VO101_MMaister

I can remember that the toe brake issue was very common with my CH-pedals. It is caused by broken wires not the pots. The wire is too short and brakes. Easy to fix fortunately.

Gears always have an efficiency nr. (torque loss) The cheap gear solutions like worm gears have a very low one. The higher the ratio the worse it is ( can be around 70%, so you loose the precious input torque`s 30%) High efficiency gears are the planetary gears (efficiency over 90%), but they contain several cog wheels which results backslash. This backslash gets worse over time because of the wear out of the cog connections. Low or near 0 backslash gears are available but they cost a lot. These gears require regular maintenance (lubing, cleaning) The cable pulley transmission is actually a good idea. The cables wont wear out only get stretched but it is easy to retention. And it is a dry, maintenance-free system.

I think the choice of gearing and motor is not crucial at this stage. But it will be important to specify what is the required min. RPM output of a motor+gear combo to give sufficient speed for the force load effects. Also the gearing has to be backslash free.

Andre`s Simshaker sw uses the telemetry of the game, and still able to deliver effects for stall, landing gears, weapons ect... It is actually much better than an on-off effect. The stall warning is for example builds up gradiently with the increase of AoA.

Hi, I wrote this on SimHQ, but since here is the right place, I put it here as well: "I think the best what can be done is to use the simulator`s output data about speed and AoA and translate these into force load on all three controll axis. I know it is possible with DCS, FSX or X-plane but I am not sure about CloD or IL2. This is the method what is used by the Simshaker software which translates the sourced data into transducer FX or what is used by the BFF Simulation controll loader system. http://bffsimulation.com/FFB-yoke-1.php The later one supports FSX, X-plane and maybe DCS in the future. Support from software developers side can`t be expected until there is a widely used standard like it was the directinput FFB which is not really accessible anymore due to the high royalty fees. Anyway if someone with the right software and electronics skills wants to go ahead with this one, I am more than happy to help with the mechanics, mechatronics.

No it is not about my work, but the picture I attached to my previous post got lost. Here it is again:

Here is another Dora enthusiast`s work:)

OK, I didn`t get what is so wrong with the warthog or what do you call unseparated axis load. Now from this graph I get it. It looks odd indeed. I am completely aware of that the Cougar gimbal I used have the same spring setup as yours. Balancing all the four spings all the time is what I call unseparated. The stick I use today is truely separated and this feature itself doesn`t make the flying easier. That was my point. MM

My comment was not about your mod vs the stock Warthog. I don`t own a Warthog so I cannot comment on its carachter. And I am not here to criticize your mod, because it actually looks smart and for 30 bucks it is a bargain especially if you deliver with dampers, because that makes a huge difference. My intention was to chill this hype around separated axis, because it wont make your flying better. I still own and I had used for almost 10 years an evenstrain modded TM cougar which had 0% load separation on its 2 axis but it was 100 times more precise than a stock cougar which had 100%!

This debate is pretty much a beating a dead horse and i can`t resist to clear some air here. 1. In real ac the ailerons and elevators are mechanically separated. 2. You won`t really notice that while you move the stick around at cruising speed and moderate maneuvering. I can`t tell about acrobatic flying because I don`t do that. 3. The aileron is always lighter (by ca 50%) because of ergonomical reasons and not because it makes your flight more precise. These ergonomical reasons have no point at the low force loads of a pc jpystick. 4. Even if you make the separation perfect and the aileron axis lighter on a pc joystick it won`t help you to fly more precisely or to pull an unwanted roll into a pitch up unless you have a center detent on both axis which is again totally unrealistic. Just think it thru. When you pull hard it is actually more difficult to roll unintended with a non separated stick because the necessary force to move the stick sideways is higher than with a separated stick where the roll axis spring is unloaded in this situation. 5. So if you can`t fly precisely in a sim it is not because your axis are not separated but because you have not practiced enough. Axis separation won`t help you! 6. In a real flying you feel and correct the aircraft`s movement with your bottom which is 1000 times easier than using your eyes on a screen only.

These are not micro struds, and would not fit the Mamba`s casing. By the way it is not very smart that the dampers are connected to the CAM arms :noexpression: If you move the stick swiftly the damper slowed cam arms cannot catch up. The dampers have to be connected to the main gimbal elements or the stick shafts to avoid this.

The miniature linear dampers which would fit into this compact casing have a negligible effect. A simple, and quite good solution would be the use of rubber or elastomer springs instead of the current steel ones. The rubber has a natural damping effect due to the internal friction in its material. I don`t know if it is possible to find one which can be a direct replacement, but I am sure it is not that expensive to make one and order a bigger batch of it.

Guys, be aware that these micro damper struds have a very little effect when you have a half a kg clump on a 200mm long lever. They were designed for lightweight modell cars. I don`t say that they are not worth a try, but dont`t expect too much. I would rather go for a pair of adjustable motorcycle/ scooter steering dampers and get them mounted between the control column extension and the base plate

Wow, I don`t know how have I missed this thread so far! I will follow from now for sure! Amazing job draken! Crazy lot of costum made part! Very smart frame solution with the Bosch profiles!

Very impressive! What stick will you use?

I may pull the trigger on this. But since the delivery time is August if I order it right now I think that I will just sit and wait to see what happens. I guess the first order boom will calm down in a few weeks, so I can order it in August and still get it within a reasonable 1-2 weeks. Time is working for us in this case.;)

Hi, what is the general experience about min. PC config to play DCS with oculus at least at medium setting? I have a i7 2600k at 4,3Ghz + 970 GTX card. Is it good enough?

Well it is always a pleasure to give feedback when it is properly followed up by the developers, like in your case:smilewink:

I took my modules for a spin to test the AoA feedback. Here is what I experienced. Bf109K4 - perfect AoA feedback!:) P51D - Perfect as well Fw190d9 - you know Mig15 - no AoA feedback at all. Mig21 - perfect F86 - perfect So the Mig15 and the Fw190 need some polishing. Otherwise I am very happy now, it is a great addition, which makes my buttkicker much more useful.

Wow, I haven`t seen the new version. I will give it a go tonight:)

Andre, Do you know when will be the AoA issues with the fail stall warning addressed? Is it only the sound module or the Jet-Seat is also effected by it? cheers MM

The Y-connector didn`t work for me, and the buttkicker was fed with one channel only. Regarding switching, your sollution can work if you don`t mind to setup the default sound device in Windows each time you want to switch between the simshaker and the default buttkicker setup. There is one question. Is the optical bypass of the headset still working when you switch to USB input on the base? If not than you need a spdif splitter before the base.

DAC is a digital to analog converter. The stereo mono converter is used to fusion the left and right channel for the single buttkicker. Otherwise it will only use one channel (left or right depending on which wire you connect) and it is very annoying when you rotate your head in the cockpit and the vibration stops because the buttkicker is not wired for the side where the sounds are coming from. The simshaker concept is really cool I think, but it doesn`t support the other sims I play with. Therefore I build an RCA switch into the loop where I can choose the input for the buttkicker between: 1. simshaker via the external USB soundcard 2. line out of the headset so classical buttkicker setup

Well, you ain`t need any spdif splitter, because your Headset`s base has an optical bypass, called line out. So you can spare that one. You need an DAC indeed to connect the Buttkicker`s amp. What I installed in this loop was a stereo-mono converter, because I really disliked that the buttkicker was connected to one channel only. Now it is really good, but I will try the Simshaker soon.

No bad feelings NeilWillis, you were right about the terminology. :thumbup: