Cgjunk2

Seeing a 55 percent tax would make a customer freak out just the same. I just wonder if it's legal to claim they are collecting a tax that is not actually directly payable by the customer to begin with. Again, I'm not saying wingwing wouldn't increase the price by just as much across the board to cover the tariff they already payed to import it, because I'd expect they would.

You could argue that the market is so small for high-end Flight Sim peripherals, that even Winwing's business case was already marginal in pre-tarrif conditions. I'm not going to hold my breath for any US made products within this niche market. And if there were to be any, I'd have to imagine it would be using nearly 100 percent imported components. And on that note, it wouldn't surprise me if it's more likely for winwing to look into hiring a few people to do final assembly of the peripherals in the US in order to get the "Made in US" sticker. I doubt it would change the pricing much, since I imagine the taxes on importing their components will still add up.

If this is due to the tarriffs, would they actually be listing it under taxes on the customer's bill? I would think if winwing is paying the tarrif tax upon importing the inventory, they would increase the sale price of the product to compensate....not seperate it out as a tax owed by the customer. I'm not saying the price would be any different, but I find it odd that they would itemize the tarrif under "taxes due by the customer"

I’m fine with rumble effects, even on a FFB joystick. The problem is that there seem to be more and more folks that think rumble effects are FFB. Unfortunately I recall seeing this with “influencer” review videos when the Moza FFB stick came out. Slick professional “hey guys” videos by people who had no idea what FFB was supposed to be modeling as it relates to airplanes. I saw reviews that basically seemed like they were unaware of what they should be feeling, skipped commentary on FFB, and instead worried that the gunfire effects werent very strong, and “geez it’s big, probably cant use on on a desk” comments. I’d hate for Moza or other FFB manufacturers to feel pressure to appeal to influencers or other gamers that don’t understand airplanes and how to model forces. But I feel like I’m taking this off topic. Wouldn’t want to turn into an old man yelling at clouds with my ranting lol.

I agree about the need for tuning. How they work their magic to tune I;m not sure, but hopefully it will be made a bit less "touchy". As an aspirational force feedback stick and rudder owner (dang that stuff is expensive!), I really hope that the FM gets properly done with regard to force feedback. The lack of trimming/stick position changes is disappointing. Hopefully it's not an oversight, but just something they haven't gotten to yet. As far as the amount the displacement forces as a function of speed, I guess I'd have to research more on the Corsair's handling. Even heavy planes could theoretically have very light forces at all speeds based on the mechanical and aerodynamic design of control surfaces. Regardless, I hope that just as much research goes into figuring out a good force feedback profile as the FM itself. Force feedback is the largest untapped flight simulation advantage there is to increase realism, and I really hope that developers get serious about it soon. If they don't, the ship may sail and there will be nobody left interested in simming with old airplanes that have aerodynamic forces. I fear that time is already near given how many people think force feedback is about feeling the gun make the stick vibrate... sigh. lol

I actually suspect that the Corsairs FM is just fine, but we have trouble "feeling" it because most of us are flying on spring centered joysticks that give the same pressure at 80kts as they do at 300kts. It's the same for rudders, it's super easy to overshoot how much movement you'd need causing wild yawing. I had a lot of problems with the huey and how it felt fake, until I really thought about how much movement I was commanding with my stick. And since every overcorrection on one axis affects all other axes, it just felt bad. In a way, I had to train myself to imagine forces on my joystick that weren't actually there, once I did (and when I got a joystick extgenstion), things started to feel more real. Most warbirds in DCS have a one to one relationship between the movement of the joystick and the movement commanded to the control surfaces, regardless of the speed. There is good reason for this because that's how it works in real life. The only exception is the Bf109 once airspeed gets high, where the virtual stick becomes stuck in cement despite your input...in order to simulate very high IRL control forces. The whole idea of keeping a one to one relationship between joystick movement and control surface movement is really a philosiphical choice in how airplanes are simulated. You could argue that forces are more important to model and then model things to where you have to move the stick more at speed in order to simulate forces experiences. Either way, you can't have both displacement and force accurately simulated at the same time...unless you have force feedback. I suppose there's something to be said for a "filter" of sorts that would dampen your input a tiny bit in order to minimize the effect of micro-movements on our light spring-centered sticks, which could be done by delaying the transmission of signal from the stick to the simulation very slightly.... I could see a variable filter where micromovements are increasingly damped out with speed, but don't ultimately affect total control throw range. It could give the impression of "weight". I suspect that some modules might use something like this. This isn't the same as curves, because curves just shift the sensitivity of the stick from center point and shift it to the extremes.

Hmm, but the pilot and stick animations in the Tomcat don’t suffer from this delay. Even if I yank the stick or move my head as fast as possible, it tracks immediately. This goes for all other modules as well. What is different on the F4 that makes this smoothing delay necessary? For example, the pilot head reflection in the F4 often starts moving only after I finish a 45 degree head turn. By the way, I don’t notice any delay in stick movement in the F4 at all. The only thing I notice is decoupling between the physical stick and simulated stick, in the attempt to simulate stick force on non-FFB sticks (through increased physical stick displacement). It’s not simply visual smoothing, rather the virtual stick will move past the position commanded by the physical stick, and the aircraft will move based on the movement corresponding to the virtual stick’s position. That’s why I was wondering if the OP is experiencing the force modeling for non-ffb sticks, and why I suggested he double check his settings in the special options menu to make sure he has it set up for FFB.

I’m not sure if gradient step sounds during startup is related to the loss of the turbine sound in external view. Whenever I see a tomcat fly by or taxi by me, all I hear is the sound of the rushing air expelled by the engines, but not the whining sound of the turbine. It’s been gone at least since the previous update for me. Anybody else notice this?

My impression was that the stick position in game should actually be one-to-one if you are using a FFB stick. Is that not correct? @frumpyhave you checked to make sure you selected the correct FFB special menu settings? Also, I thought that spring joystick positions (non-ffb) are decoupled from actual control surface and stick positions in the game on purpose in order to simulate forces from the bob weight/bellows system by making you displace your spring joystick more (as a way to simulate force). Or do I have this all wrong? Is the stick visual animation referenced here a totally different thing (like pilot head animation delay in mirror reflections)?

My impression was that the stick position in game should actually be one-to-one if you are using a FFB stick. Is that not correct? Also, I thought that spring joystick positions (non-ffb) are decoupled from actual control surface and stick positions in the game on purpose in order to simulate forces from the bob weight/bellows system by making you displace your spring joystick more (as a way to simulate force). Or do I have this all wrong? Is the stick visual animation referenced here a totally different thing (like pilot head animation delay in mirror reflections)?

Two years is essentially imminent, at least as far as DCS goes Everything else is "soon", which means that it may release within a human generation. This thread is an awesome history lesson on this module. I've been flying eagle dynamics way back since I was a kid in the 90s. I still see the mig21 as relatively recent, but I guess it actually is kind of old if I were forced to admit to the passage of time. Yet, yesterday I grabbed a mig21 and raced an online buddy in a Fulcrum from Kutaisi to Tsiblisi, Tsiblisi to Anapa, and Anapa to Batumi. I won two out of three legs! One of them dead stick lol. But I only won because I knew how to fly it exactly by the numbers. It's awesome that the Mig21 is modeled nicely enough that it rewards a pilot that knows how to fly it. After all these years, the Mig21 is still a great time. It goes to show that a good product is a good product, even if it's old. The devs should know that they made something lasting, and something that can be deeply appreciated by discerning pilots.

Comparing the price of the Quest 3 to any other headset is probably difficult. Facebook/Meta essentially subsidize these for the consumer on the hope they buy in to Zuckerbergs vision for a virtual world ecosystem where users can buy games, and where data can be collected to be monetized. While technically they are very good headsets, they work on PC only at Zuckerberg’s pleasure. And in my case, the consistency of the PCVR experience with the Quest 3 has been infuriating frequently. Zuck could remove PCVR functionality via update once they see it’s not beneficial to sell to PCVR users who never use it within their ecosystem (mine runs with the wifi connection turned off). It might be worth noting that Zuck, Bezos, etc are also currently beholden politically to someone they are afraid of, so chances are good that whatever data a Quest, Iphone, Alexa can collect will be released to whomever the dear leader wishes. He won’t get in the way of that, as there is no benefit for him to stand up for the user when the consequence is a yuge orange scorched-earth tantrum.

Do you remember where that mod can be found?

Can you explain where this setting is? I also have a problem with stuttering head-tracking (which is a different problem than stuttering frame rate).

