FIN_Centurion1

Yeah that was my plan to use ball bearings, the big holes are cutouts for the 22mm ball bearings. I plan on having ball bearings in all moving pivots except the gas springs and damper. Can someone show me how you have your magnets and hall sensors set up? How far do the magnets and sensor be from magnetic metals (steel)?

Yeah the cooling CAN work with even an OC'd i7 - but it takes some pretty meticulous fine-tuning to make it really work. For example Obsidian PC of portugal sells this type of barebones laptop configured to customer specs - you can even get one with a 1080 and i7 if you want to. I bought my from IVY PC of Sweden. Sager is another well known brand that basically customizes and sells this type of laptop. Since I have only time to game when away from home it was a no brainer to get one. What I'm really wanting to hear is owners of kaby lake or skylake i5s and i7s - what kind of performance are you getting? Is it worth getting the i7?

Hi guys, I'm on a clevo P775DM3-G laptop that I bought this spring, it support desktop CPUs, i have the kaby lake 7100 i3 that I was forced to select for budgetary reasons - my plan was all along to upgrade to atleast i5 when I get a chance. That time seems to be getting near, the i3 does not really allow for DCS, so I ideally need to get a fast processor and because of laptop thermals I need to delid and undervolt to boot. The I7 7700K is really pushing it - you can probably not get away with a hefty OC, even though it is possible to get them working provided you delid and tweak them by undervolting. Options: -New, delidded 7700k from Siliconlottery about 400USD -New, stock i5 6700K around 200USD + delid kit -Used older i5 6600K around 150USD + delid kit What do you think. I am tempted by siliconlottery but in the end spending money on a fairly straightforward DIY job does not seem like a good deal. But siliconlottery tests the cpus and promise a certain attainable OC - so I might be able to reach almost 4.3-4.5ghz on a promised 5.0ghz chip. Then again I am a bit disgusted with how bad DCS runs in VR for people even on super OC i7s and 1080Tis. I "only" have a 1070...

That was an awesome video. Quite interesting times here up north, the Finnish air force is picking a successor to the F-18C (or is it F/A-18C now that they got bombs too?) and the Rafale is one of the contenders, as well as Gripen NG, F35, super bug and Eurofighter. Regardless of the pick, the Hornet seems to have been a good match for the FAF, even though they never did get to land it on a deck.

Ok, here is the steering damper integration, plenty of space in the middle. I will probably achieve about 40 degrees of angle vs. 35 for the old layout.

Thats a really good point. Especially the cam will be suspectible to wear. I guess I could put some sheet metal over the cam surface to reduce wear. As for bearings, yeah oversizing might work or I could make inlays for the bearings made out of composite material, like a cutting board or some such.

I bought a 5v to 3v level conversion chip to go along it. Since there is code already om github for imtergrating it on arduino it should be possible.

Another day, another design - Sokols sage advice had me seriously consider heels on ground pedals and started sketching on a design. Not pretty, especially the long 8mm threaded rods I'd use to offset the pedal from the mechanism.. Hmm

Good advice as always!I found this but obviously no joy for MMjoy https://hackaday.io/project/11865-3d-magnetic-field-scanner/log/42471-arduino-mlx90393-library We'll see

Wow cool, thanks a bunch! Have some rep :D I hope to take it one step further and use said MLX90363 3d hall sensor as my primary sensor - but we'll see. Will probably use regular halls for the toe brakes though. Here is my project design so far btw https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=192832 Price tag is probably a bit higher thank your's because of the added expense of steering damper and gas shocks, but I still think I will come out below 100€ which is the price of a new set of plastic ones.

Would the MLX90363 also work, it seems to be the same sensor just more advanced?

Hey Sniperwolf, thumbs up for this thread and a detailed writeup - I am just now designing my own DIY set of rudder pedals and have been using your list as a template of what to order - I now have a bunch of products coming my way from the far corners of the world. I am a bit hesitant when it comes to putting it all together, any chance you would know any good places to start out with the whole Arduino business and where to get good firmware? My shopping list: Allegro A1302KUA-T A1302 Ratiometric Linear Hall Effect Sensors ATmega328P CH340G UNO R3 Board Mini USB Board for Compatible-Arduino +USB Cable 16 Bit I2C ADS1115 Module ADC 4 channel with Pro Gain Amplifier for Arduino RPi I also ordered a CJMCU-90393 MLX90393 Digital 3D Hall Sensor since it seems to be superior to the traditional hall sensor in pretty much every way - but I have not got a clue if I can even use it. Thanks for the help so far!

