Jump to content

Kestrel

Members
  • Posts

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kestrel

  1. I map the Ka-50 throttle(s) to the 'Flaps' switch on my Warthog Throttle. Makes it very intuitive and easy to move up and down between the preset throttle positions (idle-med-auto-max). The throttles tend to stay in 'auto' when airborne, so others may find a better use for this switch. I lock the two Warthog throttle levers together and use these as the Collective.
  2. Hi guys, this looks right up my alley. Signed up to SimCentral and awaiting activation. I'm based in Chch NZ and have been playing DCS since initial release, but never had any joy the very few times I've tried multiplayer (always found myself either in air quake or every man for himself affairs, usually with not much going on) . I much prefer structured (esp coop) missions but struggled to find anything at local times that suit (... until just now maybe). I own most DCS modules, but by far spend most of my time on the F14, F18, F5, Harrier, Su27, Su25T, Huey, Ka50 and warbirds (all of them). I have recently got the F16 but haven't got very far with that (yet). If there is a mission going tonight (being Sunday), I might drop in on discord if that is ok (I see the link is in an earlier post) and see what happens from there. Also love the idea of chopper Tuesday! Cheers.
  3. Tempest. Along with 'The Big Show' campaign part deux!
  4. My PC specs are very similar to yours, however I play DCS exclusively with VR rather than using multiple monitors (although both of these set-ups are very demanding on the GPU). I have OC'd my 8700k to 4.9 GHz and personally I have noticed a slight but not significant improvement (vs. stock) for DCS. My Kraken x62 seldom goes above 50deg (whereas my 1080ti always runs hotter than my CPU). But in your (and my) situation, I think you have to look at it like this: If you have an 8700k, Z370 MB and Kraken x62, it would just be silly not to OC. If you are just going to run stock speeds, it would have been better to buy a non k chip (with bundled stock cooler eliminating the x62) and more basic MB. Also, not a lot of time and effort is required to OC, if you don't go too crazy with it. I just incrementally bumped mine up every few weeks and then didn't feel the need to go beyond 4.9GHz due to diminishing returns and increasing likelihood of stressing my hardware.
  5. Wow ... very cool Pave Low presentation. SOLD. But just imagine the resources required to model all that complex technology and systems! And a very steep learning curve to fly/operate if it is a four person job. Would be awesome though!
  6. It is useful to have the 'controls indicator' up and become very familiar with the hover trim position (cyclic slightly back and to the left). Something that worked well or me was trimming to this position reasonably early in the approach (before things get too busy). While I then have to provide quite a lot of stick deflection initially to maintain my approach, it eases up nicely the closer I get to the final hover position (with just a bit of fine tuning required occasionally) so I can focus more on collective and rudder inputs . For initial landings, I recommend taking it slow with a long approach so you can get use to make a lot of small adjustments along the way, noting that adjustment of one of the primary controls (cyclic, collective and rudder) also then requires immediate adjustment of the other two. Making large adjustments can therefore quickly become unmanageable!
  7. My only experience is with Rift CV1. Like you, I have a 8700k & 1080Ti and 16Gb RAM and I am more than happy with my DCS experience. Thrilled in fact! This setup allows decent super sampling in DCS (via pixel density slider in GUI) to improve perceived resolution. But I found higher is not always better and use a pixel density of 1.3 as my sweet spot between resolution, spotting ability and smoothness. And this pushes the 1080ti really hard, so I would not recommend waiting for next gen VR as this will be even more taxing (I expect a new GPU will be needed to run next gen, so might as well get the most out of your current GPU in the mean time). One thing to note though; if you have been playing DCS for a while, be prepared to unlearn most of what you are comfortable with and go through a whole new learning curve. At first (after being blown away how it feels to be sitting in the plane), you may struggle a bit to get to grips with using controls etc. using mostly just touch or voice (already using viacom should give you a good leg up here though!). And you may feel a bit queasy and have eye strain initially. But stick with it and it and it soon will feel very natural and immersive. I'm at the point now that when I (very occasionally) go back to using a monitor and track ir, I simply can't cope without 1 to 1 head tracking and the depth perception of VR ... it feels unplayable (even though the graphics are undeniably more stunning)! If you get the Rift, I doubt you'd ever regret it!
