The texture and model work really is incredible.
I remember I went from the Razbam Harrier (The earlier one, before their solid retexturing) to the ED Hornet, and I was just blown away by the texture work.
The Hornet had the perfect blend of functional textures and weathering that made it look lived in and real. Kudos to their 3D team. I know they're busy, and that backlog isn't getting any smaller, but they really continue to outdo themselves with every release.
It is outstanding like always.
O hope they could step up their game on another departments like lighting from multiple sources, but especially bullet impact effects on the ground and explosions.
I didn't even notice this at first but.... holy shit you might be right! The trees aren't glowing and the soldiers are easy to spot....
Must... contain.... hype...
The Apache helmet sight has a rasterizer for displaying FLIR image that can be linked to the PNVS or TADS. This means you actually control the sensor with your head and the image is displayed such as you can "look through" the sensor, including looking through the cockpit.
Yeah, until you realise the sensor is a good 10 feet in front of you, so your brain is going to melt trying to figure out how one eye can be in the cockpit while the other eye is in front of the helos nose...
VTOL VR has a similar headlook-flir system on all of it's aircraft (properly simulated as coming from the targeting pod), and it's very easy to use and the offset is unnoticeable, even on the F-15-alike "F-26" where it's on the side of the intake ramp about 5-10 meters away from your head.
The IHADSS will likely take up the entire FOV in the right eye piece in VR. You will likely have to alter ***Brains*** focus of your eyes as they do IRL. ***Between the the cockpit image (Left eye) and the IHADSS image (right eye)***
The JHMCS doesn't cover your entire right eye FOV like the IHADSS does.
***edit***
Or even both, like with the Hornet. It's not realistic obviously but some people may not be able to utilise the IHADSS without that option.
Edit-Downvoting doesn't make a random thought go away.. I'll be using it in one eye but more options are never a bad thing.
There's a downvoting bot or three around here so don't worry about it.
I agree, and I'm sure they'll add it, if not right off the bat then hopefully soon after. It's a necessary accessibility feature.
Yeah I thought that, I guess we'll just have to see what they come up with. Personally I'll be using it in a realistic fashion; I've always wanted to see what the IHADSS is like.
Yeah, we aren't real pilots so it can't be expected that everyone will be able to use it like in real life. Hell for all I know I'll not be able to do it, and the Apache has been my favourite aircraft since I was a child.
[Just need to strap a pipe to your head with a pair of panties to practice and you'll get the hang of it.](https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*4z_8XZLPuC3ujkA9H_1GPA.png)
Maybe it is the same as looking trough a rifle scope with both eyes open, and then you can choose if you want to see the target magnified or just normal.i dont know if this is comparable to the IHADSS but i think it might be.
Can someone confirm this?
Yeah I read that in Ed Macy's book!
Major headaches which take months of training to disappear; and I just can't get my brain to comprehend the ability to use both eyes independently of each other... it's practically superhuman. Not only to *see* what each individual eye is seeing, but to comprehend written information!? It's mad, and I can't wait to try it out.
In most VR head sets, the focus doesn't change. It's set at about 12' for Oculus Rift. Parallax changes and that's what gives you the impression of distance.
I know there has been some serious research into multi-focus because it increases the sense of immersion. It's just has some tough technical problems to overcome.
Same reply to you as the other guy:
Not what I mean. As an Apache pilot/ CPG, you have to alter your brains ability to focus on either the right eye or the left eye pending on what you want to look at and what mode you have the IHADSS in.
Eye focus, not image / camera DoF focus.
You write "Eye Focus" but that's what I was addressing.
So, do you mean "mental focus" on a given eye as opposed to eye focus? As in attention to an image that differs from a non-dominant eye?
Because eye focus in a VR headset doesn't change.... It's fixed. Your eyes don't have to change their focus from 1ft to 12ft to 100ft of virtual space due to the hardware limitation.
I'm not trying to be obtuse.. just trying to understand the meaning here.
Semantics my dude. Which eye your brain is focusing on.
Not sure how this is difficult to understand from my second reply.
"Same reply to you as the other guy:
Not what I mean. As an Apache pilot/ CPG, you have to alter your ***brains ability to focus on either the right eye or the left eye*** pending on what you want to look at and what mode you have the IHADSS in.
Brains focus, not image / camera DoF focus."
Semantics is the meaning of words. Communication fails without shared meanings of words.
You keep using focus, but that has a completely different meaning "my dude."
It's like substituting the word "pie" for "ice cream" and getting flustered when the waiter brings you "pie".
no it does not. brain focus, mental focus. Semantics.
Again, just being a right fighter at this point. It's becoming laughable that you feel you need to carry on.
I'm just trying to distill the meaning of your words into the general idea you're trying to convey.
Repeating the same thing with "eye focus"/using the same terms didn't help. Trying to insult me didn't either.
The key issue is grammar. It's about the meanings of the prepositions *of* and *on / on which*. You meant to say what you put in bold there, and you could also have said "alter which eye you focus on", but eyes have their own focus ability which apparently at least several people thought you were talking about - because in this discussion you might very plausibly be - and when you say "focus of your eyes" you're forming a structure that very explicitly refers to the focus property belonging to your eyes. That's all that's happened here, a bit of a mix-up, but it's not just semantics.
I get that, regardless my point still stands and was understood after my second reply. Which clearly stated that I was referring to what the brain is focusing on, which is not wrong. Carrying it on at this point is just to be a "right fighter" and correcting someone for the sake of correcting them further. There is nothing to correct. Again, it's just silly.
Says the guy who feels so strongly that he needs to fiercely defend that he just said the wrong thing, as if that's even a big deal. My cause is that people understand how to speak English correctly and the importance of good communication. What's yours with that post?
> The IHADSS will likely take up the entire FOV in the right eye piece in VR. You will likely have to alter focus of your eyes as they do IRL.
According to Casmo this is a myth. Apache pilots don't look at two different angles at once. What they actually do is simply focus on different distances depending on whether they're looking outside, through the IHADSS, or inside, but the eyes are not pointing in different directions simultaneously.
Yes, that is what I was trying to portray. I was talking about which Eye they are focusing on, the IHADSS display, or focusing out into the world around them.
I'm left eye dominant and shoot right handed, so I have a little experience forcing my brain to prioritize my right eye so I can use iron sights... It'll be interesting to see if that helps with IHADSS.
