I'm lurking here but am trying to decide which VR headset to get next. I have the first Rift sitting here and I'm just tired of the screen door effect and lack of clarity. The HP Reverb looks really good... especially the Pro version. So more to think about. Good thread!
It's a good headset overall. If you play other games in VR I'd recommend either keeping the Rift or getting a Rift S, but for sims where the controllers aren't used much you can't beat that amazing clarity.
The new face cushion has arrived. Not as pretty or neat a fit as the original of course.
Yeah I remembered an Oculus Go 3rd party face cushion that I had and tried it on the Reverb. I found that it let my face get too near the lenses so I could see the screen edges. Pressure on the nose was worse, but comfort around the eyes was better.
The facial interface of the Reverb seems have a plastic bit that pushes the foam out from the headset body. It's hard to model, but if I had a 3rd printed version of that, suck some velcro on it, then added the 3rd party cushion to it, the result would probably be good.
I wonder if HP sell spare facial interfaces 
I'm surprised the company "VR Cover" hasn't made one by now. They seem to have solutions for everything else out there.
Thank you very much.
Hope there is a solution regarding the road network overlay.
Okay I figured it out.. you just change part of the url.
Give me a few days and I'll (hopefully) have a new beta of AeroScenery out.
https://2.aerial.maps.api.here.com/maptile/2.1/maptile/c98407140a/hybrid.day/16/36210/14831/512/png8?app_id=VgTVFr1a0ft1qGcLCVJ6&app_code=LJXqQ8ErW71UsRUK3R33Ow&lg=eng&ppi=72
https://2.aerial.maps.api.here.com/maptile/2.1/maptile/c98407140a/satellite.day/16/36210/14831/512/png8?app_id=VgTVFr1a0ft1qGcLCVJ6&app_code=LJXqQ8ErW71UsRUK3R33Ow&lg=eng&ppi=72
Really good news.
Getting access to good ortho is basically the biggest challenge. But perhaps another challenge is just as demanding: How can we combine "Here We Go maps" with the excellent AeroScenery tool?
Yep, I can add HereWeGo maps as an image provider for AeroScenery.
What I can't figure out is how to get rid of the road network overlay on the aerial view. Maybe mikced knows?
I appreciate the Reverb, notably its clearness, as well. One of the downsides is the ugly WMR software, though. Can anyone post his WMR settings for using the Reverb in AeroflyFS2? I recall there was a thread already, which, however, was a bit confusing notably on the optimum resolution setting (79% vs. 100%).
I'm away from my gaming PC, but I'm running WMR with default settings (high quality visuals) and Steam VR for WMR at the closest value to the Reverbs hardware resolution (2160 per eye).
I haven't tried super-sampling with Steam yet (e.g. running at more than the native res of the headset) as the clarity and lack of aliasing look good to me.
Not sure if WMR settings become irrelevant when running a Stream VR game. Maybe so.
Running at 79% would only be optimal if your PC can't handle 100% or more.
Edit: Various Windows & Steam updates seem to have changed what the resolution percentage means in Steam. Best to ignore it and get the "resolution per eye" value near or slightly higher than the native res of the headset.
Sorry, yep, I mean in anything that's not Aerofly (which does make it easy). I was testing the tracking with Beat Saber. and recentering the view seemed such a pain for what's just a long press on the Rift.
I'll find out...
I was looking at those this morning. Let me know if it improves things. I also found the leather facepad uncomfortable after a while. My "bulky" nose doesn't help either. Rhinoplasty for more comfortable VR seems extreme though.
Will check out Voiceattack, that looks really useful.
My biggest frustration with WMR so far is why recentering the view is so hard. (Desktop app > Setup > No boundary > Center). Am I missing something?
I finally got my new gaming PC built, and finally got a chance to test out the HP Reverb that has sat in it's box for two months, waiting for a PC capable of doing it justice.
The headset itself has it's quirks and annoyances, but for flying and racing sims, it's probably the best out there. Actually being able to read every part of instrument in the cockpit is a game changer.
Looking down and seeing real detail in the airport below, rather than pixelated mush is something special. Coming from the Rift CV1 it feels like huge step up.
I thought I go "all in" for a first stress test, Vulkan, Aerofly graphics on ultra, downtown NYC, 6k feet so thousands of buildings to render. Aerofly handled it perfectly. I didn't have time to do a proper FPS test, but I couldn't detect any reprojection, stutter, choppiness. The textures and details of the aircraft cockpit really come to life when you can see them clearly.
