Feedback Thread Viggen Patch Feb 22nd 2024

[IronMike]

Dear all,

as always we would like to ask you kindly for your feedback for the current patch. This time we bring you a major overhaul of the cockpit, based on @MYSE1234's excellent work, who, as you know, joined our team to strengthen the efforts on the Viggen side of things. We are looking forward to your feedback and as always thank you for your kind and continued support! Enjoy!
 

DCS AJS-37 Viggen by Heatblur Simulations

Major art revision and refinements for better accuracy and useability. Special thanks to Viggen maestro MYSE.

• Added missing lights to the upper airbrake. 
• Corrected landing lights mounting angle and properties.
• Changed taxi light properties for more accurate angle and intensity.
• Remade the Distance indicator to show the distance more accurately. 
  • Range accuracy is now within +- 100m (1000m), average accuracy is +-40m (400m).
• NEW: Added optional Imperial altimeter and distance indicator.
• NEW: Implemented major art corrections and refinement pass for entire DCS: Viggen cockpit, non exhaustive list including:
• Modified model of pitch trim indicator, break pressure gauge, oxygen gauge, nozzle position indicator.
• Rotated EP13 glass, and changed HUD and radar screen.
• Evened out lighting strength on instruments
• Fixed broken lighting on some instruments
• Fixed some degenerate normals across the entire cockpit mesh.
• Removed the black paint on panels being illuminated 
• Added "LJUS RADAR" symbols to illuminate radar brightness and BELYSNING to illuminate cockpit illumination.
• Added arrow illumination on FR22 panel, and MIL flag on distance indicator.
• Fixed white lines in the radar display moving with the sweep
• Removed lens flare from lights.
• Added night lighting to warning flag on CI.
• Changed FLI needles and wings to be lit more realistically
• Added dots on panels to see what position the rotary switches are in
• Added STD cover lighting effect
• Clearer and more accurate warning panels. Also dotted a few Å,Ä and Ö, and added some missing lines.
• Redder altitude warning light, brighter AP light and ALT warning light, and clearer radar range numbers.
• Thickened altimeter 0.5 lines and added text on weapon jettison and X-tank jettison covers.
• Added emissiveness to the α 15,5 button for nighttime visibility.
• Updated placement of selected CI scale (15,30,60,120 lights): Moved toward the bottom of the scope
• Updated CI compass bug size: Made wider and slightly thicker, and updated 12 o'clock marker size and shape.
• Added missing lights to Fälld last, Trans/Rev, AP buttons, Reverser handle, CI bearing bug.
• Changed colour of FÄLLD LAST and TRANS/REV rights, to orange and yellow respectively
• Changed cartridge reader model and texture to fit new DTC
• Animated throttle linkage to move with the throttle more accurately and attached rear half of throttle linkage for linked movement.
• Animated canopy lever linkage to move more accurately
• Made FLI ball horizon fixed in rotation per real device.
• Increased “SNURK” button size and 
• Fixed duplicated VFR/IFR chart.
• Fixed clipping on the left ejection rope and added the right side ejection rope.
• Updated KB panel model/texture
• Updated placement of FLI parts to align with each other, recentered FLI ball and remastered FLI ball texture entirely.
• Added Dzus fasteners to the right annunciation panel, made the oxygen switch larger, and added separate white startup marks on the right annunciator panel.
• Put emergency instruction illumination switches to TILL
• Added Illumination to FR22 “GRUPP” and “BAS” text, and updated rollers for both.
• Added illumination dimming to the annunciation panels.
• Added mounting screws for the AOA indicator, made altimeter knob larger, changed textures on altimeter settings controls.
• Made the arrows on FR22 change with Instr. lighting knob
• Made the instruments on the left panels change with Instr. lighting knob
• “Radar light” changes colour with pol filter changes
• Added glass “windows” to FR22 “GRUPP” and “BAS” selectors
• Made the “MKR” knob girthier, and updated its textures.
• Changed size of waypoint buttons and changed WP panel textures slightly.
• New Data panel model
• Added 6 o’clock marker on CI compass, glass to ADI slipp ball, and missing glass to CI.
• Added “PK/FK” button on left wall panel
• Adde missing text to INSTR Belysning and FLI Bel and changed colour of several lamps.
• Added text on “ALLMÄNBEL” knob, changed NÖDFRIGÖRNING decals and added FK on master mode.
• Changed “LJUS RADAR” knob model, added several decals on emergency trim panel.
• Added numbers to temperature control and text to radio test knob.
• Changed AFK light colour to orange
• Made “α15,5”’s button “on” light larger 
• Changed model around the RWR lights and changed RWR light textures.
• Added screws to CI modelled compass
• Made FR22 selector panel’s “AM” and “FM” lights to illuminate individually to show which is selected
• Changed altimeter “STD” select animation to move the knob out, instead of in. It also moves more
• Changed distance indicator model and centered hands on clock.
• Added text on HUD brightness knob: “LJUS SI”
• Slightly changed orientation of reverser handle.
• Increased size of speed indicator knob.
• Added animation for correct start pos for speed indicator hand

[TOViper]

Love, love, and once more love.

LOVE³

[Spirale]

Thx for this wonderfull bird !

[Otulf]

Hello!

WOW!!!!

GREAT Update!

What a list of fixes...

Thank you very much!

 

Best regards:

Otulf

[MIghtymoo]

Thanks for all the continued love you give the Viggen.

You are the best!

[VikingSail]

Thanks for the various fixes for the instrument/panel illumination for night flights.

Now that @MYSE1234's mod has become part of the vanilla Viggen module, I have noticed a few things that still need some fine-tuning:

1. First a minor issue: the left hand panel seems to be missing the flood light. I'm not sure if this is the case on the real aircraft. But in comparison to the right side, the aft part seems much darker: 

• without floodlight on:
• with floodlight on:
• compared to the right hand side:

2. Second, a major issue: now the radar screen has changed its base green color, at certain brightness levels it will "bleach out/overwhelm" the horizon indicator and altitude reference line, making it very difficult to read the latter two. The usability was better with the old milder green base color for two reasons: the background green was less saturated, and it was lighter in alpha. Therefore the contrast between the background the foreground elements was a lot higher. This has additional impact on the functionality of the radar screen too besides the horizon and altitude indicators: the radar return, being on different scales of grey, is also harder to read (especially the finer details) now due to the darker green with a higher alpha blackens/darkens the finer details of the rarar returns, creating higher contrast and thus making it lose the details. For comparison, I have have screenshots here in an old post containing the old radar scope. You can see how much clearer, more detail you can read with the old mild green background. 

The horizon indicator and altitude reference disappearing in the vivid green background at various brightness and red filter levels, notice that not only the horizon and altitude lines get washed out by the background more, the radar returns all gets "painted" to a darker grey due to the darker nature of the new green background. Changing the gain does very little help:

Night examples:

Day example:

2.5 Another major issue is that the radar fix cross has flipped from the transparent white color to a completely black color. This makes precise marking a small radar return harder. Additionally I personally think the lines marking 10km, 20km, 40km etc on the radar scope is also way too thick. In short, the old radar scope was better in every way.

Example: notice that even if the cross was transparent white, the overwhelmingly vibrant green still makes it very difficult to see.

3. An issue with the changes to the landing lights: in the changelog it is stated that:

Zitat

• Corrected landing lights mounting angle and properties.
• Changed taxi light properties for more accurate angle and intensity.

From my testing it seems that the switch for the lights now work properly (previously the landing and taxi light position had no difference, i.e. the two 250 Watt landing lights were missing. only the single 50 Watt taxi light was modelled - source: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/340127-feedback-thread-viggen-patch-december-19th-2023/?do=findComment&comment=5373083 ). The update has fixed the two 250W landing lights and now they work properly from what I can tell. However, the 50W taxi light is very dark. I understand this might be the result of the correction to the wattage. However, in a rendered game, the dynamic range is much lower than that of human vision. Therefore by correctly modelling the 50W lamp, it results in an usable taxi light for the sake of the game: one can barely see anything beyond 2 meters in front of the aircraft while sitting in the cockpit. In the real world, our eyes adapt to darker environments and after a minute or two, we could see a lot more with the help of a 50W lamp. But this is not the case in DCS:

In the pit with both taxi and landing lights on:

View from the outside:

4. Another issue is the waypoint bearing indicator / the yelllow bug on the compass. The yellow side lines have now been replaced by black ones (as seen in the screenshots in point 2), making it more difficult to read at a glance. In @MYSE1234's mod, the black side lines used to illuminate when instrument lights are turned on. With the new update, they stay dark. Again: I'm not sure how it is on the real aircraft. This is just my opinion from a usability point of view.

For comparison, I have screenshots for night operations from the previous openbeta version in this post: 

5. The new HUD texture is a downgrade in terms of quality: at certain brightness levels, one can even see the jagged artefact edges, which has much less smooth transition between the illuminated elements and the transparent background than the old texture: The old HUD texture was easier to read, had a moderate level of illumination artefacts at different brightness, and is overall much more pleasing to the eye. I know this is subjective, I'd love to hear what other Viggen pilots think.

6. Lastly the warning light panels has also been replaced with the mod's effect: it's brighter, the text are more rigid. It has lost Heatblur's signature wear and tear effect like those found on all Heatblur modules. However this is not the only case. The other background lights, especially for the side panel, are also replaced by the mod, making the these parts of the cockpit with a much "newer" look than what Heatblur intended with the older model. In particular the warning lights panel is "out of place" when compared to the rest of the cockpit: 

Unfortunately I don't have old screenshots from before the update for those panels. I could only find a picture on page 48 of the manual, version RC 2.1:

As we can see, the old panel illumination was much better aligned with the rest of the cockpit in terms of its wear and tear authenticity. This also applies (to a lesser degree) to the lack of wear and tear of these dividing lines/grids on the side panel: 

Edited February 23 by VikingSail

[Ghost79]

Having had a quick spin in the Viggen last night, overall the upgrades are superb.  I really like the new much more readable HUD, however...

 

I have to agree with @VikingSail in that the radar screen is a bit of a downgrade from its previous version.  But if thats the accurate colour level on the real aircraft then so be it.

[hilmerby]

Why did you change the colour of the Radar? It was very good in the previous version. Now it is just awful, not even close to the real AJS37.

[MYSE1234]

Quote

@VikingSail

1. First a minor issue: the left hand panel seems to be missing the flood light. I'm not sure if this is the case on the real aircraft. But in comparison to the right side, the aft part seems much darker: 

There is only one light on the left side as opposed the two on the right side. Where the one on the left is located and shining I'm not sure, but made a guess it would light the front of the panel.
I didn't find any reference for it so if you, or anyone else do, I'd be happy to change it.

Quote

2. Second, a major issue: now the radar screen has changed its base green color, at certain brightness levels it will "bleach out/overwhelm" the horizon indicator and altitude reference line, making it very difficult to read the latter two. The usability...

Quote

@hilmerby 

Why did you change the colour of the Radar? It was very good in the previous version. Now it is just awful, not even close to the real AJS37.

It's due to this reference. Now I'm aware that it's from a (AJ)SH37, but I have a hard time thinking they'd be that different color wise. Maybe they were though, but I'm working on very limited data here.

Real radar from video on the left, old DCS top right, and new DCS lower right.

The "white" circle marker can just about be seen at the very top of the left image for reference. (Old images on the right)

null

 

Quote

2.5 Another major issue is that the radar fix cross has flipped from the transparent white color to a completely black color. This makes precise marking a small radar return harder. Additionally I personally think the lines marking 10km, 20km, 40km etc on the radar scope is also way too thick. In short, the old radar scope was better in every way.

It has incorrectly been "white" previously. It should be black, like it now is.

 

Quote

3. An issue with the changes to the landing lights: in the changelog it is stated that:

The taxi light is something I definitely am going to improve.

 

Quote

4. Another issue is the waypoint bearing indicator / the yellow bug on the compass. The yellow side lines have...

They are black/grey IRL and thus are not very visible. Especially so at night.

 

Quote

5. The new HUD texture is a downgrade in terms of quality: at certain brightness levels, one can even see the jagged artefact edges, which has much less smooth transition between the illuminated elements and the transparent background than the old texture: 

Subjective as you say, but using a sensible brightness level for the current time of day should make it look better than in that image. 
Going full blast IRL I would think wouldn't look very great either.

 

Quote

6. Lastly the warning light panels has also been replaced with the mod's effect: it's brighter, the text are more rigid. It has lost Heatblur's signature wear and tear effect like those found on all Heatblur modules. ...

The wear on those old ones look more out of place than the new panels IMO. To get the amount of "black" on those I think you'd need crew chief painting them with black paint. Here's some real panels that are quite old at the point of taking the photos. Just because it's old doesn't mean it's completely destroyed. 

Edited February 24 by MYSE1234

[Naquaii]

6 minutes ago, MYSE1234 said:

It's due to this reference. Now I'm aware that it's from a (AJ)SH37, but I have a hard time thinking they'd be that different color wise. Maybe they were though, but I'm working on very limited data here.

Real radar from video on the left, old DCS top right, and new DCS lower right.

