FW 190 lower joystick-hand workload than the other two?

[Echo38]

Hi folks, some of you may have heard my tale of the bum hand, and why I haven't been able to fly the P-51D in DCS for a long time. If you haven't, here it is, in brief: both of my hands are permanently compromised, and using a gaming joystick is painful. Any ergonomic solutions which could solve the problem (e.g. full-scale stick) are beyond my price range & ability to obtain.

 

Now, I happen to be approximately as fond of the Me 109 and the FW 190 as I am of the P-51 (I'd pick the 109 over the other two, but only barely; P-51 & FW 190 are pretty much a coin toss), so if it turned out that I was unable to fly the P-51, but able to fly one of the other, then it'd be a bummer about the P-51, but can't complain too hard, you see.

 

However, if other flight sim/games are to judge (and I'm more than aware that those games are often very unlike DCS!), the FW 190 and Me 109 are both about as hard on the joystick hand as the P-51. Only when one gets to fighters like the P-38 (don't have to fight torque & gyro all the time) or Spitfire (little stick movement required) does the hand workload significantly drop.

 

So, my question to those who have both the P-51D and the FW 190D and/or Me 109K modules in DCS: which would you say has the lower joystick-hand workload? I have pedals, so rudder work isn't a concern, but rather elevator and aileron workload.

[ZaltysZ]

P-51 looks easiest for me, because it has all trimers and effective controls.

 

Next is FW190, however it can be trimmed in pitch only while inflight, so if you are not at certain speed and power setting, you have to give either aileron input or suboptimally workaround that with rudder input. Other than this, FW does not need much mashing with the stick.

 

BF109 is the hardest on hand, especially when going through wide speed range, because of stiffness modeling and somewhat lack of trim effectiveness at certain speeds.

 

P.S: It would be better if you described what your hand prefers: lots of small inputs or few large ones and etc.

Edited April 30, 2015 by ZaltysZ

[Echo38]

Thanks, ZaltysZ--I distinctly remember our duels in another sim/game, years ago--if you're as proficient now as you were then, then I can trust your opinion of how an aircraft handles!

 

Anyone else have other ideas? Different joysticks could result in different experiences. For reference, I'm using a Thrustmaster T.16000M, at the moment--it's rather unyielding. (What're you using, ZaltysZ? Forgot to ask in O.P.)

[ZaltysZ]

Warthog.

 

EDIT: By the way, your stick uses the same programming software as mine. You can make some things easier for you with it. I.e. aileron trim for aircraft which does not have it, switchable response curves and so on.

Edited April 30, 2015 by ZaltysZ

[Solty]

P51 is the easiest. Just trim it for takeoff and it will fly itself.

 

. 109 needs a lot of work on its ruder and stick during takeoff and landing. Actually u need to use the stick all the time. It needs lot of care and its behaviour changes across speeds.

 

190 needs rudder kicks at takeoff so its the middle ground.

 

All of them need a lot of work during combat. But 190 is the fastest so keeping energy is enough for combat employment as B&Z plane.

 

I use AV8R saitek

Edited April 30, 2015 by Solty

[[DBS]TH0R]

I second ZaltysZ's comments. 109 requires a lot of work on all controls during all the maneuvers. With 190 on the other hand, you only have one throttle to worry about while the Mustang can be trimmed at all speeds to minimize stick input.

 

P.S: It would be better if you described what your hand prefers: lots of small inputs or few large ones and etc.

 

Yes, more details are needed.

 

An extension like what can be found on Warthogs definitely helps but creates larger movement. And the Hog is tiresome after a prolonged use when not extended. Extending a joystick with less resistance in its default configuration like X-55 would further lower forces required to move it. There are relatively cheap solutions for extending a stick, see mine from the sig.

[Echo38]

What if trim weren't a factor, hypothetically? Assuming that no trim is being used on any aircraft; now which one has less load on the hand (bearing in mind that rudder-work is irrelevant 'coz pedals)?

 

(I do use trim if I'm cruising & such, but if my primary interest is duelling a friend from a close air start ... well, during hard maneuvers, there isn't much time to trim with keys.)

Edited April 30, 2015 by Echo38

[Solty]

I can tell u that without trim 109 is the worst. A lot of movement up and down to counter the pitching movment

 

190 would be the best as you just need to keep your speed.

 

Takeoff and landing p51

[Echo38]

It would be better if you described what your hand prefers: lots of small inputs or few large ones and etc.

 

Mm, yes, good point. Okay, the frequency of micro-motions is one problem; the P-51D is hard in this because of its "twitchiness;" that is, I'm constantly making tiny corrections in every direction because of torque & gyro. The P-51 is unstable, so a tiny amount of back-stick necessitates a bit of rudder to counter the gyro; the rudder movement is easy, with pedals, but that rudder input begins a slight roll, which necessitates a tiny amount of side-stick. Furthermore, as the aircraft slows down from the increased drag from my back-stick, I need to shift everything again. A more stable* ship could mean that I don't need to compensate so much for these effects with my stick (or, at least, ignore them with less of a drag penalty et al.).

