If I ever do it’ll be Quest 3. I can’t justify a $1000+ headset.
If I ever do it’ll be Quest 3. I can’t justify a $1000+ headset.
KQ3 is a good all around headset.
TThe VR space needs more competition in the $500 range.
KI'm all for it. But for that the market needs more buyers.
SAnd for that the market needs more cheaper sets
TCatch 22, because I’m not a buyer based on the price alone.
KTrue.
AThe headset is not the expensive part of VR, especially for flight simming, you need a top spec PC to drive it, more expensive than most headsets.
BYup, its telling that for dcs vr a 4080s is considered a budget option.
Is that because vr is an almost impossible task, or because ED consists of a bunch of drunk idiots that shouldn't be working in the industry?
Well you can guess my opinion.
Is that because vr is an almost impossible task, or because ED consists of a bunch of drunk idiots that shouldn't be working in the industry?
Well you can guess my opinion.
JBut they're removing single core soon and improving performance on multi core 
Surely that means I can use VR on my 3080 soon right
Surely that means I can use VR on my 3080 soon right 
V:package: 
RHINO #0698 Has Shipped!
RHINO #0698 Has Shipped!
VSo background, I've been flying aircraft since 1968, and sims (military and PC) a lot, with and without visual/motion/control loaders and now VR and FFB. IMO, VR is the biggest improvement - flying on a flat screen is a nice game, but still a game; VR makes it a simulation. It's not only depth perception, it's the one-to-one correlation to where you are looking as well as the presense of parallax which makes a huge difference. VR is better than the best military dome sim, and I've worked on the best; which is why militaries are going VR also.
JI love VR as well, the part that is way behind in VR is interacting with the cockpit. PointCtrl works well with DCS, but there are no great options for MSFS or Xplane (other than the mouse which is ok, but not ideal)
VRight now the main problems with consumer VR is FOV and the need for really good pass-through (MR) to allow use in a sim pit and for checking documents, etc. Also the PC horsepower; it's not cheap! But military users are pushing those areas, and that will trickle down to us eventually. I actually did testing on an MR full fidelity Tornado simulator in Germany back in 1993 (!) and it was amazing, but crushingly uncomfortable and the graphics were, well, basic. And now I have it all (except for MR) at home.
VBy the way I use a Quest Pro and with eyetracking and DFR it's amazing.
JI agree FOV could be better, I use the crystal and vertical fov is good, but I would love to have horizontal fov out to 180! That would also help the sense of speed perception quite a bit.
HI get all that, but for me to be sold, VR headsets need to become waaay more comfortable and the picture quality also needs improvement still. I‘m not saying it is bad, or that VR doesn’t have its perks, but it’s not there yet for me. Just personal preference - nothing to argue about.
Jlol, not trying to convert you of course. I fly without VR occasionally as well just to avoid the mess. It's sometimes way easier for me to learn in 2D and then move to VR as well. I have VR, motion, FFB, buttkicker, haptic pad, and addons (Vaicom, necksafer, etc...) - I had to write a pretty lengthy powershell script to manage all of the software startup and remind me to check things along the way to get a consistent startup experience. It's honestly a mess to self support all of the integration points.
J...and then tuning anything is a multivariate problem with infinite combinations.... why do I do this again? lol
Hyeah that’s another thing. If it gets too cumbersome, I catch myself staying on the couch even though I feel the urge to fly. I tend to simplify things instead of making them more difficult (well some exceptions like FFB obviously). For example I went down the rabbit hole of surround sound pretty deep before I realised that I actually don’t need more than a decent stereo setup, which is much cheaper, much easier to deal with and makes a nicer room.
ABut what is more cumbersome than doing a quick flight in VR, is going to an airport, opening up the hanger, fueling a plane, and getting going overall. Not to forget washing the thing when you are done....
Jwell that's true! although there is something to be said for actually touching the aircraft aluminum, smelling the jetA, talking to ATC, and feeling the plane come to life!
Jwe can sim all that, but it's not quite the same:)
JI used find myslef like hiob sometimes just not wanting to take on the effort, however, having a dedicated sim that is always set up and automating the startup so that it asks me what sim I want to fly, if I want to use VR, etc... and then everything justs starts up has helped a lot
AI have flown planes big and small IRL, but one of the most immersive flights in VR is gliding. You are laser-focused from beginning to end on managing your flight and staying aloft. When you land and come to a standstill, you feel the same kind of satisfaction and release as in real life.