  8. ... don't even need a key binding, all we need to do is invert the throttle axis. So then when we want to "slam on the brakes and he will fly right by", all we need to do is simultaneously pull back on the stick and push throttle fully forward:lol:
  9. I've also noticed that if you taxi with wings folded it automatically locks to NWS HI (which confused me initially), but then I read somewhere that this is exactly how it is supposed to work. I thought it was in the EA manual, but just did a search and can't find it there.
  10. Indeed we have come a long way! I recall an 'advanced' sim of the A-10 in the early 90's (just a teenager then). I thought it was so amazing ... it even had wingman communications! In comparison, where we are now with DCS 2.5 and VR is just incredible! I really hope that I live a long time so I can see where this all goes in the future! Found a link to that old A-10 game if anyone is wondering what blew the minds of us oldies back then:
  11. The P51 is the best starting point and so skills learnt will transfer over well to any of the other three which are (in my opinion) slightly trickier to get to grips with. As others have said, all are very good, so don't think you'd be disappointed with any of them. I'd personally recommend the 109 as your second plane as it is a suburb all round performer and seems to be the easiest to fly (after the mustang) in a wide range of situations. Take offs and landings can be difficult at first, but become quite easy (and extremely satisfying) with practice. You will notice that after quite a bit of time in the 109, you will easily nail take-offs and landings in the mustang! Nose cannon has a low rate of fire and not much ammo for A2A combat (but very effective when timed right), but is very effective in A2G strafing runs. Spitfire is a joy to fly and would recommend that as a close third plane. It does take a bit longer (at least it did for me!) to adapt to the ground handling (as it is the only one without a tail wheel lock) and engine over heating (if flying too slow with high boost and revs), but once you go through that learning curve it is not a problem. Currently, there are no external stores (bombs or rockets) for ground attack (but I think these may be coming eventually?). I've been really enjoying the Epsom campaign in this aircraft, it feels very authentic. I like the FW190 a lot, but struggle with it at times with it in combat. It feels very powerful and fast, but bites if you get too aggressive or slow (probably just my lack of skill and too much time in the 109 and Spitfire). I also find that unless I get a kill quickly (which seldom happens lol), I spend a lot of time running away from fights so I can re-engage under more favorable conditions. This results in a cycle that tends to result in a long drawn out combat which I personally don't find as much fun compared to the other planes. Hope that helps.
  12. Interesting to see so many people primarily into SP on here. I'm one of them as well and really enjoy doing my own thing, but have always felt at the back of my mind that perhaps because I choose not to do MP makes me somewhat of an oddball outcast and I'm missing out on the core way (I thought) most people enjoy DCS (i.e. in MP). For me the Persian Gulf map is a no brainer. Really looking forward to that environment with F14 and F18 naval ops and lots of scope for some really good mission making (especially because the Straight of Hormuz is such a natural pinch point in the middle of a powder keg). I enjoy the variety that multiple maps provide and the cost of any new map (to date!) is minuscule compared to the overall time and modules I have invested in DCS so far, as well as all the hardware (which tbh is by fay the greatest cost). And I think DCS has a great future ahead, so will get good value in the long run given I can see myself doing this for a very long time.
  13. Would love a Tempest more than anything else. Perfect for Normandy and blowing up all those nicely modeled German tanks in the WWII asset pack which currently do not serve much purpose! I also think that a Mosquito and JU88 in tandem would be a great thing and provide an opportunity for attack/defend scenarios (at low level where you can utilize and enjoy the high map detail) beyond the current fighter/bomber vs fighter. Eventually I would like to see a Bf106G and FW190A, but would much rather have other planes are progressed before variants of models we already have. A Russian fighter (comparable to existing DCS warbirds) would make things really interesting. Yes, would be totally out of place for Normandy, but with a bit of imagination, existing map winter seasons could serve (at a pinch) as a crude stand in for the Eastern Front.
  14. Looks like you guys have sorted this one with the parking allocation, but it reminded me I recently made a mission where I found that AI aircraft were attempting to take off in different directions depending on their parking location, which was not what I wanted. I fixed it by increasing wind speed and setting the wind direction towards what I wanted to be the active runway. This seemed to fix it; the AI seem to want to always take off into the wind once the wind speed reaches some critical value. This might help if others are having similar problems with AI conflicts causing blockages of runways.
  15. +1, would be awesome if this could be implemented.
