AH-64D VR

[Fuggzy]

On 3/19/2022 at 3:49 AM, BeerNfrites said:

 

 as a VR user I think could be useful:

• Boresighting - I can't currently position the boresight and see the button to click, because of the way the mouse has to stay within the constrains of the view, I can't hold it in place whilst I line it up and then click.

Workaround:   I set a button on the joystick to Cursor (ENTER) for both crew.  When you click the IHADSS button and it starts the boresight, it automatically places the cursor over the B/S NOW button on the MFD for you -- so don't touch the cursor movement control.   Line up your sight and then click that joystick button, and it does an Enter click for you on the MFD and -- voila!  

[Fuggzy]

Ok Here's a Weird One - actually pointing at things with my head reveals I'm Katherine Hepburn

I've got acceptably smooth VR resolution and performance in my meh system, 2070super with Quest2, in all modules including Apache so far. 

When it comes to using the IHADSS it seems like my Quest2's tracking is hypersensitive.  Not laggy, not choppy, but jittery because of my head movements.  The very tiniest movement of my head moves the IHADDS, like I have to focus like zen master on holding my melon still and I still cannot get the pointer dead still.  I see my heart beat in it, no joke.  Is this right??  Do other Quest2 users have this with the Apache?  The other heads-up displays in other modules don't seem to behave like this.   Viper's HMCS seems smoother but I honestly haven't used it much.  Is there some way to add software smoothing to Quest head tracking or anything similar to TrackIR's great controls over everything?

It kind of acts like in the Apache, the place in virtual space that my IHAADS projects is out a couple feet from my face near the dash, thereby making very small movements of my head translate into large moments on the IHADSS.  Whereas on Viper, maybe the projection is much closer to my face in this virtual space and the deflection moment is shorter... and the effect is it's smoother and no jitters from me.  I dunno.   I'd just really like to smooth out control of IHADSS -- I'm having a tough time holding it on target even at a standstill and the continual jittering around is annoying.  It needs a tiny little axis curve around center to make a soft deadzone or something.

[Recluse]

5 hours ago, Fuggzy said:

It kind of acts like in the Apache, the place in virtual space that my IHAADS projects is out a couple feet from my face near the dash, thereby making very small movements of my head translate into large moments on the IHADSS. 

Similar experience with Quest 2  RTX3070.  My big issue is what you mentioned about the  IHADSS projection being farther away from my eye than it appears on either the 2D screen or the mirrored VR screen.  I cannot quite describe it, and   I cannot get a screenshot to truly represent what is seen in VR, because the capture from the IHADSS eye looks like the 2d mirror not the VR appearance.  I kind of accept the jitter, but the view of the entire IHADSS especially the critical right side altitude and Vertical Velocity indicator is very hard to keep in focus compared to how it looks in 2D because it appears farther away and is not as clearly in the FOREGROUND of the cockpit elements   It looks much better in the CP/G cockpit than the back seat, but probably due to the width of the front cockpit.

[Fuggzy]

3 hours ago, Recluse said:

Similar experience with Quest 2  RTX3070. ...  I kind of accept the jitter, but the view of the entire IHADSS especially the critical right side altitude and Vertical Velocity indicator is very hard to keep in focus compared to how it looks in 2D because it appears farther away and is not as clearly in the FOREGROUND of the cockpit elements  

You get what I'm saying, yes...this makes me happy.  

I think this is part of the reason that many people are experiencing a weird disorientation where the brain can't figure out how far away to focus when they cross the IHADSS with the instrument panel, especially at night when everything is green. The IHADSS is projecting out into and beyond where the instrument panel is in virtual space, when these mix the brain can lose track of which is which.  And for jittering,  it's like one is holding a long-gun...very small movements translate to the end of the barrel moving a lot more.  Whereas in other systems it seems like one is sighting with a handgun -- the end of the barrel just doesn't move as much relative to the grip end movements, holding a sight picture steady is easier.   When I look at a pic of the eyepiece of a real Apache pilot, it's obviously right at his eye...meaning there is practically no lever length at all in play, and it would only jitter if he's really nervous.  Anyways that's my story I'm sticking to for now.  I think Devs could solve at least 2 issues -- spatial disorientation and tracking smoothness -- by shortening that virtual projection distance.

[Recluse]

9 minutes ago, Fuggzy said:

You get what I'm saying, yes...this makes me happy.  

 

...and YOU get what I have been saying from the beginning! This makes ME happy!  I have struggled to describe it and I don't know if it is a QUEST2 thing in specific or a VR thing in general.

A lot of folks (even QUEST2 folks) say EVERYTHING IS FINE! So maybe it is what you can tolerate. All I know is when I look at the IHADSS in 2D or in the VR Mirror coming from the right eye, it looks TOTALLY different from my VR view.  In some ways the VR version has a LESS intrusive Monocle frame (when it is ON) but the 2D/Mirror version has a lot easier to read symbology and the Monocle frame eventually fades into the background. To use your long gun analogy further, it is like looking through a peep sight, and eventually your brain makes the sight frame disappears and only the front post is visible in the FOV. I imagine same with Monocle frame.

Note: Monocle frame on or off doesn't change the way the IHADSS looks farther away or overly large in VR compared to 2D. I actually prefer the frame ON now.

Edited April 21, 2022 by Recluse

[Fuggzy]

13 hours ago, Recluse said:

...and YOU get what I have been saying from the beginning! This makes ME happy!  I have struggled to describe it and I don't know if it is a QUEST2 thing in specific or a VR thing in general.

A lot of folks (even QUEST2 folks) say EVERYTHING IS FINE! So maybe it is what you can tolerate. All I know is when I look at the IHADSS in 2D or in the VR Mirror coming from the right eye, it looks TOTALLY different from my VR view.  In some ways the VR version has a LESS intrusive Monocle frame (when it is ON) but the 2D/Mirror version has a lot easier to read symbology and the Monocle frame eventually fades into the background. To use your long gun analogy further, it is like looking through a peep sight, and eventually your brain makes the sight frame disappears and only the front post is visible in the FOV. I imagine same with Monocle frame.

Note: Monocle frame on or off doesn't change the way the IHADSS looks farther away or overly large in VR compared to 2D. I actually prefer the frame ON now.

 

Bingo.  I quoted the whole thing there simply to say YES... you get it.  The peep sight/long gun analogy is spot perfect.  When I run 2D with TrackIR, like I do when trying to learn the aircraft, like I did the first many hours in Apache, no problem with head tracking the sight or disorientation, nothing except a preference of liking the monocle displayed or not.  But VR is playing a few mind tricks here, I think mostly because it's simulating an Apache pilot wearing a monocle that is attached to his helmet with a 2.5 foot rod to hold it out in front of his face, and it's sized up to the size of a dinner plate so that it will appear again like it's a monocle that actually sits on the pilot's face.  To him it's the same effect, until he tries to aim with that thing.  He can't hold it steady on target, because he can't get his own head still enough.  And all the focal distance problems like you mention with peep sights come in, mostly because that distance is the same as it is to instruments, and this sometimes causes his brain to trip out and give up when it's working hard to keep these images separate/distinct (IHADDS vs Instruments).  The brain is depending on that spatial separation to identify one from the other subconsciously, and this is a pretty neat example of optical illusions severe enough to cause random disorientation.   I want it improved but it's also pretty fascinating

p.s. if nothing else, I wish there was a slider in the VR config tab in DCS that said "VR Head Tracking Smoothing ____________"  that simply means I can find a value where when I am consciously holding my physical head still like a normal person, my  IHAADS symbology is also completely still.  And it's not interference  or signal or lag jitter, it's actually picking up my very tiny, very normal movements as if the tracking is absolutely lock-step and too perfect.  Why is this a problem for me?  Because it breaks VR for me in the Apache.  In Viper I use HMCS for 1 thing - fast n easy SPIs.  I haven't felt like I *need* HMCS in Viper, it's optional.  With Apache, can anyone imagine hearing an Apache pilot say "Nah, I'm good without it I go old school".  No.  Apache w/ IHAADS *is* the devastating weapon, the pioneer of everyone else's If-Looks-Could-Kill system.  What's happening is that even though yes, it's tracking me exquisitely, I can't use the IHAADS to gun with even as CPG, because while I'm sitting here as still as I can, that little circle dot in the center is everywhere EXCEPT that tank in 360 degrees because I'm not a statue made of stone, I'm a man who breathes.  I know the gun is not a precision gun by any means to begin with, that is NOT what i'm talking about.  Let's say all I want to do is mark a point out on the terrain with a click, I can get close where I really want it but rarely right on it, it's a matter of the click registering fast enough.   