It's notoriously hard to capture how an old phosphor screen like that looks on video and this is added to that also a kinda crappy old video that has been digitised. The colors are likely way off. My guess is that the AJSH radar looked kinda similar to the PS-37 but that that video is not a good representation of the colors at all.

[VikingSail]

Thanks @MYSE1234 for clarifying. Now I see a lot of the reasoning behind the changes. Kudos to you for gathering the information and putting them into the mod which is now part of the module.

I understand and agree with most of your points now. Thanks for sharing.

However, on the point of the radar scope color - I have to agree with @Naquaii here. Elemental colors like red and green tend to be more vibrant than they actually are when recorded on a video. So I think it is difficult to say with certainty that the video is a definitive proof.

I am curious about the source though. Is it possible to share it here?

[Naquaii]

3 minutes ago, VikingSail said:

Thanks @MYSE1234 for clarifying. Now I see a lot of the reasoning behind the changes. Kudos to you for gathering the information and putting them into the mod which is now part of the module.

I understand and agree with most of your points now. Thanks for sharing.

However, on the point of the radar scope color - I have to agree with @Naquaii here. Elemental colors like red and green tend to be more vibrant than they actually are when recorded on a video. So I think it is difficult to say with certainty that the video is a definitive proof.

I am curious about the source though. Is it possible to share it here?

It's not just that either but these old phosphor based screens are really hard to capture accurately in themselves as well.

[MYSE1234]

3 minutes ago, VikingSail said:

I am curious about the source though. Is it possible to share it here?

Sure it on youtube here. It's shown a few times, but here's a time stamped link for the first one.

The colors seems pretty accurate to me in it, but it being an issue capturing a phosphorous display accurately is a fair point.

 

Edited February 23 by MYSE1234

[VikingSail]

Thanks for linking the source.

Now we have something to refer to and to base further discussions on. 

One thing is very obvious about the video - for anyone with a trained eye for photography/cinematography it is clear as day that the white balance in most of the clips are all over the place. The inaccurate white balance is the result of multiple things stacked together: the unreliable nature of the original medium (magnetic tapes of VCRs back then) + the digitization of the original medium which involves the encoder further losing information of the inaccurate original recording + YouTube compression and more layers of informational loss that don't need to be mentioned here one by one.

Therefore relying on the total picture of such a video can result in very inaccurate interpretation of what the real thing looked like to the human eye.

In the selected segment for the comparison above (at about 1:41), that clip has a very strong blue tilt in its white balance. This is easily verifiable by selecting any pixel inside the (supposedly) white compass bearing lines/digits and read off the RGB values there.

A quick adjustment will yield a very different picture:

direct screen crop from the video:

white balance adjusted:

We can see, the whole picture has now become a little bit milder, more yellow-ish, has less contrast which is actually leaning towards what the old radar scope color represents. Of course, I would also agree that the old one looks way more washed out than this quick adjustment picture. But the reality is probably somewhere in between with one thing for certain: to a human eye, the dynamic range would be much much higher than any photo-graphical medium could capture back in the days. So for the sake of the module, we should instead focus on how to represent what human perception could see - i.e. emulating a higher dynamic range even if it means artificially adjusting certain elements. And we should avoid dogmatically making it one-to-one on paper/by the numbers to an unreliable video.null

[renhanxue]

If actual Viggen pilot @hilmerby says the previous one looked good I'd say that's a pretty good endorsement of it.

[Aenonar]

As others have mentioned, the radar screen is completely unusable now and would never have passed operational service IRL.. Previous one was much closer to IRL so the patch for that should simply be reverted.

And I'd say the same about the EP13 sight. To be able to see anything at all you need to reduce brightness to near 0, anything else just makes the image pure white. Contrast has little use as the image is very bright overall even with brightness at 0, the actual contrast seem to be light gray vs dark gray rather than white-black? And once you've found something slightly usable it's extremely difficult to even see targets now? As if the zoom is extremely low. I can see the targets way better looking out through the canopy than even through the enhanced zoom RB75B, where you might be able to differentiate a tree and a tank at about 5km. Now that you've managed to find the target and lock onto it the little opening that forms around the target is only a few pixels wide, so tiny that you might not even notice that you managed to get a lock. I sincerely doubt that this is anywhere near realistic as I wouldn't accept something like that into operational service...

Noted that the cover for the CK37 display has been tilted way back now as well. The default seating position before was quite a bit too far back and is this new tilt based on that position or actual geometry from the real aircraft? Can't quite get a good seating position now... The new enlarged HUD fits pretty good in my more forward position but the CK37 display is then slightly difficult to see.