  16. I think there needs to be a balance, and that is a difficult thing to get right. @dmatsch, I think what you suggested sounds like the best overall approach to get the balance right. I have to say that a pet hate of mine is when (say) orbiting the AO waiting for something to kick off and have had ample time to build good situational awareness, but then an enemy armor convoy (for example) might suddenly spawn in an area that I knew was totally clear a moment ago! This is a big immersion killer for me. I wonder why did I even bother painstakingly bother to can all the approaches in and around the AO if the mission designer is going to cheat like that! If there are enemy units hiding in wait for an ambush later on in the mission, then they should be fair game from the start. Sure, the ambush or counter attack might not then happen as intended by the mission designer, but as far as I'm concerned it's the pilots job to stop said ambush/counter attack from happening in the first place (but also be ready to react it if it does happen unexpectedly)! Further thought is also needed when designing missions where players have access to long range sensors (radar, rwr, tgp etc.). If the mission involves something like a separate SEAD package, then it is only natural that a player in the attack flight might want to maintain situational awareness by attempting to track these assets using any of the available sensors. They may become justifiably concerned or confused if they can't be detected where they are expected to be. Finally, I really value the build up to the mission you feel when you see a SEAD flight or tanker etc. take off as you are doing pre-flight checks and startup ... you know it's all on for a big show (and they are your buddies ... all in it together ... even if dumb AI)! But of course all of this is pointless if it slows everything to a point where it's unplayable (hence the need for balance). However, you don't necessarily need a lot of objects (especially moving ground units) to make an exciting and realistic mission if it is kept reasonably focused. This seems to be the case in most of the (admittedly only single player) missions I've played, including most of the third campaign modules.
  17. @cromhunt: Sorry you have misunderstood me. I certainly have no desire to emulate RC flying in DCS; other simulators exist for that specific purpose. I enjoy DCS (and other flight sims) as a totally separate hobby; the purpose being to experience realistic on-board fight and procedures from a pilots perspective. @Focha Comparing any two classes off helicopter is unfair. I interpreted the OP ("What is a helicopter able to do and perform?") in the broadest sense of the subject, and to push the limits of what a helicopter can do inevitably requires some type of specialization. For example, a Mi-26 can lift 20 metric tons. Does this demonstrate what amazing things a helicopter is capable of doing? Yes. Is it a fair comparison with other helicopters? No. By definition, a helicopter is not restricted to any particular size, nor is it required to accommodate a pilot. But in hindsight, yes I should have perhaps considered this question more purely in the context of DCS (where the subject matter determines that a pilot must indeed be present on-board). So I apologize if considering a slightly broader scope offended anyone. But I won't apologize for my love of helicopters (of any shape and size!)
  18. Yes, it is truly amazing what helicopters can do ... so much more than anything with a fixed wing! For example, many people don't know that technically helicopters can sustain inverted flight if the range of blade pitch is simply configured to be negative as well as positive. By far the biggest limitation is the people inside them. This is obvious when you watch RC helis, which show the true potential, such as the one in the link below: I fly RC helis (but my skills are nothing like in the video), and I can tell you this is not electronic trickery. It took hours of practice for me to learn just to hover with any confidence ... and many more hours before I could fly backwards or inverted. Very stressful hobby ... hence the appeal of flight sims like DCS with it's low cost per crash!
  19. Sounds like you're using 'Central Position Trimmer' mode (under the special menu tab for Ka50). I tried using this mode for a while and generally found it to be nice, but if you do not center the stick (very precisely) after each press of the trim button, your controls will be locked out (as you describe). The trim button will still 'click', but controls will not be released, even if you are just slightly off center. Even when aware of this, it is still very easy to mess up ... and can often end up crashing almost as soon as you realize that you didn't quite center the stick with enough precision! So in the end, I shifted back to the 'Default Trimmer' mode. I find it to be a much more reliable method and ultimately results in less frustration! One less thing that can kill me! Hope that helps.
  20. Well henhag, all I can say is that you must be a much stronger person than me, the warthog spring is very heavy, Salute! I have a 7.5cm extension on my warthog and still find it hard work even though I use trim all the time! If I was doing it over again, I'd definitely go with a floor mounted stick (biggest regret for sure). Perhaps when my warthog wears out (if that will ever happen). I think the KA50 would be too difficult (and tiring) to fight in effectively if had to manhandle the warthog stick the whole time, but you have got me thinking about the Huey now ... that might indeed be doable (for short flights), so might give it a go! But if you very seldom use trim, wouldn't it actually be quite feasible to use curves in that case (if the key concern relates to trimming as per OP)? Each to there own I guess, and I am glad DCS provides so much flexibility for users to tailor the experience according to hardware limitations and personal preference. If it wasn't for the fatigue factor, I agree that your setup does sounds the ideal way ... otherwise it is very easy to lose track of where the cyclic is really at (and while the control indicator helps immensely, I do have to admit that it does reduce immersion in VR).
  21. Interesting consideration. But wouldn't this only apply to force feedback joysticks? My understanding from my own setup experience (and I may well be wrong!) is that the curvature applies to the physical joystick only, not the virtual cyclic. So when flying with my physical (non force-feedback) joystick, when I hit 'trim' (e.g. to match the green dot in your figure), then the virtual cyclic locks to that position and my joystick returns to center. If I then make a post trim adjustment to the left or right, then the sensitivity is the same in both directions, because the starting point for the adjustment is from a centered joystick (coinciding with the curvature inflection point in the middle position). Similarly, in your example with 50% Y-saturation, I can move my physical joystick fully up and hit trim and I get 50% forward locked in the virtual cyclic. After centering my stick, I can move my physical joystick all the way up and hit trim again, and I've now got 100% forward locked in the virtual cyclic. You can clearly see this with the controls indicator turned on. I fly the Ka-50, Huey an Gazelle with both curvature and saturation set and it works very well for me, enabling super fine adjustments from the centered joystick (wherever the virtual cyclic happens to be offset to) and still providing sufficient precision for larger stick movements (without becoming over sensitive). Trimming multiple times is however required for fast forward flight, but in a heli you're always trimming anyway, and with my set-up it can now be done with much greater precision (and with the full range of the virtual cyclic still being accessible)! Hope that makes sense!
  22. I'm still tweaking, but finding that (at this stage) I need to vary some settings by map to get the best results rather than use fixed settings for all. The settings I have ended up with after tweaking for over a week are below: Textures: HIGH Terrain: HIGH Civ Traffic: OFF Water: MEDIUM Visibility Range: MEDIUM Heat Blur: OFF Shadows: MEDIUM Res: NA Resolution of Cockpit Displays: 1024 (lowering this doesn't seem to improve performance) MSAA: 2 HDR: NA Deferred Shading: ON for Caucasus (trees are too much of an eye sore with it off) ON or OFF for Normandy (depending on in game time of day, but kinda sitting on the fence) OFF for Nevada (lose the nice DS effects, but colors and terrain look so much better to me) Clutter/Grass: 0% Trees: 80% Preload: radius 50% Chimney Smoke: 2 Gamma: 1.6 (default but often adjust slightly in game for specific conditions) AF: 8x Terrain Shadows: Flat Global Cockpit Illumination: ON (but sometimes OFF depending on time of day) VR Settings PD: 1.3 (intensive missions and combat) - Smooth 45 FPS and good overall balance between performance and visuals including spotting PD: 1.6 (simple missions and solo flying) - Very smooth 45 FPS and simply gorgeous! I have recently found just flying lots of circuits (touch'n go's etc) is almost as enjoyable as any combat because of how clear the instruments are and how real it feels (even 1.5 to 1.6 PD is big step, but not much difference beyond that, although FPS still seems smooth). After comparing with the settings others have posted, I'm thinking of experimenting a bit more with AF (I don't recall it making much difference during initial testing, but most seem to have it low or off) and also putting Visibility Range up to HIGH (as most others seem to have) and seeing what the benefits are compared to a drop in PD (if any) is required to maintain performance. But I seem to remember dropping this from HIGH to MEDIUM was one of the more effective adjustments for boosting performance (with FLAT ground shadows being another one). Thanks OP for this thread ... very enlightening to see what settings others are using on comparable rigs! My specs are in sig below (note that my system not currently OC'd as I'm more than happy with stock performance, but might do so once my 2.5 settings are finalized)
  23. I've noticed that the red rotating beacon in KA50 lights up entire cockpit (e.g. strobes across the entire instrument panel and other places where the light shouldn't reach) with deferred shading on. No major drama, as can simply switch it off. Other thing that I have noticed is smoke effects inside cockpit after firing vikhr.
×
×
  • Create New...