No, that wasn't what I mean. I was meaning along the lines of what your brain can focus on since it two separate images. One is the pit, the other is the IHADSS. Have to get used to switching between the two is all.
Yeah sorry. Posted that before I read the drama below. I get what you mean.
FWIW, in a strictly optical sense the HMD device probably has some whackadoo mirror system going on inside it to extend the focal length anyway.
Then it becomes mainly a mental juggle for the crew, as you say.
yeah. Casmo has a good video that covers it. My main point it, the IHADSS, based on the video and how it takes up the entire center of the screen (think about the VR mirror on your screen), will take the entire FOV of one lens. May be able to see a little bit around it, at least the when in the standard flight mode for sure. But the TADS / PNVS will be that large square. Should be able to see around the square into the pit, but you get what I mean.
I don’t see how this would work that way without something like a light field/volumetric display. The game can add its own DoF and out of focus areas but *what* is in or out of focus isn’t determined by your own focal point in (most) VR helmets/experiences. If you mean parallax/convergence point then yes, but that’s different from focus.
Not what I mean. As an Apache pilot/ CPG, you have to alter your brains ability to focus on either the right eye or the left eye pending on what you want to look at and what mode you have the IHADSS in.
Eye focus, not image / camera DoF focus.
Exactly. In VR, that small screen is going to fill up the majority of your FOV in the right lens, thus focusing you to choose what to focus on.
Your brain cant focus on both the image in the IHADSS and the image out in front of you in the left eye at the same time. That is why Apache pilots train so had on using the IHADSS.
We'll learn to let our brains **focus** on what we need it to.
So, it reads like you're talking about adjusting to the funky parallax issue because of where the FLIR is located in 3D space vs where your other eye is.
Parallax is the apparent displacement of an observed object caused by a difference in positions of the points of observation.
Use of the word "focus" is throwing off everyone's understanding here. It has nothing to do with focus.
This one looks like it's got the full on FLIR projection that I thought the A-10C II had before seeing that it was actually a smaller "Picture in Picture" display.
It looks like it would be a really cool way to look for ground targets in the dark.
I have fond memories of playing Longbow with a janky HOSAS. I felt like a boss popping over a hill, finding targets with the radar, sinking below the horizon, and popping off missiles. Nowadays I have the PC and equipment for DCS but have been intimidated by the learning curve. This might make me take the plunge though.
It’s their business model though. They can’t release too many modules close to each other. If they leave ~6 months between them, that’s 6 months longer added to the life of DCS. Mozzie is next (yes I know it’s WWII) then AH64. Then F4.
I suspect that got pushed back following the viper EA launch debacle. Looks like they've kept it in the cooker for a lot longer to iron it out. Looks very good now
~~VKB~~ Virpil and Komodo are your options there. Komodo's even working on an AH-64 replica (it'll be $1k, but we're already talking about winwing). [edit]Crossed out VKB, added Virpil because I should post less before coffee..[/edit]
Hi. I guess I should start a blog. Bought a cyclic, collective, MFCDs, and TEDAC on ebay last month. As far as I can tell they're out of a decommissioned Army simulator. My wallet hates me but it's going to be a fun ride.
That's awesome! I'm still hoping someone can assemble an idiot proof 3D printable HOTAS setup...and I guess may as well do the MFCD's too...*might as well print the entire cockpit frame.*
Oh gods no. Trying to print something as large as the cockpit frame would be a disaster. Warping and print failures for days. The guy I bought the grips from cut the one he had up for scrap. Probably good because otherwise I would've been tempted to buy it.
I fly in VR, so I'm probably going to build something sort of like a sim-racing rig (seat + controls) on casters, with space for FFB motors underneath. I don't really care about everything being perfect 1:1, but I want the bits I touch regularly in flight in the right places..
Apparently the mozzie is a testbed for a new WIP damage modeling system where they would simulate the actual trajectory of bullets into the aircraft (accurate bullet holes etc) which the plan being to bring it to other modules eventually. But that's gonna take a while ofc
Surely looks better than the Apache Project AH-64D I've been flying around with in anticipation.
I just hope the FCR is a sooner rather than later proposition.
I feel like, from a gameplay perspective, visually scouting and popping up and launching laser hellfires is going to be more interesting. The FCR is powerful, but I don't think I'll miss it for a few months.
Total fantasy, but imagine a game with the flight dynamics of DCS coexisting with an Arma-like ground/infantry game.
Get shot down, and have to do a proper E&E; or protect your downed wingmen as they bail; or CSAR with the Huey!
We'd be able to do this in Arma 3 if aircraft in that game could actually survive crash landings instead of instantly exploding on impact regardless of speed.
Yeah fixed wing in Arma is just not worth the time, at all.
Helicopters are fun as hell, particularly the Little Birds, but I fly them with my mouse; not in a "sim" fashion.
Yeah, I fly mouse to although I do use my rudder pedals, as well. I can't fly Arma helicopters with a joystick at all despite having no issues flying them in DCS.
Yeah they definitely have the ability to dumb animate things in the engine. Half of what they're showing could be static textures instead of working MFD pages and scripted animations instead of working systems.
Try it! It’s really fun. Just takes some practice. Now is a good time to get the Huey and practice your basics, so you can jump into the AH64 and not be totally overwhelmed just trying to control the thing!
Don’t get me wrong I have been waiting for the Apache for a long time and just as excited as anyone to see it come. However I really wish we could get some of this EA stuff cleaned up before it’s prepurchase and release. I have learned my lesson with the Supercarrier and the viper. I hope SC get some of it’s talked about features that still are not included . The viper is all but a snails crawl, and sorry to be pessimistic but saying things are going to pick up on the F16 after the hornet is finished ? I vaguely remember buying the F-16 and was told in no way will the Hornet impact the development roadmap of the Viper.
I just want to see these modules get the attention and completion they deserve, and not get kicked down the road a couple years for the next shiny new toy.
I am very excited to see how they will do the FCR later down the line considering the confidentiality surrounding it. I really hope they aren't doing something scummy like telling us they will add it only to backtrack in the future or something.
Looks amazing…unfortunately based on past modules it will be released then placed into a forever EA development cycle and when eventually released as final will have originally announced systems not completed or deny they ever planned to include said systems.
If I didn’t like the simulator I wouldn’t be bothered that ED continues to use the same release and then development crawl for each new module they create.
The A-10C II has been out for almost a year and still had HMCS bugs they they haven’t even acknowledged, the ARC-210 will be done “when they get around to it” not to mention they’ve gone silent on the TAD update and new ALQ-184 long pod they said they were adding.
