correct as is Pitch command only spans on 56% of the total axis length

[Comrade Doge]

 

Hello all, this is a post meant to help clear up some findings in regards to the F-16 commanded pitch. I am not sure if what I will describe below is correct behaviour or not, hence why I figured I'd ask in this post about it.  

Currently in game, the F-16 command for pitch will use only 56% of the total available axis length when pulling back. Any input bigger than that will not increase the elevator position any further. For instance, if I pull back on my joystick 56% of my total pitch travel from the center point, it will behave the same as if I would have pulled 100%, all the way back.  

Image of the elevator with the axis pulled at 100% (left) and 56% (right). Identical elevator position.  

 

To make this test happen I decreased the axis saturation in the settings, to observe the point at which the elevators reach their max position. As I found out, every command from 56%-100% of the total stick motion will be identical.  

Here is an image of the setting so that you can set it this way yourself, and replicate, no difference in aircraft behaviour if you change Saturation Y to 100% instead of 56%:  

I recently seen this post on the forum, talking about the usable pitch only being at 78%, but it seems like it's at 56% now...

To conclude, I am not sure if this is correct or not, maybe this is how the F-16 works. I am posting this to make sure this is intended behaviour.  I have also included trackfiles. Thank you and have an easy day.  

Pitch56.trk Pitch100.trk

Edited June 24, 2022 by Comrade Doge

[BIGNEWY]

The control surfaces may not move 1:1 to control input, the controls only asks the FLCS for the inputted performance, but the FLCS will deflect controls as it sees fit. It is working as intended. 

[Bunny Clark]

To expand a bit on what BN is saying - what you're measuring isn't actually axis deflection, it's control surface deflection. In the F-16, as with other DFCS "fly by wire" aircraft, pilot inputs do not translate directly to control surface movement. The DFCS takes pilot inputs, analyzes them relative to the aircraft's current state - airspeed and AoA in particular - and then commands control surface movements based on a number of different factors. In a DFCS aircraft pulling back on the stick doesn't simply command "elevator up" but rather commands "pitch up" and may result in movement of the stabilators, ailerons, and flaps depending on what state the aircraft is in. This is also why roll commands will move the stabilators, ailerons, flaps, and rudder. 

So what you're really seeing is just how far back on the stick you need to pull for the DFCS to max deflect the stabilators while parked on the ground. This is also why other people have come up with different numbers - do the same test in the air at different speeds and you'll get different results every time. 

[DummyCatz]

20 hours ago, Comrade Doge said:

I recently seen this post on the forum, talking about the usable pitch only being at 78%, but it seems like it's at 56% now...

 

 

If I'm not wrong that's the g-command gradient curve. It does not translate to how much elevator deflection you can get, but how much Gs you want to command, especially in the air. By the look of the curve, with 32lbs stick force (=30.25+1.75 breakout), you're sending out a 11.86g command (=10.86g + a constant 1.0g). This is later limited to 9Gs, which means the 9G to 11.86G section of g-command gradient is not usable.

Try it in the air to see if you can pull 9Gs with only 78% stick travel, when the aircraft have sufficient energy. With gear down the gain is different.

 

BTW the roll curve seems to be a simplified one. Ref https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=58462

Edited June 25, 2022 by DummyCatz

[Comrade Doge]

Thank you for the replies. While I was aware about the "fly-by-wire" character of the jet, I was mislead a bit by that 78% stick travel, and I thought it was now reduced to 56%... Upon conducting further flight tests though, indeed the commanded G is different, and in flight, 78% of the total travel seems the limit of the actual G command. Setting the saturation to 78% will give better fine control over the whole G spectrum, however, a tad slower onset than setting to 100%...

[Svend_Dellepude]

8 hours ago, Comrade Doge said:

Thank you for the replies. While I was aware about the "fly-by-wire" character of the jet, I was mislead a bit by that 78% stick travel, and I thought it was now reduced to 56%... Upon conducting further flight tests though, indeed the commanded G is different, and in flight, 78% of the total travel seems the limit of the actual G command. Setting the saturation to 78% will give better fine control over the whole G spectrum, however, a tad slower onset than setting to 100%...

If I'm not mistaken, the last 22% is there to make sure you can reach max G or max AoA with forward trim in the system. Might be wrong on this one, but that was my conclusion when i discovered this.

[RuskyV]

Just for some feedback,

I’m using an R3 from real simulation and I can confirm that when setting to 78 in axis tuning makes quite a difference in pitch control ability more in line with how it was a few patches ago. The benefit is that it doesn’t hinder pitch performance so if you needed to pull hard you still have the response needed so it’s not sluggish at all and feels more linear.

Roll interestingly does seem to slow roll rate when fully deflected, not a lot but enough to be noticeable which impacts performance. Using 78 seems to be clipping the top end of the axis so It might be that a different number is used for roll. I didn’t bother testing higher numbers but some using standard sticks might find this to be useful.

With pitch command being spread over usable stick deflection an not having the last 22% do anything, 78% is now being used by 100% of the stick. 
 

Great find. 

Edited June 26, 2022 by RuskyV