the bug is there, because there is no symbolic for a System Track during a Datalink connection. What we can do, is to play this the IFF symbolic (which was broken, I don't now if that is fixed), and disable parts of the Datalink symbolic. But that leads to the old Problem. Where the hexx is the hollowed yellow Datalink square during a TWS scan gone? What is the reason for we can see a system track? It's because with that symbol we can see that TWS has a special eye on its track, and we know, we can make all of those tracks to bugged Tracks with only one click. So please explain, why is that not necessary for a TWS scan with an active Datalink? With an active Datalink we have to guess which track is a system track? Why? If you can, P l e a s e show me how I can get the yellow hollowed square during a TWS scan and Datalink on. I ask that since month and nobody could answer me this simple question.

Hi, nearly all page changes will switch TWS to RWS, not matter if you are in NAV, AA or AG mode, Change your Page = go to RWS.

The symbology is right now completely off. And if this the only new one on top of all the old bugs, we should be happy. But after a short testing, it's not the only new one. With this patch, the Symbology is more off than ever before. I am getting right now the old "Can only bug one system track (and now every time)" plus " the first track, with Datalink on, is always a white track, until the track is less than 10 miles away." So, in the end, one bug on top of the old one. But only for the Datalink Symbology. I can see this behavior in all Quick Action Missions. No Mods or whatever activated. I don't know how long we have to wait for a Fix, but this bug is several months old. And I fear all those bugs will not be fixed until the sniper pod is ready. And there are so many of them, soooooo many, and with each patch we get some more. I think the only weapon without a bug is the gun, but I am not 100% sure.

As far as I know, @Taz1004 has made a Mod, reducing the Haze on all maps. Try that posting It's still working.

What have you tried? I think, that's for HOTAS Systems with a Hardware Detent for Full Mill Power and Afterburner. With this setting, you can finally set when the AFTB should start to work, dependent on your Hardware Detent. Before you had to set up a curve for that. Edit: ok now I think I know what you may want to say. No matter what you try, there is no change. Yeah, would be nice it would work like I thought.

Hi, since the latest Update, in some missions I have an overly loud sound noise if I am communicating with the AWACS. In some Missions, that loud background noise will never disappear (F16 Afghanistan Quick Action Mission Air to Air), so I have to set the Sound for the Channel 1 to off. The Background is in some cases so loud I can't really hear what was said. It's sounds like I am on the wrong Channel, or the AWACS or Tower is too far away, so I hear this loud overlay noise. Is this a bug? null

Ok, so that everyone has heard it once: "Not one of those who have complained, are complaining or will complain about the delays have or will ever have any blame for ED's internal processes!" And one more thing: "Anyone who supports ED, whether financially, through YouTube videos or anything else, has the right to point out and criticize obvious deficiencies, as long as that criticism is then justified!" Justified criticism is necessary for the purposeful further development of the game. You have NO right to try to shut up or blame the ones who are not happy with all the patch delays this year. Not a tiny little bit! You are the one who is dishonest with yourself. Don't blame the others because you can't or will not see the truth.

Oh, now that you mention it. It's not ED that has a problem with patch management, it's the people supporting the game that are to blame for all the delays. Good thing we have smart people like you. I almost thought ED had an internal issue. I almost fell for it. A question from me to the geniuses among us. If someone is really p*ssed off, regardless of whether it seems justified from another point of view or not, what would be smarter? To inflame the situation further and point out how childish he or she is, or, if you know you can't calm the person down, simply not to write anything? Three guesses for everyone! I've already found my answer, I'm curious to see what the geniuses have to say.

Disconnect your G2 completely from your PC, restart. Connect the G2 again, but use different Ports. You are using the dcs.exe in the bin-mt folder? Do you use any kind of tool that could limit the refresh rate (amd panel)? Try to do a fresh installation of your gpu driver or reset the settings to standard. Edit: Ok, try to disable Dirt and Flare and set it to none. Within the VR-Settings, disable Bloom.

