Speedlink Aiirow vs CH Fighterstick: Some thoughts

[Mr_sukebe]

Just taken delivery of an Airrow, one of the few remaining units left in the Eu for sale.

I've owned a CH Fighterstick for a couple of years now, thought someone might appreciate some thoughts on the comparison.

 

The Fighterstick is clearly well known, but seems to receive most criticism on how it looks and it's 8 bit precision. Personally I have no issues with how it looks and have appreciated the fact that it's not only festooned with buttons, but feels basically "as new" after 2 years of serious use.

 

The Airrow is apparently a copy of an earlier version of the VKB Gladiator. Made on the same production line. Key differences being software, non-upgradeable firmware, cheaper pots on the side throttle and twist axes and plastic gimball/cams when compared to the metal of the Gladiator pro.

 

Plugging the Airrow in, was instantly recognised by Win10, and then known to DCS, which even knew the name of the unit. So no setup issues.

Played with it for an hour, alternating between it and my CH Fighterstick. Frankly I couldn't tell a lot of difference in precision, which makes me wonder about the genuine need for 16 bit. The CH is a good deal more obvious that it has independent springs in the X and Y axes. The Airrow was less obvious, required more effort, but also no quite as smooth in operation (maybe my Airrow needs greasing). So from the point of view of flying my Huey, there really wasn't much in it.

 

I didn't really like the twist action, but frankly it's unlikely I'll us it as I have pedals. Probably OK.

 

The Airrow has the equivalent of 2 "function" buttons, allowing each of the real buttons to perform 3 independent actions. So I think that it's probably easier to map a higher number of absolute buttons. However, I like the fact that the CH has all of them directly to hand.

 

Whilst some criticise the plastics of the CH, as mentioned, I have no issues with it. Feels "industrial" and very long lasting. The Airrow grip felt cheaper and more plastic whilst in my hand.

 

Both are of a similar weight, and as I'd use them Velcro'd in place, doesn't really make a difference.

 

So in summary, in use not much in it, but I prefer the feel of the plastics of the CH, which is why it'll say as my primary until I get myself a VKB MCG at some point.

 

I'll be keeping the Airrow as there was nothing actually wrong with it, just a question of preference. Additionally, it was half the price of a new Fighterstick and it'll make a nice backup, or will be given to my son if he graduates into flight sims.

Edited July 4, 2017 by Mr_sukebe

[Sokol1_br]

the CH is a good deal more obvious that it has independent springs in the X and Y axes. The Airrow was less obvious, required more effort, but also no quite as smooth in operation (maybe my Airrow needs greasing). So from the point of view of flying my Huey, there really wasn't much in it.

 

As curiosity, Gladiator (non PRO) and their "cousin" Airrow (or Javelin) gimbal is "clone" of CH gimbal, with independent X, Y axis movements. The difference is the damper grease in pivot grooves to soft the spring back effect.

 

BTW - If that 8 x 10/12 bits (Airrow/Gladiator - 16 bits is Tm marketing) don't make perceptible difference flying Huey, difficult will make in any other plane.

[zcaa0g]

I have both a Warthog and the CH Fighterstick and that glass filled nylon polymer will far out last that cheap Chinese metal used in the Warthog. Anyone that criticizes the durability of CH's "plastic" is ignorant, plain and simple. And that's how I really feel. :-)

 

While I prefer the Warthog due to ergonomics, there's something to be said for the CH Fighterstick USB which is still flawless after about 15 years of use (same for Pro Throttle). I also got 2 of the throttle quadrants and the CH Eclipse yoke when they were released and they are still going strong as well.

 

Anyway, I am getting off topic, so I will bail out now.