Edited February 24 by Aenonar

[Chaffee]

4 hours ago, VikingSail said:

Thanks for linking the source.

Now we have something to refer to and to base further discussions on. 

One thing is very obvious about the video - for anyone with a trained eye for photography/cinematography it is clear as day that the white balance in most of the clips are all over the place. The inaccurate white balance is the result of multiple things stacked together: the unreliable nature of the original medium (magnetic tapes of VCRs back then) + the digitization of the original medium which involves the encoder further losing information of the inaccurate original recording + YouTube compression and more layers of informational loss that don't need to be mentioned here one by one.

Therefore relying on the total picture of such a video can result in very inaccurate interpretation of what the real thing looked like to the human eye.

In the selected segment for the comparison above (at about 1:41), that clip has a very strong blue tilt in its white balance. This is easily verifiable by selecting any pixel inside the (supposedly) white compass bearing lines/digits and read off the RGB values there.

A quick adjustment will yield a very different picture:

direct screen crop from the video:

white balance adjusted:

We can see, the whole picture has now become a little bit milder, more yellow-ish, has less contrast which is actually leaning towards what the old radar scope color represents. Of course, I would also agree that the old one looks way more washed out than this quick adjustment picture. But the reality is probably somewhere in between with one thing for certain: to a human eye, the dynamic range would be much much higher than any photo-graphical medium could capture back in the days. So for the sake of the module, we should instead focus on how to represent what human perception could see - i.e. emulating a higher dynamic range even if it means artificially adjusting certain elements. And we should avoid dogmatically making it one-to-one on paper/by the numbers to an unreliable video.null

This^ entirely. This evidence image isn't color-corrected. It's also likely the highs are clipping (reds are bleeding; camera exposure is overdriving the radar scope, which is probably oversaturating the green).

Edited February 24 by Chaffee

[Chaffee]

I sharpened and desaturated the greens in @VikingSail's white-balanced image. This is likely much closer to what the eye would see. Consider the evidence medium here.

Note the greens are no longer bleeding into the blacks. While better than nothing, video tape is an absolute garbage source, and requires correction. The key here is to get that image to look like an actual oscilloscope, not a 40-year old video tape of an oscilloscope.

I don't think my image is quite bright enough, however.

Edited February 24 by Chaffee

[VikingSail]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb Aenonar:

As others have mentioned, the radar screen is completely unusable now and would never have passed operational service IRL..

And I'd say the same about the EP13 sight. To be able to see anything at all you need to reduce brightness to near 0, anything else just makes the image pure white. Contrast has little use as the image is very bright overall even with brightness at 0, the actual contrast seem to be light gray vs dark gray rather than white-black? And once you've found something slightly usable it's extremely difficult to even see targets now? As if the zoom is extremely low. I can see the targets way better looking out through the canopy than even through the enhanced zoom RB75B, where you might be able to differentiate a tree and a tank at about 5km. Now that you've managed to find the target and lock onto it the little opening that forms around the target is only a few pixels wide, so tiny that you might not even notice that you managed to get a lock. I sincerely doubt that this is anywhere near realistic as I wouldn't accept something like that into operational service...

I agree with the observations about the EP13. I believe many others would say the same thing too: to better utilise the EP13 sight, the standard procedure has been reducing its brightness to 0 and then adjust the contrast for as long as I can remember. anything above 0 brightness would usually yield a less usable picture. however, even during darker hours, using a higher brightness simply washes out the picture without providing much "gain" to the overall exposure.

vor 6 Stunden schrieb Chaffee:

I sharpened and desaturated the greens in @VikingSail's white-balanced image. This is likely much closer to what the eye would see. Consider the evidence medium here.

Note the greens are no longer bleeding into the blacks. While better than nothing, video tape is an absolute garbage source, and requires correction. The key here is to get that image to look like an actual oscilloscope, not a 40-year old video tape of an oscilloscope.

I don't think my image is quite bright enough, however.

 

It is incredibly difficult to create an accurate-to-the-eye image in post-processing when the original medium has significant informational losses. The information is simply not there to work with. Most significantly it is about the compressed color range and the extremely narrow dynamic range compared to human vision.

At the end of the day, it is about re-creating the sense of dynamic range - making things accurate by the number (when that number isn't even accurate to start with) will degrade the quality of the module as a product.

[Chaffee]

1 minute ago, VikingSail said:

It is incredibly difficult to create an accurate-to-the-eye image in post-processing when the original medium has significant informational losses. The information is simply not there to work with. Most significantly it is about the compressed color range and the extremely narrow dynamic range compared to human vision.

