Ranma13

How much play does the base have around the center point before the motors start providing feedback effects? On the MS FFB2 the play was fairly big, so when I was trimming for helicopters, I had to pull the stick back a tiny amount from where I wanted it so that when I released the stick, it would "fall forward" into the position that I actually wanted it to be in. Also, can anyone give an idea of how the FFB strength compares to the MS FFB2? I know the motors in the Brunner aren't strong enough to use with a long extension, but is the FFB strength significantly stronger than the FFB2, or just slightly?

How's the weight of the stick compare to the TM Warthog?

Sending button presses is not implemented yet. I'm still working on it in the spare time that I have, but I recently started a new job and I also have 2 other side projects, so progress has been glacial. Every time I come back to it, I have to re-familiarize myself with the code as well, which is a huge time sink. Hopefully things will wind down soon; the side projects are ending in about a month or so, which should free up some time.

It's the same on a spring-based joystick. On a FFB stick, holding down the trim button will disable the forces on the stick, which is undesirable. That's where the FD comes in, which keeps the forces on the stick but disables the channel holds.

This is enlightening, I've always wondered why people found it difficult to adjust to the base when it took me less than a minute and felt completely natural. But I also never use curves, which is probably the reason why.

Additional buttons (36 physical, 64 virtual), 8 profiles, Bluetooth connection, and analog axes built into the grip itself. Like the FSSB R3 base, this isn't a product for budget-conscious consumers, it's for enthusiasts that have a real need for its features. The biggest selling point is the built-in axes and Bluetooth connection, making it no longer dependent on the base it's mounted on and whether or not it supports the stick. You can mount it on virtually anything as long as it has the proper threading and it will still work as a joystick. This isn't going to matter for people who are only in the market for TM/VKB/Virpil devices, but it's a pretty big deal for home cockpit builders looking for a custom setup that the current commercial devices don't serve.

I think this is a new feature in the newer firmware releases. I'm using an older firmware from January 2019, though I can't find a place to download it from now. The source of the problem is the magnet in one throttle arm interfering with the hall sensor in the other throttle arm when it passes over it. The most the software can do is filter it out, but there's no way to fix it at the hardware level without disassembling and relocating the magnets and sensors.

I had this issue on my V2 as well, but I fixed it by doing a recalibration.

RealSimulator makes products for commercial and military flight simulators, and their home use products are dumbed down versions of those products. The product page states: If you don't need the additional buttons or features, then there's no reason to pick this up over the Warthog stick. But the new features open up doors that weren't possible before. It allows you to mount the stick to any base and still get full functionality out of it, which is very helpful when you're mounting it to a base that either doesn't support all the buttons, or a base that doesn't have any electronics in it (like a home-made gimbal). It also allows it to be used in non-standard configurations, for example as a collective head when attached to a rod.

Yes, the stick has axes sensors in it to allow it to be used independent of a base.

My guess is that the stick uses its own USB or Bluetooth connection, and only mounts, but does not electrically connect to the base it's mounted on (aside from getting power for Bluetooth). The axes movements can be disabled in the software, so you'd treat the base and stick as two separate devices: one only for the X/Y movement, and the stick for the buttons. The USB HID protocol for game controllers supports up to 128 buttons, so 64 is not an issue, at least on the driver support side. The built-in control panel in Windows will only show up to 32 buttons, but using another program like VKB Joystick Tester or DIView will show you all 128 buttons. Some games though only support up to 32 buttons, so it's likely that they'll offer the option to split it up into multiple virtual devices. This is already doable on the FSSB R3 base, so most likely they'll just use the same thing.

It is possible, all TARGET does is send a USB HID report to the throttle to tell it to turn off the lights. Just as TARGET is an app, you can also write an app that sends the same command to turn off the lights. The source code has been moved here: https://gitlab.com/Tenebrous/warthogthrottlelights VAWarthogThrottleLights is a plugin for VoiceAttack, Warthog is the console app that turns off the lights, and WarthogLightControl is the library.

I find the Bluetooth connectivity particularly interesting. This gives it the ability to mount to any Warthog-compatible base without also being restricted to the button count limit of the Warthog, and could be superior to running 2 different cables out of the joystick (one for the stick, one for the base). It remains to be seen how stable the BT connection is though. There's no description of what the rotary surrounding the trim hat does. Chances are it's either a rotary encoder or hard-coded to switch profiles. I would've preferred a physical axis as it would make an excellent zoom/antenna elevation rotary, but oh well. The built-in axis detection is also very interesting. Most likely it's using an accelerometer, but I wonder how they've solved the drift issue and how it detects movement when directly mounted to a base vs. on an extension.

