some1

What is considered weak in real world applications is still very strong by flightsim hardware standards. According to the linked document, a change in airspeed of 50 kts in landing configuration still results in a force change of several kgF on the stick. Meanwhile in Heatblur's implementation the change in these conditions is something like 0.15 kgF on a VPForce Rhino... when measured at max deflection, and much less at neutral trim position as measured in the real test. It's basically a limp stick. Even the strongest FFBeast hardware will not produce realistic forces with FFB inputs like that. Here's a comparison of how FFB works in practice. Blue line is DCS F-4 at stock settings. Red line is DCS F-4 at 250% gain, even when scaled it is still very weak at approach speeds. Yellow line is how other ED aircraft with aerodynamic forces on the stick are implemented. Not great either, as FFB spring saturates quickly, but at least the stick is centring nicely at low speeds and feels more like a real airplane. A green line is a possible compromise solution that would both provide decent centring force on takeoff and landing, while also retaining the effects generated by F-4 Phantom control system. *The lines are drawn from a few data points so they may not be fully accurate, it's just for illustrative purpose.

Ok, now I see what you mean, you need to set a large number there to actually see any effect at all. So for example 100 on the slider is a 10% deadzone, and contrary to what the manual says, it's the total deadzone size, so +- 5% on each side of the detent.

Not according to Heatblur's own manual. Either way, doesn't work.

Hmm, I though that this could be theoretically possible, but assumed that this is not the case, considering the target velocity is not indicated anywhere else. DCS manual also has no mention of this feature and the wording even suggests otherwise. Looked at the real manual and also can't find anything on such feature.

The setting in the options has no effect, there is no deadzone for afterburner detent. I use split throttle with separate axis for left and right engine.

Here's my summary of how it works right now. https://forum.dcs.world/topic/349269-force-feedback-settings-discussion/?do=findComment&comment=5439674

When linking TADS to FCR targets, it will slave and track current vehicle position, not the FCR contact. This is noticeable on moving vehicles, which are not in the same place as they were during radar sweep. But linked TADS will follow them somehow, and I can even switch between vehicles in the convoy with NTS button, even though the contacts on the radar (and C-Scope) are in completely different place by now. ah64link.trk

I've looked into FFB telemetry on my joystick and yeah, my conclusion is that the stock settings are pretty much unusable on most force feedback devices. At 100% gain in the special options, the pitch axis works like this: 1% force when stationary. less than 5% force at 150 kts. 12% force at 200 kts. 50% force at 300 kts. 100% force at 470 kts, give or take. Roll axis does not have the dynamic feel system, so it's fixed at 25% force. This may be mathematically correct if you have a stick capable of producing 30-60 kgf at 100% force, but for most of consumer devices, the stick is basically limp at traffic pattern speeds. You can crank the gain up, but a small number remains a small number even if you multiply it 250%. And the joystick will saturate quickly below 300 kts. A more practical solution would be something that Aerges did for their module, which lets us set the minimum force, and then the force increase is scaled on top of that baseline to match 100% at the intended target. Or just bring the force build-up with airspeed more in line with other DCS modules from ED, like warbirds. Right now it does not feel like any other aircraft in DCS, and I don't say it as a compliment.

I'd say the ones built from a single piece mold, like Realsimulator or Tianhang. They don't have a seam in the middle. Most popular grips are built from two halves with a shaft wedged between them, all held together with tiny screws. So if pull very hard, it all wants to come apart. On top of that, Thrustmaster shafts are rather brittle, but there are aftermarket replacements available.

You need to go to https://forum.dcs.world/attachments/ and remove some of the old files you've uploaded in the past.

If you hold the grip firmly in place and keep trim button down, then at some point the stick in game will move by itself, the aircraft will pitch up and you won't be able to compensate even if you push the grip forward. Then after the aircraft slows down, the stick in game will reposition itself again. This is ED's way of simulating control forces too high for the pilot to handle. Doesn't matter if your joystick makes 1kg or 30kg, the game will reduce the movement range for you. It works "okay" (sort of), if you stay in correct trim and don't use any curves.

Curves modify the input as usual, but they do not modify the forces, or rather modify the forces as if the stick was in a different place. The stick position does not align with the forces any more. This is especially visible in helicopters with central trimmer, but it gets messy in aircraft too. True, not sure how much force most of the popular grips can take, but even with Rhino and FSSB set at moderate levels, I have to tighten the screws on my Virpil and Thrustmaster grips from time to time, as they become loose and you can feel the main shaft starts to move. There are people who snapped the shafts on Thrustmaster grips, fortunately there are replacement parts from less brittle material. Or more sturdy grips like Tianhang. It's not about what's plausible, but rather what's practical. Real pilots like what they're used to in real life. But I'm not sure there are many people here who would want to dogfight in a Hornet using realistic forces, requiring 18kg (40 lbs) for max deflection. If you're one of them, then sure, FFBeast or a custom VPforce with a set of stronger motors, or that ultra expensive Brunner base is the way to go.

Below is the setting I use with A-10. The real F-14 has 4 inch forward/5.5 inch aft stick travel, so my guess would something like 75% max forward position instead of 35% for the A-10. When rescaling an axis you may also need to reduce that axis gain. FFB trim is badly implemented in both F-15E and Harrier, it works on top of non-FFB trim that is still active. At least that's how it was last time I checked. Q-Feel is not simulated. And FFB doesn't work at all in the Mig-19.

