propeler

It depends on module. Some modules have more or less appropriate. But most have generic. Some prop planes have load depending on speed and some buffeting. None have effects of landing, damage, gunfire and many others. That's why all hardware solutions available use telemetry in some extent to generate more effects. Native effects are petty rudimentary.

Let's be honest, in extremes. Typical load curve will be closer to this:

Here is testing data from soviet book. It is measured force in kilograms to displace stick per 1 centimeter. Left - pitch. Right - roll. For instance Me109G at speed 400km/h require you to pull around 6 kilos to move stick 1cm. Here is another graph. It shows how much force you need to pull in kg for rotation speed 1 radian per second. So yes. Force on planes could be very high. null

You are trying to talk about things you do not fully understand in form if you are an expert. Nobody there is talking about Moza. Even what will work for Moza will not work for the FFB base that is discussed there. One should consider dive deeper into topic and people needs, before teaching them what they should or shouldn't do

3d printed extension will not hold FFBeast forces

You can decide on your own. On the page there is a CAD base preview with possibility to measure dimensions. You can find out how long stick extension you will need and decide from that knowledge. I propose 20Nm for those who either will be using short stick extender (100mm max) or flies helos exclusively (as helos do not need all that force). If you fly prop airplanes, modern jets, plan to use it with full size stick extender ( for example 200mm), and want to achieve more realistic forces on the stick - 35Nm will give you more room in forces. 20Nm will bee too weak to give good dynamic range. Do you have proper grip for it? Not all grips will handle it

The topic was discussed there on forum several Times. It is something like 4.5lb per G linear force plus additional force when AoA Goes higher than 22 degree

Not all devices are toys. There are devices that can produce needed force on pitch

HI. I found hooks to be good alternative to adding my code to Export.lua. But I'm facing some problems of using functions which are available in Export.lua. By the instance in Export.lua I can call get_param_handle("BASE_SENSOR_PROPELLER_RPM"):get() And it works. But I can not find the way how I can call it from the hook. As when called from hook it is not present in global context. Will be much appreciated if someone can give a tip how to call that function from the hook.

Force release is exactly what you described. And it is possible to mix trimmer from DCS with other effects. Hardware trim is more for modules that do not have correct trim implementation and for rudder pedals (as there is no DirextX effect trim for rudders in DCS)

Functionality is already on final approach. I already added hardware trim functionality for all axes. In the next release native FFB from DCS will be pretty much obsolete.

https://ffbeast.github.io/docs/en/joystick_manual_quick_start.html#dcs here is what need to be setup in DCS. FFBeast Commander can mix DirectX effects and generated effects, but it do not affect trimming. Trimming comes now exclusively from DCS in DirectX FFB effects

If so then the best solution to try is temporary disabling device in DCS. It is just a two clicks on device column. When WW is needed - enable it, when not - disable. No need disable/enable FFB, just device column in controls

By the way. What do you mean by pitching? Force on the stick? Or non zero input on pitch axis so when centered it pulls up?

It should work without software. Just native DirectX FFB. No need to do it. FFBeast do not require any changes in axis setup in DCS.

Do you have any curves on axes in DCS? If there are any - FFB will not work correctly. The best approach when setting up FFB - to have clear airplane profile in DCS. Assign axis from ground up and enable FFB options for airplane. Better to test first without Commander running. It is not a problem. If the same axis is not assigned to two joysticks connected simultaniously it works without problem. Do you mean that it works correctly with FFB joystick on laptop?

Joystick gremlin, voiceattack, probably simhub.

You do not understand how patent works. It is not possible to patent FFB second time as it was patented once and it is already in public domain.

There is common graph of motor efficiency (form is true for 99% of motors, actual numbers could be different) As in joystick we use motor always in mode closer to the left border of the graph, no matter how efficient motor is on nominal RPMs in stall mode 99% of current goes into heat.

They copied Brunner not Rhino

Walmis already had it's device before, topic just resurrected it with new ideas. And there was a topic with some china FFB device that time as well. I do not know why t disappeared. So I would not underestimate interest of other companies in making FFB. I'm 99% sure this idea come into the mind to a lot of people. This idea was just "in the air" but there for years.

I think we get it in any case sooner or later. Moza is a company that have everything to make it and it is obvious decision for company which makes FFB equipment to enter the market of FFB joysticks. I think many companies already have same thoughts for years, just their managers decided "not a time yet" because of risks involved in RND and not ready market yet.

It's not out of nowhere. Several People started reviving it already several years ago. And it was obvious seeing how ffb evolves in simracing that ffb in flight sims is on the go. https://forum.dcs.world/topic/246873-honey-i-developed-ffb-joystick-diy/?do=findComment&comment=247782 a lot of thingth started there

Depends on what you mean by "enough".