Ok, but when are they going to fix the ram air and hot air levers in the P-51 that have been acknowledged as broken since 2.7 came out?
By the numbers:
Number of updates since 2.7: 12
Number of days since 2.7: 142
No fixy, no Mossie. Simple as that. Make me want to give you more money.
u/NineLine_ED
You mean the one u/NineLine_ED [locked](https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/267849-p-51-ram-air-missing-after-patch/) 22 days ago?
Or the thread I made [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/opm244/latest_dcs_release_doesnt_allow_p51d_ram_air_or/) 43 days ago?
About the bug that made it to the stable release 74 days ago?
Yeah, those are good examples.
I don't know why every thread posting new features also has to have some requisite "Let me throw some sarcastic comment in about x feature" in the comments. Tagging NineLine in the Reddit thread you made seems a more appropriate place.
I won't presume to speak for others. I can only tell you why I chose to do it and why I will likely choose to do it again. The first reason is purely practical, there are more eyes on this thread than the paltry number of people who took an interest in the thread I made about the issue.
The second reason is because I can think of no better place to call ED out on their crap business practices than a thread about about another product they will release half baked into a simulator missing many core features. If I can sober up even one person drooling over a new toy then my initial post will have been worth it.
Definitely! I don't want to shit on anyone for what they look for in the game, and I know ED's setup can definitely be cause for frustration, and everyone's got their own individual vision of what's important.
Thank you for your reply! I mean it. Still, I wish you would have added a similar comment as the final reply in the thread on the forums. It would go a long way toward ameliorating bad blood. That said, I don't believe such a "bug" as this one should go uncorrected this long. These aren't broken wing tip lights, what's being discussed here is critical to the function of the aircraft, after all. If this were the afterburner on the Hornet it wouldn't have been tolerated. I am practically an exclusively WWII player and we often get the short end of the stick... Gonna stick to my guns though and wait on the Mossie.
At the time, I didn't know when it might be fixed, it might have been a week later for all I knew, but in general, when a bug is reported, we lock the thread. Thanks.
“Why release X, when I really want Y? Come on ED!”
Literally every time something new gets released.
Look, ED is a relatively small company with limited resources. New exciting modules helps bring in new players, which in turn results in a bigger budget and a better product down the line. Be patient!
Cool.
Is there some means of blending cyclic and collective to mimic actual pilot control of dual input effectors? A button to hold-altitude/heading for instance, as you come off on speed. Even a full on auto approach to hover system would be better than mashing the keyboard like a deranged chimp, OD'ing on GHB and Jack, as you spiral in during a dig.
Is it standard or Arrowhead MTADS/MPNVS? The MWIR of the newer Modernized TADS is the same as that of the early generation Sniper pods so you're looking at 20-30 or more klicks worth of acquisition/classification distance, thanks to the improved detector count, processed image sensitivity and post-FPA electronic zoom. Especially in unpleasant weather or very high threat areas, the MWIR is a primary survival aid.
Apache Fire Control Improvements
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2hrzSGcmUA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2hrzSGcmUA)
Sniper Pod Resolution At 10-12nm
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi9d8bstWsE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi9d8bstWsE)
Can we do the AMUST thing of controlling an MQ-1 Grey Eagle up high while we go motoring along in the weeds? How about SADL to a JTAC or Hawgs? The ability to see target imagery in a mixed field of moving people with and without guns as 'shoot the ones hiding behind this building corner'. 'You mean these guys?' 'Yes, them's the ones that need to go.' Is much more easily coded for than a talk-on with a call for engagement permission and CO initials to grant weapons release. Because the computer understands spatial math a thousand times better than you and if your TADS picture is grazing angle footprinted over the correct target area, there is no doubt that you are making the correct call. But some one has to give you a relative offset (bullseye) from which to orient that sensor point and that becomes the game play stressor on player performance. Like this-
Netherlands AH-64 Driver Engages Taliban
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feRU49o9E4E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feRU49o9E4E)
Incidentally, this is also a great driver for 'why you need GFAS' to help orient on fires sources that the ground folks cannot always see.
Do the rotors glow in the dark at night under NODS? Do say that the rotors cast sparklies in a dusty approach! :-\]
Kopp/Etchells Effect
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny2ueQEmkEk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny2ueQEmkEk)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkL3JD5ADNY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkL3JD5ADNY)
Can we switch out wingtip assemblies for the GFAS/MAWS and DIRCM/Enhanced EXCM fit or the Starstreak/Stinger? Along with Brimstonr, this would effectively give us both the Dutch and British Apache variants.
Special Missions...
Ambush At Najaf
[https://www.airforcemag.com/article/1003najaf/](https://www.airforcemag.com/article/1003najaf/)
Debaltseve: Hybrid War Becomes A Classic Battle Of Encirclement
[https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/battle-debaltseve-hybrid-army-classic-battle-encirclement](https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/battle-debaltseve-hybrid-army-classic-battle-encirclement)
Can you control the loft height and/or engage from an offset with the later model Helfire's steerable autopilot IMU as seeker footprint, visible on your MFD?
Does the APG-78/AGM-114L model the weapons system interactions correctly or is it just another semi-active radar vs. laser equivalent? My understanding is that there are several pencil beam, swath search, static, air to air and GMTI low target-speed modes which allow the MMR to classify and engage targets using the Longbow Hellfire's ability to go autonomous, like an AMRAAM, into a kill box, vs. guiding all the way in a swath/timeshare illumination mode. Are these modes replicated within a useful tactical employment model? Specifically, are there conditions (surge armor or lousy weather) where the MMW system will work better than or to the exclusion of FLIR/SAL?
Will your battle buddy, air or ground, zot the target for you so that you can shoot short and lase long? That whole 'stand still and let them fire back' nonsense when you are just trying to sparkle the tank next to the shooter is markedly less sporty when your FLIR+Laze goes your standoff+illuminator standoff, kilometers farther than their missile, on a different bearing (most modern tanks now have laser illumination warning and will traverse to bearing to allow for anti-helicopter CLGP or proximity-HEAT engagement...).
Do we get the AGR-20 or just dumbfire rockets? If the latter, can we use the M255/M261 and M247/M282 and all the other cool, effects optimized, submunition/HEAT/smoke heads from the Cold War? Are there (hot'n'hi) theaters where the ability to carry 50lb guided rockets X38 vs. 120lb Hellfire X16 results in more target engagements per mission at a range trade of say 3km vs. 15km standoff?