TL;DR I should be able to hold IHAADS perfectly still whenever I want, but literally cannot, because the tracking is too GOOD.   1st world probs lol 

Edited April 22, 2022 by Fuggzy

[St4rgun]

17 hours ago, Recluse said:

...To use your long gun analogy further, it is like looking through a peep sight, and eventually your brain makes the sight frame disappears and only the front post is visible in the FOV. I imagine same with Monocle frame.

 

No. It's not the brain, it's your eye. Unfortunately current VR HMD technology have a FIXED focus, so your eye does NOT focus to infinity correctly when using the IHADSS (as it should IRL). Right now proper depth perception can be done only by using image for both eyes. The only solution will be the making of varifocal lens HMDs, which will be the future.

For more details: 

 

Edited April 22, 2022 by St4rgun

[Fuggzy]

St4rgun, thank you for that.  That explains exactly what I see that I can only describe as "weird optical ilusion" with the depth perception.  I'm new to VR and while the experience is a different ballgame of amazing, the technology of VR itself is what is starting to fascinate me.

So this addresses the depth perception strangeness I experience, it is what it is.  I still am haunted by my second issue:  the hypersensitive head tracking of my Quest2.  After watching the video you linked, now I'm really intrigued. It is like a longun effect, referring to sensitivity only, because what I'm trying to describe is actually the case.   Because of the limitation of non var-focal lenses that I think I understand now, it really is like the IHAADS display is extended out further in space than it normally would be, and that also makes holding it steady very hard. 

I dunno, I can't describe it any better than I have, it's just a huge bummer and I've given up on using it for aiming guns as Pilot unless it's an in-close brawl and I'm spraying n praying.  I don't use it at all for CPG, I turn it off and I gun with TADS so I don't have to hold my breath every time I pull the trigger.  It would solve aiming and make my VR experience shine if I could simply make my head tracking less sensitive just around dead-center of wherever I'm holding still.  Like a small acceleration curve around center, on all 3 axes. So that I can get the pipper to stay in 1 place for 2 seconds.  It's definitely another symptom of the same root problem with focal length magic that new VR tech will solve someday.   For now, I wish ED would implement a slider to smooth out the motion of IHAADS or HMCS etc views in VR only.  Can't fix the depth problem yet until new tech, but they could help with motion tracking with a band-aid to just make it a tad mushy for those that need it... right?  This issue doesn't exist in 2D.

Edited April 22, 2022 by Fuggzy

[St4rgun]

I'm using WMR with Reverb G2 and a low power GPU (GTX 1070 only), so the framerate is not great (25+) with the Apache.  If TADS video switched on as a pilot then much lower (15+).

But even with these low framerates the motion smooting of WMR (OpenXR) is so good, that it does not induce nausea and I'm able to aim pretty well with the crosshairs of IHADSS.

At first it's weird that the slightest motion of your head (even the pulses of your heart) is sensed and transaltes in minor movement of the crosshairs, but with enough practice you can learn how to aim steadily with it. I have 24 flight hours with the Apache right now and I think any smoothing of the IHADSS movement would feel "laggy" or "floating" for me.

The real concern for me is the focused visibility of the IHADSS monocle frame and projector lens. Personally I'd like it much more with some blur on those to simulate  the very close distance to the eyes. It's impossible for anyone to focus on such a short distances (2-3 cms), so its totally unreal right now. But if the framerate is high enough then the movement is fine as is.

Edited April 23, 2022 by St4rgun

[Baldrick33]

3 hours ago, St4rgun said:

 

The real concern for me is the focused visibility of the IHADSS monocle frame and projector lens. Personally I'd like it much more with some blur on those to simulate  the very close distance to the eyes. It's impossible for anyone to focus on such a short distances (2-3 cms), so its totally unreal right now. But if the framerate is high enough then the movement is fine as is.