Thanks Sokol, those are some good ideas and good links. I will think about reducing my paralellogram, but I have faith that massive wood will be good enough. If not, redesign is not a problem really. Also nice bonus about the MLX90363 sensor - seems like a real winner. I will order both the MLX 3d hall as well as a set of normal A1302 hall sensors, and arduino UNO r3 and a 16 Bit I2C ADS1115 Module ADC 4 channel with Pro Gain Amplifier for Arduino RPi. Decided to go the Arduino path since it seems to be the least expensive way. I sure have ordered a shitload of stuff now :D Need to study the Arduino now - how to make it work. EDIT: to clarify I made some measurments in Inventor, my rudder pedals have a travel range of 35 degrees, that equals a distance/travel of about 23cm at full deflection (from pedal lower edge to edge). The rotor arms are from pedal unit pivot to pivot 44cm, wider than most commercial pedals but not excessive - or is it? A shorter rotor would certainly place less risk of bending and breaking of the rotor arm...

I got the idea from other devices, many more professional level products seem to use them to get a crisp centering feel, so you know when you are centered which is more important in fixed wing flying. If you want to get rid of the centering you just unhook the spring. With the steering damper you still get a feel for of feedback. I hope it just aint too stiff / sluggish. here is a pic of the first integration of the steering damper, and also a picture of my previous project, which was a very ad hoc helo sim controller made out of a discarded logitech 3d pro also + some other bits and bobs i found lying around. It worked reasonably but really was without any kind of feeling which was off putting, also the mechanical parts had too much play. So now I am trying to get a nice smooth operation this time around, I will probably at some point make a stick and collective too, perhaps a throttle to create a nice dual use home cockpit (fixed/rotary wing) Your project looks cool, some good ideas for when I get around to doing a new collective stick.

I tweaked the design now, the cam profile is no longer symmetrical and is closer now to what it should be, the arm moves more or less equally on both sides. I ordered the steering damper and the gas shocks on ebay, shipping time was not fast but I got time :) Now I need to integrate the steering damper

Thanks for the input! I guess I'll have to score some Hall sensors then and see.. I read alot about the Arduinos but the Leo Bodnar seems more plug and play. Regarding the cam profile, I read that earlier about not being symmetrical but I have no idea how to design it properly, I guess I will have to go a bit by trial and error. I am away at work so I have a good week or so to perfect the design before I go building it.

Hey guys, After getting to use some rudder pedals I decided my simming really needed some proper ones, and spending 100€ on a set of plastic ones didn't really seem like money well spent. I tried my friends Thrustmaster pedals and they really lacked the feeling and tactile response I was looking for, so I scoured the net for DIY and professional level projects to get inspiration. I got an educational version of Inventor Pro 2018 and started tinkering, mind you I am NOT an engineer nor do I have any product design experience. I do not have access to fancy machining equipment either, but I am in the middle of a house renovation (the stressful part is over, thank god) so I have a lot of wood working equipment. The BF109 style pedals seemed like a good place to start. Since I do not have metal machining experience or equipment I needed to use sturdy enough parts of massive wood and I really didn't fancy doing it all out of plywood because I don't like how that looks. I have some 28x28mm left over from a kitchen shelf project and it seems sturdy enough to work as the arms. I plan on having 8x22mm ball bearings on most of the pivot points, I think 8mm bolts will be sturdy enough as axles. For centering I thought the cam with follower seemed like a good idea - the bad news is I have no idea how to properly design said cam. The fairly massive one you see in the renderings are just me SWAGin it. But basically centering is by a spring loaded arm and a ball bearing follower moving against the cam. The spring is missing from the pics because I couldnt figure out how to make a spring yet in Inventor :doh: The pedals will have some small gas shocks on them. Electronics wise I will start out with a discarded logitech 3d pro - it has three axis I can use - but will go down the leo bodnar route eventually. Still haven't decided if I want to just go leo bodnar straight away, hall sensors would be easier to mount I guess. The sensors and mountings are still missing from the drawing, since I haven't quite decided what I want to do yet. I also have trouble conceptualizing how to best mount pot sensors. I am also considering a cheap motorcycle steering damper to add additional tactile feel, like this one for example: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Universal-Motorcycle-Steering-Damper-Stabilizer-Linear-Reversed-Safety-Control-/282615215834 So, any input is appreciated, I figure if I do the design work properly first building it will be a lot faster and easier on the nerves :megalol:

My experience with 3ds max is you never will get geometry like that working properly, I would just remodel it all with subdivision modeling, using the scan as a transparent overlay.. If you really want to, use the select border tool to mark the open edges and use the cap poly function - it should only cap the selected area. As for solid or hollow - it's just flat geometry in 3ds max - you need to use AutoCad to define such things. I have no experience in 3d printing tho.

This is the best thing I've seen in a while, beats my MK1 helicopter controls out of the water :D I got my Oculus rift CV1 a couple of weeks ago and my sim flying has gone up by like 50 times, currently mostly running warbirds (in war thunder because 90fps at all times) but want to get back to the helo game in DCS, and currently researching a more serious home cockpit build with more feel - tried my mates Thrustmaster pedals and they just dont cut it. I feel I still don't understand how your mag brakes work really, but I'll get there I'm just a bit dull :helpsmilie: My biggest dilemma is how to make some multipurpose cockpit that would be good for fixed wing and rotary, I understand I need a collective and throttle unit separately ofcourse but I want to have a stick and pedals that work reasonably for both. So that is a bit of thinking required item. I also want to integrate some more feel into the controls, preferably by using oil shocks or some similar. Gonna try to sketch up something in CAD tomorrow - try to formulate a working design and get a parts list etc... Anyway, thanks for the inspiration you provide!

Very interesting MBot, I have also thought myself about how such a dynamic campaign could be implemented and just like you I thought about an external application doing the ground work (well, it is the only practical way) but I am very pleased you started doing it - since I would have to learn programming first :D The main problem for me is the lack of any real game engagement in DCS, ie some sense of progression and a real motivator to master the systems of the jets. Flying scripted campaigns is good fun but they are for a certain skill set, if you are not good enough you fail and have to redo until you get there. A dynamic campaign allows you to fail and still continue to progress, building up your skill level. A few ideas for the future: 1) Strike Fighters 2 had a "intelligence" value on each asset, so the campaign engine could not plan counters for assets that were unknown to the opposite asset. A good example would probably have been the F-117 Nighthawks in Desert Storm, I doubt the Iraqis had any idea about the capabilities of said aircraft. This also prevented perfect planning. I think this would be a good idea for some mobile SAM assets. Naturally, recon flights and exposure upped the intelligence value on said assets as the campaign went on. 2) Regarding the ground war, a IL2 or SF2 type node network that defined ground units moves along would probably be best to start with. Once you implement ground war and helicopters I would love it if you could make a "helicopter hunter" mission type for slower aircraft types like trainers or the like. 3) Can the campaign maker define aircraft turn-around time, this could give an advantage to aircraft that are in real-life simpler to service and refuel, like the Viggen, or to more rugged aircraft like the MiG-21 who can fly with minimal maintenance if needed. Finally, and I felt this should be a separate point, as I fully realize this is not in the scope of what you are doing right now: After you feel the DCE is perfected a logical step could be to create a graphical front end where you are allowed to interact with the mission before committing to it. This could open up for expanding the campaign scope by doing away with a lot of limitations the game has, you could have individual briefings in MP for PVP and so on. In my ideal world, a dynamic campaign would have airframe, pilot and weapon inventory (a bit of the Jagged Alliance / XCOM engagement factor thrown in) to make it less sterile. If you read up on actual conflicts on for example ACIG.org you quickly realize that the machines are only half of the story, the human factor is huge and completely omitted currently in most sims. Anyways, great work! :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

It will affect how sharp and crisp the ground texture appears. Terrain resolution in this context means how large a terrain area the ground textures will be stretched out over. Let's imagine a 2000x2000 pixel aerial photo that will be the ground texture. If we stretch this out on a 20x20 km area the each pixel on said aerial photo will cover a 10x10m area, whicj of course wont look very good from close up. If we use said image but only use it on a 2x2km area the terrain resolution will be 1m, ie one pixel covers a 1m x 1m area. This is of course 10 times better, but will also take 10 times as much data to cover 20x20km.

Really looking forward to this one! Great work on the cockpit details!

Steam sales are seen by millions of gamers when they log in, the "daily deals" give huge visibility to ED vs selling at their own site. I have read (cant remeber source) that Steam sales actually gives 4 times the revenue even if the price is very low. If this is true in this case, ED and third party module vendors will get a healthy injection of capital -> Better position to develop further modules. And as said, it has become standard procedure in the digital selling of games, and gives good value for both devs and gamers who might not have the cash to buy full price. Personally for my favorite series of games or individual titles I buy at release for full prize even if I consider it expensive, and everything else I wait for a sale. So all in all, happy days.

A very good article, and very well written too! You have some very good points, and this goes pretty much along with my perceptions even though I haven't even had a chance to try OR yet. Perhaps one potential solution to the "gauge read at low res" problem is to present a small-ish but readable text in the bottom of the FOV that gives the readout of the gauge if you look directly at a gauge? Anyways, I am really looking forward to the Rift CV1 for my simming. I could not care less how much better or worse it would make me perform in competetive multiplayer dogfights, I want to feel like I am flying an actual combat jet and so far the OR might be our best hope yet to achieve that end.

Will the requirement to run 75fps also be on the CV1, or is it a result of the screens in the DK2? Man, I hope EDGE will give some really good performance improvements, otherwise I am going to need to upgrade my video card again for the CV1...