Test flying by chords(!) and not visual cues only

[jonfog]

A suggestion for the developers that shouldn't be to hard to try out.

The main problem with any PC simulator today is that it relies to much on visual cues only, whereas in real life you would feel forces acting upon you, and thus give feedback of whats happening.

From what I understand, see clip below, you feel how the aircraft moves before you actually see it. That's why it's so hard to hover in a chopper or taking off in a Spitfire.

And in a similar way when you fly a warbird, you can judge the speed by how stiff the controls get.

Now there is some expensive solutions to this, motion platforms and once upon a time force-feedback joysitcks, but how to get feedback to the masses?

Well what's built in today is sound, so why not move the sensory input to the ears?

For movement we need a cue in the 6DOF. If you grab a say Emaj13 chord from music theory you have six notes that can be mapped to the 6DOF. The volume of each note would then match the acceleration in a given axis. For negative values you could shift the note down a halfstep.

In this way you would be able to fly withour having to look at your instruments all the time and wonder if you're decelerating or not.

For control stiffness you could have a hearbeat that goes upp as you start to press the rudder or stick hard. And maybe the input of your joystick shouldn't map to the axis in question, but would be an indication of how hard you're pushing. Now as you get tired the actual axis input would decrease, you cannot yank and bank forever without resting. In outher word a stamina factor would be considered.

Or maybe we could use the "blackout" effect that exists today but use another colour?

All this would add a lot of sounds, but maybe not more than having music in the background. 

This shouldn't be to hard to program since the movement is already calculated in the sim. The sound engine is there too, so really nothing new.

Well this is somewhat wild but I do think it would add a critical part that is lacking today.

 

[Lace]

VR solves many of the issues.  The addition of depth perception makes up for a lot of feel.

I'm not convinced by your suggestion - I'm sure I can't distinguish six different notes playing at the same time and translate that into meaningful data on how the aircraft is performing at that particular moment.  Maybe you can, but I'm no musician.  I'll just stick with a glance at the HUD or gauges thanks.

Also, there is a reason pilots are trained to rely on instruments and visual cues, rather than feel.  Even in VFR conditions your sense of balance can be tricked - google Somatogravic illusion for an example.  

[Mars Exulte]

1 hour ago, Lace said:

Also, there is a reason pilots are trained to rely on instruments and visual cues, rather than feel. 

  Pilots relying on ''feel'' and disregarding what their instruments are telling them is one of the leading causes of fatalities in flight. Sukhoi lost an airliner full of people (while attempting to sell said airliner to said people) because the pilot decided to wing it and disregard his instruments telling him there was a mountain in front of him. Also a F-16 guy in a recent interview that described getting so disoriented he didn't know up from down and lawndarted into the ocean.

  We're not missing THAT much by not have feel.

[Cmptohocah]

3 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

  Pilots relying on ''feel'' and disregarding what their instruments are telling them is one of the leading causes of fatalities in flight....

One of the reasons why US air force does not train dog-fighting in simulators is precisely absence of all the cues that can't be simulated properly on a computer. We are missing most of these cues in our sim also.

[SharpeXB]

54 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

We are missing most of these cues in our sim also

Yeah but trying to simulate them with music is ridiculous

[Tippis]

3 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah but trying to simulate them with music is ridiculous

Nope.

[jonfog]

Yeah, I agree that it might be ridiculous. But why not try? You don't need any new hardware and all the pieces should already be in the software. So the code to implement this should not be too hard to do.

Also for the idea of a chord is that music is something we humans tend to like, even if we have no clue why. We''re in some way neurologically prepared for it. Anyone here that doesn't listen to music?

But the main problem is (as told in the video, also by youtuber "Mover" in another video) the lack of feedback. And I think Casmo TV (a real chopper guy) also said this.
So how do we simulate the forces acting upon your body and joystick and pedals?

11 hours ago, Cmptohocah said:

One of the reasons why US air force does not train dog-fighting in simulators is precisely absence of all the cues that can't be simulated properly on a computer. We are missing most of these cues in our sim also.

Exactly. But we don't wan't a simulator of a real "USAF simulato"r where you're not supposed to dogfight.