 

I would presume the IHADSS works much like our VR headsets with a focal distance of 2m or so. Your G2 panel is pretty close to your eyes too!

[St4rgun]

36 minutes ago, Baldrick33 said:

I would presume the IHADSS works much like our VR headsets with a focal distance of 2m or so. Your G2 panel is pretty close to your eyes too!

Not really, it is focussed to infinity, so the light rays from the symbology image are parallel (https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Reflector_sight#/Design)

That's the problem with current VR headset technology: fixed focus. IRL the cockpit, the projected sight of the IHADSS and the reflector glass and the projector lens are all at totally different focus distances, so our eyes can distinguish between them by focussing. It is impossible with one eye in VR headset.

The panel in the G2 is indeed close to my eyes, but there's lens inbetween which corrects the visuals for the ~2 m focal distance (see my previous post with varifocal lenses).

Edited April 23, 2022 by St4rgun

[Lange_666]

When in VR, my IHADSS view is slightly tilted to the right when i look straight forward.
So the IHADSS horizon line doesn't match with the real horizon. I have to tilt my head a bit left to make then match.
I find this annoying. Anybody else have this problem?

[Zap921]

 

On 4/22/2022 at 5:01 AM, St4rgun said:

No. It's not the brain, it's your eye. Unfortunately current VR HMD technology have a FIXED focus, so your eye does NOT focus to infinity correctly when using the IHADSS (as it should IRL). Right now proper depth perception can be done only by using image for both eyes. The only solution will be the making of varifocal lens HMDs, which will be the future.

Ok, I'm going to try the both eyes option for a bit and see how that works out.  I wonder if IRL Apache pilots actually have to look up with their eyes to read the heading tape as I do in DCS.

[St4rgun]

3 hours ago, Zap921 said:

 

Ok, I'm going to try the both eyes option for a bit and see how that works out.  I wonder if IRL Apache pilots actually have to look up with their eyes to read the heading tape as I do in DCS.

I have never tried with both eyes setting. It's also unrealistic because you CAN sense the symbology like a picture far away (focussed to infinity), but it will be still sharp when your eyes focus on the cockpit at much closer distance. So it will trick your brain other way. Beside of that it covers the MFDs from your left eye, so will disturb those in the view.

Unfortunately the best solution right now with the current VR technology is the following:

• use the IHADSS only ONE eye, the dominant one (for 100% realism only the right eye is supported)
• have the highest framerate possible for accurate head tracking without lag (45+)
• have the best edge to edge clarity of your VR headset (if you have to wear glasses for perfect vision at monitor distances (50-60 cm) then try it with the headset also - it's MUCH better despite it shouldn't needed for the so called 2 m focus distance. If you don't have any glasses and older than 45 and using a lot of monitor a day then check your vision, because it's most likely it's already not 100%)
• train your brain a lot to accomodate to different views from your eyes
• try to reduce the IHADSS symbology and video brightness to the minimum which gives adequate contrast (mostly at night don't overbrighten your right eye while the other is in the dark)
• practice, practice, practice

Edited April 24, 2022 by St4rgun

[ddc196]

Just out of curiosity I tried using the IHADSS using the both eye setting. Using it this way I could not get a good boresight. I tried using both eyes open, left and right eye only. It just wouldn't boresight correctly. Just FYI from my experience. I went back to right eye only and all was good again.

Edit: Not saying or suggesting this is a bug. 

Edited April 24, 2022 by ddc196

[Zap921]

Well I'll stay with one eye then.  I am left eye dominant and haven't tried it on the left side.  Probably been using it to long on the right now to even enjoy anything else.

[dburne]

I tried it with both eyes and went back to right eye only, was best for me.

[Fuggzy]

Yes it helps to know which eye is your dominant and using that in this sim.  It matters.

I know what's happening with the sensitivity. It's nobody's fault but the Quest2 working so well.  And it merely affects the IHAADS more.