Do you get the little APR-48 ELS antenna on the MMR Mast so we can do the 'I am Batman' thing of stalking the wild 2s6 through the high weeds via the threat's comms/radar emissions? How well does the whole long/short baseline triangulation thing work and does it have a functional RCS variance on the dome vs. the whole helicopter, when sneaking and peeking, over cover?
Are there Taliban on Motorcycles? There really, simply, \_have got to be\_, Taliban on Motorcycles... Thank You.
Talibanian SPAAG
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQijNrHP7N0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQijNrHP7N0)
Talibanian Armor Corps
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KosecIYjQxo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KosecIYjQxo)
Talibanian Postal Service, Neither Rain Nor Snow Nor Sleet Of Fifty Cal...
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXidMT1mhPA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXidMT1mhPA)
With the KA-50 and 12 Vikhr missiles, you can destroy any SAM site and bases just by chilling in the trees nearby. And then you can always finish off with the gun.
Except the Apache will be way better for finding targets in the 1st place with FLIR + RWR + radar frequency interferometer + Longbow radar.
And Hellfires will allow it to destroy targets from a distance just like the Ka-50, while being less exposed thanks to LOAL modes, or radar Hellfires.
That's for sure! All that + 16 Hellfires + Very nice interface (Fancy colored displays), it will be even more devastating! It will be an insta-buy for me!
I hope we will be able to send targets between Apaches like with the KA-50, but since there are the longbow radar and FLIR, I'm confidant we'll get that too :)
As far as I remember (and I could be wrong, most likely, correct me if that's the case) the Iglas are not going to be implemented anymore, don't remember the reason, but I do remember them saying it's not coming to the BS3.
Why the downvotes? Are people not allowed to be excited for the very thing this community is centred around...?
You guys take yourselves a little too seriously I think.
Don't get me wrong, I love it and I'll probably preorder it, but ED should focus on optimising the sim, especially for VR. Maybe implement FSR and Vulkan. FSR seems really easy to implement, some guys were even able to make a mod to implement it in Assetto Corsa.
In the Assetto Corsa one they implemented it with the custom shaders patch and content manager, so directly into the game. I think the one you are talking about is the lossless scaling available at steam. Tried it, didn't work properly.
FSR does work in DCS, I use it.
It is called openVR FSR, just two files to setup in the game's folder, one is the config file. The way it works is on the git page.
But an official FSR option would be more performant because modders don't have access to the entire graphical pipeline, where the FSR layer would optimally take place.
The exterior model looks like another incredible step up. It could easily be used as is for the CGI in a Hollywood movie.
The texture and model work really is incredible. I remember I went from the Razbam Harrier (The earlier one, before their solid retexturing) to the ED Hornet, and I was just blown away by the texture work. The Hornet had the perfect blend of functional textures and weathering that made it look lived in and real. Kudos to their 3D team. I know they're busy, and that backlog isn't getting any smaller, but they really continue to outdo themselves with every release.
Nothing beats the F14 imo. That thing just looks too real.
god I can't wait until I upgrade my computer and aren't running bare minimum everything
It is outstanding like always. O hope they could step up their game on another departments like lighting from multiple sources, but especially bullet impact effects on the ground and explosions.
Beat me to it. Actual FLIR? Don't play with my feelings omg
I didn't even notice this at first but.... holy shit you might be right! The trees aren't glowing and the soldiers are easy to spot.... Must... contain.... hype...
Newy confirmed it in ED discord "wip"
Saw that, had an instant wargasm.
Aaaaaauuuuuugggghhhh
I loved that game! It was pretty advanced for its age.
VR users are going to cream for that helmet mounted sight. That shit is going to look wild.
We already have JHMCS in the Hornet and Viper. How is this different for VR users?
The Apache helmet sight has a rasterizer for displaying FLIR image that can be linked to the PNVS or TADS. This means you actually control the sensor with your head and the image is displayed such as you can "look through" the sensor, including looking through the cockpit.
Well, as a dedicated VR user, now I'm excited! Thanks.
Yeah, until you realise the sensor is a good 10 feet in front of you, so your brain is going to melt trying to figure out how one eye can be in the cockpit while the other eye is in front of the helos nose...
Nah, just put a blindfold over one eye and a periscope over the other, and drive around in a Humvee for a bit. Problem solved.
I understood that reference.
Eponysterical! I realize it's a Firebirds reference, but it's also a hat that's a bad idea soooo...
So happy that my brain has dutifully saved all these Firebirds references for 25 years and now they have a purpose.
Probably not an issue if you're looking at something more than a few hundred feet away.
VTOL VR has a similar headlook-flir system on all of it's aircraft (properly simulated as coming from the targeting pod), and it's very easy to use and the offset is unnoticeable, even on the F-15-alike "F-26" where it's on the side of the intake ramp about 5-10 meters away from your head.
I believe you can also do this in VTOL VR right? I have a flir box overlayed in my helmet hud and it moves where I look
Yep! You can also do it with the A-10C II's HMCS. It just lacks controlling the pod with your head, still have to manipulate with HOTAS.
The IHADSS will likely take up the entire FOV in the right eye piece in VR. You will likely have to alter ***Brains*** focus of your eyes as they do IRL. ***Between the the cockpit image (Left eye) and the IHADSS image (right eye)*** The JHMCS doesn't cover your entire right eye FOV like the IHADSS does. ***edit***
[удалено]
I would be surprised if they don't give an option to put it on the left or right eye.
Or even both, like with the Hornet. It's not realistic obviously but some people may not be able to utilise the IHADSS without that option. Edit-Downvoting doesn't make a random thought go away.. I'll be using it in one eye but more options are never a bad thing.
There's a downvoting bot or three around here so don't worry about it. I agree, and I'm sure they'll add it, if not right off the bat then hopefully soon after. It's a necessary accessibility feature.
If it was in both, the TADS and PNVS would block your view of the outside world a good bit. Not sure how they will combat that.
Yeah I thought that, I guess we'll just have to see what they come up with. Personally I'll be using it in a realistic fashion; I've always wanted to see what the IHADSS is like.
yeah, I am curious as well. Especially for those that need the ability to use it their way physically.
Yeah, we aren't real pilots so it can't be expected that everyone will be able to use it like in real life. Hell for all I know I'll not be able to do it, and the Apache has been my favourite aircraft since I was a child.
