Please make Radar elevation usable with rotary an option

[kengou]

If the antenna elevation was bound as an absolute axis, this would also change how the TPOD zoom is coded and interacted with. It isn't how the real jet is operated, and I don't see why people have a problem with using two buttons for up/down, it works perfectly.

[falcon_120]

If the antenna elevation was bound as an absolute axis, this would also change how the TPOD zoom is coded and interacted with. It isn't how the real jet is operated, and I don't see why people have a problem with using two buttons for up/down, it works perfectly.

The only problem is the unused axis that would work perfectly in that fashion. Those 2 buttons would be very handy for me for sim related topics like ptt in discord and SRS, or centering my VR view to give some examples...

 

Again, please look at it like this: is does not have any advantage/disadvantage its just an interface option.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[kengou]

The only problem is the unused axis that would work perfectly in that fashion. Those 2 buttons would be very handy for me for sim related topics like ptt in discord and SRS, or centering my VR view to give some examples...

 

Again, please look at it like this: is does not have any advantage/disadvantage its just an interface option.

Personally I don't care about advantage, I don't even play multiplayer, I'm looking at this as a realistic implementation. The Avionics in the Hornet weren't designed around an absolute axis in either radar elevation or TPOD. To implement this ED would have to "invent" behavior that isn't in the real jet.

[lxsapper]

Personally I don't care about advantage, I don't even play multiplayer, I'm looking at this as a realistic implementation. The Avionics in the Hornet weren't designed around an absolute axis in either radar elevation or TPOD. To implement this ED would have to "invent" behavior that isn't in the real jet.

 

Every body realizes that, and yet hardly any body is flying with a replica of the real F-18 HOTAS, so what? THis shouldn't even be that hard to code. Don't forget you are not flying the real F-18 eighter but a simulation made to "appear" that it's working like te real Jet. The way the internal code of the simulation works is not the same as the real jet works. And yet I'd even be willing to bet that if they wanted to redesign the HOTAS on the real jet and put a non spring loaded pot there, it would not be hard to program the code for it eighter. ED already implemnted the non-realistic TDC slew option because some of our HOTAS have limitations.

[_mu110_]

It seems that since ED made this sort of concession with the realistic TDC option and "invented behavior" as you put it, people expect them to do the same for other aspects of the jet.

[Pikey]

+1 for absolute control, which would include sliders. This has been asked for before. Why would that change the TPOD zoom? Do I misunderstand soemthing perhaps? If an absolute value, the antennae goes to a precise point. How can you tell by feel if it's centered if its not absolute? This is something that the Mirage 2k has, you set an elevation and it stops moving. In the Hornet, the moment if you move the control, the antennae keeps moving until you centralise the controls and pushing in one direction is like an acceleration. But if you try to use a slider with that, it means you chase around an uncentred elevation point and cannot use the button/switch/slider by feel to know if it's centered. With a key it's a seperate control method surely of up 1 notch or down 1 notch?

[falcon_120]

Personally I don't care about advantage, I don't even play multiplayer, I'm looking at this as a realistic implementation. The Avionics in the Hornet weren't designed around an absolute axis in either radar elevation or TPOD. To implement this ED would have to "invent" behavior that isn't in the real jet.

The chunk of code for this is already done. The f16 was wrongly behaving like the hornet (radar elevation) during the first 2 weeks of EA. They quickly fixed it to let it bound to a rotary. You could say the lines of code are 90% there, just need to change the links to a different object.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[Hippo]

+1

 

 

It beggars belief that this even has to be requested. Should've been in place from the beginning.

[Bunny Clark]

If the antenna elevation was bound as an absolute axis, this would also change how the TPOD zoom is coded and interacted with.

Apart from the "not how the real jet works" crap, it is an interesting conundrum. I wonder if it would be possible to make the axis behave as an absolute controller for the radar and relative controller for the FLIR? Or else I suppose when set to absolute the axis will just map to absolute zoom position for the FLIR, which probably wouldn't be that bad.

[Bruce_D]

I have programmed the 3 rotarys of my joystick to press a button instead of use a axis.

 

In one of then I use the radar elevation and works perfectly.

 

Check your joystick's software to see this possibility. I know it is possible to do that with the saitek software.

[Hippo]

Apart from the "not how the real jet works" crap, it is an interesting conundrum. I wonder if it would be possible to make the axis behave as an absolute controller for the radar and relative controller for the FLIR? Or else I suppose when set to absolute the axis will just map to absolute zoom position for the FLIR, which probably wouldn't be that bad.

 

I take your point, but this is a game and there is a multitude of physical controller options out there. It is up to the developer to try to be flexible and accommodate these options.

 

Mapping the ant elev and FLIR zoom to one axis does not have to be the only option - these could be split: ant elev to absolute axis, FLIR zoom to something else (buttons?), and obviously keep what we have now (simulating the control on the F18 HOTAS) as an option as well.

 

An analogue wheel / slider of this type is so common on so many throttles that this assignment should've been offered from the beginning. I find it very strange that this wasn't even considered as it would've been very easy to implement.

Edited February 29, 2020 by Hippo
To remove extra blank lines. Why do these always appear?

[Hippo]

ED had opened that door long time ago with compromises

The reason there are compromises is because most people are sitting in front of a computer screen with consumer game joysticks, a keyboard, and a mouse, playing a computer game, and not in sitting a real F-18 cockpit.

 

Adding another controller binding option is a minor bit of work. Being an option, people can choose to use it according to preference.

Edited February 29, 2020 by Hippo

[Cassiop]

+1 for absolute axis. being able to bind it to button for relative axis makes sense but on an axis, that feel odd

[Lukino81]

I don't know if I can help someone with this problem since I'm starting now with the hornet. I have an x52 pro and I solved this problem by assigning the elevation to the jerky knob in the photo. I then used the saitek software to set those keys as new advanced commands giving each click of the knob a small pressure delay (0.2 seconds if I remember correctly)

[Hippo]

I have an x52 pro and I solved this problem by assigning the elevation to the jerky knob in the photo.

 

That's also what I do. But there's an unused analogue wheel on my throttle that I would much prefer to use for this.

 

There isn't actually a problem here. This is a wish list forum, and the request is for a feature that should've been in place from day one, and which would be easy to implement. Easier and much more useful than putting in a fruit machine for 1st April.

[Lukino81]

That's also what I do. But there's an unused analogue wheel on my throttle that I would much prefer to use for this.

 

There isn't actually a problem here. This is a wish list forum, and the request is for a feature that should've been in place from day one, and which would be easy to implement. Easier and much more useful than putting in a fruit machine for 1st April.

 

yes I understand what you mean.

we hope they add this functionality

[CoBlue]

ED please! can we have antenna elevation as an absolute axis?

[speed-of-heat]

+1

[Phil C6]

+1

[fridgedigga]

+1

 

In the meantime, I have a decent-ish solution for X56 users.

 

I set the pinky scroll wheel on the throttle to RADAR UP/DOWN (= and - keys by default in-game) ONLY on release with a 0.05s delay in the profiler.

 

Setting it "on-press" is an issue since the buttons themselves tend to get stuck in between scrolls. At least for me.

I added a 0.05s delay since DCS seemed to have a problem registering input with a 0s delay.

 

This requires a good amount of scrolling sometimes but it frees up some buttons.

If someone knows of any better alternative solution, please share.

 

Edited May 23, 2020 by fridgedigga

[Jonny]

+1 for Absolute Antenna Elevation control.

 

* I have the new Virpil throttle with a dedicated analog axis for antenna elevation, with a center detent (for easily finding the 0 elevation position). It was designed to have an absolute Antenna Elevation binding.

moving the antenna elevation slightly up/down requires me to move the elevation knob out of center detent, decide on my desired antenna elevation acceleration (the further I move it from center detent the higher it will accelerate in the desired direction), and before the antenna reaches the desired elevation (how much before? depends on how much I've accelerated the elevation control movement in the desired direction) I need to bring it back to center detent in order to stop the antenna elevation from moving further in the desired direction. Usually It requires a second run for fine tuning. This takes up so much time and attention that during a combat situation it really throws you off and puts you in a disadvantage.

 

Please ED take the time to fix it.

[Fri13]

This is a bug, and it is related to simulation part, that some people don't seem to understand that we are not emulating something but simulating. And it is the HOTAS controls. Where we need to simulate real function (moving radar altitude angle up and down) and current PC controllers don't have a such functionality as real throttle has.

 

So either we accept that there must be multiple ways to do adjustment (fix bug) like an analog dial that we can set on any absolute position between its range...

 

Or we simply delete the Hornet from ED store as we can't fill the purists ideology demands that we must have a spring loaded dial in throttle.

[Bunny Clark]

This is a bug

It's not a bug, it's functioning exactly as intended. We'd just like an option for it to be able to function differently.

[speed-of-heat]

I could go either way. But the outcome is what we care about not the definition of the problem.

[falcon_120]

I could go either way. But the outcome is what we care about not the definition of the problem.

Yep, please give us that option once and for all.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk