Jump to content

Please add Bindings for Pedal Micro Switches


AeriaGloria

Recommended Posts

In Mi-8 the way the yaw Auto Pilot is programmed makes sense and works, but I believe that this approach makes less sense in Mi-24 for one reason, Dutch roll

Becuase of the 8.5 degree swept wings, the Mi-24 suffers from Dutch roll at speeds greater then 200 kmh and the 16 degrees of anhedral were added to fight this tendency. However the anhedral does not remove it entirely, and for this reason I believe the Yaw AP has a feature it didn’t have in Mi-8 that it might not have if there were no Dutch roll isssues. That feature being when not in heading hold mode, the yaw auto pilot acts as a dampener. A yaw dampener is a crucial feature in many aircraft with Dutch roll tendencies.

I believe you can notice this Dutch roll above 200 kmh, when initiating a turn there is adverse yaw. The inside wing increases lift as the side slip decreases its effective sweep, decreasing the roll force until the sideslip causes the tail to weathervane back into a coordinated turn after about 2-3 seconds, which is the typical Dutch roll period time. I may have some of the specifics of this effect in the Mi-24 wrong, but it is there and noticeable especially without the yaw dampener being fully functional that was designed to combat this. Dutch roll can also be noticeable with nearly any yaw movement at high enough speed 

In the real aircraft, when the micro switches on the pedals are pressed the Yaw AP disengages heading hold and goes into dampening/stabilization mode. In DCS in order to simulate this, when the pedals are within 18% of center the heading hold is activated as if the micro switches are released, and once pedal input passes 18% to either side the micro switches being pressed is simulated and the yaw AP goes into stabilization/dampening mode. 
 

However since this is a helicopter, pedals are not always near center, and sometimes in order to do a coordinated turn the pedals have to be near center. Sometimes this means that when performing a coordinated turn the pedals are close enough to center to stay in heading hold and fight the turn, when the 18% authority of the autopilot is reached the pedals are then trimmed continuing to fight the turn and exacerbate uncoordinated turn tendencies.

In order for the Mi-24 to fly as it was intended and does in real life, I hope that eventually either bindings for the micro switches in the pedals are added for those that wish to use them, and/or something added to special options that allows some control of the yaw AP’s different heading hold and stabilization/dampening functions. 
 

I know of many people since release that have each wanted the micro switches to be available bindings. I do not know how hard it would be to implement, but it would make a lot of people happy and make the module fly closer to the real thing


Edited by AeriaGloria
  • Like 8

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did you get this 18% number? Are you sure that's correct? I thought that the microswitches that disable heading hold are activated as soon as the pedals are deflected, and that it doesn't have to be a certain % of deflection? 


Edited by Lurker

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Lurker said:

Where did you get this 18% number? Are you sure that's correct? I thought that the microswitches that disable heading hold are activated as soon as the pedals are deflected, and that it doesn't have to be a certain % of deflection? 

 

It appears that way, but I haven’t tested it in a couple months. 
 

I got the numbers from joystick gremlin, I can turn the yaw AP off and on depending how far the yaw axis is deflected. So I would turn with the yaw AP on and rudder deflection with increasing amount to see at what point did it switch from heading hold(fighting my turn) to dampening/stabilization(fighting only rapid changes in yaw movement settling to neutral as movement becomes consistent). This change between the two modes always happened at 18% deflection

I know what you mean, it appears smaller but surprisingly isn’t. It’s likely that this number was chosen becuase the AP has 18% authority, but that should only be 9% to each side. I haven’t tested Mi-8 to see when heading hold stops, but I think I’ll do it becuase it does seem to be slightly less deflection. 
 

I’ll try testing also Mi-24 again, I wanted to know exactly when it switched modes so I could program my joystick gremlin profile to have the yaw AP in dampener/stabilization mode as much as possible, it automatically turns off yaw AP within that 18% window so it never goes into heading hold and fights my heading changes 

As for real life the micro switches do not care about deflection or change, no matter where pedals are or moved if switches are pressed it’s in dampening mode, if switches released it’s in heading hold. They can be neutral or full one direction, same as in Mi-8 in real life 


Edited by AeriaGloria

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Yaw AP channel, the accuracy of its implementation in DCS and its proper use remains an extremely confusing and convoluted subject to myself and I’m sure many others here.  By my count, since the Hind’s initial early access release, there’ve been ten or more separate threads discussing the subject (and here I’m only talking about in the English forum – there are a few more on the Russian side), making it very difficult for us virtual pilots, both new and old, to try to comprehend what is correct.

Aside from the fact that ED hasn't provided any real explanations yet, one exacerbating factor, I think, is that we all tend to mix up terms and use them interchangeably when really they should be separate and distinct terms representing different phenomena.  To attempt to clear up some of this language ambiguity, It makes sense to me to refer to the real-life pilot operating handbook, a 2011 version of which can be found put out by the Cold War Air Museum in Lancaster, Texas.  Unfortunately it’s not a complete POH, lacking the entire procedures section, but it does cover the systems.  In the ‘Flight Controls’ section, it has the below quotes to say about the Yaw Channel; it took me several reads to really comprehend what’s being said here.  Two important notes: 1) the excerpt below is entirely separate from the 'course control mode operation', which does not require the yaw autopilot channel to be active; 2) I was initially confused by this, but I now believe the '18% control authority' to refer to the autopilot system's separate authority over the flight control surfaces that is distinct from that originating from the pilot's controls.  So although that 18% is all the autopilot controls on its own, it can actually make use of more control authority by directly moving the pedals -- see 3rd bullet point below.

VUAP-1 Autopilot System: Autopilot correction signals are limited to a maximum of 18% of control travel for flight safety in the event of false signals or system failure. The pilot may intervene in control at any time while the autopilot is engaged to make manual corrections by operating the flight controls.”

Yaw Channel Operation: The yaw channel receives signals proportional to the current heading from the flight director system and rate of turn signals from the yaw rate gyro. The yaw channel output signals are sent to the directional flight control servo. If the pilot’s feet are not on the pedals, the autopilot maintains the preset yaw angle, switching the directional flight control servo to displacement mode as needed to introduce large corrections. The speed of pedal movement in displacement mode is controlled by the hydraulic pedal damper in the directional control system. The yaw channel includes a relay which prevents the servo from switching to displacement mode if the pedal damper is disengaged. When the pilot’s feet are on the pedals, the sub-pedal microswitches activate and the yaw channel operates in stabilization mode. The yaw rate signal passes through a low-pass filter to prevent the servo from drifting to the stops while executing manual turns with the yaw channel engaged.”

In bullet form, I read this to be saying:

  • The yaw channel outputs to the directional flight control servo, which can either be in an unnamed ‘preset yaw angle mode’, displacement mode or stabilization mode.

  • Preset yaw angle mode’: the pilot’s feet are off the pedals and the yaw channel’s 18% control authority is sufficient to maintain the ‘preset yaw angle’.

  • Displacement mode: the pilot’s feet are off the pedals and, although not explicitly stated, presumably from the context, ‘displacement mode’ means that the directional flight control servo moves the physical pedals to enable itself to have more than the 18% control travel it is usually given. This requires the pedal damper to be active. 

  • Stabilization mode: the pilot’s feet are on the pedals and thereby activate the sub-pedal microswitches.  Although not explicitly stated, presumably stabilization mode is intended to allow the pilot to change the yaw angle while maintaining stability in the yaw axis.

If all the above are true, then how a user experiences this in the DCS Hind depends not only on how it has been implemented, but also very much on whether their pedals have springs or not.  I’ve not thought through entirely how users with normal springed pedals should experience this, but for those of us like myself who pull the spring off of their pedals when flying helicopters, I think it should ideally work like this if the Yaw Channel is active -- it's quite simple, actually:

  • If pedal input by the player is detected, Yaw AP enters stabilization mode
  • If pedal input is not detected, Yaw AP enters ‘preset yaw angle mode’

Obviously DCS doesn't have the ability to move our pedals, so the displacement mode cannot be easily simulated; or put another way, it could get very confusing if the Yaw AP ends up using more than 18% of its authority but our pedals remain stationary, leading to a situation where we have a mismatch between our pedals' physical location and where the sim calculates they are.  In the worst case, this could cause situations where the player thinks they have more anti-torque authority left before hitting the stops, when in actuality the pedals are closer to the limit.

The only solution I can think of for this situation would be that the displacement mode is simply not modeled, and instead it is assumed that wherever the pilot leaves their physical pedals, they match up with where the in-sim pedals appear to be (with the obvious caveat that the actual modeled position of the control surfaces could vary by up to 18% from where that pedal position would ideally suggest they should be). 

So, after that wall of text ... it seems clearer to me now how what you describe in your opening post indicates that the current implementation only makes sense for users of springed pedals (with that 18% number just being an unrelated coincidence, I think?), because when their pedals are near center, that likely indicates the pilot doesn't intend to change the yaw angle (i.e. their feet are off the pedals) and thus 'preset yaw angle mode' is active; and when they do move the pedals out of the center, the pedals shift to stabilization mode.  But for unsprung pedals that could be at any position when the pilot takes their feet off, you would ideally want stabilization mode to kick in as soon as any movement is detected, regardless of where the pedals are at the time ... which is I guess exactly what you've implemented with your vjoy/joysick gremlin profile, right?

