Jump to content

Brun

Members
  • Posts

    573
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About Brun

  • Birthday 06/28/1975

Personal Information

  • Location
    London Town

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I guess the question should have been 'can the HMD and NVGs be used during the same flight?' In contrast to - for example - the Hornet, where you have to tell the ground crew which one to install.
  2. The pin should be easy enough to remove without disassembling anything, it's an M3 thread so just find a suitable screw. Might need something pointy to rotate the empty hole into a better position. Once you've separated the left and right throttles, remove the screw and the pin can be pulled straight out. You can also use an M3 screw as a replacement, however the head may need to be cut off to prevent it fouling the throttle handle. Edit: Just realised it's broken rather than just unscrewed. Guess that makes putting another screw in impossible, but I'd still expect you can release it from the current state and remove the pin using something suitably pointy.
  3. Recommendation for a 1200W PSU seems wildly over the top. In to addition the hardware in my sig, I have 2x M.2 SSDs, 3x SATA SSDs, water cooling pump, 8x 140mm fans, plus a whole load of USB devices powered directly from the PC. All that running perfectly fine with a meagre Corsair HX850. It's plugged into the wall via a power meter and I've never seen it draw more than 650W. People suggest that power meters aren't sensitive enough to detect short spikes in demand, but I've not had a single issue that might have been power related.
  4. It seems a bit weird to deliberately reduce the number of available buttons, but I wanted to simplify one of the F15EX switches by limiting its movement to just forward and backward. A very simple 3D print later, works exactly as I wanted. STL attached if anyone else fancies it. I just used double-sided tape to attach, which seems perfectly sufficient. F15EX_SwitchGuard.STL
  5. Overall latency is a factor of speed and CAS latency (CL). You can compare the two kits using this calculator and see that they're actually identical in this respect. If the extra cost isn't an issue, I'd go for the 3600.
  6. Nick Grey's comments certainly don't inspire any confidence in a 2024 release. Around 25 mins into the video...
  7. Definitely sounds like an application 'capturing' those keys and preventing them being passed though. I'd suggest opening task manager and see if that shows what might be responsible. Force-quit anything that looks like it could be, checking after each whether the keys start working again.
  8. On the calibration page, which currently looks like this?
  9. Having got the impression that this board was at least monitored by WinWing, I thought it worth posting here... While calibrating my throttle it occurred to me that the axis values should be visible on the calibration page. Two reasons... 1. There's currently no way to identify each axis without going back to the 'test' page. Having to do this repeatedly is annoying. 2. It's useful to be able to see raw axis values while calibrating. Simple photoshop mockup...
  10. The most significant light source in DCS is the sun, and that's definitely not static. Neither are the cockpits which it casts shadows into, or aircraft it casts shadows from. While I would agree that there are fewer benefits to ray tracing in DCS compared with other applications, it should at least make shadows more accurate and less prone to issues. It's also important to distinguish between ray traced direct shadows and bounced lighting from diffuse surfaces (aka global illumination or GI), the latter being what baking seeks to address. As far as ray tracing is concerned, they're independent of one another and direct shadows could be ray traced without the performance hit of calculating indirect lighting.
  11. What 'it' are you referring to? Fixed foveated rendering has been part of the toolkit for ages, long before Matt developed the eye tracking stuff. It uses a method called Variable Rate Shading, which is nothing to do with quad views as far as I'm aware. It's been suggested upthread that the foveated rendering of quad views is better than that of the toolkit, even for users of headsets without eye tracking. I'd just like to know what that's based on, or see some evidence for it. Have had a read of the documentation and failed to see anything there, apologies if I've missed it.
  12. Where does he say one is better than the other? I had a look into things and it appears that they use different techniques, but if the quad views method is superior why wouldn't Matt have used that in the toolkit?
  13. It's taken a while, but with the recent arrival of a Bambu Lab P1S I've finally done something about the mess that was visible from everywhere but the pilot's seat. Before... After...
  14. For a headset without eye tracking, what's the difference between this and the fixed foveated rendering in OpenXR toolkit?
  15. They don't take any payment info at all when pre-ordering. On the global store at least.
×
×
  • Create New...