I have lots of experience with other head tracking, starting with TrackIR 2 back when that was new tech, and other implementations of the concept that a camera watches your head/eyes etc.  TrackIR5 is what I usually use and I can aim Apache with that.  Many VR headsets use radio base stations to do essentially the same thing -- track the headunit's position in space from a relative position.  This is automatically going to mask VERY tiny movement and be quite smooth to the user, when smoothness means we're talking about stability -- the ability to hold perfectly still.

With the Quest2, it tracks itself in space, there is no distance to a radio station.  It also happens to be that the tracking resolution of these units is extreme, like the best in the consumer amything-tracking realm.  These two factors combine to perform extremely well, and the tracking of the Quest2 head unit and controllers is very tight.  Looking at raw input data of the head and hands, a human can't physically stay still enough to keep them still.  IF I put my elbows on the table and both hands on the head unit to stabilize it, VOILA... the IHAADS will be still.  It really is the Quest that is hypersensitive.

But it only shows with the IHAADS, and the HMCS in Viper too... although it's less.  It seems closer to my face, like I've been saying I can see the IHAADS in space merging into the dashboard...it's too far away.  And the shakes are more exaggerated the further that distance is. 

The world is not shaky at all.  Smooth as butter.  It's as if the world view has smoothing, but the IHAADs is moving absolutely perfectly with the tiniest movements of my Quest.

So....  I need to cut Quest2's motion tracking resolution in half.  Ima find a way.  

[nachomaga]

On 4/24/2022 at 9:56 PM, ddc196 said:

Just out of curiosity I tried using the IHADSS using the both eye setting. Using it this way I could not get a good boresight. I tried using both eyes open, left and right eye only. It just wouldn't boresight correctly. Just FYI from my experience. I went back to right eye only and all was good again.

Edit: Not saying or suggesting this is a bug. 

 

I use both eyes for HIDASS and for boresight in cold start I focus to bullseye circles. While I'm not focus to infinity, I see two HIAADS cross and I put the bullese circles in between the two. Works fine for me.

[St4rgun]

On 4/25/2022 at 2:34 AM, Fuggzy said:

Yes it helps to know which eye is your dominant and using that in this sim.  It matters.

I know what's happening with the sensitivity. It's nobody's fault but the Quest2 working so well.  And it merely affects the IHAADS more.

I have lots of experience with other head tracking, starting with TrackIR 2 back when that was new tech, and other implementations of the concept that a camera watches your head/eyes etc.  TrackIR5 is what I usually use and I can aim Apache with that.  Many VR headsets use radio base stations to do essentially the same thing -- track the headunit's position in space from a relative position.  This is automatically going to mask VERY tiny movement and be quite smooth to the user, when smoothness means we're talking about stability -- the ability to hold perfectly still.

With the Quest2, it tracks itself in space, there is no distance to a radio station.  It also happens to be that the tracking resolution of these units is extreme, like the best in the consumer amything-tracking realm.  These two factors combine to perform extremely well, and the tracking of the Quest2 head unit and controllers is very tight.  Looking at raw input data of the head and hands, a human can't physically stay still enough to keep them still.  IF I put my elbows on the table and both hands on the head unit to stabilize it, VOILA... the IHAADS will be still.  It really is the Quest that is hypersensitive.

But it only shows with the IHAADS, and the HMCS in Viper too... although it's less.  It seems closer to my face, like I've been saying I can see the IHAADS in space merging into the dashboard...it's too far away.  And the shakes are more exaggerated the further that distance is. 

The world is not shaky at all.  Smooth as butter.  It's as if the world view has smoothing, but the IHAADs is moving absolutely perfectly with the tiniest movements of my Quest.

So....  I need to cut Quest2's motion tracking resolution in half.  Ima find a way.  

I have a theory: for the IHADSS reticle to be correctly focussed to infinity (mainly for the both eyes mode) they placed the symbology on an imaginary plane FAR away. That's the effect like if your head and the far away plane would be connected by a several hundred meters long pole and you are trying to hold the OTHER end of the pole stationary by stabilizing your head.

If this assumption is true then this is massively wrong idea from the devs, because the lights from the IHADSS reticle indeed should be focussed to infinity IRL (it means the light rays coming parallel into your eye), but that affects only the focus and depth perception. Meanwhile the reticle itself is very close to your eye, so the movement of it should be proportional with that close distance.