I'm struggling to enjoy the F1 due to the sparkles as well. I understand that the physical texture of the real cockpit has a bit of a "spray on bed-liner" look, but it's almost as if the bumpy textures of the cockpit are literally modeled as tens of thousands of tiny individual bumps in 3 dimensions. It seems a bit too much in terms of granularity of details, no pun intended. Maybe they can make a VR friendly cockpit texture for all of the offending surfaces? I'm running pretty high resoulution on my quest3 (at the expense of frame rates) but this is the only cockpit with such distracting shimmers. And it's been exactly the same since day 1 of release. Was MSAA broken when this module released? I used to use DLSS and just tolerated the ghosting, but after trying to fix stutters, I noticed MSAA was better all around. I went back to DLSS recently and it seems just as broken in a different way....everything is immensely fuzzy compared to what I remember. In any case, I don't remember DLSS fixing anything when I was using it. It was still pretty bad shimmer.

Thanks for the help and ideas! I found my issue after a bit of troubleshooting using the simappro software to track what was going on. I was able to recreate the “pause” or hitching as I moved the throttles quickly through it’s range. Then I noticed 2 virtual buttons briefly light up everytime the throttle had a hiccup. One of those buttons was assigned to “chute deploy”. After a bit if thinking, I double checked the cable connection that goes externally from the base to the bottom of the f18 throttle grip. It wasn’t super loose, but it definitely wasn’t tight. About a half turn to tighten it up, then I retested, and had completely smooth throttle with no ghost activations of the virtual buttons!

So I flew around and noticed that at certain times, movement of the throttles as they went from mil to ab power, the throttles paused in between. It acted as if I had a throttle detent (I don’t). This “step/pause” did not always occur, it seemed to happen randomly. But when it did, the chute plunger was pulled back. i have an Orion2. The throttles levers did not show up as being bound to anything else (besides throttle axes) when I moved them around in the assignment menu. And they did not cause the chute binding to light up. A fellow online player suggested deleting the binding for chute (bound to a rocker axis on the f18 throttle grip). Once deleted, the throttle axes no longer moved as if there was a detent on the axis, and the chute no longer deployed. I bound it to another rocker switch on the other f18 grip, and I get good actuation with no detent on throttle axes, and no uncommanded chute deployment. It might be related to the throttle base itself…still need to check in simapp pro to see if something lights up when I move the throttle. I’ll update if I find the source of that signal.

I will try that thanks. Is there any other bind action in the F5, besides “drag chute”, that I should check within the DCS bindings menus? Is there a dialog within the game, or file I can access that records actions/commands and what was used to command the action to help me trouble shoot this?

I’ve had some issues with uncommanded drag chute deployment in flight. This problem started when the F5 remaster released. It acts as if it’s a double binding issue with the throttle as it’s moved towards 100 percent. Even though it appears full throttle axis movement is the only thing that triggers chute deployment, it doesn’t always trigger deployment. When I look at my drag chute bindings I don’t see anything else bound to this action (besides my normal binding to deplow chute). Anybody else experience this? I’m not sure if this is a bug, or if I’m missing something obvious. Any help appreciated.

The quest 3 is more than a match for the HP Reverb G2 based on my experience. The visual clarity and resolution is equal to, or greater than the G2 in most regards. However, big caveat, It most definitely does not fall under "it just works". The reliability of the meta branded link cable sucks... Sometimes it doesn't recognize it as a USB 3 device and defaults to USB 2, requiring reconnections and fiddling. I bought another brand cable for 20 bucks less, which sucks in its own way. I can't leave it plugged in to charge when I;m not using it because the charging function repeatedly shuts off and turns on. I'm on a 2070 GPU and i9700k with 32gb of ram, and the performance is wildly variable on DCS. Some days it's absolutely beautiful, smooth FPS with reasonable settings. It can run smoothly for hours on end on multiplayer on a very busy server. Literally the next time I start DCS, and do the same exact thing (same settings, flying on the same server) I will have horribly jerky/stuttery head-tracking for no discernible reason. Sometimes the jerky/stuttery head tracking happens with perfectly fine FPS performance, other times it happens along side large persistent FPS slowdowns. Sometimes within the same session head-tracking will be perfect, but then an F4 does a close fly by and the LOD texture loading triggers low FPS, or poor head-tracking, or both. I suspect much of these problems relate to DCS specifically, since it's not something I see when I use the headset outside of DCS (not that I do much else with it). I'm a bit hesitant to dump money on new computer system, since it seems a subset of people experience very similar problems with high end systems. It's all pretty infuriating, but I think we all know what VR is like. If I can get 1 out of 10 good sessions, I'll keep trying to figure out what the pattern is, I'll keep trying to find a startup ritual that is appeasing to the VR gods. It's a horrible position to be in, VR ruined me and I can no longer play flat screen lol. As a side note, I worry the era of VR might be stalling out. I hope new hardware will keep coming, but I don't like what I see. The G2 was really quite a nice headset. But now, the lack options for headsets with integrated audio and inside out headtracking is depressing. And the whole deal with Pimax trying to go "subscription" suggests manufactures aren't as interested in developing the hardware side of things (as does Varjo and HP pulling out of the market). Zuckerberg will keep making the Meta for as long as it takes him to realize that the Metaverse is an idiotic idea, so I'm not sure if he'll see the need to subsidize the prices of these headsets for much longer.