For how long? The Ka-50's lighting has been broken since deferred shading came out 2 years ago and DCS 2.x was called EDGE. It took ED a year to even acknowledge that it was a problem and that they were working on an update to fix it by the end of the year, but that was 2018. They then pushed it back to 2019, and we're still waiting, 2 years and still counting. How long should we be patient for? 3 years? 4 years? Maybe I need to wait as long as I've been waiting for Huey multi-crew, which is still not implemented after 6 years despite still being listed as an upcoming feature? As I've already mentioned, it's not just the autopilot lights that are busted, it's a whole slew of lights across the cockpit. It's easy enough to say "just know that the lights are reversed", but what if you don't know? I've already come across multiple instances of people buying the module and then turning "on" the channels, not realizing they're turning it off instead. How is the average person supposed to know that they're reversed, when the only place that mentions it is this very specific sub-forum in very specific threads? And putting aside your humble brag, I'm not talking about the NVG, I'm talking about the night vision lighting switch that puts out a blue light throughout the cockpit:

The lighting issue affects more than just the autopilot lights. The data link, auto turn, A/A, A/A HO, and ground moving target lights are nearly invisible when turned on. The panel backlighting and ADI and SAI backlights are not working at all, making the helicopter unflyable at night without the cockpit light on. The night vision lighting is equally busted and puts out less light than a tea light. The lighting has been busted for 2 years now, so long that some people who've bought the module recently don't know that the lighting is backwards and end up turning off the autopilot channels thinking that they're turning it on.

Elgato just announced the Stream Deck XL with 32 buttons: https://www.elgato.com/en/gaming/stream-deck-xl Available for $250: https://www.amazon.com/Elgato-Stream-Deck-Controller-Customizable/dp/B07RL8H55Z They also announced Stream Deck Mobile for iOS: https://www.elgato.com/en/gaming/stream-deck-mobile It's a free download, but requires a subscription for either $2.99/month or $25/year. It seems like the free download is a timed trial, but I don't have an iOS device to confirm this with. In other news, work on the DCS BIOS plugin for the Stream Deck software continues. Progress has been glacial because I'm currently in the middle of 2 projects in addition to a full-time job, so it's difficult to find time to work on the plugin. I will finish it eventually though, so please sit tight.

It's pure fly by wire. There's a bit of stick movement, you can see it in this video:

The mod to show the laser temperature is part of the English HUD mod: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/607269/ It passes integrity check for multiplayer, though be aware that there's no way to tell when the laser has failed aside from shooting a Vikhr and seeing it not track properly. The temperature will rise and drop normally as you're lasing even with a burnt out laser, which is most likely a bug. If you don't do anything special with the laser, you should be able to get 2 to 2.5 engagements out of it, where an engagement means a full complement of 12 Vikhr missiles. If you micromanage it and turn it on only for rangefinding, and turn it off immediately after getting the range, and turn it off immediately after the Vikhr hits instead of waiting for the additional 6 seconds that it lases the target, then you should be able to squeeze 4-5 engagements out of it. Despite what the manual says, from my testing it seems like you can range find infinitely, and only guiding a missile will reduce its life. Internally, there seems to be a counter that records how long you've used the laser for guiding, and once you exceed a certain amount of time, your laser is considered burned out.

