ericinexile

I am finally happy with the following: Logitech FFB settings: Default Logitech DCS Profile Setting: Sensitivity X @ 30%, Y @ 30 %, Mini-X and Mini-Y sensitivity at 0 % and range at 70% DCS Joy Settings: FFB trim 100 %, No Curves, deadzones, etc. This allows for smooth hover FD on or off. Autopilot will hold hover evan as you fiddle with joystick buttons. Trim will solidly hold attitude through about 250 KPH. After that, you must very slightly "overtrim" in order to get a solid attitude hole. Overall, a pretty satisfying setup for me.

The Ka50, as a design, is NUTS! I love the sim but you couldn't pay me enough to put me in the real thing. It's a near-miss 3000 times a minute! Kudos to Russia (and Turkey) for taking a more traditional, survivable approach to their attack helicopter programs.

Alec, You mentioned Sensitivity and I had never thought to play with that other than your suggested "0" (low). My latest setup is: EVERYTHING--Logitech and DCS--DEFAULT, except Axis Sensitivity in the Logitech Profiler. That is set at 50 %. Now FFB trim works fine. 100 % works also but, as you stated, it's very sensitive. 50 is a nice balance and very controllable. Another change I've made since this post is adjust the bottom Centering Spring slider to 20 % and check "Enable Centering Spring in FFB Games". This has a slight negative effect with DCS but allows better control of planes in IL2. The negative effect in DCS is a slight return to my original complaint but the trim holds well enough at high speed to allow the autopilot to fly a route or hold a heading and speed--an acceptable balance for me. If DCS is your only sim then its best to have the box unchecked.

As for my non-FFB settings. I use the Centering Spring at 50%. (I also have the spring enabled for FFB games and that seems to work well enough. It also means I don't need to change setting from game to game. It does FEEL less precise but my test of precision is to hover with ALL dampeners off. And I do this much better with this stick...even though it FEELS "sloppier".

This is also mentioned on the Logitech forum from a Logitech rep. To paraphrase: There is no "deadzone" on the G940 (see, it was our imagination). The center slop we experience is due to the fact that the full capabilities of the G940 are not yet addressed by game developers. That's believable enough. We are trying to tweak a piece of equipment that is not supported by the games we play. It's a bit like trying to use TrackIR with FS98. Now the more scary part of that discussion is overheating sticks. I really don't want my expensive new toy to burn my house down.

Should attack helicopters carry heaters? Based on my experience trying to shoot helos with vikhrs, YES! Should ED model something that is not operational, NO! (well, it could be argued that the Ka50 really isn't operational but enough semantics. Keep it real.

Alec, No offense taken. Just the opposite in fact as you've been helpful. ddalstrom, The rudder thing I have pretty well down pat. The original trim logic (both cyclic and anti-torque) never bothered me. The point is that I can look at the in-game cyclic (or the Shift-Enter window) and see the stick move right and aft when I let go after trimming (with FFB ON). This does not happen with the non-FFB setting. I think I could overcome this by fully complying with Alec's suggestions in other posts. But that would mean changing my Global settings every time I play IL2, RoF, FSX, ect. And if I do that the stick becomes work and I should get paid to use it. Part of my concern is that that stick is not quite because I seem to be having issues that others are not (primarily a big sloppy dead-zone and that tendancy not to hold the trim position). Otherwise I love the stick and I even like the non-FFB trim implementation in DCS.

Alec, I've read all of your posts as well as those of others. I was once a fence sitter watching this discussion take place and eventually took the dive based on positive comments. But, I just spent all night last night trying every possible combination of springs, dampeners, strength, curves, FD On/Off, and throwing spaghetti against the wall to see if it would stick. The trim does in fact work so-so until I accelerate past about 220. Then letting go of the (taped) stick will result in a pitch up and turn to the right as the feedback mechanism doesn't seem to want to hold the stick in the trimmed position. Hey, It could be that I have a bad stick. And that's a question for the fence-sitters: Are these complaints due to the obsessive compulsive nature of the reviewer?, is it a flawed stick?, is it incompatible implementation on the part of ED?, or Logitech? Don't know. Don't care. The stick works as well as the Saitek in spring (or non-FFB) mode so for those who need a HOTAS this is still a doable choice. But for me. I still don't know. It's very cool in IL2 and that alone may entice me into keeping it.

I know many are considering the huge investment in the G940 and probably can't get enough information on the setup. I like mine a lot. It is well-constructed and precise. The FFB feature just might save my ham-fisted arse in IL2 (no more panic driven Spit snap-rolls). It has postponed the onset of arthritis caused by continuous forward stick in Rise of Flight. I no longer have to be bathed in Saitek blue light. But after eight relentless hours of trying to get a usable trim with DCS I've decided to disable FFB in the producer config file. It still flies better than the Saitek that way. The spring without FFB is very smooth, natural, and adjustable. I love the pre 1.01 trim and am comfortable with it. One negative is a small amount of undampened play around neutral. For some, that alone might be a deal breaker. But I think I'll stick it out for another week or two. Sorry for the short post but my baby just woke up. Time to work. REVISION: FFB Works better for me with the following settings: Logitech FFB properties: All default except bottom Centering Spring Slider at 20 % and "Enable Centering Sping in FFB Games" is CHECKED (This has a slight negative effect with DCS but allows good control of planes in IL2 and RoF.) Logitech DCS profile axis properities: Default except Sensitivity at 50% DCS Controller settings (in-game options): Axis default, ie, no curves. FFB 100%.