On a separate note -- I've always found it hard to believe that pilots are taught to pull their feet off the pedals (and thus not activate the microswitches) except when they intend to move the pedals.  Is this really how it's done?  I would think that would make normal maneuvering in an Mi-24 extremely tedious, unless the assumption is that the Yaw AP channel doesn't need to be active in anything other than a stable regime of flight.


Edited by GregP
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GregP said:

The Yaw AP channel, the accuracy of its implementation in DCS and its proper use remains an extremely confusing and convoluted subject to myself and I’m sure many others here.  By my count, since the Hind’s initial early access release, there’ve been ten or more separate threads discussing the subject (and here I’m only talking about in the English forum – there are a few more on the Russian side), making it very difficult for us virtual pilots, both new and old, to try to comprehend what is correct.

Aside from the fact that ED hasn't provided any real explanations yet, one exacerbating factor, I think, is that we all tend to mix up terms and use them interchangeably when really they should be separate and distinct terms representing different phenomena.  To attempt to clear up some of this language ambiguity, It makes sense to me to refer to the real-life pilot operating handbook, a 2011 version of which can be found put out by the Cold War Air Museum in Lancaster, Texas.  Unfortunately it’s not a complete POH, lacking the entire procedures section, but it does cover the systems.  In the ‘Flight Controls’ section, it has the below quotes to say about the Yaw Channel; it took me several reads to really comprehend what’s being said here.  Two important notes: 1) the excerpt below is entirely separate from the 'course control mode operation', which does not require the yaw autopilot channel to be active; 2) I was initially confused by this, but I now believe the '18% control authority' to refer to the autopilot system's separate authority over the flight control surfaces that is distinct from that originating from the pilot's controls.  So although that 18% is all the autopilot controls on its own, it can actually make use of more control authority by directly moving the pedals -- see 3rd bullet point below.

VUAP-1 Autopilot System: Autopilot correction signals are limited to a maximum of 18% of control travel for flight safety in the event of false signals or system failure. The pilot may intervene in control at any time while the autopilot is engaged to make manual corrections by operating the flight controls.”

Yaw Channel Operation: The yaw channel receives signals proportional to the current heading from the flight director system and rate of turn signals from the yaw rate gyro]. The yaw channel output signals are sent to the directional flight control servo. If the pilot’s feet are not on the pedals, the autopilot maintains the preset yaw angle, switching the directional flight control servo to displacement mode as needed to introduce large corrections. The speed of pedal movement in displacement mode is controlled by the hydraulic pedal damper in the directional control system. The yaw channel includes a relay which prevents the servo from switching to displacement mode if the pedal damper is disengaged. When the pilot’s feet are on the pedals, the sub-pedal microswitches activate and the yaw channel operates in stabilization mode. The yaw rate signal passes through a low-pass filter to prevent the servo from drifting to the stops while executing manual turns with the yaw channel engaged.”

In bullet form, I read this to be saying:

  • The yaw channel outputs to the directional flight control servo, which can either be in an unnamed ‘preset yaw angle mode’, displacement mode or stabilization mode.

  • Preset yaw angle mode’: the pilot’s feet are off the pedals and the yaw channel’s 18% control authority is sufficient to maintain the ‘preset yaw angle’.

  • Displacement mode: the pilot’s feet are off the pedals and, although not explicitly stated, presumably from the context, ‘displacement mode’ means that the directional flight control servo moves the physical pedals to enable itself to have more than the 18% control travel it is usually given. This requires the pedal damper to be active. 

  • Stabilization mode: the pilot’s feet are on the pedals and thereby activate the sub-pedal microswitches.  Although not explicitly stated, presumably stabilization mode is intended to allow the pilot to change the yaw angle while maintaining stability in the yaw axis.

If all the above are true, then how a user experiences this in the DCS Hind depends not only on how it has been implemented, but also very much on whether their pedals have springs or not.  I’ve not thought through entirely how users with normal springed pedals should experience this, but for those of us like myself who pull the spring off of their pedals when flying helicopters, I think it should ideally work like this if the Yaw Channel is active -- it's quite simple, actually:

  • If pedal input by the player is detected, Yaw AP enters stabilization mode
  • If pedal input is not detected, Yaw AP enters ‘preset yaw angle mode’

Obviously DCS doesn't have the ability to move our pedals, so the displacement mode cannot be easily simulated; or put another way, it could get very confusing if the Yaw AP ends up using more than 18% of its authority but our pedals remain stationary, leading to a situation where we have a mismatch between our pedals' physical location and where the sim calculates they are.  In the worst case, this could cause situations where the player thinks they have more anti-torque authority left before hitting the stops, when in actuality the pedals are closer to the limit.

The only solution I can think of for this situation would be that the displacement mode is simply not modeled, and instead it is assumed that wherever the pilot leaves their physical pedals, they match up with where the in-sim pedals appear to be (with the obvious caveat that the actual modeled position of the control surfaces could vary by up to 18% from where that pedal position would ideally suggest they should be). 

So, after that wall of text ... it seems clearer to me now how what you describe in your opening post indicates that the current implementation only makes sense for users of springed pedals (with that 18% number just being an unrelated coincidence, I think?), because when their pedals are near center, that likely indicates the pilot doesn't intend to change the yaw angle (i.e. their feet are off the pedals) and thus 'preset yaw angle mode' is active; and when they do move the pedals out of the center, the pedals shift to stabilization mode.  But for unsprung pedals that could be at any position when the pilot takes their feet off, you would ideally want stabilization mode to kick in as soon as any movement is detected, regardless of where the pedals are at the time ... which is I guess exactly what you've implemented with your vjoy/joysick gremlin profile, right?

On a separate note -- I've always found it hard to believe that pilots are taught to pull their feet off the pedals (and thus not activate the microswitches) except when they intend to move the pedals.  Is this really how it's done?  I would think that would make normal maneuvering in an Mi-24 extremely tedious, unless the assumption is that the Yaw AP channel doesn't need to be active in anything other than a stable regime of flight.

 

I agree with everything you said. It does appear in game that in displacement/heading hold when 18% authority is exceeded, the pedals are automatically trimmed. I believe this is indicated in the Rcntrl + enter control menu when the yaw channel reaches its limit on displacement/heading hold mode a yellow Cryllic letter appears. I believe this causes issues with running out pedal authority for some users after a lengthy period of flying. 

My vjoy/joystick gremlin profile doesn’t base it off movement, just when the pedals are in the +/-18% zone that triggers displacement/heading hold and turns off yaw AP In that zone. 
 

However, I believe it was here that I spoke with a real Mi-8/24 pilot that said a better way to simulate the switches would be exactly what you say, when pedals are moved it goes into stabilization mode and when input stays the same they are in displacement. However I’m not sure that would work in all cases, imagine a coordinated turn. As you begin turn you change pedal Input and when fully settled with constant bank angle you keep the pedals in one position, presumably in the position that the slip ball is centered. This lack of input would put it in heading hold/displacement thus counteract your turn with opposite pedals and trim them to continue fighting the turn when the 18% limit is reached. That is if I understand you correctly under the hypothesis that if the simulation was modified to base the switching of Yaw AP modes off of movement.

I also used the Cold War museum manual when first having questions about the system, it is the only source I have found with information on Yaw AP.
 

Additionally the real life manual stipulates that Yaw AP should be on from before take off to after landing, so while users not using a joystick gremlin profile like me would benefit from turning it off when maneuvering, it would not be a realistic procedure. I believe it is then in ED’s best interests to change this simulation to make real life procedures function as intended
 

also i do think the 18% boundary or mode switching is either coincidence or perhaps even a mistake where value is supposed to be 9%(for each side). Testing Mi-8 might enlighten us here, if it is 9% or 10% that might show the boundary that displacement/heading hold is activated is too large. 
 

I appreciate your post very much, honestly I should have put this in wishlist but I am very afraid that this may never get attention from ED, I hope that a community manager @NineLine or @BIGNEWY would be able to pass this question along to someone in the team that could then decide if it is worth it for them to change the simulation of the pedal switches to better conform to both real life procedures and the way it is meant to be flown, either by adding pedal switch bindings and their respective functions or something else. After all the yaw AP going to stabilization/displacement mode was designed for a reason whereas Mi-8 has no such feature, im sure for both Dutch roll issues and overall stability

I wonder where did you hear that is operating practice for pilots to only put feet on pedals when moving them? I think I remember a phrase from the real manual that says something along the lines of “it is okay to remove feet from the pedals in Straight and level flight in order to hold the current course.” I will try and find this mention in the Mi-24P manual I have 


Edited by AeriaGloria
  • Like 4

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

My vjoy/joystick gremlin profile doesn’t base it off movement, just when the pedals are in the +/-18% zone that triggers displacement/heading hold and turns off yaw AP In that zone. 

Now that I'm thinking about this some more, this isn't ideal, is it?  Because turning off yaw AP in that region is thereby deactivating both 'preset yaw angle'/displacement/heading hold mode and stabilization mode, when really what you want is to have the yaw AP change mode depending on your intent, as I detail below.

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

However, I believe it was here that I spoke with a real Mi-8/24 pilot that said a better way to simulate the switches would be exactly what you say, when pedals are moved it goes into stabilization mode and when input stays the same they are in displacement. However I’m not sure that would work in all cases, imagine a coordinated turn. As you begin turn you change pedal Input and when fully settled with constant bank angle you keep the pedals in one position, presumably in the position that the slip ball is centered. This lack of input would put it in heading hold/displacement thus counteract your turn with opposite pedals and trim them to continue fighting the turn when the 18% limit is reached. That is if I understand you correctly under the hypothesis that if the simulation was modified to base the switching of Yaw AP modes off of movement.

That's a great point and I stand corrected -- basing the change in mode off of movement alone wouldn't be sufficient.  Instead, the criteria really needs to be 'what is the pilot's intent right now?' Given that all sources seem to agree that the yaw AP should always be on, the question then becomes 'what should it be doing while it's on, and what is it actually doing in DCS right now?'  In order to perform the way it appears to work on the real Hind, what we need is a simple way for the yaw AP to differentiate between a) times when the pilot is manually holding a yaw angle or moving the pedals to a new yaw angle, and b) times when the pilot wants the AP to take over and hold the yaw angle he's selected.  Which again comes back to the microswitches and why they make so much sense, as this is the only way for the yaw AP to 'understand' what is being asked of it, and how (I'm getting it now!) you're right in saying that having this feature on the Hind is absolutely critical.

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

also i do think the 18% boundary or mode switching is either coincidence or perhaps even a mistake where value is supposed to be 9%(for each side). Testing Mi-8 might enlighten us here, if it is 9% or 10% that might show the boundary that displacement/heading hold is activated is too large. 

Well now it makes me wonder whether someone at ED read the real-life manual and saw that 18% number and mistakenly applied it to this effectively deadzone around the center of the pedals. Because as I outlined above, I think overall the current implementation (aside from the actual 18% number) makes sense for users with spinged pedals.  Unfortunately for users with unsprung pedals, it does not (and nor would it on the real helicopter); so, if true, users who are attempting to more accurately simulate a real helicopter pedal movement actually get penalized with a behavior that is unrealistic.

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

I appreciate your post very much, honestly I should have put this in wishlist but I am very afraid that this may never get attention from ED, I hope that a community manager @NineLine or @BIGNEWY would be able to pass this question along to someone in the team that could then decide if it is worth it for them to change the simulation of the pedal switches to better conform to both real life procedures and the way it is meant to be flown, either by adding pedal switch bindings and their respective functions or something else. After all the yaw AP going to stabilization/displacement mode was designed for a reason whereas Mi-8 has no such feature, im sure for both Dutch roll issues and overall stability

I now absolutely agree.  But I guess we should add the caveat that microswitch implementation is only critical for those of us using unsprung pedals -- which I assume you are?  

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

I wonder where did you hear that is operating practice for pilots to only put feet on pedals when moving them? I think I remember a phrase from the real manual that says something along the lines of “it is okay to remove feet from the pedals in Straight and level flight in order to hold the current course.” I will try and find this mention in the Mi-24P manual I have 

I thought I recalled seeing someone, or several people, mention that in one or more of those ten-or-so threads I mentioned above.  Maybe even PilotMi8 in the Russian forum?  I can't quite recall.  But it also just follows logically, if you modify my original words to read 'when moving them or desiring to manually hold a specific angle', which is what I should've written.  If a pilot wants the yaw AP to take over and hold a heading/yaw angle, he'd have to pull his feet off the pedals.  And then whenever he wanted to change the angle, he'd have to put his feet back on to make the adjustment.   Thus you wouldn't keep your feet on unless you were intending to manually hold a yaw angle or change to a new angle.


Edited by GregP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GregP said:

Now that I'm thinking about this some more, this isn't ideal, is it?  Because turning off yaw AP in that region is thereby deactivating both 'preset yaw angle'/displacement/heading hold mode and stabilization mode, when really what you want is to have the yaw AP change mode depending on your intent, as I detail below.

That's a great point and I stand corrected -- basing the change in mode off of movement alone wouldn't be sufficient.  Instead, the criteria really needs to be 'what is the pilot's intent right now?' Given that all sources seem to agree that the yaw AP should always be on, the question then becomes 'what should it be doing while it's on, and what is it actually doing in DCS right now?'  In order to perform the way it appears to work on the real Hind, what we need is a simple way for the yaw AP to differentiate between a) times when the pilot is manually holding a yaw angle or moving the pedals to a new yaw angle, and b) times when the pilot wants the AP to take over and hold the yaw angle he's selected.  Which again comes back to the microswitches and why they make so much sense, as this is the only way for the yaw AP to 'understand' what is being asked of it, and how (I'm getting it now!) you're right in saying that having this feature on the Hind is absolutely critical.