Try to place some marker on an eyeglasses or sunglasses and "aim" with that marker at objects far away: you'll be able to perfectly stand still with your head and hold the mark stationary on the given objects like hundreds of meters away.

@BIGNEWY Could you please check with the devs, that this is what's happening with the IHADSS? Because if it's true then this should be corrected from the ground up, because it makes senses of IHADSS totally false.

[Fuggzy]

3 hours ago, St4rgun said:

I have a theory: for the IHADSS reticle to be correctly focussed to infinity (mainly for the both eyes mode) they placed the symbology on an imaginary plane FAR away. That's the effect like if your head and the far away plane would be connected by a several hundred meters long pole and you are trying to hold the OTHER end of the pole stationary by stabilizing your head.

If this assumption is true then this is massively wrong idea from the devs, because the lights from the IHADSS reticle indeed should be focussed to infinity IRL (it means the light rays coming parallel into your eye), but that affects only the focus and depth perception. Meanwhile the reticle itself is very close to your eye, so the movement of it should be proportional with that close distance.

Try to place some marker on an eyeglasses or sunglasses and "aim" with that marker at objects far away: you'll be able to perfectly stand still with your head and hold the mark stationary on the given objects like hundreds of meters away.

@BIGNEWY Could you please check with the devs, that this is what's happening with the IHADSS? Because if it's true then this should be corrected from the ground up, because it makes senses of IHADSS totally false.

YES! This is exactly what it feels/looks like to me.  The real Apache pilot's eyepiece is on his face, like wearing sunglasses, and he can aim.   But simply relocate his eyepiece wayyyy out in front of him, and every tiny movement of his head is magnified.  That's it exactly.  

[TylerPL666]

I realy like destroying BUK's and Patriot systems on 4YA server and never had problem with IHADSS as aiming sight for gun. I think people doesnt realize that in close range they should take a correct from 1500m whis is default setup for gun.

Next time place the reticle cross under the target as in screen. 

For longer distance than default 1500m u have muliply cross height 3-4times for each 1000m and aim above target.

 

Also never had problem with TADS following my sight.

 

Use very short bursts fires. And do not forget its not the ultimate sniper anivehicle weapon - its machinegun with heavy ricoil atached to constance moving vehicle.

Edited April 27, 2022 by TylerPL666

[St4rgun]

The last part of the discussion was not about the aiming itself, but the movement of the reticle (or better say the jitteryness, or over-sensitiveness of its motion). By the way Casmo in one of his videos showed that a default of 800 m manual range is more appropriate for general use. I can also pinpoint and destroy targets perfectly with the gun, practiced a lot.

But somehow we all feel that the movement of ALL VR helmet mounted sights are a bit odd in DCS, they are too wobbly. In the Apache it's more pronounced maybe because of it's high importance and continuous use as a pilot. Trying to find a solution to this issue.

[Lurker]

12 hours ago, TylerPL666 said:

I realy like destroying BUK's and Patriot systems on 4YA server and never had problem with IHADSS as aiming sight for gun. I think people doesnt realize that in close range they should take a correct from 1500m whis is default setup for gun.

Next time place the reticle cross under the target as in screen. 

For longer distance than default 1500m u have muliply cross height 3-4times for each 1000m and aim above target.

 

Also never had problem with TADS following my sight.

 

Use very short bursts fires. And do not forget its not the ultimate sniper anivehicle weapon - its machinegun with heavy ricoil atached to constance moving vehicle.

 

Or you can, and get this it's quite revolutionary, set the right engagement distance for the target and then aim with the cross. 

[Hiob]

1 hour ago, Lurker said:

Or you can, and get this it's quite revolutionary, set the right engagement distance for the target and then aim with the cross. 

The moment, the terrain is not flat, that concept goes right out of the window. IIRC casmo somewhere mentioned something along the lines of "aim by experience and then walk the projectiles to the target". It certainly doesn't hurt though, to enter at least a solid approximation of the combat distance.

Anyway - it's an "area effect weapon" and not a sniper rifle. Main problem is probably the missing or poorly implemented area effects of explosive ammunition and shrapnels in DCS.