draconus Posted October 23, 2019 Posted October 23, 2019 Fuel flow is a good indicator, but when I'm coming over the top in a fight and just want military power I don't like having to look, or listen. 1. Fuel flow does not indicate the AB use afaik. 2. During the fight you don't have to be any exact in the power setting. There are still unanswered questions from this thread about throttle modeling: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=251919 Is it really like in the manual (half of throttle range is AB - from the MIL position to over the MAX) or ingame (10% of throttle range for AB - from MAX position to the end)? Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX4070S Quest 3 T16000M VPC CDT-VMAX TFRP FC3 F-14A/B F-15E CA SC NTTR PG Syria
bonesvf103 Posted October 23, 2019 Posted October 23, 2019 It wouldn't be such a big deal to me if there were a high-quality throttle with a detent you can adjust to exactly match the F-14's in-game. But the Warthog, with its unnecessary weight, cheap internals, and useless TDC slew, can hardly be called "high-quality." And Virpil has since discontinued any version of its throttle with a detent. I loved the Suncom F-15E Talon HOTAS. The throttle was a replica of the F-15E throttle (as was the stick) AND you got throttle detents in it. Programming was a breeze too. I have several but they are Win98 vintage so they work on PS/2 and a USB converter like Rockfire doesn't really work well with it. v6, boNes "Also, I would prefer a back seater over the extra gas any day. I would have 80 pounds of flesh to eat and a pair of glasses to start a fire." --F/A-18 Hornet pilot
lunaticfringe Posted October 23, 2019 Posted October 23, 2019 Is it really like in the manual (half of throttle range is AB - from the MIL position to over the MAX) or ingame (10% of throttle range for AB - from MAX position to the end)? The manual is a representation of the travel in the quadrant. If you shift your head over the throttle, you'll see said illustration is very much the case. Half way up you bang the gate, and have to essentially downshift into blower. But unlike the F-14A, there aren't specifically discernible zones in the AB. If the throttle axes were represented the same as the airframe, we'd have well less than half range for working out if idle and burner on a consumer sized throw, when there is much less actual analog gradation in the AB range.
lunaticfringe Posted October 23, 2019 Posted October 23, 2019 I loved the Suncom F-15E Talon HOTAS. The throttle was a replica of the F-15E throttle (as was the stick) AND you got throttle detents in it. The throttle detents are more like polite suggestions. Having used a lot of gear over the years, I decided that in lieu of a throttle with an appreciably long throw coming to market anytime soon I'd go back to a Suncom TFS converted to USB and a full switch replacement rather than be disappointed with the current crop. I was able to refurbish the slide pots to a degree that a 12 bit processing board on the Arduino doesn't see any appreciable noise, and military grade switches beat anything else. But it's still a creaky TM knockoff monstrosity from a bygone era. If WinWing doesn't get off their duff and release their Taurus throttle standalone by the time I get a 3D printer in the new year, I'm going simply engineer the long throw mechanics myself and be done with it.
captain_dalan Posted October 23, 2019 Posted October 23, 2019 I also use the sound as an indicator, namely the click and the blowing. Not ideal yeah, but it's better then no feedback at all. Unless until someone makes more user friendly throttle segments. Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache, F4U Corsair, WWII Assets Pack
draconus Posted October 23, 2019 Posted October 23, 2019 If the throttle axes were represented the same as the airframe, we'd have well less than half range for working out if idle and burner on a consumer sized throw, when there is much less actual analog gradation in the AB range. So you confirm that it's not modeled correctly. Doesn't it bother you that MIL power is not at MIL detent? I'd be fine with the smaller range of throttle but even using curves won't give me the correct throttle positions in game. Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX4070S Quest 3 T16000M VPC CDT-VMAX TFRP FC3 F-14A/B F-15E CA SC NTTR PG Syria
lunaticfringe Posted October 23, 2019 Posted October 23, 2019 Doesn't it bother you that MIL power is not at MIL detent? Not remotely. Behind the boat, behind the tanker, flying cruise formation, I want the granularity over something more than an inch and a half of travel, when 90% of my flying day is spent in that region. Afterburner is essentially an on-off affair, with very little time spent trying to find something "just right". If everyone was running a throttle with a large, realistic throw length, losing half of it with a perfectly 1:1 realization of the stop at half throw isn't a big deal (although the complaints about detents now being too far away would be just as intense). Instead, people are working with two and three inch throw throttles. The flexibility goes away, and it's far less comfortable. So maximizing where the real work of flying in lieu of the realities of what people are working with is fine with me.