WMR You should find it within the Settings App. Edit: And that what @BIGNEWY said: check this too, if my suggestion was wrong (change the USB-Ports too). If all went wrong, disconnect your G2 completely from the PC, restart, deinstall all WMR Software, restart the PC, connect your G2 and install all the WMR software again.

Plz check your refresh rate settings. Sounds like your Headset was set to 60 Hz

To test it, one can pick the F16 Free Flight Quick Action Mission on the Caucasus Map and test it. In 9 of 10 times you'll pick only one target if you are in TWS mode, even so 4 targets are in between the TWS scan bar. Only one target will be bugged. That behavior will stay until the targets are in a 25 Miles range. Could it be that there is something bound to IFF scan mode and the bugged Data Link and the wrong symbolic? As soon one is using the Data Link there is no way anymore to see what Tracks are System Tracks (no hollowed out yellow squares will ever been shown with the Data Link on). I have the feeling, the F16 is completely broken. Nothing works anymore in a way that was marked for years as "correct as is". And the F16 is the only AC in DCS that has a different weapon behavior, even so she is using the same hardware as other AC. All documents for the F16 can't explain that different behavior. The worst part of that is, they explain mostly a different, the old working behavior and steps to let the hardware do their work. That alone makes it's nearly impossible to know it's working like it should and how to use the Hardware, the now "correct as is" way. Mostly all the F16 documents are broken and misleading to a wrong explanation. Is there any ETA we will get working systems with the right, not misleading documents? Right now I have the feeling not even ED is knowing what is "correct as is" and some schoolers have some "fun" with the F16 module as a programmer test bed.

I tried this several times, I always have to "adjust" the target. But even so, I tried it to do it manually, the Mav D snaps to the more in the front Target until I am below 7-6 miles. And it doesn't matter the wrong target is in direct line of site or left and right but more near to me as the target of interest. At less than 6 miles, the Auto Handoff always works, even so the wrong target is now closer to the right target (angle wise). No correction using the Mav picture necessary. The Magic Border is 6 or fewer miles for a working Auto Handoff snap with a Mav D. The TV Mav is the better pick for daytime. There is something completely wrong with the Auto Handoff and the Mav D. For what is the TGP and an IR Missile good for (no matter which daytime), if the Missile snaps to targets which are 100 feet away from the line of sight off the designated target, only because they are more near to me? One can test this behavior very good with the weapon test quick action mission on the Sinai map. Try the Auto Handoff with the Mavs D. At 6 miles the Magic happens and the Mav D will lock the right target without any correction needed even the wrong target in front of the designated target is now more overlapping the target of interest. The angle got worse, so the view to the target of interest, but the "Magic" does its job. How is that possible? Explanation? More overlapping but better clearance for a target pick? What would we do without some kind of Magic. But this all away. The real questions are, why is it more complicated with the F-16 to designate and pick targets as with any other AC using the same weapon, and why wasn't it that complicated before, even it was marked for years as "correct as is"? Do we require evidence again, because evidence has changed again? Is there any explanation, why all the stuff with nearly the same hardware is working so different with the F-16, and that even so this good old working behavior was marked for years as "correct as is"? I can't wait to hear that explanation.

Hi, um deine Angabe der verwaschenen Schrift einordnen zu können, frage ich mal, ob du schon Erfahrung mit anderen VR-HS hast und ob, es in anderen Spielen deutlich besser ist, als in DCS? Hilfreich wären auch immer ein paar Screenshots von deinen Einstelllungen in DCS, ansonsten artet das hier in eine Raterunde aus. Mit Virtual Desktop wirst du immer Verluste bei derr BQ haben. Eine hochleistungsfähige WiFi-Verbindung (6G), ist da fast schon Pflicht, wenn die BQ nicht zu stark leiden soll.

The same, but with a better viewing angle and much better video quality. And to be clear, the proof we are looking for is simple physics. Why do you think the Russians use much bigger and wider tires and then even two of them at each stage? Why is the engine inlet on the MIG 29 closed for bottom loading and open at the top? There is no physics in this world that would give an F16 a chance to land on a grass surface. Not with those little narrow wheels. Not now and not in a thousand years. Physics doesn't lie.

How I understand all the statements: 1. The Viper has a new (big) INS drift and can't currently correct it by itself (no matter of the time period of the mission (GPS is working)) or (seems to be not 100 % clear) can do a self fix for the INS drift every 60 seconds. 2. Nobody knows how big (in feet) in how many seconds the INS drift of the Viper is. 3. Preplanned GPS attacks don't work anymore with the same precision as before, with only using STPT coordinates. So preplanned doesn't make sense anymore, if you want to stay high and try to use the clouds as cover. 4. A JDAM can fix the INS drift by itself 30 seconds after the release (ED seems to working on it). 5. No other Jet has an issue with preplanned bombing runs like the Viper. 6. The JDAM module can fix the INS drift a way better than the GPS module of the Viper (Viper 60 seconds for an INS drift fix, JDAM 30 seconds (future)). 7. Nobody can tell us, how it should work in which way, if something special happens and why the old "correct as is" is now "was wrong all the time". Possible Solution: The Crew Chief nails a future JDAM GPS module on the Viper. Now the Viper can fix the INS drift by itself every 30 seconds. Problem fixed and a huge upgrade for the Viper. Fun aside: I know the Viper is still in development, but I didn't buy the Viper just to get every patch a new (then) broken "function" which was working before like a charm. And this year it looks like we have that kind of "new stuff" with every new patch. The worst part is, there is absolute no documentation in which we can see how we have to use the new stuff (Fuzzes anywhere?). So we try to figure out, why a system is now "broken" (for us), investing hours of our time, and later we get a "correct as is" or "we mixed some things up and in "two weeks" you will get a fix". And if we ask for a documentation who explains all the new stuff, we get a link to the Patch Thread with e.g., "TGP: we have mixed up two different pods, to test some stuff and later this year (it's still May 2024) the things will work like they should". And to complete all the "fun" we get more "new" stuff with more things to learn without any documentation. Sometimes I have the feeling, ED wants to fool us and not funnily. We really want to work together with you (ED) and we will invest our time, so your product gets better, but you, ED, should reach us a hand and please start stopping slapping us with every new patch and changing things without any explanation and documentation. I want to have fun, not working for you!

That's not the point here. The view angle and the timestamp for both eyes are the same. The difference of how big the picture of this reflection is, is 2 times. And for me, the most important part is, this kind of reflection is always only on the right side of the canopy, never on the left side. On the left side is also a reflection, but much more shifted to the pilot direction, and really tiny. If I fly straight into the sun, the reflection should be in the middle or on both sides, but never only on one side, and for sure, never always only on one special side.

Yes, I have the exact same problem. And another one is, this kind of reflection is only on the right side of the canopy. No matter what I'd tried, I couldn't reproduce this reflection on the left side. F16 Quick Action Mission, Syria, Cold and Dark. Edit: Track uploaded. As soon you close the Canopy you can see the reflection on the right side, and no matter what I try, always only on the right side. And in VR the pictures in each eye are a way different. I have a feeling, this bug is an old one saying "Hello again". glow_f16.trk Edit 2: My reflections are not as bright as one can see in the pictures of the first posting. It seems to be a mod that makes it so bright. Nevertheless, all the said points still stay.

If I understand the posting from @Mapi right, the current "solution" is wrong, and a setting between 200 (AGL) and 20k feet (MSL) should work? Come on ED, what's going on? We need more information. Sometimes I've got the feeling a ED-dev makes big fun with us. The current situation is so frustrating.

Nope, not here. Do you use any kind of a Mod?

Ok, it's shifted with no answer. Doesn't help a bit.

Thank you, I'll take a look.