[jonfog]

The Casmo TV video where he mentions the lack of "seat of the pants"...

 

[SharpeXB]

4 hours ago, jonfog said:

Yeah, I agree that it might be ridiculous. But why not try?

Because it would be a waste of development resources. Nobody wants to hear some dissonant warbling tone in their ears constantly while playing the game. 

[Dunx]

Yes, please be cautious, and do your research.

Noise can cause permanent hearing damage - speaking from experience

[THERION]

On 12/5/2021 at 12:54 PM, jonfog said:

A suggestion for the developers that shouldn't be to hard to try out.

The main problem with any PC simulator today is that it relies to much on visual cues only, whereas in real life you would feel forces acting upon you, and thus give feedback of whats happening.

From what I understand, see clip below, you feel how the aircraft moves before you actually see it. That's why it's so hard to hover in a chopper or taking off in a Spitfire.

And in a similar way when you fly a warbird, you can judge the speed by how stiff the controls get.

Now there is some expensive solutions to this, motion platforms and once upon a time force-feedback joysitcks, but how to get feedback to the masses?

Well what's built in today is sound, so why not move the sensory input to the ears?

For movement we need a cue in the 6DOF. If you grab a say Emaj13 chord from music theory you have six notes that can be mapped to the 6DOF. The volume of each note would then match the acceleration in a given axis. For negative values you could shift the note down a halfstep.

In this way you would be able to fly withour having to look at your instruments all the time and wonder if you're decelerating or not.

For control stiffness you could have a hearbeat that goes upp as you start to press the rudder or stick hard. And maybe the input of your joystick shouldn't map to the axis in question, but would be an indication of how hard you're pushing. Now as you get tired the actual axis input would decrease, you cannot yank and bank forever without resting. In outher word a stamina factor would be considered.

Or maybe we could use the "blackout" effect that exists today but use another colour?

All this would add a lot of sounds, but maybe not more than having music in the background. 

This shouldn't be to hard to program since the movement is already calculated in the sim. The sound engine is there too, so really nothing new.

Well this is somewhat wild but I do think it would add a critical part that is lacking today.

 

 

This is a general problem in flight simulators - no matter how good your setup actually is. Some have FFB devices which might give some cues, but still
it is not very convincing.

But did you try out the JetSeat? This device gives you a lot of tactile cues (well it's actually a rumble/vibration) and helps a lot to compensate the lack of
forces and feedback you would actually have in an airplane, car or whatever you think of.

The JetSeat is completely configurable with the free software for DCS. I do have this device and it helps me a lot. Also with this device I learned to fly clean
too, meaning to have your plane trimmed and glide well. Here you will get some further information:
 

For the free software:
 

 

Cheers

[jonfog]

46 minutes ago, THERION said:

 

This is a general problem in flight simulators - no matter how good your setup actually is. Some have FFB devices which might give some cues, but still
it is not very convincing.

But did you try out the JetSeat? This device gives you a lot of tactile cues (well it's actually a rumble/vibration) and helps a lot to compensate the lack of
forces and feedback you would actually have in an airplane, car or whatever you think of.

The JetSeat is completely configurable with the free software for DCS. I do have this device and it helps me a lot. Also with this device I learned to fly clean
too, meaning to have your plane trimmed and glide well. Here you will get some further information:
 

For the free software:
 

 

Cheers

Interesting, I'll look into that.

 

Found the export.lua might have all the data needed, which makes sense since cockpit builders need much of the same information. Guess I have to compose a MIDI track with 3 notes and varying velocity to get an idea of how it would sound like. TacView should have the info too. 

[Tippis]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

Nobody wants to hear some dissonant warbling tone in their ears constantly while playing the game.

This is very obviously false. Don't generalise from your irrelevant and uninformed opinion.

Also, why is it a waste of development resources? You use that argument a lot but you never mange to make a cogent, coherent, or even remotely intelligent case for it. Is it just that you wouldn't use this feature, whereas those efforts you deem not wasteful are the ones you'd benefit from? Because if so, your line of reasoning for wasteful resource allocation is also incoherent, irrelevant, and uninformed.