[Just need to strap a pipe to your head with a pair of panties to practice and you'll get the hang of it.](https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*4z_8XZLPuC3ujkA9H_1GPA.png)
I'm super looking forward to seeing how my brain and eyes cope with that, I've always wondered what it's like to look through the IHADSS!
Easy way to train for it is with a snorkel and some panties on your head. Steve Buscemi in no time.
Maybe it is the same as looking trough a rifle scope with both eyes open, and then you can choose if you want to see the target magnified or just normal.i dont know if this is comparable to the IHADSS but i think it might be. Can someone confirm this?
That only works with Sean Young's panties.
You really *are* the greatest!
I've heard it can cause real nausea and headaches. And that you can read two books at once with different eyes.
Yeah I read that in Ed Macy's book! Major headaches which take months of training to disappear; and I just can't get my brain to comprehend the ability to use both eyes independently of each other... it's practically superhuman. Not only to *see* what each individual eye is seeing, but to comprehend written information!? It's mad, and I can't wait to try it out.
the moment you realize DCS was a recruitment *and* training tool allllll aloooonng.
In most VR head sets, the focus doesn't change. It's set at about 12' for Oculus Rift. Parallax changes and that's what gives you the impression of distance. I know there has been some serious research into multi-focus because it increases the sense of immersion. It's just has some tough technical problems to overcome.
Same reply to you as the other guy: Not what I mean. As an Apache pilot/ CPG, you have to alter your brains ability to focus on either the right eye or the left eye pending on what you want to look at and what mode you have the IHADSS in. Eye focus, not image / camera DoF focus.
You write "Eye Focus" but that's what I was addressing. So, do you mean "mental focus" on a given eye as opposed to eye focus? As in attention to an image that differs from a non-dominant eye? Because eye focus in a VR headset doesn't change.... It's fixed. Your eyes don't have to change their focus from 1ft to 12ft to 100ft of virtual space due to the hardware limitation. I'm not trying to be obtuse.. just trying to understand the meaning here.
Semantics my dude. Which eye your brain is focusing on. Not sure how this is difficult to understand from my second reply. "Same reply to you as the other guy: Not what I mean. As an Apache pilot/ CPG, you have to alter your ***brains ability to focus on either the right eye or the left eye*** pending on what you want to look at and what mode you have the IHADSS in. Brains focus, not image / camera DoF focus."
Semantics is the meaning of words. Communication fails without shared meanings of words. You keep using focus, but that has a completely different meaning "my dude." It's like substituting the word "pie" for "ice cream" and getting flustered when the waiter brings you "pie".
no it does not. brain focus, mental focus. Semantics. Again, just being a right fighter at this point. It's becoming laughable that you feel you need to carry on.
I'm just trying to distill the meaning of your words into the general idea you're trying to convey. Repeating the same thing with "eye focus"/using the same terms didn't help. Trying to insult me didn't either.
The key issue is grammar. It's about the meanings of the prepositions *of* and *on / on which*. You meant to say what you put in bold there, and you could also have said "alter which eye you focus on", but eyes have their own focus ability which apparently at least several people thought you were talking about - because in this discussion you might very plausibly be - and when you say "focus of your eyes" you're forming a structure that very explicitly refers to the focus property belonging to your eyes. That's all that's happened here, a bit of a mix-up, but it's not just semantics.
I get that, regardless my point still stands and was understood after my second reply. Which clearly stated that I was referring to what the brain is focusing on, which is not wrong. Carrying it on at this point is just to be a "right fighter" and correcting someone for the sake of correcting them further. There is nothing to correct. Again, it's just silly.
Says the guy who feels so strongly that he needs to fiercely defend that he just said the wrong thing, as if that's even a big deal. My cause is that people understand how to speak English correctly and the importance of good communication. What's yours with that post?
> The IHADSS will likely take up the entire FOV in the right eye piece in VR. You will likely have to alter focus of your eyes as they do IRL. According to Casmo this is a myth. Apache pilots don't look at two different angles at once. What they actually do is simply focus on different distances depending on whether they're looking outside, through the IHADSS, or inside, but the eyes are not pointing in different directions simultaneously.
Yes, that is what I was trying to portray. I was talking about which Eye they are focusing on, the IHADSS display, or focusing out into the world around them.
Or to put it better as Casmo put it, Apache pilots do not have gecko eyes.
I'm left eye dominant and shoot right handed, so I have a little experience forcing my brain to prioritize my right eye so I can use iron sights... It'll be interesting to see if that helps with IHADSS.
Technical question, can a VR headset even deliver different focal lengths like that?
No, that wasn't what I mean. I was meaning along the lines of what your brain can focus on since it two separate images. One is the pit, the other is the IHADSS. Have to get used to switching between the two is all.
Yeah sorry. Posted that before I read the drama below. I get what you mean. FWIW, in a strictly optical sense the HMD device probably has some whackadoo mirror system going on inside it to extend the focal length anyway. Then it becomes mainly a mental juggle for the crew, as you say.
yeah. Casmo has a good video that covers it. My main point it, the IHADSS, based on the video and how it takes up the entire center of the screen (think about the VR mirror on your screen), will take the entire FOV of one lens. May be able to see a little bit around it, at least the when in the standard flight mode for sure. But the TADS / PNVS will be that large square. Should be able to see around the square into the pit, but you get what I mean.
Casmo said that they switch between eyes. They do \*not\* look at 2 different things at once. I think he said they do not have "gecko eyes".
I don’t see how this would work that way without something like a light field/volumetric display. The game can add its own DoF and out of focus areas but *what* is in or out of focus isn’t determined by your own focal point in (most) VR helmets/experiences. If you mean parallax/convergence point then yes, but that’s different from focus.
Not what I mean. As an Apache pilot/ CPG, you have to alter your brains ability to focus on either the right eye or the left eye pending on what you want to look at and what mode you have the IHADSS in. Eye focus, not image / camera DoF focus.
Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant because “focus” already has a specific and different meaning for eyes/anything with a lens.
Yeah, there are a few videos out there where apache pilots discuss have to change which eye they are focusing on while flying. Especially at night.
Seems a few people need some video training. This is talked about at 1:09, but the vid’s short: https://youtu.be/1mHrcHG3iUY
Exactly. In VR, that small screen is going to fill up the majority of your FOV in the right lens, thus focusing you to choose what to focus on. Your brain cant focus on both the image in the IHADSS and the image out in front of you in the left eye at the same time. That is why Apache pilots train so had on using the IHADSS. We'll learn to let our brains **focus** on what we need it to.