 

But another big problem is amount of elevator deflection. Mostly, I'm interested in dogfighting, and when I duel my friends, I'm more often than not holding the stick back pretty far. An aircraft such as the Spitfire (as depicted in other sim/games like IL-2, Aces High, War Thunder, at least) needs less back-stick to maintain a high-G / high-Alpha maneuver, and so is less taxing on my hand in that regard. It's true that I should be trimming out this pull with the trim keys, but in a dogfight, I don't usually have time and/or the free hand to do this, since my left hand is busy with the camera keys. (Hat switch isn't an option, in part because of the bum hand.) Trimming it out beforehand is no good, either, because then when I unload / extend, I've got the opposite problem (hard forward-stick required), and don't always have time to retrim while unloading, either.

 

So, there are several aspects to the hand workload, but those are the two main concerns: "twitchiness" near the center of the stick travel range (lots of micro-movements due to compounding effects & low general stability), and "hard pulls" being required for normal dogfighting maneuvers like combat turns & Immelmanns. Both frequency of motion, and distance of motion, contribute; the worst case, of course, being a high frequency of large motions on both axes.

 

*Of course, there's the problem that a more stable ship might require fewer/less micro-movements, but require a harder pull to do a good turn; however, something like the War Thunder Spitfire manages to get a "sweet spot." I suspect that none of the three WWII birds we have in DCS come close to such a sweet spot, but it's looking like the FW 190D might be the closest of the three.

 

Edit: after thinking about the problem more carefully, I would say that, at least for now, the largest problem for my hand is holding the stick pulled back for sustained amounts of time, such as in sustained turns or a lengthy duel comprised of high-G and/or high-Alpha maneuvers (which is what I tend to spend most of my flight time doing). Again, I really ought to be trimming that out, but I simply don't have the time--or perhaps the presence of mind--to do so mid-fight.

Edited April 30, 2015 by Echo38

[ZaltysZ]

(I do use trim if I'm cruising & such, but if my primary interest is duelling a friend from a close air start ... well, during hard maneuvers, there isn't much time to trim with keys.)

 

BF109 is the hardest. Which one of the other 2 is easier depends on person.

 

P-51 is more sensitive, it lets quick correction, but if your hand isn't precise, it will feel twitchy and tiring.

 

FW109 is less sensitive, but you need to do somewhat larger movements.

 

For average person, FW is probably less heavy on hand, because it allows to fly with less "focused" muscles. However, if you have precise hands or have hand movement restrictions (limited angles and etc,), P-51 is easier on hand.

 

EDIT: Judging by your post above, I think you should try FW190. It is not as twitchy as P-51, in fact, it is like on rails. If you find it requiring too much to pull, you can always change response curve of elevator, so that cockpit stick will be at 100%, when your real stick is at 80% or so.

Edited April 30, 2015 by ZaltysZ

[Echo38]

An extension like what can be found on Warthogs definitely helps but creates larger movement.

 

I didn't explain it very well; sorry. A larger movement is fine, as long as it's a lower resistance (i.e. a stick extension is a good thing, all else equal). But if we're talking about my current stick, unmodified, flying an aircraft that requires larger motions is worse than an aircraft that requires smaller motions, all else equal. When I said that large motions are bad, I meant large motions against a hard spring. With my current joystick, a large motion means really straining against the spring (relatively speaking--for my hands, anyway).

 

P-51 is more sensitive, it lets quick correction, but if your hand isn't precise, it will feel twitchy and tiring.

 

For average person, FW is probably less heavy on hand, because it allows to fly with less "focused" muscles. However, if you have precise hands or have hand movement restrictions (limited angles and etc,), P-51 is easier on hand.

 

Hmm. I don't know exactly what you mean by "precise"; I am capable of some very fine motions, but, in order to make them, I need to grip the stick tighter than I ought to--at least, when my mind is focused on combat. So my method is "ham-fisted," but if you remember our duels, you know that it can produce "silk-handed" results. (I've flown with direct input ever since my time flying real aircraft, ~15 years ago. No curves, no dead zones. Perhaps this is contributing to my pain? On the other hand, curves generally mean larger motions.)

 

This phenomenon (gripping the stick for greater precision--I didn't do this when I flew IRL, by the way, but IRL I didn't fly with a six-inch spring-bound stick, nor was I dogfighting) happens subconsciously. I don't think it's something that can be trained away; I've been dealing with the hand-joystick problems for ten years now, to various degrees. In the heat of the fight, I often am not aware that my hand is hurting until after my mind is no longer occupied the dynamics of the dogfight (E, Alpha, etc.). So, I think my hand is precise, but on the other hand, it is weak and tires quickly.

 

It does look like the FW 190 is the best fit of these three for my particular problems; I will keep this in mind. Thank you all very much for your input; any further discussion is also welcome.

Edited April 30, 2015 by Echo38

[ZaltysZ]

Hmm. I don't know exactly what you mean by "precise"; I am capable of some very fine motions, but, in order to make them, I need to grip the stick tighter than I ought to. So my method is "ham-fisted," but if you remember our duels, you know that it can produce some silk-handed results.