A stronger FFB base can give you more "dynamic range" to work with, and also will perform better when mounted on the floor and with a long stick extension. Which I guess is the only way to use FFBeast anyway, looking at its size and force output. On the other hand, very large forces aren't that practical for flight sims, unless you go for immersion at the cost usability. I have a Rhino without stick extension, which due to Rhino size is equivalent to a typical spring joystick with ~8 cm extension. And I normally use ~70% gain for most of the flying, especially dogfighting. At 100% I don't fly better, I just get fatigued faster To me that ~3kg pull at the stick is a comfortable compromise for armchair flying. I also have FSSB R3 Ultra and I don't use full forces on that base either. And FSSB R3 at 100% is only half of what real F-16 stick requires from the pilot. But in the game we're not concerned so much about airframe limitations, pilot induced oscillations, passenger comfort, we don't fight g-forces and we are not thrown around the cockpit when performing manoeuvres, so other than immersion, there is not much need to have very heavy sticks. Contrary to what other guy says about Mosquito, that plane in DCS doesn't require stronger base, it just needs small inputs to fly well. One fundamental thing about FFB in general is that it doesn't work with input curves. So you cannot use curves in the software to fix twitchy FM, which some guys over at Mossie forum tried to and learned the hard way. Mosquito also has an issue with trim due to ED hardcoded effects, but this is the same with every FFB device. I haven't followed FFBeast development so I don't know how good is the software provided with the base. But be aware that FFB support in DCS varies between modules, and joystick software is needed to make up that deficit. In Razbam modules FFB is bugged or not existent, even the trim. ED approach in their modules is to simulate only forces that are transmitted through the control column in real life, so if you want additional haptic effects like airframe shake due to g's, buffeting, VRS, runway bumps, gun firing etc. all that needs to be provided by the joystick software. Some other modules like Deka's JF-17 or Heatblur's F-14 have such effects already built in to some extent. There are other useful things that can be done in the software, like balancing a heavy grip and extension, or rescaling axes to shift the neutral point back to centre if the module doesn't do that (A-10, F-14) If you plan to play other games, then FFB support varies there too, Il-2 is pretty good out of the box, MSFS and Xplane don't support FFB at all, and everything has to be provided by external software that reads telemetry data from the sim.

I think there are two issues here: - One is that the aircraft is quite sensitive in pitch on stock settings, so people tend to set input curves to cure it. But joystick curves and FFB don't work together well, and anyone setting curves is asking for troubles. That's how it is for all DCS modules, and, to my knowledge, other games too. - The second issue is that DCS "simulates" forces on the stick being to high for the pilot to manage, by repositioning the stick by itself, without affecting FFB. You can't utilize full stick deflection at high speeds, the game will limit you to a smaller window around the current trim setting. You can see this when the aircraft is not trimmed and you accelerate, the stick in the cockpit will move and follow the trim. That is further messing up with FFB and trim interaction. Again, it's not something unique to the Mossie, similar thing also happens in BF-109 for example, but in the Mosquito it's very noticeable even at moderate speeds. Unfortunately neither of these seem to be easy to fix.

Not really. ED seems to follow the school of thought that force feedback should transmit only the effects that really exist on the control column, not the general cockpit "shakes". And that, for aircraft with hydraulic boosted controls (Sabre and newer), means there isn't much effects other than trim. I don't remember feeling any shakes from gun shooting in any ED module for that matter. Other 3rd parties sometimes have extra effects built in, like Deka with JF-17 or HB with F-14. If you have VPForce Rhino, you can have all the effects you want through TelemFFB software. Don't know about other brands of FFB hardware.

Still bugged in 2024. The altimeter indicates correctly only in missions with default atmospheric pressure (1013 mbar).

ED has no intention to take over and continue development of 3rd party module if the original developer ceases the support. Chizh and other ED team memebers made it pretty clear on the Russian thread recently. Regardless of whether Razbam issue gets resolved or not, that seems to be the current stance about all 3rd parties and it's not much different to how it works with MSFS, Xplane or even Steam itself. Translation: https://forum-dcs-world.translate.goog/topic/317495-dcs-f-15e-strike-eagle-ot-razbam/page/30/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_hist=true

Hmm, i don't have this issue. I have recenter view remapped to different key combo (keyboard, not joystick button), and num5 is free to use for other functions.

I agree. The band for autopilot activation is so narrow, it causes issues with most high end sticks without firm centre detent or large deadzone in the middle. Other aircraft in DCS don't have such issue. I couldn't reliably activate the autopilot in the Hornet with VirpilT-50 base, and I still can't with Vpforce.

You have to map it to something else, that will free the num5. If there is no user mapping, it will default to the num5 key.

The grip has both a button and an axis on that lever. First you have to calibrate the axis in the Rhino Software. Then you have to assign that axis (and not the button) in DCS.

I have them off and start dcs from Windows like any other program. Don't use the dashboard at all.

Always nice to see updates to some older modules.

Mine has been working for half a year so far with zero maintenance required. Best to check their Discord and look at the support requests there, but I don't think there are any serious issues so far. A few people damaged the thread on the part where you screw the grip on, but that's fairly easy to replace. Belt drive may need tensioning after a while.