I've written about my experiences with the FSSB R3 here: Pasted here for convenience: Whether it's worth it or not depends on what you fly. For modern fly-by-wire aircraft, it feels pretty great because the aircraft has flight computers that will smooth out your inputs. You no longer have to wrestle with springs and cams not returning the stick to exact center, and you get a lot of precision around the center point (no more having to break the static friction force before the joystick moves). For WWI and WWII aircraft though, because they're a lot more "jittery" in comparison and require a higher amount of stick movement to move, it can get pretty tiresome. You can lower the force sensing amount to compensate, but it does get pretty tiring having to constantly put force on the stick in order to get your guns on target. Even then, because the force sensors are very sensitive and accurate, it will pick up any difference in the amount of force that you're applying, so there will always be some jitter present. This translates to jitter when you're trying to place the gun sights on a target, which can be really annoying. So if you only fly modern aircraft, I'd recommend it over spring-based joysticks. If you like WWI, WWII, and non-fly-by-wire aircraft, you're probably better served by a spring-based stick. It feels pretty good with the A-10C, especially since the gun is stabilized with PAC 1. I will say though that if you're really on the fence about it, you're probably going to be happier picking up some other gear first. A force sensing base does make a noticeable difference with control accuracy, especially when doing things that need finesse like air-to-air refueling, but it also has its drawbacks. The price to value ratio is also way off, so you should be pretty confident that you'll enjoy using one before picking it up (not sure if RealSimulator accepts returns, but it ships from Spain). Also keep in mind that you'll need a stick to go with the base, so if you don't have a Warthog stick already, you'll have to buy one. I got mine direct from Guillemot without the Warthog base, and I suspect it's a refurbished unit because it arrived with a dent on the ring that surrounds the trim hat. I wouldn't recommend using a MongoosT-50CM with the base though; with the forces involved, the plastic noticeably bends and creaks with that stick, and I'm concerned that over time the plastic will fail. Admittedly, deciding if you'd like a force sensing base is hard if you've never used one before. What sealed the deal for me was when I couldn't get my MCG Pro with the extension to return to center accurately when the dry clutches were engaged. If I loosened the dry clutches to the point where the stick centered accurately, it felt too much like a spring joystick, and if I tightened them up to the point where it was dampened to my liking, it couldn't pull itself back to dead center (I was using #50 + #20 springs with the soft center cam). This really killed it for me with aircraft that have flight computers that will attempt to keep your attitude once the stick is let go of, because I found myself constantly trimming to compensate for the stick never returning to true dead center.

No, MIDI devices use the MIDI protocol. You'll need to convert it to a HID somehow to get it to work with DCS. I'm not aware of any software-only solutions to do this.

Ah sorry, I saw your post and meant to respond, but it slipped my mind. The source code is available here: https://github.com/danieltian/dcs-bios-stream-deck-plugin Edit: At this point I'm not accepting any PRs. The code is still pretty heavily in flux and some major pieces are not implemented yet, so it's not in a state where PRs would really be helpful.

I haven't had time to work on it recently, but I estimate that if I'm able to get another 2-3 full day's worth of development in, it'll be ready for an initial release.

You're talking about how the detents were implemented in the TM Warthog throttle. The Virpil throttle uses a different system.

I am no longer interested in any further discussion with you.

