kablamoman

My experience is not smooth. Did you watch the video all the way? The oscillations in stab control resulting in pitch oscillations are quite apparent, as highlighted in @FusRoPotato’s first graph where he plotted the non-FFB stick response over the FFB stick. The squiggly blue line (as opposed to the squared off orange line) is what I’m experiencing. woody-toy-story.mp4

Not sure if you noticed (it’s hard to see), but the slider is not a percentage but a per mille of total travel. Might just have to jack up the value.

Sounds awesome, but I don't think floor mounting will work for my current setup. I'll keep an eye on development, though!

Hook a brother up! I put my name down for the Rhino as it has mounting hardware for the monstertech chair I'm using and it's compatible with my VKB grip -- do you know if the FFBeast offers that?

My virtual hat is off to you, sir. Thanks. I have also finally put my name down on the list for a VPforce Rhino

That is correct.

This is great and probably the best counter argument to anything I've brought up. The problem is that when talking about control forces we start getting into fuzzy territory with regards to modelling it on a non-FFB stick. As mentioned, you can control the behavior with an FFB stick, but can't with a regular spring loaded one. This would mean our virtual pilot ends up being endowed with a comparative wet noodle for an arm.

Oscillations in that case have everything to do with aerodynamic damping, or the lack of it at low indicated and high true airspeeds (ie. high altitude), or basic stability issues (in the case of the mustang with a full fuselage tank). In both of those modules, the player's stick retains direct control of the elevator deflection even in those scenarios and so you have a chance at properly damping them (but good luck).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the bellows side of the mechanism in the F-4 only provides stick downforce. It also helps sets the trim stab angle/stick position insomuch as it's the trim actuator modulating said input from the bellows. The bobweight is what provides increasing stick weight at high G... But for the duration of the stick being pulled, relaxed, modulated, and then eventually brought back to the neutral trim position that we had trimmed by modulating the bellows force with the trim actuator -- the bob weight is being supported by the pilot's arm (helped a bit even, by the bellows' down-stick force). In essence, the bobweight is something to be felt only through the duration and modulation of loads by the pilot's arm -- it does not interact with the bellows except for when pressure is taken off the stick completely, at which point, it should be at 1g and back in balance if the pilot does it right and doesn't simply let the controls snap back. After further flying I do not believe the bob weight forces -- when being generated by pilot control inputs -- should have any impact on the trim neutral point at all. Because there is no way for the sim to know if the pilot is applying the grip force to keep the stick in place, or if it's the springs and cam of our stick. We cannot simply assume the pilot has released their grip, and so this is where I think there is an error in modelling. It seems Heatblur, in the pursuit of conveying those forces, is taking "returning stick to neutral" to mean "progressively letting go of the stick entirely". You don't pull hard and then progressively let the stick slip out of your hands as you ease off -- you hold it there and bring it back to neutral with some grip/arm strength to support the weight of the stick throughout the motion until you're back to 1g. The imbalance between bellows and bobweight should be completely absorbed throughout the maneuver by the pilot's grip. Modelling it "properly" in this way would indeed have unfortunate side effects for non-FFB users in that we have to assume the pilot is gripping the stick in place at all times -- it's the only valid assumption we can make without breaking things. For instance, you would no longer see the hands-off oscillation response when trimming, as you would in real life if you were flying with very light, fingertip pressure on the stick -- but that effect should be apparent and preserved for users with proper FFB. Instead, spring stick users would only visually experience a constant pitching moment, which they would then feel if they tried to oppose it against the force of their real-life springs without retrimming (still a great approximation). Likewise, the "dead stick" effects at low to nil airspeed would be appropriately overridden, but still be there for FFB users. I've been flying professionally for 15 years, I started instructing in small pistons (telling students to HOLD the controls tight when they're setting their go-around attitude even though the plane is pushing back), hand-bombed multi-engine turboprops up in the North for a few thousand hours and moved on to the corporate world where I've been flying my non-reversible (non-tactical) hydraulically actuated stab controls with artificial feel for the last 6 years. I enjoy spinning tail draggers in real life and on the World War Two servers in the sim I also enjoy star gazing and long walks on the beach.

