Baldrick33

You can also unlock and lock the tail wheel to aid turning (right shift T)

I would love a Battle of Britain era set of aircraft. Though it would be quite limiting multiplayer gameplay wise and even single player it will always be my ultimate wish for WW2 simulation. That said I am enjoying the later era aircraft we have in single player. DCS is many things to many people, getting to fly a number of cool military aircraft and blow stuff up and get blown up just keeps delivering for me but if it was a simulation of 1943 WW2 I would probably be saying they got the wrong year!

Not a solution to the question but I consolidated a number of button boxes and controllers into 128 button vjoy controllers to simplify things using Joystick Gremlin.

Are you sure you have updated the Sound Module application, it is separate to the Simshaker for Aviators application? https://simshaker.com/software/general/sound/

How will it turn at low speeds on the ground without differential brakes? It doesn't have toe brakes if that is what you mean as the mechanism for differential brakes was linked to the rudder similar to other British planes of that era. It will easily turn inside its own wingspan using the brake lever and rudder pedals and the free to rotate tailwheel. I am not sure what you are meaning? The only issue I have the the Mosquito I resolved by building an analog brake, the implementation of a digital brake will always be a compromise but seems better done with the Spitfire which builds up pressure the longer the lever is held, whereas the Mosquito seems instantly full on.

Isn’t it easier to refer to the release version as “Stable”. Then we have Steam Stable and Beta versions and ED Standalone Stable and Beta Versions

That reflects the design of the G2 compared to the G1. They use the same resolution panel but the lenses in the G2 are different and to improve image quality are designed to be oversampled by default. Steam are just applying the "correct" resolution to optimise the image quality. The G2 isn't designed to be run at the native resolution of the panel. For these reasons I sold my G2 and kept my G1 as my 2080Ti wasn't capable of pushing the G2 to the levels to see much if any benefit image wise in DCS. Of course there are other benefits of the G2 over the G1 but not enough for me.

The tricky bit is discovering what you really enjoy and without trying various configurations of 2d, trackir, VR, button boxes, MFDs, trackballs, HOTAS mouse configurations etc. and with a decent enough PC it can be hard to plan what to spend your hard earned cash on. An awful lot is down to preferences. I guess a good starting place is what do you do now with DCS and want do you want to do going forward? I love VR in DCS, it is my favourite VR experience. That said I enjoy the really simple things with it as the immersion just blows me away every time. Be it firing up the Mossie and just flying it to the next airfield, or creating a simple easy mission to blow some stuff up with a reasonable chance of survival! I also enjoy flicking switches as shallow as that may sound and have an array of button boxes, 3 printed gear & flap levers and so on, all of which I find remarkably easy with a bit of muscle memory. Don't be put off by being blinded from your controls with a headset it is amazing what you can quickly learn by feel and it feels natural after a short time. Voice attack is good. Personally I only use it for comms (VAICOM) as it feels a bit unreal treating an old aircraft like a modern car (that said I don't use voice control in my car which it has either). However, I get that real pilots are used to calling out check lists even in single seaters so it isn't that unrealistic - just doesn't work for me. If you want to run complex single player missions and lots of multiplayer the combination of VR performance and spotting capability may be a serious issue and reduce your enjoyment. I know some VR pilots are exceptionally good but I do feel VR is better for immersion but has some drawbacks for competitive play, so it depends what you want.

By simply mapping mouse buttons to a HOTAS and just looking at a cockpit control in VR it is remarkably easy to do most stuff you would use a keyboard for. Stuff you might not want to be looking around the cockpit whilst operating can be mapped to HOTAS and button boxes and in a short time with muscle memory can quickly be operated without fumbling around. Or as mentioned use voice controls. I am not a fan of using a mouse or VR controllers but that is a preference thing.

Referring to the fact you did not have permission to edit the lua file I believe.

It might be worth trying this tool:

VAICOM has an option to suppress the messages, so it can be done. Whether there is a way of doing this outside of VAICOM I don't know.

I use VAICOM wherever possible but still have the comms menu enabled as a fall back just in case there is something I can't do. I do find the pop ups annoying and if they could be totally user initiated it would improve the immersion for me.

@Mistermann it depends what you mean by custom profiles. In SSA you can adjust all the various outputs relative to each other for each aircraft (e.g g forces, engine, gun fire etc.) if you want to change the samples sent to the seat for effects then you use the editor. Personally I find the adjustability of the SSA aircraft profiles more than sufficient.

I will happily take stuff when it comes rather than fret about knowing the minutiae of their working life. Over the years I have followed a number of games/sim developers and the community in every case has wished for greater, more transparent communication about developments. Unfortunately elements of every community I have witnessed will micro analyse every word and take every projected release or extrapolate a progress update to determine a likely release as promises which then get broken and the sky falls. Or get cross because the team doesn't appear to be working on their specific priority. I think ED does pretty well and has significantly more community interaction than other developers I have experienced. More regular and granular two way engagement between enthusiasts and developers is a dream but probably only really possible in closed groups IMHO.

DCS Version 2.7.9 is the latest version of DCS SSA Version 2.3.1.0 is the latest version of SSA There is nothing to update AFAIK

Maybe, though It would probably be amusing watching a 21 year old kid drive a 1940s car now!

I have a G1 and we have a family Quest 2. The Quest 2 is very versatile and can be used for many games and obviously very portable, the G1 I use for DCS and race sims. If the primary use is DCS I would go with a G2 right now. If you can squeeze a few more MHz out of your processor all the better!

It might be worth adding your PC specs to see how well you should be able to run VR.

I use speakers which obviously is the worst option for using a mic. Bought a headset to replace my G1 headphones but was a bit of a faff wearing two headsets. After upgrading to Win11 I tried the G1 mic again and it has worked perfectly, even with the Mossie Merlins cranked up on the speakers! I can't categorically say it is Win11 but something changed that made the mic work much better in my G1.

The Cougars are always going to be a compromise, using modifiers or short/long presses to simulate the extra buttons on the real MFD. If the Apache is really your thing and you want a realistic control method I can see the attraction. Plus I think the Cougars fit inside, so will be handy for someone using multiple aircraft. I think you need to be pretty set on using the Apache a lot but given the fan base I would expect there to be a number of hardcore sim pilots who would go for this, Cougar ownership or not.

You can bind a fire rockets trigger button and both control (Master and Salvo) switches can be bound too. Yes they work and I got to blow stuff up with them! Ergonomics wasn't really a thing back then though was it!

Seems to have been addressed with today's patch. Thanks.

Yay!

Pretty much what @Schwarzfeldsaid though I might suggest it is more likely middle aged men with a decent disposable income that are the market It is basic pricing elasticity economics. Tiny niche market with low production runs. They could half the price but not sell twice the volume so would lose out and probably not be worth making them in the first place and the tiny niche market lose the opportunity.