SNever try to talk someone into spending for something that they don't value.
HOh, I do own a VR -headset. Not the fanciest by todays standards but okayish (Valve Index). I used it quite a lot with DCS, but it is shelved.
VTotally agree. I used to use Condor 2 a lot, and our gliding club has a 3-screen simpit for training on it, but lately I've been using the gliders in Aerofly FS4 and they are a blast in VR - much better FM than Condor IMO (but weather needs work). There is an Antares selflauncher that is just incredible.
VI find that simming (especially in VR) and actual flying complement each other nicely. At my age, it's important to keep current, and while I still fly a lot with my local club, over the winter I try to fly often to keep sharp. Always trying to make flights complete: Startup, TO, airwork, RTB and land. Bonus if there is a nice furball in the middle. The P-51 and Dora 9 make a pretty good standin for the Pawnee 
一just curious, for XP, is it a similar problem to MSFS(completed unusable natively), or is it just that the experience is not as good as in DCS?(The mouse cursor looks huge in XP VR.) I haven't tried it yet tho. I know MSFS uses a different way to project the mouse cursor in VR(or something like that) so PointCTRL cannot be used unless used with Fred's HTCC..
JXP seems to assume that you will use the hand controllers to fly, which I think is the worst choice. The mouse works but is somewhat clunky... you would think there would be a better way. too bad pointctrl doesnt work with all 3 as is.
一thx for the info. yeah interacting with the cockpit in a realistic way in VR is a huge issue yet to be addressed, totally agree with that. wish there could be a wearable vr controller with Otto swtiches and a high quality scroll wheel on it lol.
JI'm thinking about designing my own solution for XP and fs2020 along these lines. I already have a "knobster" and air manager so could incorporate that like in the video. It's not a great solution becuase I would rather interact directly with the cockpit in VR, but it does have some advantages over just using the mouse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rrLKxNfKK0&list=PL7j2Vs5sY-W5oqKZb6_k2f5vQUeIKqJdv
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rrLKxNfKK0&list=PL7j2Vs5sY-W5oqKZb6_k2f5vQUeIKqJdv
YouTubeRuss Barlow
A demo of a homebuilt :Super" Mouse to add functionality in VR flying. Twelve buttons that can assign simulator knob functions to the kneeboard mounted encoder or assign other sim functions to the buttons. Using an Arduino Nano programmed with Air Manager it is easy to build and a great addition to VR flying.
Jsorry for being way OT for this discord now...
Hcurious...is this the same Walmis that made the F-15 model for LOMAC all those years ago?
Hif anyone remembers that era
Kdid you ever get this fixed? I remember figuring out a fix
WWow, someone remembered. Yeah that was me 
Hi kinda figured, remembered it when I first heard about your kit and thought it an odd coincidence
H@Vulture et al. Question to the Real World Pilots out there: Are V-speeds refering to true airspeed or indicated airspeed (ktas/kias)? Reason for question - the manual for the MSFS Black Square King Air states the following:
H- Maximum Cruising Speed 312 ktas
H- Economy Cruising Speed 234 ktas
HBUT V(ne) 263 kts?!
HI can't make sense of this (assuming the values are correct that is)
(VNE, the redline on the airspeed indicator, is an indicated airspeed, but the critical flutter speed may be a true airspeed. So the margin separating VNE from the critical flutter speed gets smaller as you gain altitude.
HThat's what I figured. Are all the other V's (flap retraction, gear retraction, turbulence penetration etc) also indicated Airspeeds then I assume? (I'm aware that the difference is marginal close to the ground)
AYes, they are usually aerodynamic speeds, and these are governed by the IAS. TAS has no bearing on aerodynamics (except mach effects)
MVNE is based on true airspeed. It's usually determined by the flutter speed of the wings or some other lifting body. This leads to a service ceiling in ac called the 'coffin corner', since you can't fly slower than stall or faster than VNE and at some altitude those line converge since stall is airspeed and VNE is true
M..For ac not limited by their propulsion that is
HThat's the opposite of what @(41F) Dave H said and would render the given values in the manual without any sense.
HAgain, I have no pilot training, just from logic I would assume that IAS makes more sense for a Vne