What's more, I haven't even overclocked my PC yet, this is a 9700k running at the stock 3.6Ghz, with an RTX 2080 Super.
So thanks IPACS, I felt like a tried out the high-res VR future of flight simming last night. 
I agree with Spit40 that I now don't crave much better resolution in VR. I want better FOV, better optics, bigger sweet-spot, less CA, better comfort etc. It never ends. 
I looked into this a while ago, for VATSIM. I was considering whether it would be possible to write VATSIM client.
The main obstacle is that there's no way to add traffic with Aerofly. If you can't see the traffic while connected to VATSIM / IVAO you risk annoying others by crashing into them, getting in their way etc.
VATSIM requires its clients to be approved to connect to the network. I'm almost certain that they wouldn't approve a client where the user can't see traffic.
I'm hoping that at some point we see a version of the IPACS C172 with a GNS 430 / 530.
As far as I know, these were developed by IPACS for JustFlight, so there's a lot of work already done. I'm not sure if JustFlight did the modelling though.
I recall Jan saying that the existing C172 is very stable and tested, and they didn't want to mess with that, but this could be offered as a separate variant?
I recently watched another Aerofly review where the reviewer said "the cockpit doesn't look like a real C172 as it has this arcade style map screen" and I thought that it's a shame as IPACS seem to have already done a lot of work on this.
I haven't seen it mentioned much on here, so just a +1 from me.
Michael, thanks so much for all the effort that you've put into this.
I'm pleased that AeroScenery was able to help with the process.
Nick,
GeoConvert wrapper isn’t working. I do have Use GeoConvert Wrapper on in the settings. When the first grid is done. The green “GeoConvert has finished press esc.” comes up but, doesn’t go on to the second grid. Pressing esc. it will continue with the next grid.
I'll check to see if a new SDK release has broken this functionality.
What I would recommend though is to try it when you're not using other apps on your computer. Unfortunately GeoConvert is buggy and seems to have several problems with restarting or hanging when other apps are being used.
If that's not the issue, you can always disable GeoConvert Wrapper in the AeroScenery settings.
In Steam go to Steam menu > Settings > Downloads > Steam Library Folder button
You can then set the default location for downloads.
Great to see what you guys have been working so hard on behind the scenes. Well done IPACS.
HP Reverb is currently the best choice for simming IMHO. treat yourself for Christmas !
Great to hear your positive report Phil. I assume frame rate is holding up on your 1080ti?
My long suffering wife has agreed to part fund one as a Christmas present. I think I'll be more excited than the kids this year. 
Hello Nick,
thank you for pointing out that Geoconvert is unnecessary slow.
I assume you get similar results when you run the bechmark as Michael and Me did them?
Please see details in #7: Experimenting with AeroScenery
I'll benchmark it when I get a chance, but yes, it's just as slow for me too.
I can't think of a good reason why GeoConvert is so slow to be honest. Most of us are running it on really fast PCs and SSDs.
6 and 8 core chips should chew through this stuff if it's multi-threaded.
Even if you're resampling, converting an image format, compressing, and cutting up a large image into smaller chunks it's hard to end up at 2 hours unless you're doing thousands or tens of thousands of operations.
When I first wrote AeroScenery I said that IPACS should just open source GeoConvert so the community can fix it and optimise it. It's clear that IPACS don't have time to, which is understandable. I still stand by that.
The following problem.
In the program I see working grid sqaure 4 from 77.
but in the geoconverter module it often stops, example:
Unfortunately GeoConvert is an IPACS app and it is, in my opinion, full of bugs. There seems to be no interest from IPACS to fix them.
AeroScenery has to try to detect when GeoConvert is done (as it doesn't send any signal). It's sub-optimal to say the least.
What I would recommend is:
- Run every other task apart from GeoConvert and let them complete successfully. You'll get good error logging for any AeroScenery (not GeoConvert) problem).
- Run GeoConvert while you're away from your PC. Don't move the window, Don't start other apps. This seems to be the cause of most issues.
- Try fewer than 77 squares for a GeoConvert run. Try one at first to confirm it works, then build up.
Hello, nick.
what get to do, start the geoconverter manually after load pictures?
i have to change the textures of the airfield, because the airfield changes, in Bing and google there are still old sat pictures.
Hi,
In the left sidebar you can select which tasks you want to run if you change the drop down to "Choose Actions To Run".
Just uncheck everything apart from "Run GeoConvert" and only GeoConvert will be run against your existing data.
Interesting, thanks.
Looks like they're reducing the price for a few days every month.