For what it’s worth, I had an early version of the Orion 2 throttle base. Well, technically, I had two of them. Both bases developed dead axes within a month of receiving them. Based on my observations and diagnostic work at Winwings behest, I suspect both of them were very susceptible to stray static charge. Both of the based died in winter in the northern hemisphere, where walking around on carpet will build up static charge on your body due to the very dry air. Both of the faulty bases would get a static discharges on some occasions when I first touched them. Sometimes the shock was quite loud, and caused the computer screen to blink on-off briefly. I think the base’s design must have allowed the static discharge to make it’s way into the motherboard. I shared my suspicions with Win Wing support, but they didn’t confirm the cause of failures (not that I expected them to tell me what was wrong). The third base that they sent me took a while to get to me, but it had some changes that seemed to be visibly geared to improve electro-static isolation (plastic clamps over the axles instead of metal). I suspect they must have made other grounding changes as well. Thankfully, whatever they did nailed the problem, because my third throttle base unit has been running flawlessly for a year. The reason I mention all this, is that the mounts that hold the grip to the throttle lever may be part of the total system that isolates the grips electro-staticaly from the base. Making metal extension mounts may be risky depending on your climate and depending of how well the Orion 1 design isolates static discharges.

I’ve taken an Orion 2 throttle apart as part of the diagnostic process on a defective unit that WW eventually replaced. To get to the friction surfaces under the split collar on the throttle axes, the unit has to be completely disassembled. I’m pretty sure it’s every last last nut, bolt and screw is undone. I should add, I explored the axle assembly after the throttle base was replaced by winwing, but I did not reassemble the defective unit. But I’m sure it’s possible to take it apart, grease it, and reassemble. It’s just not a job that should be done in any sort of hurry. Lots and lots of tiny screws, uncaptured nuts, and lots of fiddling with connectors, so it’s best to be organized about it if you do decide to grease it. If it was me, I’d just tighten to the point it doesn’t fall forward and leave it be.

The F5 cockpit looked too big before due to the child-size pilot model it had. I think something in the front canopy hoop proportions changed. Subtle, but the overall proportions seem more appropriate to my eye (I only play in VR). From the external view, the larger pilot immediately seems to communicate the small size of the jet. However, I haven’t compare it side to side with another jet.

The nosewheel shimmy is an actual thing that happens on this airplane in real life, if I recall correctly. In fact, I think it tends to happen with a much higher frequency than the slow side to side sway that’s modeled. The shimmy oscillation frequency on DCS might be limited by the sim itself though. At least it seems to happen and go away under expected circumstances. Lots of planes with castoring wheels will shimmy. Even if it’s an oleo strut wheel, they can shimmy .

I’m absolutely loving the remastered edition. It looks fantastic inside and out. The cockpit doesn’t seem as expansive as it did before in VR, probably a large part due to a more believable size for the pilot model. Now the cockpit size feels more like I would expect. The aero buffet cues are nicely done. I don’t spend too much time outside the cockpit, but wow are the details an shapes nice looking!. For all the complaints I was hearing, I expected this was basically going to be a skins pack. It’s not. It feels like another module of the same plane. I think the pilot viewpoint shifting under G and loads is also new. It must be, because that must explain why it feels like a different flight model. While the feeling of a new flight model might be placebo, I’m really thinking something must have changed…i can maintain control at lower speeds predictably with rudder much easier than before. It also seems to be happier with a bit of rudder input during turns. I’m just a VFR flyer, so I don’t have much comment on the radar.