Thanks for moving this thread to a sub-forum that gets minimum traffic and therefore a minimum chance of future help.

I appreciate the input and advice. Short of getting a definitive answer from ED regarding what events actually tigger the "Server Ping Timeout" message then, as an alternative, I'd like some guidance as to where to go for advanced learning on terms such as "ping" and "server timouts". In this knowledge vacuum I just don't understand how the problem is on my end when it's the server that's timing out. Is it because my system ceased communicating with the server or is it something else? I am NOT conected to a router but rather directly to a cable modem. And while I'm rambling, why would low pings cause a problem? As an interim stab in the dark, I think I will just edit Network.cfg to a 600 second timeout and see where that leads.

I'm way outside my knowledge level but I just don't see why ED would even attempt to model the crazy things that happen to rotor systems when they are pushed so far outside the laws of sanity. It would be like modeling how the A-10 would "fly" underwater. Fun, but thousands of lines of unneeded code.

Well... I'm not sure what's unusual about low pings. When boot up DCS Multiplayer I see a choice of servers listed in ping order usually from the mid-40's through 200 +. I always thought low is good which I assume is why ED has them display first. But If I choose such a server I usually get the above message within 10 minutes or so. No router.

The popping part, I would agree. Otherwise, no way. ED took the aerodynamics as far as they needed to within the confines of "normal" flight (just above the design envelope of the Ka50). After that it's fiction, just like the fly-through trees and the water that's always about 2 feet below the river's edge.

The explanation is easy: The speed limit for rotorcraft (not just helicopters) is set at the point where the rotor system can no longer handle the trans-sonic effects on one part of the disk and the retreating blade stall on the other. Some gyroplane designers, well Carter is the only one I know of, have tried to develop methods to slow the rotor enough so that it isn't doing any damage while a wing takes over as the lift-producer. The Lynx was the first (again that I know of) to "sweep" the outboard portion of the blade to delay the onset of trans-sonic buffet. The Ka50 has two rotor disks and therefore can produce sufficient lift with a smaller disk radius. That smaller radius equates to a lower tip speed for a given forward airspeed when compared to single rotor designs that are otherwise roughly equivalent. In the end, it seems to be the general philosophy that a fast helicopter is a waste of R&D dollars as there are much cheaper ways to go fast.

I get this a lot when I connect to a server with low pings. Is there anything I can do on my end? I should add that the message states "Server Ping Timeout( >40.000000 sec)". It used to state "30.000000 sec" but based on a thread about Servman I changed the Timeout line on the Network.cfg from 30 to 40. I also read on an old LockOn thread that the Timeout value can be changed to 600! I don't want to do this for fear of really screwing both my online experience and perhaps even others on the server. Again, help is appreciated.

Every reason to be proud. Very cool.

The flight model is amazing. But... Supersonic flow must be hard to model. My belief is that so long as we remain within the real Ka50 flight envelope (<351KPH) we are seeing something close to real. After that, it is fiction. But its fun.

OK, I gotta get back up and see what I can do.

The fastest I've managed to fly the Ka50 in level flight was around 330. Not satisfied with that I wanted to try it in a dive. With no shells, flares, and min fuel on a "standard" day I climbed to 1000m and began the dive. I've found that with the ball a little left of center it is pretty easy to survive but the descent rate is crazy as the collective has to be kept at low pitch to avoid low rotor rpm. The best I could manage was 409 (let's see the AH-64 do that). Curious if others have tried and would like to post their best.

Well.... I'll make no claims about solving a problem for others. For me it is solved, without question. I've been playing Lomac and DCS for hours today and have enjoyed the quiet after a year of noise. btw, I had to manually add both Lockon and DCS to the alchemy games list as neither is officially supported by Creative.

Nice discussion. But this is what caught my attention... That must mean soon on a geological scale. Smokin' Hole

For over a year (since switching to Vista) I've had an irritating sound issue that reared its ugly head in several ways but the two most obvious were a very high pitched N2 Turbine noise in the Ka-50 (which I had partially solved by opening and closing the cockpit door) and a loud afterburner sound on the ramp in LockOn. I searched forums and was pointed to all sorts of sound.cfg files to screw up and comments about a "known issue with Vista" but never hit on a solution until a recent search at simhq.com hit on a passing mention of Creative Alchemy. That solved both problems instantly. All of you probably already know this which would explain the lack of complaints about X-Fi sound. But for those in the dark, like me, I hope this helps. Smokin' Hole

Ahhhh, my old trim back. Funny what you get used to.

Yep, that was my problem. However I don't like using wide deadzone on a perfectly good stick. I've decided to return to the old trim logic. Thanks for the help.