Here's what I'm talking about. The behavior is there at all speeds and weights, varying at bit of course with aerodynamic damping, loading (on the plane) and moments of inertia, I'm sure, but all showing the oscillating stab. It is nothing to do with roll input. By unload after pull, I mean move the stick (and stab) back to its original trimmed position before the pull while still gripping the stick. I am not referencing roll reversal -- nobody in this thread mentioned that. I am using a VKB gunfighter with a 200mm extension and 2x #50 springs on each axis for a total of 4 with the soft center avia cams. It is the heaviest feel I can get on my stick. Like you, I crave a heavy stick because heavy control forces are what I'm used to IRL. My stick is center mounted, I typically don't rest my arm on anything, but as you can see from my flying of the other modules and my control indicator I have no trouble being precise with it. I was using a curve of 15 in the video, but started initially with 20. Apologies for the first few seconds, I was trying to show that in-game stick was locked to my inputs while pulling, but my lower FOV was cut off by the VR mirror.

Neat. Should post a video of it in action if you can get it working. I think for me I'm most interested in understanding what's going on... Helping if I can, and being humbled if I can't. If I'm way off base and turns out they've modelled it accurately I would not want them to change a thing.

I don't think anybody is disputing anything you wrote. Good description of how our control interfaces in sims work. I also don't see anybody in here confused about flight control systems. I have no problems flying the thing. As in, I can take off, fly around, shoot things and drop bombs just fine. I just think it handles pretty terribly in pitch in one specific area because there is a pretty gnarly error in how they've tried to shoehorn feel forces into the processing of control inputs -- it directly, and adversely affects stick/stab position being selected by the pilot. It manifests as a pronounced bunting and ensuing oscillation in pitch when unloading after a pull. You cannot control it because direct control of the stick is not possible, as it would be in real life -- as it is in other non-FBW modules. It stands out to me as a small, but still glaring error in an otherwise amazing accomplishment so far. I'll see if I can get a video up describing my problem with it, comparing the relation of physical stick inputs to the control surfaces of a couple other modules juxtaposed with the Phantom.

@Super Grover Sorry to bug you again, but in the process of trying to put together a video a thought occurred to me, and I wanted to run it by you to see if there was something I was missing. I think we all understand the concept of the bob weights attached to the stick and the bellows creating a balancing force. I think everybody here understands and accepts that and also that a sudden increase in load on the bob weights would cause an imbalance and throw off trim. My main problem with all of this has always been the uncommanded stab deflections, and according to your simulation, it's due to the modulation of the trim neutral point when load is put on the plane -- but my question is this: Did you take into account that in this control system, when a pilot is pulling on the stick, or indeed if he were to suddenly relax his pull, that he is still gripping the stick and holding it in place, and thus supporting the increased load of the bobweight? If this is the case, the moment caused by the increased load of the bobweight should not be fed back into the system to throw off the trim neutral point, therefore, it should not be modulating erratically as it does with load. If this is indeed an oversight, I believe it would pretty much resolve the issues I'm seeing with the pitch oscillations. What do you think? Is it perhaps one of those engineering oversights where one might be so zeroed in on the complex interactions of the system that one forgets to put the system into its proper context? ie. The pilot's arm in real life is actually there, and doing the work of supporting the increased load. It's not an isolated system -- a human is meant to be part of it providing forces of their own.

Unfortunately, I don't think that would work, as the correction itself would disturb the trim neutral point once more and the model would output the resultant feel force as a change to the virtual stick/stab position all over again. It's the same reason we can't damp the wobble ourselves with the current model.

Is the plane's nose oscillating up and down in reaction to the stab going up and down only visual??? I'm sorry, but what?? I am really struggling to understand the disconnects here (both in the discussion, and in the F-4's virtual flight controls). It's not only the case on the ground -- watch the end of maksim's video at 15:45 as he lets the plane nose over close to the stall. His physical joystick is centered, yet the stab and in-game stick are fully forward. Pretty sure he's in the air there! I don't want to get used to it because it is broken. It does not fly like a real aircraft in this one critical regard. I get that you do not want to accept that assertion, and that's your prerogative as well. I also get that most players don't know enough to understand what's going on as they don't fly aircraft in real life. Maybe one day, if they ever get a chance to learn, they'll understand that they sometimes actually have to push back against the controls in order to make them do what they want.

This is unequivocally, undeniably false. The virtual stick moving about uncommanded by the player in pitch is directly representative of the virtual horizontal stab moving about uncommanded. You can see it for yourself in the external view. Since the stab is also moving and altering flight dynamics, this is in no way "only visual". This is happening because the player is not directly connected to the control loop via the stick as they would be in real life, or indeed in other more properly modelled non-FBW modules (including the F-14). No, leaving it centered means the stick is centered! The sim cannot possibly know whether or not the springs are holding it centered, or if our grip is. Traditionally linked flight controls behave just the same on the ground in the absence of dynamic pressures over the control surfaces as the F-4 should -- the elevators or stabs will droop under their own weight and the stick will usually slump forward against the stops. That doesn't mean you can't move it around freely -- quite the opposite, as it can be far easier and lighter to manipulate without any load -- you're just lifting the weight of the control surface itself. In the game currently on the ground and at low airspeeds as in the video posted, the stick flops around as if nobody has their hands on it, and when you do try to manipulate the stick to set a desired control surface deflection, your inputs are in essence run through a ridiculous filter that ends up flopping it around every which way. This is in no way realistic! This is completely misrepresenting what @Maksim Savelev was saying, and in fact leads me to believe you are the one not understanding how control inputs work in real aircraft. As pilots, we use the control stick directly to set a desired deflection, which gives us our desired attitude -- we do this IRREGARDLESS of forces felt through the controls. If we want to sustain that selected attitude for a period of time, we'll only then trim out the force. You have broken this basic principle with your stick modelling for non-FFB users and made it impossible to smoothly and accurately set desired pitch attitudes without a whole heap of extra slop that shouldn't be there. I get it, you were trying to convey a "feel", which is great. You have done similar things in the past with the enhanced buffeting and aural cues in the Tomcat. But this time you have actually broken the most primary flight control loop in a very real way.

Thanks so much for making the video. I was thinking of making something similar. You've illustrated the dead stick on the ground and in the air at slow speed and its limp noodle behavior -- and how absurd it is -- quite well. There is zero reason why we shouldn't have full control over stick position in that situation, and it illustrates the major conceit and problem with their model in a way that's a little more obvious to most people. The pilot's hand is on the grip! We should be able to position it anywhere within its range of travel and hold it there in the complete absence of load forces, save for the bobweight. Maybe Heatblur thinks the average simmer is incapable of lifting 3-5 pounds? After trying to fly it quite a bunch more and only becoming more and more frustrated, I feel the emphasis really needs to be on the lack of direct correlation between the user's input and in-game stab position, how fundamental this relationship is to flying non-FBW aircraft, especially with a spring-loaded set up, and how it has been completely broken in this implementation. It is not true to life in any sense. For instance, it's almost impossible to fly the cross: If you pull, but then unload the stick before trying to roll, you'll just experience a bunch of slop and oscillation in pitch. It's quite violent without pitch stab augmentation. It's impossible to achieve any precision. Forget the visual representation of the stick -- go to external camera and watch the stab dance around uncontrollably even though you've locked your grip tight. It's such a large, fundamental error in modeling that the rest of the module is completely overshadowed. My Phantom is grounded as well... Gotta talk to the crew chief, something is wrong with the rigging!

If you wish to go wireless and you have a newer router (Wi-Fi 6 or 6E) another option might be to forego the Oculus software entirely and use the Virtual Desktop app.

Unfortunately, I think the team supporting this module is now no longer involved in the project due to external factors. As I understand it, there are unlikely to be any bug fixes for the foreseeable future. (Hope I'm wrong about that, though.)

Don't be silly. I am surprised you guys are able to respond at all, as it must be a very busy time for you. It's just another example of how great it is to have such dedicated third-party devs actually involved and making some real art, here. To be clear, I am not clamoring for, nor would I ever expect any kind of immediate fix or anything. Anybody with half a brain that's been following the project knows it's the culmination of years of work, and I wouldn't expect anything short of obvious showstoppers to be addressed for some time as the masses get a hold of it and put it through its paces. Nor do I expect you to necessarily agree with anything I'm saying, for that matter! @Super Grover @IronMike You guys both have a great evening, too!

Cheers, guys. Really do appreciate the openness! I'll take my broken record off the turntable for a bit.

Spooky!

Sure. Let's call it "we" as in "every other module in DCS".

yes I realized this may be the case and made an edit. The point still stands that we do not model aileron control like this in modules that do have direct linkage and experience aerodynamic loads.

A spring attached to a stick, which is also attached to a control linkage attached to control surfaces experiencing real loads!!! From a simulation standpoint those loads are no different and exactly what the bobweight and bellows system is designed to emulate!! Edit: I should clarify I don't know if the linkage to the aileron control is hydraulically boosted or not, but the point I am trying to make is that the bobweight/bellows provides a similar control feel to a traditional directly linked control surface. In a traditional warbird, for example, you would experience increase aileron loads at higher dynamic pressures (speed/deflection). We don't oscillate the input axis trim neutral point for those every time the load changes there in sims without a FFB stick for good reason