 

Read 'precise' as being able to do fine enough movements without increased effort or focus on task.

[Echo38]

Got it. So, in that case, my hands would be "not precise," and thus better suited to FW 190D than P-51D. [nods]

[ZaltysZ]

Got it. So, in that case, my hands would be "not precise," and thus better suited to FW 190D than P-51D. [nods]

 

Yes. :thumbup:

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

Deepest sympathies for your affliction Echo, I don't know what I'd do if I were to lose that much ability in my hands as Simming is my only real hobby I'd surely go mad. Now unfortunately life has it to where I as well do not have financial freedom to spend money on a full cyclic, however I do have the occasional currency to buy new modules and seeing as nothing too important or of my interest is coming anytime soon, this brings me to my suggestion. There is a company that makes a full cyclic and throttle system http://www.maxflightstick.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&path=102_2002&product_id=31. Now seeing as we are quite the tight nit community here and we all know each other well. Should a kickstarter campaign or other such entity come up with link to fund this inexpensive ( compared to alot of other systems availible) system, I would be more than willing to fund said campaign. Just a suggestion.

[Echo38]

I don't know what I'd do if I were to lose that much ability in my hands as Simming is my only real hobby I'd surely go mad.

 

"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat. "We're all mad here."

 

Yeah, I totally hear you; flying was my goal since I was four, and ever since it became impossible, sim-flying has been my primary hobby. I think I have gone mad!

 

A few days ago, a friend convinced me to dust off the ol' stick & pedals and give DCS another, more careful try. It's disgruntling to be limited to ~15min a day (back in the old days, I used to do at least three hours a day avg.). Still, after all that time away, just taking off and landing in the P-51D made me feel like Tigger having his first bounce after a year-long abstinence. And way more convincing than the War Thunder I'd been dabbling in with mouse & pedals.

 

Should a kickstarter campaign or other such entity come up with link to fund this inexpensive ( compared to alot of other systems availible) system, I would be more than willing to fund said campaign.

 

That is a most kind thought, thank you, but I'm pretty sure my Charisma stat is too low to pull off something like that. ; )

Edited April 30, 2015 by Echo38

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

I'd say the Fw190 is the lighter, plus you don't have to "mess around" with the aileron and rudder trim :)

 

By far my preferred ww2 fighter in DCS, if it wan't for the fact that I don't find the modeling of stick forces anywhere near what I believe was flying the real thing, specially when pushing speed to limits. Also don't like the yaw response - too lose for me....

[fastfreddie]

Definetly give the Dora a try. Great roll rate, light flight controls, and is quite easy to control throughout most manuevers without all the attention that the 109 requires. You may have to use half of the range of the flight stick and usually anymore will send you into a stall but shes pretty forgiving. Dora became my favorite plane the first time I flew it simply because of the way it handles itself and the cockpit layout was wonderful. You may have to apply some rudder to keep it trimmed but that doesn't sound like a issue. Its just one of the great planes to fly but requires the pilot to learn deflection shooting to be really good.

 

If you have trouble with precise manuevers the Spitfire may be the worst "module" for you. Everything we've heard so far indicates that it takes quite a bit of precision and I wonder if it got pushed back because of flight model programming.

[SharpeXB]

When I said that large motions are bad, I meant large motions against a hard spring. With my current joystick, a large motion means really straining against the spring (relatively speaking--for my hands, anyway).

Have you tried a different stick with a lighter spring? One thing I like about the CH stick is that it has a very light spring. I know some sticks have adjustable springs or ones that can be removed altogether.

[Echo38]

Have you tried a different stick with a lighter spring? One thing I like about the CH stick is that it has a very light spring. I know some sticks have adjustable springs or ones that can be removed altogether.

 

[nod] My old stick is CH and I have considered going back to it, but the shape & size of the grip was much less ergonomic for me & harder on my hand for that reason, even though the spring strength was more forgiving. Hands are better able to grasp round things than square things, especially if the square things are large. There're other things as well that I didn't like about the CH, some having to do with ergonomics and some having to do with functionality.

 

Removing the spring altogether--there's an idea. It'd hamper my flying ability, but I've been playing with relative-mouse in War Thunder and it's doable without having the reference point from a spring. Hmm--I think my warranty's already expired, so if I can get someone to open this thing up & extract the spring ...

[Ultra]

For joysticks I've found the X-52 to be the most comfortable and ergonomic. My hand never got tired using it, since it has a very light centering spring. I wasn't a fan of the CH feel. Or you could get an X-55 and use the lightest spring it comes with.

[ZaltysZ]

 

Echo38, it seems your stick centers because of single huge spring. You can try cutting away one or two coils of spring or joining few coils together to lessen centering force.

Edited April 30, 2015 by ZaltysZ

[fastfreddie]

Never tried it but what about the Saitek X65? I don't believe it had a spring at all but sensed pressure applied to determine how far to move the virtual stick.

[Ultra]

I've tried the X65f. It could maybe work if set to really low pressures for movement, but I would guess it would be worse for him.