CyBerkut

Could be a Five Man Electrical Band fan... http://www.fivemanelectricalband.ca/ Kidz.... :music_whistling:

You are about two years too late...

Hmmm... The alcohol level in your blood wasn't what I found myself wondering about as I read that... :music_whistling:

I really like what digitaljjd came up with there. However, the O.P. mentioned that his office chair is armless, so he's going to need a somehat different approach. Markdude... If you like what digitaljjd came up with, you may be able to mount something even though you don't have arm rests. Most office chairs have bolts attaching the pedestal to the chair's underside. If you have them, you could use those as attachment points for whatever HOTAS mounts you fashion. Of course, you could easily end up departing from the "super cheap" criteria that you mentioned. Deadman's suggestion will get you there at low cost, that's for sure. Do you have any materials already on hand? (Plywood, pipe, conduit, ???)

Excellent! :thumbup: I'm looking forward to what you come up with. :)

Doing a little searching online: Here is a 9" display: http://www.buy.com/prod/doublesight-ds-90u-9-smart-usb-lcd-monitor-300-1-30ms-1024-x-600/q/loc/101/212323674.html Doublesight makes a 7 inch version, too. Here are some 8" displays: http://www.ioffer.com/i/Mini-8-TFT-LCD-Color-Monitor-TV-AV-VGA-SD-USB-Inputs-109228159 (scroll down for it) http://www.geekstuff4u.com/century-8-inch-vga-monitor.html http://www.geekstuff4u.com/8-inch-usb-monitor.html http://www.geekstuff4u.com/8-inch-usb-and-dvi-monitor.html

It appears that MIMO http://www.mimomonitors.com/ will be coming out with a non-touch version of the iMo monster 10" screen. That may be too large, but then... maybe not. If the software will let you re-size and move the displayed image, you should be able to make that work. I guess some of this comes down to whether one wants to mount them in a panel, etc.

If I remember some pics I've seen ( a long time ago ) correctly, the hat switches / buttons are mounted to those boards. If so, you would need to fashion an alternate mounting method for the switches/hats in order to get rid of the circuit boards. I believe the solution I've seen from others is to keep the boards, but cut the traces on the circuit boards (ie. with an exacto knife) to disconnect the undesired portions of the circuitry. Then, you just solder your wiring to the boards on the switch/hat side of the cuts. Hope that helps!

If it were me, I'd probably place external springs (or bungie cords) immediately above the base, connecting the low end of the extension shaft to 4 posts/screws in such a way as to minimize exerting any additional downward stress upon the plastic internals of the base unit. [Maybe even have the ever-so-slightest upward pull to counteract the additional weight of the extension shaft]. Then find, or fashion, a boot to cover it all up for a better appearance. [A large-ish stick shift boot would probably do the trick].

How long of an extension are you contemplating? If you're talking about mounting the base on the floor and extending the stick up to above thigh level when seated... I'd predict that you would need some serious external springing to get desirable results. Of course, some of it comes down to how much resistance you want. With a short extension, you might get by if you want a light touch.

The only problem with those illustrations is that the woman is not slapping the crap out of you for cluttering up her home!!! ;) Seriously though, it's a very interesting project. :thumbup: Good luck with it!

I saw that thread title, and the first thing that popped into my head was, "But honey, I really *need* that Thrustmaster Warthog controller to make this simulator work the way it was meant to!" ;)

Software Triple Head aka SoftTH. http://www.kegetys.net/SoftTH/ Have fun!

I think I'm in lust with Kaci..... my wife has to take a Xanax before getting on a commercial airline flight! :P

Well cheezy, there are a number of reasons to increase the use of UAVs (where they can fulfill the mission requirements). - The value of human life. Sadly, the value level varies between cultures, circumstances, etc. Generally speaking, in the west we place a pretty high value on our people. One only need look at the enormous resources that get employed / risked to rescue personnel in trouble. Another example would be some special forces units that won't even leave a dead member behind, let alone a live one. Part of this goes to a related aspect... unit morale / cohesion. Military personnel count heavily upon their brethren to come through when needed, and know that their side of the bargain requires them to do the same. - The investment in training. Not only of the pilots / crew that would be initially at risk, but also of the pilots / crew / special forces, etc. that participate in rescue / recovery efforts for downed pilots /crew. Then there is the potential to eventually need fewer medical personnel to treat wounded air crew members, etc. - Simplified logistics. While a UAV may have some high technology on board, it probably does not differ much from what is already being maintained on manned aircraft. Meanwhile, things like life support systems and ejection seats do not need to be dealt with on the UAVs. - Potential for maneuvers that could exceed human endurance. Not an issue with something like the current Predator drones, but in missions that traditionally get handled by high performance fighters, aircraft design/employment has already run up against the maximum G's of acceleration that the human body can withstand while retaining some semblance of functionality. Unmanned aircraft can be engineered to function under higher stresses. - Potential for missions that no human life should be placed at risk for. UAVs open up the possibility to send aircraft on missions that the current political / moral climate in the nation will not tolerate risking air crew on. - Reduced risk to intelligence / security. A UAV that has been shot down has far less to potentially reveal than a live pilot or crew member. - Reduced opportunity for enemy propaganda. The enemy can make a video of the UAV wreckage, and make whatever claims they want to about the events, etc. But that is far less dramatic/useful than trotting out a bound/blindfolded crew member, or making them read some statement/confession on video. The potential benefits are too great to ignore. Any major power that rules out the future development of a high performance combat aircraft than can exceed human limits, does so at its own peril... because someday other countries will have an edge over them. This is not to say that the technology is ready to take people out of the equation altogether at this time. But technology marches on.