S. Low Posted October 24, 2019 Posted October 24, 2019 No one has officially confirmed that the throttle behavior not matching the throttle markings or throttle diagram is on purpose or not. No one has given me a solid answer. The real life throttle behaves exactly like the sim throttle. Off to idle (short travel), idle to mil (long travel), ab to max (short travel). The markings on the sim throttle and on the throttle diagram in the manual do not even remotely match this behavior. Most people thought I was wrong, then once they realized I'm right, they said it doesn't matter (I'm not bothered by this, just showing the confusion). I haven't found a real life photo of the throttle zoomed in enough to verify that the sim markings are correct. But I assume they match the real aircraft, just not the behavior. So my best guess is this: the meaning of the phrase "military power" has changed over the years, and during the time that the f14 was being developed, the phrase was probably in a transitional state that referred to non-afterburner thrust. Then the phrase changed shortly thereafter to mean max dry thrust. No point in changing the markings on the throttle. That's my best guess
draconus Posted October 24, 2019 Posted October 24, 2019 (edited) No. Definition is clear. Markings are right. The throttle power settings does not match it in game. For confirmation read #28 & #32. NATOPS is full of references to the MIL position in lots of procedures so it cannot be some random middle throttle setting. Edited October 24, 2019 by draconus Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX4070S Quest 3 T16000M VPC CDT-VMAX TFRP FC3 F-14A/B F-15E CA SC NTTR PG Syria
S. Low Posted October 24, 2019 Posted October 24, 2019 (edited) The in-game throttle function is correct. "MIL" power is reached near the top of the throttle travel path. There is video of a real f-14 cockpit and a pilot demonstrating the throttle movement, and says that it is "MIL" power when pushed to the top of the travel path at the detent, then the afterburner is a very small travel to the top. ( ). Edit: In fact, after looking at this more closely, though the quality is poor, it seems the throttle marks say MAX or MIL at the detent, and not in the middle. Maybe HB modeled the throttle markings and diagram incorrectly? Edit 2: I can't get over how poorly placed the HSD is in reference to the flight stick. How do they see that screen? lol The markings on the throttle don't match this, as they show "MIL" power at the middle of the travel path. The diagram doesn't match this, as it shows "MIL" power at the middle of the travel path. My question was always "why not?" I thought it was a phrase etymology/etiology issue. Edited October 24, 2019 by Relic
draconus Posted October 25, 2019 Posted October 25, 2019 The in-game throttle function is correct. "MIL" power is reached near the top of the throttle travel path. There is video of a real f-14 cockpit and a pilot demonstrating the throttle movement, and says that it is "MIL" power when pushed to the top of the travel path at the detent, then the afterburner is a very small travel to the top. ( ). Edit: In fact, after looking at this more closely, though the quality is poor, it seems the throttle marks say MAX or MIL at the detent, and not in the middle. Maybe HB modeled the throttle markings and diagram incorrectly? Edit 2: I can't get over how poorly placed the HSD is in reference to the flight stick. How do they see that screen? lol The markings on the throttle don't match this, as they show "MIL" power at the middle of the travel path. The diagram doesn't match this, as it shows "MIL" power at the middle of the travel path. My question was always "why not?" I thought it was a phrase etymology/etiology issue. Again, slowly. The 3D model and graphical MIL mark in our Tomcat matches both the diagram and RL aircraft (NATOPS confirmed, video confirmed), so the MIL mark really is around the middle of the throttle range, and the AB range is rather big. But the ingame engines get to AB only around the MAX mark at the end of the throttle range and at the MIL mark we only get some middle RPM like 50% - which is wrong but may well be intentional to let users more freedom in the range they use the most. And there is no phrasing issue. MIL is military power - maximum dry thrust. Flight stick is currently wrongly placed too (too much forward) - we're waiting for correction. Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX4070S Quest 3 T16000M VPC CDT-VMAX TFRP FC3 F-14A/B F-15E CA SC NTTR PG Syria
S. Low Posted October 25, 2019 Posted October 25, 2019 Either I'm blind or I dunno.. I see that video and he has the throttle nearly all the way forward for mil power. But you see that video and say he has throttle halfway for mil. Perhaps you're right. Certainly doesn't look like that in the video, but I've been wrong plenty of times
draconus Posted October 25, 2019 Posted October 25, 2019 Either I'm blind or I dunno.. I see that video and he has the throttle nearly all the way forward for mil power. But you see that video and say he has throttle halfway for mil. What I see: he moves over to idle about 1", then about 4" to the MIL detent - "around" halfway, then about 3" to the max AB. Look at his thumb. No, I'm not going to make screenshots and measurements... I'm NATOPS believer. Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX4070S Quest 3 T16000M VPC CDT-VMAX TFRP FC3 F-14A/B F-15E CA SC NTTR PG Syria
S. Low Posted October 25, 2019 Posted October 25, 2019 I may measure it later. I'll say though that it would make sense that they've modeled it weirdly. If it's true that they do it this way to accommodate being a "virtual pilot" with no detents, in my experience it isn't helpful because they've spread the dry thrust across too much travel giving the jet a sluggish feeling when its supposed to feel powerful and responsive (I think?). Does that make sense? Thinking out loud I guess lol. If you're right then I feel like they should correct the throttle to match the real life one. There's a lot of travel in the throttle that feels like it gives next to no power, which can be a little difficult in formation or landing imo (novice opinion).
draconus Posted October 25, 2019 Posted October 25, 2019 If you're right then I feel like they should correct the throttle to match the real life one. There's a lot of travel in the throttle that feels like it gives next to no power, which can be a little difficult in formation or landing imo (novice opinion). I for one would very much appreciate it at least as another special option but I can understand how many users would not like it - like was said in #32. Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX4070S Quest 3 T16000M VPC CDT-VMAX TFRP FC3 F-14A/B F-15E CA SC NTTR PG Syria
S. Low Posted October 25, 2019 Posted October 25, 2019 I for one would very much appreciate it at least as another special option but I can understand how many users would not like it - like was said in #32. He makes a good point. I think the difference in experience for me may be in using the TWCS throttle (I think that's the acronym), which is a glide/slider throttle with a lot of travel. Perhaps when I upgrade to the rhino I'll want the throttle behavior like it is now.
key_stroked Posted October 26, 2019 Author Posted October 26, 2019 However since I feel this is important to you guys, we'll be happy to take a second look. Yes please. This is a huge deal for me. My throttle has no detent, and I frequently find myself in AB when I just want 100% RPM with no blower. Thank you for looking into it!
Recommended Posts