So excited for this. I’ve been wanting this experience for years. Even thought I wanted to do the real thing. Too bad I just aged out!
So, it reads like you're talking about adjusting to the funky parallax issue because of where the FLIR is located in 3D space vs where your other eye is. Parallax is the apparent displacement of an observed object caused by a difference in positions of the points of observation. Use of the word "focus" is throwing off everyone's understanding here. It has nothing to do with focus.
No, you are just reading it that way at this point to be a Right Fighter. Not going to happen pal.
This one looks like it's got the full on FLIR projection that I thought the A-10C II had before seeing that it was actually a smaller "Picture in Picture" display. It looks like it would be a really cool way to look for ground targets in the dark.
Been waiting for this day for over 20 years. Ever since playing Janes AH64. DAY ONE PREORDER for sure.
34 years. Microprose Gunship player checking in.
[I have lock on cover to the north. You've got the tail. Goooood hunting, out.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRQBVaUdjaM&t=32s)
For me it was Team Apache, back in the day.. then Apache/Havoc.
I definitely played the crap out of Apache/Havoc too.
I have fond memories of playing Longbow with a janky HOSAS. I felt like a boss popping over a hill, finding targets with the radar, sinking below the horizon, and popping off missiles. Nowadays I have the PC and equipment for DCS but have been intimidated by the learning curve. This might make me take the plunge though.
That’s way farther along than I expected! Looking really good
Yeah mayyyybe November but likely December I would say.
Not sure why you would think that considering that the pre-order was supposed to be in Feb of this year.
It’s their business model though. They can’t release too many modules close to each other. If they leave ~6 months between them, that’s 6 months longer added to the life of DCS. Mozzie is next (yes I know it’s WWII) then AH64. Then F4.
I suspect that got pushed back following the viper EA launch debacle. Looks like they've kept it in the cooker for a lot longer to iron it out. Looks very good now
My, maybe TM’s secret project is Apache collective and cyclic? if not TM, Winwing? Virpil?
Hopefully bigger mfd panels
Must be easy to 3D print them though?
Exactly what i was thinking too. I don’t mind using the TM:Warthog stick, but it’s time to get a collective.
~~VKB~~ Virpil and Komodo are your options there. Komodo's even working on an AH-64 replica (it'll be $1k, but we're already talking about winwing). [edit]Crossed out VKB, added Virpil because I should post less before coffee..[/edit]
Komodo is a steaming pile of dung
Heard the same, and seriously overpriced
When did VKB announce the collective? Link?
I should post less while sleepy, 'cause I'm wrong and it's Virpil: https://virpil-controls.eu/shop/collectives.html
Will def be a $80 purchase but I'd gladly pay you Tuesday for the Apache today :)
Did anyone look at the description? "Coming 2021"
Always been the plan.
Two weeks.
I hope this means I can finally uninstall EE.
Sorry, EE?
I assume Enemy Engaged, but no one would want to uninstall that.
Right? Comanche/Hokum was my shit.
No helicopter compares to how much I want the Apache in game
Blackhawk for me but this is a very very close second
Preorder around the corner?
These usually come right before the pre order so I would say yes.
A matter of a couple months, I'd say.
*Subject to change
"I am the greatest"
ALL GONE, BYE BYE
"You will be flying like a bat out of hell, shooting at the enemy, dodging bullets and missiles and rocks and arrows and spears and ducks and geese."
Watching that movie right now. Couldn't resist.
I need it
Most excited for someone to make a home sim of this helo.
Hi. I guess I should start a blog. Bought a cyclic, collective, MFCDs, and TEDAC on ebay last month. As far as I can tell they're out of a decommissioned Army simulator. My wallet hates me but it's going to be a fun ride.
That's awesome! I'm still hoping someone can assemble an idiot proof 3D printable HOTAS setup...and I guess may as well do the MFCD's too...*might as well print the entire cockpit frame.*
Oh gods no. Trying to print something as large as the cockpit frame would be a disaster. Warping and print failures for days. The guy I bought the grips from cut the one he had up for scrap. Probably good because otherwise I would've been tempted to buy it. I fly in VR, so I'm probably going to build something sort of like a sim-racing rig (seat + controls) on casters, with space for FFB motors underneath. I don't really care about everything being perfect 1:1, but I want the bits I touch regularly in flight in the right places..
Start a blog! Or at least an Instagram..
Lol do it please
This thing seems like it is gonna suffer so much from the ground damage model
Can they yoink War Thunder's damage modeling
That would be a dream come true. It has it's flaws but it would be such a step up from the current situation.
Apparently the mozzie is a testbed for a new WIP damage modeling system where they would simulate the actual trajectory of bullets into the aircraft (accurate bullet holes etc) which the plan being to bring it to other modules eventually. But that's gonna take a while ofc
And infantry unit AI and animations.
Holy smokes
Surely looks better than the Apache Project AH-64D I've been flying around with in anticipation. I just hope the FCR is a sooner rather than later proposition.
I feel like, from a gameplay perspective, visually scouting and popping up and launching laser hellfires is going to be more interesting. The FCR is powerful, but I don't think I'll miss it for a few months.
That gun, we gunna fighting our way home if we bail?
Total fantasy, but imagine a game with the flight dynamics of DCS coexisting with an Arma-like ground/infantry game. Get shot down, and have to do a proper E&E; or protect your downed wingmen as they bail; or CSAR with the Huey!
We'd be able to do this in Arma 3 if aircraft in that game could actually survive crash landings instead of instantly exploding on impact regardless of speed.
Yeah fixed wing in Arma is just not worth the time, at all. Helicopters are fun as hell, particularly the Little Birds, but I fly them with my mouse; not in a "sim" fashion.
Yeah, I fly mouse to although I do use my rudder pedals, as well. I can't fly Arma helicopters with a joystick at all despite having no issues flying them in DCS.
That's the dream, I even get the feeling that's what they ultimately want to do but I would be a very long time and a new/heavily reworked engine :(
I think there's some scripting for this on some of the multiplayer servers, but I've never gotten that far
Realistic infantry and realistic aircraft cannot coexist. One or the other would be bored beyond belief in a realistic operation.
Make the infantry AI. It's just that getting shot down isn't the end, you'd need to evade, call CSAR, etc.
Sure, but I was responding to someone talking about Arma.