Hmmm... why do you do that?

Nice job, Kuky! If someone didn't want to risk butchering their Cougar, they could alternatively consider making an extension that would fit between the Cougar's removable grip and the base. That extension could then incorporate and angle change desired for the stick. I've seen other threads (either here or possibly SimHQ) that discuss what the electrical connectors and the mechanical connections are. One could keep the extension short if they didn't want the stick's throw to change much. Someone clever could probably even make it adustable so that it would be easy to change between side stick and center stick modes.

As for the 2 wires per switch issue with the X version of the Bodnar board... You can cut the conductor count down easily. On the Bodnar board, you jumper the return connection for all of the switches on a controller together, and run a single return conductor to the controller. Inside the controller, you jumper the return post for each switch together, and tie them to that single conductor that was brought in from the Bodnar board. 20 switches then only need 21 conductors to run between the controller and the Bodnar board, instead of 40 conductors.

Hi Leafer, It wouldn't be connecting to a serial port on the computer. The DB-25 connectors (typically used for parallel port printer connections) are just a commonly available connector with a lot of pins. (You could use whatever type of connectors that your prefer, as long as they have enough pins and can handle enough current / voltage.) In what I described, they would strictly be connecting the controller bases to the Bodnar Box. The Bodnar Box would be using a USB connection to the computer. Also, keep in mind that more than 1 Bodnar Board could be placed in such a box. Someone who has lots of stuff to convert over might want that. Of course, each Bodnar board has it's own USB connection to the computer, but even that could be brought down to one USB cable (running to the computer) by placing a USB hub inside the box with the Bodnar boards. Anyone doing that sould consider using a powered USB hub, since some controllers / devices might bog down a hub that only uses the power from the computer's USB connection. As for the switch diodes on the non X versions, it is because of the switch matrix approach. The use of the matrix allows more switches to use fewer wires, but without diodes limiting the current flow to one direction, you can end up with switch ghosting (aka phantom inputs) when multiple switches are operated simultaneously.

Noooo... What he has in the picture above is three monitors, each in landscape mode / orientation, stacked vertically. What I was asking about was three monitors, each in portrait mode / orientation, arranged horizontally, (side by side). Human eyes are presumably the way they are because we are land dwelling creatures by nature. This whole flying and fighting in the air hasn't been going on long enough to be a factor in how our vision develops/evolves. As for what is more immersive in the sims, some folks feel it is more important to get more of the vertical view. I suspect there is a better result for flight sims somewhere in the middle ground... hence my question to the O.P. There are a lot of variables at play in what works best... Using head tracking? Using 16:9 aspect ratio monitors, 16:10, or ??? Which Sim(s), and how much time do you need to have your head down in the cockpit, versus looking outside?

Back when I was contemplating a mod for the Suncom HOTAS, I was leaning toward the BU0836X version. Not messing with adding diodes appealed enough to me to be willing to spend a bit more on it (along with the other improvements). The other thing was, I was not concerned with the size of that board, versus the earlier versions. I was actually thinking of placing the BU0836X into a separate box, with the idea that it could also be used with other controllers... basically, a get more bang for the Bodnar Buck sort of approach. The Bodnar box would have the BU0836X card wired to some 25 Pin (DB-25) connectors. The converted controllers would have DB-25 connectors on their bases, and then would just be cabled up to the Bodnar Box. Later on, to switch to a Cyclic and Collective (or whatever), just move the cables over, and tweak the software. [ Note, this would probably need some pre-planning to standardize on using certain pins for given functions ]. I suspect different profiles could be stored for different controllers, but I never got that far along in analyzing/planning. Not as clean/elegant as burying boards in the controller bases, but it could be useful for someone who wants to have different controller setups for different sim types.

My bad! I have a Suncom HOTAS that has not been modified. I haven't used it in many years, but I was contemplating doing a Bodnar based mod before we found ourselves swimming in a small sea of split throttle offerings in recent times. As for the "cheap feel" issue... it's going to be one of those 'eye of the beholder' sort of things. I don't think anyone who has laid their hands upon milspec controls is going to claim that a Suncom controller is comparable. They clearly are not in that neighborhood. The higher end version(s) at least (ie. having both a coolie and castle switch on the stick), were not that shabby in my mind. In any case, since you are doing this mod, you have an opportunity to upgrade components as you wish. Hopefully, the 'learning experiences' along the way won't be too painful! ;)

Interesting. Have you tried 3 wide with the displays in portrait mode/orientation?

I assume you are referring to this: First off, there's been a lot of confusion in the past over the various Suncom models and the nomenclature used. { And no, I'm not holding myself out as an expert... } In light of that, it might be best to wait and see what actually arrives at your door. If you are indeed actually getting what is described in the quote above, then the potential issue is the way the hat switch is being handled inside the stick. Instead of a true hat switch, it is apparently being handled by the hat actuating some small buttons. It will require, I believe, a different wiring method to the Bodnar board than a true hat switch would. Not a major biggie, I imagine, but be aware of it. Something like that might make it more important to use diodes with the Bodnar board, if you are using one of the non-X versions. Once you have it in hand, I'm sure Sokol1 will have good advice for you. He's definitely way up on the "Been there, done that" list. :)

Bodnar ships from the U.K., worldwide for £4.99 ( = 7.89 USD = 240.89 THB as of this writing ). I don't know how that stacks up, cost-wise for you, though.