Well now it makes me wonder whether someone at ED read the real-life manual and saw that 18% number and mistakenly applied it to this effectively deadzone around the center of the pedals. Because as I outlined above, I think overall the current implementation (aside from the actual 18% number) makes sense for users with spinged pedals.  Unfortunately for users with unsprung pedals, it does not (and nor would it on the real helicopter); so, if true, users who are attempting to more accurately simulate a real helicopter pedal movement actually get penalized with a behavior that is unrealistic.

I now absolutely agree.  But I guess we should add the caveat that microswitch implementation is only critical for those of us using unsprung pedals -- which I assume you are?  

I thought I recalled seeing someone, or several people, mention that in one or more of those ten-or-so threads I mentioned above.  Maybe even PilotMi8 in the Russian forum?  I can't quite recall.  But it also just follows logically, if you modify my original words to read 'when moving them or desiring to manually hold a specific angle', which is what I should've written.  If a pilot wants the yaw AP to take over and hold a heading/yaw angle, he'd have to pull his feet off the pedals.  And then whenever he wanted to change the angle, he'd have to put his feet back on to make the adjustment.   Thus you wouldn't keep your feet on unless you were intending to manually hold a yaw angle or change to a new angle.

 

Yes. For your first point about my profile yes it isn’t ideal, but it’s better in terms of stable handing then keeping it off. 
 

On unsprung pedals, up until about a month ago I used normal sprung centering pedals. It still mattered to me a great deal becuase no matter where the pedals are I want the stabilization to function at all times like it does in the real helicopter. I don’t want to have to choose between keeping it off or having the heading hold fight me whenever I’m maneuvering and my pedals happen to be near center. I want to be able to attacks runs with its help not throwing me off while it tries to maintain heading.  I want to be able to start or reverse a turn with it dampening the yaw that causes Dutch roll. Regardless of flight envelope or how the pedals center, I think if this goes unaddressed it will be one of the only things hindering use of the module and it’s flying qualities the way they are in real life 

Since a month ago, I added a dampener to my pedals, and while I did not remove the spring I made the dampener extremely strong and reduced the spring force slightly so it still returns to center and has a centering feeling, but does so slowly while I mostly push against the dampener. While it has helped my piloting it has not changed my use of the yaw AP or feelings about it. Wether sprung or springless I feel that it’s important either way. Even without a dampener and with springs, sometimes depending on speed and bank angle you have to have pedals near center to be properly coordinated. A lot of the time especially during attack runs you will need to make small heading corrections or large ones while airspeed and torque and coordination dictate that the pedals be close to center, so I see it as an issue both ways and something that if ED was able to modify in some way could benefit everyone that wishes to make use of your he 24s stability augmentation systems 
 

Before I made my joystick gremlin profile, I compensated by over coordinating turns, I.e using so much pedal that my nose was always skidding toward the inside of the turn, but I hated flying that way in such an imprecise and unreleastic way without the benefits of proper coordinated flight that pilots of any flying machine would follow. 
 

I’m sure to some this sounds like I am asking something that is nit picky or I should have just flown without yaw AP since the beginning and ignore how the yaw dampener improves the flying qualities of the 24 in stability, Dutch roll, adverse yaw, wind/turbulence resistance, even hovering qualities and its ability to smoothen the pilots pedal inputs into a more consistent yaw rate. But I can’t ignore it, it’s part of the beautiful 24’s myriad of amazing systems that make it such an effective machine, and I believe ED is so close to making fly as perfectly as it does in real life, but this one thing is holding us virtual pilots back compared to the real pilots that can just put their feet on the pedals. I realize virtually we make a lot of sacrifices compared to real life, no butt feel for instance, but this is a system that uses a switch, we are so close yet so far from having it work as it does in reality. And systems and procedures are one thing that sim does AMAZINGLY


Edited by AeriaGloria
  • Like 1

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

On unsprung pedals, up until about a month ago I used normal sprung centering pedals. It still mattered to me a great deal becuase no matter where the pedals are I want the stabilization to function at all times like it does in the real helicopter. I don’t want to have to choose between keeping it off or having the heading hold fight me whenever I’m maneuvering and my pedals happen to be near center.

 

This has been my experience as well. It felt like the YAW AP Heading Hold system would fight my inputs when using "normal" pedals with springs in them, when doing small inputs. This also sometimes happened when exiting coordinated turns where if I didn't time it exactly right, the AP heading hold would turn on at the wrong moment and prevent me from returning to a desired course, or in other words I would keep having to correct my course with pedals after every single turn, which felt like something that should not be happening in any kind of helicopter AP system. 

The result was that I now fly without springs in my pedals, and with the AP channel completely turned off. I really hope that someone from ED takes a look at this behavior and implements a solution that would allow us to use this system correctly. (Even at the expense of making it different than in a real HIND since we do not have microswitches in our pedals)


Edited by Lurker

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GregP you said 18% seemed extremely large.

Well I just tested Mi-8, in that helo the yaw autopilot turns itself on and off depending on pedal input simulating the micro switches

I didn’t test it as exactly as I did with Mi-24, it’s hard to when it turns off on its own, but it turned off heading hold with FAR LESS pedal travel then Mi-24. I would say it defiantly felt like the yaw AP heading hold turned itself off at about 9% travel in each direction.

EDIT: I just tested Mi-24 again. My test intitially was two to three months ago, and something must have changed since then becuase now the boundary of pedal input to turn off the yaw AP heading hold is under 9%now!!!!! Just as we thought would be the number. So it does seem that it is same as Mi-8 in that respect,  I don’t know if something changed many months ago or I made a fatal mistake, but it is 9% now. I still think this enough to mess us up especially with pedals that don’t have dampener or no springs, I still think the bindings or some other option is the way to go to fly the Mi-24 the way it is in real life, not everyone can use a joystick gremlin profile like I can and even with the profile I sacrifice 9% witching center that I would’ve had stabilization in the real helicopter. But 9% is Atleast 50% better then 18%


Edited by AeriaGloria
  • Like 1

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

@GregP you said 18% seemed extremely large.

If the Mi-24 was changed so that pedals had to be within 5% of center instead of 18% to do heading hold, that change alone would make me EXTREMELY happy and worth the effort and a change that would make flying it more realistic and smooth to boot

 

Yes, I believe that would probably make a world of difference. However you also have to take into account that the AP channels work very differently in the Mi8 compared to the Mi24p. So, good catch on that one but would the Mi24P purists have a problem with it though? 


Edited by Lurker

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Yes, I believe that would make a world of difference. Good catch on that one. 

I am sorry my testing and typing was a little late, I edited my post but you replied right before I finished editing it. I tested Mi-24 again and it is 9% boundary to turn off heading hold same as Mi-8. So I was incorrect, either something changed in the months since I created the profile a long time ago or I must’ve made mistake. I still think a change would help a lot but Atleast it’s not as bad as I thought it was 

why would purists have an issue? 


Edited by AeriaGloria
  • Like 1

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, edited my post. The AP channels and logic work differently in the Mi8 compared to the Mi24p. This is why purists might have a problem with this. I will have to test the Mi24p again, since I haven't flow in it in a while, both without springs and with springs installed. 

From your quick tests, is the Mi24P much better behaved when exiting coordinated turns now and when doing small corrections on strafing runs with the YAW AP channel on?


Edited by Lurker

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lurker said:

Sorry, edited my post. The AP channels and logic work differently in the Mi8 compared to the Mi24p. This is why purists might have a problem with this. I will have to test the Mi24p again, since I haven't flow in it in a while, both without springs and with springs installed. 

From your quick tests, is the Mi24P much better behaved when exiting coordinated turns now and when doing small corrections on strafing runs with the YAW AP channel on?

 

Well I changed my profile to confirm to the 9% limit and It’s better. It would be ALOT better if it could work all the time….

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish someone would do a proper tutorial on how to properly fly the Mi24p (WITH THE YAW AP CHANNEL ON). All the ones I could find online are at least 7 months old, and or are flown by people who never turn on the channel. 

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, why is there this dead-zone anyway? In the real aircraft, as soon as the pilot's feet are on the pedals, AP HOLD is deactivated. The easiest way to simulate this would be to remove the deadzone entirely and simulate AP HOLD off as soon as ANY deflection on the pedals is detected. Or am I misunderstanding something completely here?


Edited by Lurker

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real pedals do not have a spring return to centre. They stay where the pilot put them. 

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, some1 said:

The real pedals do not have a spring return to centre. They stay where the pilot put them. 

Yes, this is why they have microswitches. However our own pedals do not, with or without springs. So I will ask my question again. Why is there a dead zone for AP YAW HOLD OFF in pedal deflection in our simulated DCS Mi24p? 

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would require you to have a deadzone in the hardware or in the DCS curves, otherwise the AP would never activate. 

But the adjustable AP deadzone as an option in special settings tab would be the best. 

  • Like 1

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, some1 said:

That would require you to have a deadzone in the hardware or in the DCS curves, otherwise the AP would never activate. 