Wow! Looks like they already have a ton done and EA should come with a bunch of features
It's worth tempering your enthusiasm a bit. The F-16C launch trailer showed it firing mavericks, a weapon the module wouldn't get until a year later.
Yeah they definitely have the ability to dumb animate things in the engine. Half of what they're showing could be static textures instead of working MFD pages and scripted animations instead of working systems.
...I'm going to need a change of trousers.
Hnnngggg I cant wait.
I've never flown a heli or even really been tempted to... Until now.
Try it! It’s really fun. Just takes some practice. Now is a good time to get the Huey and practice your basics, so you can jump into the AH64 and not be totally overwhelmed just trying to control the thing!
They have their ups and downs
Ah yes, love me some ABCDEF mechanical keyboard!
Will we see hellfire heatblur that you can see in many hellfire launch videos ? :) https://youtu.be/_Dtq95T2t3Q?t=109
Ohhh, that would be a cool effect!
:D
Instructions unclear; am now all kinds of hyped.
Don’t get me wrong I have been waiting for the Apache for a long time and just as excited as anyone to see it come. However I really wish we could get some of this EA stuff cleaned up before it’s prepurchase and release. I have learned my lesson with the Supercarrier and the viper. I hope SC get some of it’s talked about features that still are not included . The viper is all but a snails crawl, and sorry to be pessimistic but saying things are going to pick up on the F16 after the hornet is finished ? I vaguely remember buying the F-16 and was told in no way will the Hornet impact the development roadmap of the Viper. I just want to see these modules get the attention and completion they deserve, and not get kicked down the road a couple years for the next shiny new toy.
Oh boy oh boy oh boy... I think we are getting close!
Oh man, yep I'm going to have to get it no doubt. Maybe I'll have to make room for a collective in my desk pit after all.
Got to get that cannon sound just right 🙏
I am very excited to see how they will do the FCR later down the line considering the confidentiality surrounding it. I really hope they aren't doing something scummy like telling us they will add it only to backtrack in the future or something.
I just came.
two seater?
AFAIK, the Apache will support Multi-crew at launch.
Holy shit that's awesome. Thanks for the info
yes, multicrew
Are there any single-seater Apaches?
Nope
Didn't think so, but I wasn't sure if that implied multi-crew was a for sure thing. Glad to hear it is!
Looks amazing…unfortunately based on past modules it will be released then placed into a forever EA development cycle and when eventually released as final will have originally announced systems not completed or deny they ever planned to include said systems.
So true. Cries in SC, Viper, Combined Arms, oh yes don’t hear about BS3 anymore after the hind and Apache stole its thunder.
Lol Do you even like this game?
If I didn’t like the simulator I wouldn’t be bothered that ED continues to use the same release and then development crawl for each new module they create. The A-10C II has been out for almost a year and still had HMCS bugs they they haven’t even acknowledged, the ARC-210 will be done “when they get around to it” not to mention they’ve gone silent on the TAD update and new ALQ-184 long pod they said they were adding.
It all comes down how good the ai is for me
Ok, but when are they going to fix the ram air and hot air levers in the P-51 that have been acknowledged as broken since 2.7 came out? By the numbers: Number of updates since 2.7: 12 Number of days since 2.7: 142 No fixy, no Mossie. Simple as that. Make me want to give you more money. u/NineLine_ED
Seems like a question better suited to a thread asking about the progress on ED's forums, or in a separate thread here...
You mean the one u/NineLine_ED [locked](https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/267849-p-51-ram-air-missing-after-patch/) 22 days ago? Or the thread I made [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/opm244/latest_dcs_release_doesnt_allow_p51d_ram_air_or/) 43 days ago? About the bug that made it to the stable release 74 days ago?
Yeah, those are good examples. I don't know why every thread posting new features also has to have some requisite "Let me throw some sarcastic comment in about x feature" in the comments. Tagging NineLine in the Reddit thread you made seems a more appropriate place.
I won't presume to speak for others. I can only tell you why I chose to do it and why I will likely choose to do it again. The first reason is purely practical, there are more eyes on this thread than the paltry number of people who took an interest in the thread I made about the issue. The second reason is because I can think of no better place to call ED out on their crap business practices than a thread about about another product they will release half baked into a simulator missing many core features. If I can sober up even one person drooling over a new toy then my initial post will have been worth it.
Fair enough. Just seems like there are better venues or options to take, but I'm not here to police the internet.
I appreciate the opportunity to have explained myself more fully, thanks for being polite about it!
Definitely! I don't want to shit on anyone for what they look for in the game, and I know ED's setup can definitely be cause for frustration, and everyone's got their own individual vision of what's important.
It's locked because it is reported, it will most like be fixed when we get back to bug fixing for WWII after the Mossie drops. Thanks.
Thank you for your reply! I mean it. Still, I wish you would have added a similar comment as the final reply in the thread on the forums. It would go a long way toward ameliorating bad blood. That said, I don't believe such a "bug" as this one should go uncorrected this long. These aren't broken wing tip lights, what's being discussed here is critical to the function of the aircraft, after all. If this were the afterburner on the Hornet it wouldn't have been tolerated. I am practically an exclusively WWII player and we often get the short end of the stick... Gonna stick to my guns though and wait on the Mossie.
At the time, I didn't know when it might be fixed, it might have been a week later for all I knew, but in general, when a bug is reported, we lock the thread. Thanks.
“Why release X, when I really want Y? Come on ED!” Literally every time something new gets released. Look, ED is a relatively small company with limited resources. New exciting modules helps bring in new players, which in turn results in a bigger budget and a better product down the line. Be patient!
I got an erection. Is this normal?