Throughout your posts, I've noticed a distinct trend of you making claims with absolutely nothing to back it up. You claim that you looked over Immersion's patents. So you searched through and understood all 922 patents? Can you at least provide a link to back up your claim that "some reference that possibly someone else already had the steering wheel patent"? You may be right, but I'm also not going to just take what you say at face value, because everything you've said I've already had to refute. The definition of DIY is of course different for everyone, but most people have a good idea of what an average person can accomplish without specialized knowledge. I'm a programmer and most of my peers are programmers of equal or greater skill than me, but I'm not going to pretend that because I can write "DIY" software, that somehow it means that "it's perfectly easy to do". Frankly, I find it rather ridiculous that I even have to point out yet again that someone who has the skills to design and manufacture a circuit board is, in fact, not what an average person can do. Also, you have not shown me in any remotely convincing capacity that your statement, "The fact that an amateur can build a working FFB yoke or stick base means it's perfectly easy to do", has been accomplished by any amateur. Last I checked, X-Plane requires the XPForce plugin to get any kind of actual FFB. There are also multiple reports from people who state that it doesn't support force feedback: https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/19999-xpforce/&page=2 https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/156951-force-feedback-for-sidewinder-ff2-without-add-ins/ I literally explained why you can't use stepper motors to generate good FFB effects. Once again, it's only good for holding a certain position when the motors aren't moving, but the moment they start to move, torque drops off significantly. This makes it almost unusable in a FFB stick where you need to forces to be weak as you move away from the center point and get progressively stronger the faster and further you move the stick. You also don't need to use an encoder or any kind of angle sensor with stepper motors because they can move accurately to positions by themselves. From this article: https://www.amci.com/industrial-automation-resources/plc-automation-tutorials/stepper-vs-servo/ And which legacy units are you referring to? The MS FFB2, which doesn't use stepper motors, but rather a motor similar to the Mabuchi RS-540? Or is this yet another vague claim that you're not going to back up with proof? You should re-check your definition of patent troll. Straight from Wikipedia: This is exactly what Immersion Corp does. A patent troll isn't someone who sues other people for patent infringement, it's someone who acquires patents for the sole purpose of suing other people, or charging exorbitant licensing fees. Immersion, on the other hand, exists to license their patents, and all evidence points to them setting pretty fair usage terms. Once again, the Logitech G940 was $250 and iFeelPixel is $11. You claim that other manufacturers simply refused to do business with them. Where's your proof? Maybe an article? I'll even accept an anecdote from someone in the industry. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to believe this simply because you said so, because all my research points to the contrary. Logitech's "game" is easy and it's explicitly stated: they licensed the tech: Also, your Sony example holds no water; you say that Immersion sued them AFTER the original Dual Shock existed on the market, but that's exactly how lawsuits work. You don't sue someone for something that's yet to happen, you sue them after it's happened. It's just like how you don't sue a company for a product they haven't released yet, for the simple reason that you don't know about it or any patent infringements until it's released. I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove by stating the obvious. You may want to re-read what I said about Virpil. They also have no retail presence and barely any manufacturing capacity, as evidenced by the frequent delays and instant sell-outs, but despite being around for a shorter time than Slaw and Real Simulator, they've managed to sell 10x the quantity. I don't know why you brought up Guillemot or Logitech; I didn't use them at all as examples for sales price vs. quantity sold. You say that "others" have complained about DirectX and had to work around stuff. What did they say? What did they have to work around? What exactly do you mean by "Microsoft turning out to be the 500 pound gorilla"? Previously, you claimed that DirectX has crippled haptics, which lead me to believe that you actually know something about it, but all you've done so far is give vague statements that have no solid backing. This is no different than telling someone that their car is bad and poorly constructed, without citing any specific reasons. It makes you sound smart without revealing just how little you know. So let's stop beating around the bush; either give a concrete example of how DirectX has bad haptics support, or admit that you really don't know as much about it as you claim to. And no, I'm not confusing lack of available product for the lack of desire. Rather, I feel that you're misplacing your desire as representative of the market demand. Let's go through a quick history lesson. Force feedback joysticks were never popular compared to the gaming market at large, with support limited to only a handful of titles, almost all in the same genre. Microsoft was the primary driver of FFB adoption; they designed the API and created the first consumer-level force feedback joystick, and presumably implemented it in their flight simulator, though I can't find any info on which game was the first one to have FFB support. They released the Force Feedback Pro in 1997 and the FFB2 in 1998, with Logitech trying a go at it in 2000 with the Force 3D Pro, which by all accounts was largely forgettable. At the onset of the 2000's, it was pretty apparent that the flight sim genre was dying. A major world event in 2001 and Immersion suing Microsoft in 2002 didn't help, and soon Microsoft pulled out to pursue other endeavors. This meant that the main driving force behind FFB was gone, and no company was willing to fill the void for what was then, and still is, a very niche device. Logitech did release the G940 in 2009, which was a curious choice as nothing really was going on in the flight sim world at the time (maybe the release of BS2 in 2008?), but it was a commercial flop and the last joystick that Logitech designed and released as an in-house product. Cut to present day, and FFB remains obscure. Sure, we know about it due to having hands-on experience with it and being involved with the DCS input/output community, but most simmers only know it as some old out-of-production joystick. Due to the similar naming, some even think that it only uses rumble motors like those in a game controller. Most simmers either don't know, don't care, or don't want a FFB device. Yes, there are people that occasionally ask about it, but mostly in a curious "what happened to it?" way. Although there are still FFB devices being produced, they are exclusively for the GA market and the "big 3" sims, cost $1000+, and aren't really all that popular. This can be seen by the lack of reviews and any real solid, in-depth info on any of them, and the difficulty of purchasing one in some cases (long waiting lists, constantly out of stock, special order, etc). One yoke manufacturer (Iris Dynamics) even pulled out completely to focus on providing linear actuators for commercial clients instead. So yes, some people want these things, but it's a small and not very vocal minority. Unless you have evidence otherwise, I'll trust my own observations from the past 5 years over your blanket statements.