 

I don't see how that would be the case, unless you have faulty pedal inputs. Once again, maybe Im not being clear, the AP Heading hold is always ON (not OFF) unless the pedals are depressed. This would simulate pedal microswitches. This is for spring based pedals. For springless pedals, which do not return to center some kind of bind-able microswitches should be implemented. 

1 hour ago, some1 said:

But the adjustable AP deadzone as an option in special settings tab would be the best. 

 I agree. 


Edited by Lurker

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many pedal designs do not return exactly to centre. It's typical for cam based models that have no centre detent.

I have a joystick with no centre detent and the same problem with autopilots in other aircraft. They sometimes refuse to engage simply because my stick is not dead in the middle position. 

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Lurker said:

I don't see how that would be the case, unless you have faulty pedal inputs. Once again, maybe Im not being clear, the AP Heading hold is always ON (not OFF) unless the pedals are depressed. This would simulate pedal microswitches. This is for spring based pedals. For springless pedals, which do not return to center some kind of bind-able microswitches should be implemented. 

 I agree. 

 

It’s not just springless pedals that don’t exactly return to center as some1 said. But older pedals have jittery pots, sometimes they not only don’t center perfect but the values jitter around hardly ever being zero when full released.

Even high end stuff, some amount of jitter is normal especially with time. 
 

So I assume it’s to not only combat that, but align with the 18% authority of the AP. So that at full AP deflection the AP output isn’t more then then what your pedal would do if AP was off and pedals deflected the amount from center that causes the AP to be in heading hold. 

Sure maybe it could be smaller, as some1 said adjustable dead zone. They should just make it adjustable enough that I can turn off heading hold function entirely😅

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely think there should be a keybind for the pedal microswitches, if for nothing else than binding it on the HOTAS. In the Mi-8, I already put the Yaw adjust knob on HOTAS anyway and this wouldn't be bothersome, quite the opposite. One could even get smart and emulate the toe brakes on their pedals to act as those microswitches, or just plain tape a button on it and more.

But I also have an alternative suggestion, one that I'd ideally like to see as an option alongside the keybind. Not just an adjustable deadzone for the hold to activate, but a moving one, that would establish each time the trim button is released. Instead of trimming the rudder itself, it would move the zone on the rudder axis where the heading hold engages, and disengage heading hold and move to stabilization when trim is held. Basically: Why not tie the microswitches to the trim button?

Torun_signature.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great discussion here, but as always, we'll continue to go around in circles until ED clarifies how the yaw AP is supposed to work.  Given that what we're observing with the current implementation is basically a bug -- yaw AP occasionally stays in heading hold mode when it should be switching to stabilization mode -- I think I'm going to post a bug report and ask for ED's clarification.

OK done: 

 


Edited by GregP
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GregP said:

Great discussion here, but as always, we'll continue to go around in circles until ED clarifies how the yaw AP is supposed to work.  Given that what we're observing with the current implementation is basically a bug -- yaw AP occasionally stays in heading hold mode when it should be switching to stabilization mode -- I think I'm going to post a bug report and ask for ED's clarification.

OK done: 

 

 

I do not and have never believe there to be a bug and works as intended even if I do not think it is the best solution. My thoughts are posted in your thread, while I believe there is no bug here thank you for caring enough to bring attention to this matter along with your posts on this thread 


Edited by AeriaGloria
  • Like 1

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Torun said:

I definitely think there should be a keybind for the pedal microswitches, if for nothing else than binding it on the HOTAS. In the Mi-8, I already put the Yaw adjust knob on HOTAS anyway and this wouldn't be bothersome, quite the opposite. One could even get smart and emulate the toe brakes on their pedals to act as those microswitches, or just plain tape a button on it and more.

But I also have an alternative suggestion, one that I'd ideally like to see as an option alongside the keybind. Not just an adjustable deadzone for the hold to activate, but a moving one, that would establish each time the trim button is released. Instead of trimming the rudder itself, it would move the zone on the rudder axis where the heading hold engages, and disengage heading hold and move to stabilization when trim is held. Basically: Why not tie the microswitches to the trim button?

Yes my thought exactly, people could add micro switch bindings to either keyboard or HOTAS Or toe brakes as long as they use a brand that either creates a button press when toe brake axis passes a certain degree or using some external software like joystick gremlin. Atleast people would have the choice to leave it default or play with it as desired as long as they were aware of its functions. Perhaps bindings listed under the autopilot menu as

Pedal Switches Off (Yaw AP heading hold mode)

Pedal Switches On (Yaw AP stabilization mode)

Pedal Switches Toggle On/OFF (Yaw AP mode toggle)


Edited by AeriaGloria
  • Like 1

Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com

E3FFFC01-584A-411C-8AFB-B02A23157EB6.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...