Joystick in the Center, or on the Side? Which is best and why?

[frogger]

i personally fly centre stick but with an extension. i dont see the point of having a centre stick without the extension.

 

an extension of even 4 inches will allow you to make smaller inputs with larger movements which is generally easier to handle. if u move an extended stick 2 inches at the top the botton would probably equal 15 to 20 % of the axis input. with a non extended stick to make an input of 15% you would have to move the stick half a cm or so. i find adding an extension , a stiffer spring and a good profile to the curves you can fly so much smoother which is what i want as a lead position in a formation squad.

[horus-DCS]

Joystick in the Center, or on the Side? Which is best and why?

 

I've tried almost every possible combos, including several different center-extended sticks, and my conclusion is side force sensing stick is the best. I mostly fly blackshark and huey. Same controller type with the real one doesn't mean it's the most effective type to fly the aircraft.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited March 2, 2018 by horus-DCS

[Ranma13]

I've tried almost every possible combos, including several different center-extended sticks, and my conclusion is side force sensing stick is best.

 

This is my experience as well. Most people who are recommending center mounted with extension have never used a force sensing stick before, and don't know how much more accurate it can be.

[javelina1]

I've flown "F-16" style now for many years. I'm sticking with it. My keyboard is centered, and I have a left and right mouse. (Rather a right sided mouse, and using a left sided logitech track ball thingy). working well.

[ctd01]

This is my solution.

 

The board is bought at IKEA as a board for laptops when you are sitting in the sofa. I doubt they have them any longer but any bedboard for having dinner in the bed would manage.

 

I have put a big mouse mat on it with glue, so I can also use my mouse on it. The joystick is hard mounted with screws.

 

Works very well in VR. I just place myself in the seat and put the board on my legs. Very easy to handle.

[SpeedStick]

Hope it's okey that I semi-hijack this thread?

 

This is my experience as well. Most people who are recommending center mounted with extension have never used a force sensing stick before, and don't know how much more accurate it can be.

 

I've flown "F-16" style now for many years. I'm sticking with it...

 

I've tried almost every possible combos, including several different center-extended sticks, and my conclusion is side force sensing stick is the best...

 

I'm beginning to think this as well. I've "flown" with quite a few different sticks now. Cheaper x52ish sticks, Warthog, G940 with FFB ect. ect. and now a center mounted BRD-DS with Mongoose grip.

The BRD is nice and all. However, Ranma13 summed it up pretty nice in that we are better at feeling force than range thrown in stick. Something I also felt and miss from using FFB (G940).

 

Hence I think I might invest in a FSSB R3 and this is the reason for me hijacking thread, I have a question.

On there site they now have two versions: FSSB R3 Warthog, FSSB R3 Lightning

 

The warthog is only sold as "ONLY AVAILABLE UNDER REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL USE" AKA b2b im guessing?

But what is the difference between the Lightning and Warthog? Is the Lightning a lower tier than the original FSSB Warthog ones ppl got before? Any info would be appriciated!

(I do apologize and can start my own thread if annoying)

Edited March 19, 2018 by SpeedStick

[Flamin_Squirrel]

I used to use an FSSB R3. It's a great bit of kit, just not for all aircraft, particularly helis IMO (I use a Virpil T50 now). I tried the FSSB side mounted and centre mounted. I found it more difficult to apply force to the stick when side mounted, which in turn made accurate flying more difficult. I found centre mount much better. I'm certainly not dismissing those who prefer side mount, just that it might not work for everyone. Perhaps I'd have gotten used to it if I'd used it more.

 

 

If you can get a mount that allows you to try both that would be ideal of course.

[Mars Exulte]

It's interesting to note that while the F-16, F-22, and F-35 are sidemounted, the Su-35, Su-57, Eurofighter, Gripen, and Rafale all appear to be center mounted. Obviously, it's hard to tell if any of them are force sensing or conventional, but it definitely seems the US and A is the outlier in this particular design choice.

[Ranma13]

Without any control loading, mechanical linkage, or G forces that can tell us what the aircraft is doing, the most important criteria becomes how precisely we can control the aircraft in the absence of these forces. A center-mounted stick with an extension will provide more precision than a stick without an extension due to its longer throw, and a force sensing base will provide more precision than an extension stick due to the force sensors. Whether the stick mounting position matches its position in the real aircraft is a secondary concern.

 

We also don't experience issues that would affect real pilots. We don't need to worry about G forces, we'll never get injured in the right arm, we're not forced to use a center-mounted stick so that the backup mechanical linkage will work, and we can mount our switch boxes and secondary displays wherever we want. Conversely, we have issues that real pilots don't need to worry about, such as keyboard and mouse placement, rolling office chairs, and VR.

 

In summary, just because an aircraft has the stick mounted in a certain position, doesn't mean that it's automatically the best position. The best mounting position, given your specific sim setup, is whatever will give you the best precision when controlling a virtual aircraft.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

...a force sensing base will provide more precision than an extension stick due to the force sensors.

 

:huh: That's a claim I think you need to back up with evidence.

[Ranma13]

Likewise, I can ask you for evidence to prove your standpoint. You'll find that it's impossible unless you can sit someone down and replicate the exact environment that you performed your own evaluations in. And there's always going to be someone who says otherwise, either because they have experience with only one side, or they haven't used the other side enough to formulate a good opinion. It's the same way a race car driver may find his 400 HP car to be faster than a 500 HP one, because he's more familiar with the 400 HP car despite the 500 HP one being objectively faster.

 

There are some things I can offer up though, based on personal experience. Displacement joysticks requires gimbals, and gimbals have some inherent issues. Most of us are familiar with the stiction issue in the Warthog sticks. With the VKB Gunfighter base using the MCG Pro with extension, the joystick has trouble returning to dead center if softer springs are used. With heavier springs, the joystick has no issues returning to dead center, but the extremes of the axes movement start to feel too heavy and the stick becomes very springy. To counter-act the springiness, you can tighten down the dry clutches, but it will start introducing stiction. It's a very fine balance to get everything just right, but even then it doesn't feel 100% right. Other joysticks like the T.16000M are too stiff and the springs can't be changed out, and others like the FFB2 have a lot of center play.

 

With a force sensing base, there are no gimbals, springs, or cams to deal with. To return to dead center, simply stop applying force to the stick. Issues such as stiction and center play are non-existent. Also, because humans are much better at judging force applied rather than distance, it's possible to get very fine control over the amount of pressure being applied, and thus much finer control over the aircraft. With a displacement joystick, you first have to apply enough pressure to overcome the inherent friction in the springs and cams, but a force sensing base starts registering any force applied on it almost immediately. By the time you apply enough force to break static friction in a displacement joystick, that can be enough force to register as much as a 10% movement in the force sensing base.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Likewise, I can ask you for evidence to prove your standpoint.

 

No, you made the claim. I've questioned how you came to that conclusion, so the burden of proof is on you.

 

 

Also, because humans are much better at judging force applied rather than distance, it's possible to get very fine control over the amount of pressure being applied, and thus much finer control over the aircraft.

 

 

Having used both types of stick I'd disagree with that. So I ask again, if you're going to make a statements as a matter of fact, please state your source.

 

 

With a displacement joystick, you first have to apply enough pressure to overcome the inherent friction in the springs and cams, but a force sensing base starts registering any force applied on it almost immediately. By the time you apply enough force to break static friction in a displacement joystick, that can be enough force to register as much as a 10% movement in the force sensing base.

 

 

Use a better stick then. The T50 has no such issues.

[SpeedStick]

No, you made the claim. I've questioned how you came to that conclusion, so the burden of proof is on you.

 

Having used both types of stick I'd disagree with that. So I ask again, if you're going to make a statements as a matter of fact, please state your source.