Das ist viel zu allgemein gehalten. Weder im Winter noch im Sommer bekomme ich unter der Crystal Hitzeprobleme. Das alles ist abhängig, wie warm es in den Räumlichkeiten ist und welches Headset man benutzt. Ob nun See- oder Reisekrankheit, sei dahingestellt, aber es helfen die gleichen Mittel aus der Apotheke und man kann trainieren, dass dieser Effekt komplett nachlässt. Bei mir hat es 6 Wochen gedauert, bis ich von "mir ist Übel", zu "Da war doch mal was mit Motion Sickness?" gewechselt hat. Was meinst du mit deutlich reduzieren und das mit der aktuell schnellsten Hardware? Ich höre oft solche subjektiven/ungenauen Aussagen, die den Eindruck vermitteln, dass die BQ in der VR schlecht sein muss. Ich bin gerne bereit, das Gegenteil zu beweisen, insbesondere, wenn es um sehr gute Hardwareausstattung und das machbar Mögliche in VR geht (in Bezug auf BQ). Die 8kx kenne ich nur von einem Arbeitskollegen, aber die BQ der Linsen und Displays kann nicht mal im Ansatz mit der BQ der Pimax Crystal mithalten. Das horizontale Sichtfeld ist der Hammer, der Rest ist "Steinzeittechnik", um es mal übertrieben zu formulieren. Gerade die Linsen und die Displays mit der großen Auflösung in der 8kx, um das große Sichtfeld zu erreichen, fordern ihren Tribut. Das fehlende Eye Tracking, macht es dann nicht besser. Hier wischt die Crystal mit der 8kx nochmal den Boden auf, wenn es um die erreichbare Performance und BQ geht. Mir ist durchaus bewusst, dass das zwei vollkommen unterschiedliche Konzepte sind, aber genau deshalb sollte man mit solchen Aussagen wie die deine sehr vorsichtig sein, weil sie einfach einen falschen Eindruck vermitteln können. Hast du schon mal gesehen, was mit der aktuell schnellsten HW und einer Crystal möglich ist? Ich kann dir sagen, dass der Eindruck, den du hier vermittelst, so einfach nicht stimmt.

Thank you for that. But, as far I can see on this page, It's more of the view of someone who wants to disarm the fuzzes, or did I miss a section of this page? What I am looking for is an explanation when I should use a special type of bomb and with which fuzz, and what settings for the current situation (MK84 Nose or Tail or NT, use Fuzzxy with settings xyz, because of blah blah, and so on). Wags explanation was more an overview, but we need much more details. As one can see, the "bug" reports rising because of missing information (e.g., the fuzz was set to low, but even you can do that doesn't mean this setting can work in any way).

Ich hatte mich in meinem vorherigen Post mitreißen lassen. Was davon für dich übrig bleibt, ist, dass VR immer sehr subjektiv ist. Viele lieben es, auch wenn die BQ in der VR nicht so gut ist wie am Monitor, andere kommen damit gar nicht zurecht. Und der wichtigste Satz für dich: Mit einer Quest 3 kannst du erst einmal nichts verkehrt machen. Die kleinste Speicher-Version davon sollte reichen, ein anderer Headstrap und ein Link-Kabel. Es gibt viele gute Tutorials auf YouTube. Die am besten vorher ansehen und dann entscheiden, ob dir das schon zu komplex wird. Wenn du dann immer noch der Meinung bist, du schaffst das, dann greife auf jeden Fall zu. Eine Alternative zur Quest 3 wäre eine Crystal Light. Die BQ wäre besser, aber deine "Mühle" würde dann keine bessere BQ als diejenige, die du bei einer Quest 3 hervorzaubern können, ohne dass du nur noch Ruckeln sehen würdest. Die Quest 3 bietet dir neben Sims eben noch viel mehr als eine Pimax Crystal Light. Du wirst aber vermutlich nicht darum herumkommen dir eh eine neue Grafikkarte kaufen zu müssen, wenn du in der VR von DCS Spaß haben möchtest.