At the end of the day, it is about re-creating the sense of dynamic range - making things accurate by the number (when that number isn't even accurate to start with) will degrade the quality of the module as a product.

Agreed.

As someone who does original research in history, I have to account for errors in texts constantly -- misspellings in place names, date errors, etc... and then sometimes you can think something is an error, but it's not, and that can be very difficult to unwind (but also satisfying) because it defies expectation.

At any rate, I think Heatblur have done an amazing job on this module, and I plan to make it my next purchase, but I am hoping not to get an oscilloscope that looks like it's shot on video tape from decades ago

Seriously, I hope the criticism is taken constructively. I want a realistic airframe, with realistic systems, and I get that it's not like there's an operational Viggen radar just sitting around for everyone to look at. Nonetheless, reconstructing something isn't just about looking directly at a source and saying "yup, that's it!" It's almost always about peeling away the layers that intervening years have added to it or subtracted from it.

It's not easy. It is not easy, and someone is always going to think you got it wrong.

[Usagi]

On 2/23/2024 at 7:07 PM, MYSE1234 said:

Real radar from video on the left, old DCS top right, and new DCS lower right.

The "white" circle marker can just about be seen at the very top of the left image for reference. (Old images on the right)

null

 

It has incorrectly been "white" previously. It should be black, like it now is.

 

 

Just guessing here, but Viggen had only greenish phosphor in the CRT thus circle and other markings just could not be other than green or black so current representation is better than previous in that sense.

 

EDIT: Ok, the circle is still white in cockpit and in exported viewport if brightness is enhanced to usable level (normally it's either way too dark or cockpit radar too bright):

Edited February 24 by Usagi
Added screenshot with white circle

[Schmidtfire]

So, lets bring something new to the discussion that has not yet been referenced.

Here is another reference from a little known Swedish feature film called "Älskar, Älskar inte". As you can see, radar is much closer to the reference pictures posted by MYSE.
And not washed out as it was before the update.

Scene is depicting a birdstrike with emergency landing on a road, but there are some shots from the cockpit when we see the radarscope.
There are also some references on the Warning panel lights. They look different... Might be from the older AJ37 model or
faked/re-created for dramatic effect in the film. Certainly grabs the pilots attention 

Pretty cool scene, but no subtitles. Swedish only.

VIDEO LINK 
https://vimeopro.com/blueskyaerials/blue-sky-aerial-and-specialist-filming/video/60091080

@MYSE1234

EDIT

If @hilmerby knows the new color isn't even close to the real AJS37, it should probably be changed or tweaked. Just interesting how every reference we find makes it look very green-ish on video (or on 35mm film stock as shown above). But as discussed earlier, might be related to the phosphor.
 

Edited February 24 by Schmidtfire

[Schmidtfire]

FINALLY FIGURED IT OUT!

Now, this is where things gets interesting. AJS37: Viggen was released 7 years ago. DCS World looked very different back then, before big graphic changes that affected
all the light-sources etc.

Look at this screengrab from 7 years ago, 2017. It is much closer to what we are discussing about dialing in correct color of the green phosphor.

From AJS37 Review by Ralfi



When we finally made the jump onto the new graphic engine (around the release of Normandy 1). It affected all aircrafts in DCS.
especially any type of lights. They became desaturated and bland under daylight conditions. And cockpits became very dark.
Some modules was tweaked, others not so much.

Viggens Radar scope in the new DCS World graphic engine was not an exception and ended up like this:


 
This is what we have known for the last couple of years, but it certainly did not look like this at release. Watch any DCS: AJS37 video from 7 years ago and compare it to videos after the new graphics update. But this has been the new normal for a couple of years. We have gotten used to it.

I think the initial version from 2017 is closer to what we have been trying to find in terms of what the actual radar looks like. Hilmerby probably knows best as he sat in front of the real thing, but looking at different materials from 2017-2018 It looks like HB sort of nailed the radar colors back in 2017. It was DCS World updates that changed the look of it.

For reference:

 

Edited February 24 by Schmidtfire

[VikingSail]

This looks very promising. Thanks to @Schmidtfire for the good find. Hope it gets corrected soon!

[AKULA_OPTIMUS]

As Schmidtfire said, Viggen radar screen looked better at the beginning, the first version was the best, it even casted light onto things. Now it looks like a 2D sticker, and does not integrate with the cockpit at all.