 

Use a better stick then. The T50 has no such issues.

 

Can we please not start something for something so little and meaningless?

It feels like you are being a bit dishonest in your interpretation, of what I'm pretty sure is not what he meant. Yes, it can be read out of context that "Force sensing is better than a "gimbal" stick, which would of course be wrong since that depends on sensor used. But as he also explained, all things considered, force sensing is probably more accurate when actually used. But of course people can prefer other ways to control their aircraft and be more proficient that way.

 

Anyway I'm guessing neither of you know the difference between R3 Lightning and R3 Warthog?

Edited March 20, 2018 by SpeedStick

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Anyway I'm guessing neither of you know the difference between R3 Lightning and R3 Warthog?

 

The FSSB R3 LIghting is the evolution of the FSSB R3, with the same high quality force sensor we have improved the electronic system...

 

Looks like the lightning is an upgrade of the original R3, with some additional features. Basically if you're interested, just get that and don't worry about the warthog version (at least that's my conclusion).

[Ranma13]

No, you made the claim. I've questioned how you came to that conclusion, so the burden of proof is on you.

 

You missed the point. Just as it's impossible for me to show you my proof unless you came over to my house and gave me several hours of your time, it's impossible for you to show me how the T50 is better than a force sensing base. In either case, this conversation is one step away from personal attacks, and it's neither my job nor my interest to convince you otherwise. If you like your T50, then I'm happy for you.

 

I'm guessing neither of you know the difference between R3 Lightning and R3 Warthog?

 

I haven't researched much into the Warthog version since it's not available for consumer purchase, but as I understand it, the Warthog is the military version and can stand up to more duty cycles than the Lighting version, whereas the Lighting version adds a LED and possibly additional features. You won't be missing out on anything by picking up the Lighting version (not like you have a choice either way :)).

[SinusoidDelta]

I think there are some misconceptions about force sensing being discussed here but I’ll leave it go.

 

Here are the specs on the lightning:

http://realsimulator.com/html/fssb_r3_lighting.html

[Vatikus]

With a force sensing base, there are no gimbals, springs, or cams to deal with. To return to dead center, simply stop applying force to the stick. Issues such as stiction and center play are non-existent. Also, because humans are much better at judging force applied rather than distance, it's possible to get very fine control over the amount of pressure being applied, and thus much finer control over the aircraft. With a displacement joystick, you first have to apply enough pressure to overcome the inherent friction in the springs and cams, but a force sensing base starts registering any force applied on it almost immediately. By the time you apply enough force to break static friction in a displacement joystick, that can be enough force to register as much as a 10% movement in the force sensing base.

Why F16, etc. use force sensors has only a little to do with what you had said. The main reason to use force sensor is when you have too small to be practicable positional displacement. We, humans, are not as good at judging force applied as position and this is the reason why F16 got that small movement and why all plane sticks which use force sensors have positional feedback and also the main reason why Saitek joystick failed so badly.

And.. the breakout force in mechanical pilot stick is not the byproduct of being less optimal design but is actually the design choice to help minimize PIO, and indeed is also a feature of a real F16 stick...

Overall, I would strongly suggest you to read some paper on the control and artificial feel design for aircraft. Plenty of very good free material is available on the net.

[SpeedStick]

He never was referring to the real F-16...? He's talking about stiction and centerplay ect. all of which has nothing to to with the real thing.

 

What he is saying is in other words, all displacement sticks has to have something centering it and applying force, Springs and cams ect. In order to breake the centering forces you have to use x amount of force tp move the stick which pulls on the spring and moves cams ect. Every small piece adds friction and mechanic latency, oscilations ect.... or something. Somebody smart here probably even knows the mathematic formula for this or whatever...

I think his theory is (and mine too) that with the force sensing stick you can make a finger light touch of force but also apply a couple of pounds of force extremely accurately. But some may of course still prefer to use cams and springs.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

You missed the point. Just as it's impossible for me to show you my proof unless you came over to my house and gave me several hours of your time, it's impossible for you to show me how the T50 is better than a force sensing base. In either case, this conversation is one step away from personal attacks...

 

I didn't miss the point. In fact you've just reiterated my point above: you can't prove which one is better either way, as you said. That's why when you claimed the force sensing stick was better as if it was a matter of fact, I asked you to back it up. That's all I was asking.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

He never was referring to the real F-16...? He's talking about stiction and centerplay ect. all of which has nothing to to with the real thing.

 

What he is saying is in other words, all displacement sticks has to have something centering it and applying force, Springs and cams ect. In order to breake the centering forces you have to use x amount of force tp move the stick which pulls on the spring and moves cams ect. Every small piece adds friction and mechanic latency, oscilations ect.... or something. Somebody smart here probably even knows the mathematic formula for this or whatever...

I think his theory is (and mine too) that with the force sensing stick you can make a finger light touch of force but also apply a couple of pounds of force extremely accurately. But some may of course still prefer to use cams and springs.

 

The real F/A-18C uses a displacement stick with springs to centre it, so if it's good enough for the real thing it's good enough for me!:joystick::thumbup:

[SpeedStick]

Might very well be, but it does not behave like my BRD or your VKB/Virpil or whatever your have, I´m pretty sure.

[Vatikus]

He never was referring to the real F-16...? He's talking about stiction and centerplay ect. all of which has nothing to to with the real thing.

 

I think his theory is (and mine too) that with the force sensing stick you can make a finger light touch of force but also apply a couple of pounds of force extremely accurately. But some may of course still prefer to use cams and springs.

I was referring to the real thing to show that theory of yours does not hold in real life. F16 is a very nice example of how such hypothesis (it had fixed stick on its birth) was proven wrong, and why force sensing alone (while being very accurate sensor) does not work well with human operator when it comes to flying an aircraft.

 

Might very well be, but it does not behave like my BRD or your VKB/Virpil or whatever your have, I´m pretty sure.

That is obvious... however the greatest difference is that in real life, the force you have on max deflection on your BRD/VKB/Virpil, etc. is just a breakout force to start moving the real stick :)

[Ranma13]

The F16's side stick moves 0.178 inches at max deflection (31 lb of force), and only when you're pulling it...

 

A tiny bit of movement was added to the stick because pilots didn't like the rock hard feeling that the original stick had. It's the difference between gripping a metal rod and feeling it bend a little when you apply force on it, and gripping a concrete rod and have it not budge at all. They added a bit of flex in order to enhance the feeling in the hand.

Edited March 21, 2018 by Ranma13

[Vatikus]

^^^ to add... ie problem of fixed stick was also tendency to add unintentional roll command when pulling

Edited March 21, 2018 by Vatikus

[SpeedStick]

I was referring to the real thing to show that theory of yours does not hold in real life. F16 is a very nice example of how such hypothesis (it had fixed stick on its birth) was proven wrong, and why force sensing alone (while being very accurate sensor) does not work well with human operator when it comes to flying an aircraft.

 

That is obvious... however the greatest difference is that in real life, the force you have on max deflection on your BRD/VKB/Virpil, etc. is just a breakout force to start moving the real stick :)

 

Wait, what? I am well aware of the famous history of the F-16 stick and the changes made, as most of us here probably are. I really don't follow your reasoning. I find very little of this applicable to argument, that Force sensing might be better compromise for arm-chair pilots when it comes to accuracy-realism.

 

Compare it to TIR vs VR in DCS. TIR is probably demonstrably better in many aspects (higher res, a lot easier to spot, turn rate, Fov, around), but VR is more realistic so easier to land, fly formation ect. In the end its a "feels" thing I guess. Honeslty I don't care enough to continue this discussion anyway. You can have the last word, or whatever.

 

If anyone wants to get rid of their FSSB R3 give me a shout.