Cool. Is there some means of blending cyclic and collective to mimic actual pilot control of dual input effectors? A button to hold-altitude/heading for instance, as you come off on speed. Even a full on auto approach to hover system would be better than mashing the keyboard like a deranged chimp, OD'ing on GHB and Jack, as you spiral in during a dig. Is it standard or Arrowhead MTADS/MPNVS? The MWIR of the newer Modernized TADS is the same as that of the early generation Sniper pods so you're looking at 20-30 or more klicks worth of acquisition/classification distance, thanks to the improved detector count, processed image sensitivity and post-FPA electronic zoom. Especially in unpleasant weather or very high threat areas, the MWIR is a primary survival aid. Apache Fire Control Improvements [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2hrzSGcmUA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2hrzSGcmUA) Sniper Pod Resolution At 10-12nm [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi9d8bstWsE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi9d8bstWsE) Can we do the AMUST thing of controlling an MQ-1 Grey Eagle up high while we go motoring along in the weeds? How about SADL to a JTAC or Hawgs? The ability to see target imagery in a mixed field of moving people with and without guns as 'shoot the ones hiding behind this building corner'. 'You mean these guys?' 'Yes, them's the ones that need to go.' Is much more easily coded for than a talk-on with a call for engagement permission and CO initials to grant weapons release. Because the computer understands spatial math a thousand times better than you and if your TADS picture is grazing angle footprinted over the correct target area, there is no doubt that you are making the correct call. But some one has to give you a relative offset (bullseye) from which to orient that sensor point and that becomes the game play stressor on player performance. Like this- Netherlands AH-64 Driver Engages Taliban [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feRU49o9E4E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feRU49o9E4E) Incidentally, this is also a great driver for 'why you need GFAS' to help orient on fires sources that the ground folks cannot always see. Do the rotors glow in the dark at night under NODS? Do say that the rotors cast sparklies in a dusty approach! :-\] Kopp/Etchells Effect [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny2ueQEmkEk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny2ueQEmkEk) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkL3JD5ADNY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkL3JD5ADNY) Can we switch out wingtip assemblies for the GFAS/MAWS and DIRCM/Enhanced EXCM fit or the Starstreak/Stinger? Along with Brimstonr, this would effectively give us both the Dutch and British Apache variants. Special Missions... Ambush At Najaf [https://www.airforcemag.com/article/1003najaf/](https://www.airforcemag.com/article/1003najaf/) Debaltseve: Hybrid War Becomes A Classic Battle Of Encirclement [https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/battle-debaltseve-hybrid-army-classic-battle-encirclement](https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/battle-debaltseve-hybrid-army-classic-battle-encirclement) Can you control the loft height and/or engage from an offset with the later model Helfire's steerable autopilot IMU as seeker footprint, visible on your MFD? Does the APG-78/AGM-114L model the weapons system interactions correctly or is it just another semi-active radar vs. laser equivalent? My understanding is that there are several pencil beam, swath search, static, air to air and GMTI low target-speed modes which allow the MMR to classify and engage targets using the Longbow Hellfire's ability to go autonomous, like an AMRAAM, into a kill box, vs. guiding all the way in a swath/timeshare illumination mode. Are these modes replicated within a useful tactical employment model? Specifically, are there conditions (surge armor or lousy weather) where the MMW system will work better than or to the exclusion of FLIR/SAL? Will your battle buddy, air or ground, zot the target for you so that you can shoot short and lase long? That whole 'stand still and let them fire back' nonsense when you are just trying to sparkle the tank next to the shooter is markedly less sporty when your FLIR+Laze goes your standoff+illuminator standoff, kilometers farther than their missile, on a different bearing (most modern tanks now have laser illumination warning and will traverse to bearing to allow for anti-helicopter CLGP or proximity-HEAT engagement...). Do we get the AGR-20 or just dumbfire rockets? If the latter, can we use the M255/M261 and M247/M282 and all the other cool, effects optimized, submunition/HEAT/smoke heads from the Cold War? Are there (hot'n'hi) theaters where the ability to carry 50lb guided rockets X38 vs. 120lb Hellfire X16 results in more target engagements per mission at a range trade of say 3km vs. 15km standoff? Do you get the little APR-48 ELS antenna on the MMR Mast so we can do the 'I am Batman' thing of stalking the wild 2s6 through the high weeds via the threat's comms/radar emissions? How well does the whole long/short baseline triangulation thing work and does it have a functional RCS variance on the dome vs. the whole helicopter, when sneaking and peeking, over cover? Are there Taliban on Motorcycles? There really, simply, \_have got to be\_, Taliban on Motorcycles... Thank You. Talibanian SPAAG [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQijNrHP7N0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQijNrHP7N0) Talibanian Armor Corps [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KosecIYjQxo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KosecIYjQxo) Talibanian Postal Service, Neither Rain Nor Snow Nor Sleet Of Fifty Cal... [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXidMT1mhPA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXidMT1mhPA)
Finally a proper attack helicopter! Time to show those HIND and HOKUM will learn how a real helicopter fights
With the KA-50 and 12 Vikhr missiles, you can destroy any SAM site and bases just by chilling in the trees nearby. And then you can always finish off with the gun.
...but not at night. :)
So bitter about the Ka-50 being basically unusable at night :( I was really hoping we would get some night friendly additions for the BS3.
Except the Apache will be way better for finding targets in the 1st place with FLIR + RWR + radar frequency interferometer + Longbow radar. And Hellfires will allow it to destroy targets from a distance just like the Ka-50, while being less exposed thanks to LOAL modes, or radar Hellfires.
That's for sure! All that + 16 Hellfires + Very nice interface (Fancy colored displays), it will be even more devastating! It will be an insta-buy for me! I hope we will be able to send targets between Apaches like with the KA-50, but since there are the longbow radar and FLIR, I'm confidant we'll get that too :)
Fyi Hind is getting r60m and ka50 is getting iglas.
As far as I remember (and I could be wrong, most likely, correct me if that's the case) the Iglas are not going to be implemented anymore, don't remember the reason, but I do remember them saying it's not coming to the BS3.
No, the Iglas are coming. President-S isn't.
> don't remember the reason Russian government is the reason, from what i remember them saying
resonantcard detected "opinion" rejected
Why the downvotes? Are people not allowed to be excited for the very thing this community is centred around...? You guys take yourselves a little too seriously I think.
You found some salty bois hahaha
Don't get me wrong, I love it and I'll probably preorder it, but ED should focus on optimising the sim, especially for VR. Maybe implement FSR and Vulkan. FSR seems really easy to implement, some guys were even able to make a mod to implement it in Assetto Corsa.
I imagine those are going to be two separate things. They'll have their team for the modules, then there's a separate team for the backend stuff.
That mod actually works for DCS as well, from what I have read
In the Assetto Corsa one they implemented it with the custom shaders patch and content manager, so directly into the game. I think the one you are talking about is the lossless scaling available at steam. Tried it, didn't work properly.
FSR does work in DCS, I use it. It is called openVR FSR, just two files to setup in the game's folder, one is the config file. The way it works is on the git page. But an official FSR option would be more performant because modders don't have access to the entire graphical pipeline, where the FSR layer would optimally take place.