Dudikoff

The base is meant for helicopter grips (thus, no switches), but in any case the handles you mention are for the Super Taurus and won't fit the Orion/Gemini throttle.

I'm finally getting around this, but I can only bind the buttons to "Virtual buttons" with IDs from 1 to 100 and whatever. How do I bind them to a combination of key presses? Is there another place where these Virtual Buttons can be mapped to key presses or something? It's also idiotic that you can download someone's profile, but can't customize it. How do you 'create these profiles from game files'?

Hmm, I see. I presume you're mapping it in DCS directly? One solution would be to use a middle man software (e.g. WinWing, Gremlin, etc.) which allows you to set more precisely press and release timings (e.g. for each click on the encoder, press this key combination for that long) which you could then experiment with until the switch on the bottom of the UFC is held long enough to move the CRS or HDG values by a single degree.

Oh, that would be cool. Please report back if you notice any differences with the new grip.

It's not an axis, but a rotary encoder presumably, so for each click it makes, it transmits a single signal which can be mapped to a key press (different for left and right turn, naturally).

Glad you found a solution which works for you, but I would presume they haven't changed the design of this small hat/button? In that case, if it died on you twice already, it's reasonable to expect the same issue to pop up sooner or later, no?

I understand that, but the recce button seems to be a bit of a weak point in the design in addition to how it's used. Sounds like they already replaced it once and I would say it's unrealistic to expect they'll keep shipping the grips back and forth for you. Better bet would be to accept the replacement parts and find some electronic service shop in your area which can install it for you quickly.

I wouldn't call it broken if it's just recce button. It's definitely not worth shipping the whole grip back and forth just for that. Some of the reviews also had an issue with the thing falling out, so I presume some glue would help or something.

The transmitter is not the problem here as much as the IR missile tracking unit which I'd presume simply tracks some sort of an IR torch on the back of the missile to determine the offset of the missile from the sight line so the guidance correction commands can be generated. A few issues come to mind in the context of supporting multiple missiles, one of which might be that when the missiles are brought roughly to the line of sight towards the target, they would block/overlap each other out from the tracking unit.

By default, they do operate as DX-buttons so you can map them directly in DCS or use some alternative software (Gremlin). The reason I'd want to use their software for that is to create profiles which I can modify and load outside DCS and which (I hope) would also allow me to map the backlights which exist on some of these buttons.

I've actually seen this, but thought I'm on the wrong track as there were some per-device key binding options marked as 'coming soon'. So, by running a profile made here, this would actually combine all the WinWing devices as one virtual device as seen by e.g. DCS (kind of like what Target does)?

Thanks for your effort, but you seem to be describing how to program the WW controllers in DCS. Again, I know how to do this and I'm asking how to do it via SimAppPro as then I don't have this issue where dcs updates break the mappings.

Samsung G9 is a 49" super ultra-wide monitor with native G-Sync support.

Again, the question is 'how to create binding profiles in SimAppPro instead of just downloading those that somebody else made from the cloud'. It is not 'how to create bindings directly in the DCS controller settings'. It shouldn't be this hard to ask a simple question..

Err.. The MSRP on 3090 cards was $1500 to begin with and it is higher these days due to the lack of components. When you add a factory installed water block which is a limited series and was always expensive, I don't understand the outrage. If you can get a 3080/3090 somewhere for an acceptable price, you can buy a water block from EKWB and install it yourself.

I presume you have some marble floor so one way might be to wear some indoor shoes with a thick plastic sole or to put some thick carpet under your feet?

From what I can see, OP knows he can program it in DCS, but is asking how to program the bindings in WinWing's SimAppPro. I actually have the same question as I get the impression that the controls editor is not there yet, at least for these panels I got (I remember seeing "coming soon" when I clicked on manual bindings option or whatever it's called like).

Didn't you find it weird that you're buying a full DCS module of a 4th gen jet for that price? Try contacting the customer service for a refund, but I'm not sure what's the point of this thread TBH?

Yes, the grip is an improvement over Warthog as it has a better slew control by default and also adds the vertical elevation control for the radar. But, the buttons on the base are a bit of a weird mish-mash, hence why it seems somewhat unfinished to me. E.g. Hornet's AA and AG buttons above the autopilot controls with A-10, F-15 and F-16 markings (which are quite similar to what Warthog has). IMHO, at the very least they should have added 4 more buttons next to those AA and AG buttons to be used with other modules. And a generic rotary encoder like on their panels wouldn't hurt.

I would presume it's a bigger issue for the Orion since being a desktop version, it would be mounted higher than your arm level more often than not and thus your hand will probably be somewhat bent at the wrist when pushing it (amplifying the effect of the issue), while the Taurus will be mounted lower or at your arm level so your hand will be more like resting on top of it. Orion seems like a great deal otherwise given multiple throttle handles and the price, but I'm not really thrilled with the button options on it - doesn't feel like it brings much more compared to Warthog and the end result kind of feels more like a prototype to me than a final iteration. Also, it replicates a lot of controls from the existing WW panels so if you have those already, the chosen control set will feel less than ideal even more so.

But, if you change the angle by using twisted holders, how would you move the throttles past each other independently? It wouldn't work.

You can do that with Target Script Editor. For example, I had something like this programmed on my FC3 Su-27 profile which used the Cougar throttle: SetCustomCurve(&HCougar, THROTTLE, LIST(0,0, 8,0, 90,75, 95,75, 100,100)); KeyAxis(&HCougar, THROTTLE, 0, AXMAP2(LIST(0,1,100), EXEC("bothEnginesStop();"), EXEC("bothEnginesStart();"))); The first line sets the custom curve for idle and afterburner detents and the second one splits the axis in two parts, one between 0 and 1 and 1 and 100. When the throttle moves into the first part, the engines are shut off, when it moves beyond that, they are started.

If you'd only posted this a few days earlier, I would have delayed ordering the Taurus indefinitely, but I've just gotten my FedEx tracking number so.. It remains to be seen how much it will bother me, but I guess the location of the throttle will have to be closer to me than I thought.

Hmm, good catch, wonder how nobody else noticed this yet? The Warthog throttle handles are at least straight on the backside, not canted inwards like the WinWing. So, for WW to be comfortable it should be almost right in front of you rather than beside you. To fix this, they'd have to redesign and remold the handles I guess. Perhaps if enough people complained on their FB page, they would eventually. A plug in fix might be to design some kind of add-on parts which would stick to current handles and straighten the angle at least.

True, though I guess an LHA seems like a simpler affair as its smaller and it has no catapults and arresting gear. But the point wasn't that it can't be done; the point was that having such extras is not standard for modules and if pressuring developers on releasing such extras is warranted given that it's a free extra.