Motion Platforms with DCS

[LowGlow]

Has anybody tried some motion platform with DCS? Is it worth it?

Considering that these systems start at around 2500 bucks with 4 DoF, and going into absurd amount of money for 6 DoF ore more, that's a bit steap to just purchase one to see if it really improves immersion and which one to pick. And after watching a review of somebody having tested the Next Level Racing 4 DoF motion platform and stated that his cheap but kicker brought him more immersion than that this expensive chair kit, that made me even wonder more if such a purchase would make sense at all. I mean a 100 bucks subwoofer is more immersive?

[Miles Vorkosigan]

I have been flying DCS for years with one version of my motion simpit or another (evolved from a 2DoF to my current monster 6DoF). 

More immersive? Absolutely. Entering a hot LZ in a swaying Huey is fantastic. 

However, I would give up motion (if I had to) as long as I get to keep my transducers. Start with transducers and then move up to motion later if you want to. 

All of my motion systems have been DIY from dirt cheap to cringingly (is that a word?) expensive. 

My current monster (I only fly VR so I moved the monitors up out of the way of the motion):

 

nullnull

[gianlu320]

I have a racing cube 4dof motion platform.

I bought it in 2018 and it is just amazing with dcs and also that other civil sim.

These things are expensive but the level of immersion increases exponentially.

How to explain how good it is?

It is like trying to explain vr to somebody who has never tried it.

Many will say motion platforms are not necessary or realistic specially with jets because they are unable to reproduce all the needed forces.

But you don’t need to reproduce the real forces, you have to give your brain and body sensory cues and they should be synchronized with the visual cues you get from vr.

that’s what a motion platform does..

I hope this helps

[peachmonkey]

in my opinion a transducer bass feedback (bass shakers) brings a lot more immersion than the motion platform, well, at least the ones I've tried. They were all primarily racing motion platforms, where the max tilt angles were ~10 to 15 degrees, max 20 degrees in some instances. And that's not enough. When banking or during a tight turn the motion platform reaches its maximum position and then stops while the picture in VR keeps turning, etc., it's quite an immersion killer in reality. Had it been a full horizontal/vertical rotational 360 degree platform, now that's a different story, but those are $20k+ or so..

[Rifter]

For sim racing the sun shines bright when it comes to motion platforms:
With a 4-DOF system you are well equipped to get a lot of useful immersion, because you are able to interpret the wheel load of each of your (virtual) wheels and also the composition of the road surface. Add belt tensioners for even more immersion. And the software was optimised over years simply because sim racing has a bigger user base as flight sims.

First problem you have to solve concerning a motion platform for a flight sim is your expectation.
Second problem is the motion software itself respectively your settings.

I use a simple 2-DOF seat mover for DCS. Main problem from the very beginning were the aracadish default settings.

Why would you want your motion platform to tilt sideways synchronous to the roll manoeuvers of the aircraft? In a coordinated flight there are no lateral forces on the pilot. Why would you want your platform to pitch accordingly to your climb and sink? In an accelerated dive (nose down attitude) the pitch down movement creates the wrong feeling of a decelerating aircraft.

When I started to emphasis the vertical G-force (as the main force felt during a flight) in my settings, things became interesting. I maxed out the pitch and roll impulse (intermittent pitch and roll) and set sustained pitch and roll to zero. Suddenly the rather limited possibilities of the 2-DOF platform created a lot immersion. Of course you can’t get G-forces. But in VR the directional force impulse fools the brain in a fascinating way.

[metalnwood]

I used to have a dedicated flight rig and a dedicated racing rig.  When i got motion (sfx100 3dof) i decided i had to put them together in one rig so i could use motion on both of them.  I did that for a while but after a bit of time I thought I was missing out on having an ideal setup.   This was not because of motion but because of inevitable compromises with a rig I used for both racing and flying.

     Long story short, I went back to two rigs and I dont have motion on my flight sim.  I find that on my racing sim it delivers a lot but on my flight sim it delivers a lot less.   I think the best things about ti were takeoff/landing.  Landing on a carrier especially with an active seatbelt was cool.  I soon got rid of using a belt in flight though as it restricted movement too much in VR.

     Other effects that are of some benefit can also be done with much cheaper tactile transducers, they are never a bad investment as even if you went to motion in the future they complement themselves very well .

    I know you don't have the same issues as far as dual rig, so best I can help is to say that I am in a similar boat to you.  I could spend the $ but is it worth it?  It is for racing but I just havnet got around to adding motion also on my flight rig as I am not sure its worth the investment/return on our $$ category.   If money was  less of an issue and I could get a big enough 6dof to hold my rig then yes, I would do motion.

[Miles Vorkosigan]

On 1/16/2023 at 4:40 PM, metalnwood said:

  This was not because of motion but because of inevitable compromises with a rig I used for both racing and flying.

     

Out of curiosity, what compromises did you come across? Mine is set up for fly (both fixed wing and rotor) and driving. Lots of controllers mounted all at once but my wheel is removable (Direct drive) and my collective and two throttles are mounted on a door frame so I can get in and out. 

[metalnwood]

When I got more in to developing the racing side I found I had to address some seating issues to make sure my older back was going to last the long haul.  My seat ended up reasonably reclined as well as very low in my 8040 rig.  This was quite good for most things in flight until I got my collective and found it was going to be quite difficult to mount in a good way.   A combination of how my seat was mounted, where the actuator was and  where the collective needed to be mounted.

     This was what got me back to building a dedicated flight rig again and that let me start using things like my TM MFD's which there was not room to mount on the racing/flying rig.   It has also allowed me to add on other things dedicated for flight that I couldnt otherwise have.

      If I was only using my rudder pedals/throttle/stick I would have kept the rigs together as one and used motion for both but now I have the freedom to add the winwing mip, go back to an extension on my stick, other panels etc.    For those extra things I am happy to give up motion, it didnt deliver for me in flight what it does for racing.

     On my combo rig it only took a couple mins to swap to rudders and stick, it was a good compromise and I really dont see any advantages oging separate if you only want to fly with hotas and rudders - with one exception and ymmv - if you want to use leap or even hand controllers it can be a bit of  a pita or even impossible if your racing rig is a bit cramped and you need to virtually interact with the cockpit but the wheel mount is in the way etc.

     Ah, I just saw your pic, mine was very similar although I had center mount, and it was all well - until the collective...  As well as mounting the collective  I would have had to develop something for quick change between that and throttle etc..

      So now I am on this,  the throttle slies on 8040 to the side and back depending on using the throttle or collective.   The mount of the collective drops about 100mm to store under the throttle - and the throttle is not too far to the seide all its buttons can still be used.    I do have to add back tactile though, its all on the racing rig and I dont want to steal anything from that, its set up too nice there

     Summary, yhe TLDR is that the more dedicated flight panels you want the harder it is.

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by metalnwood

[LowGlow]

Hmm, quite mixed opinions. But from what I got here, it's probably better to start with a simple butt kicker instead.

I get it that a motion platform is especially useful for helis, but in case of fixed wings if immersion is somewhat limited to takeoff and landing, that doesn't really pay off in my opinion considering the prices of these things.

Interesting though that there seem to be so many people having done motion chairs DIY. I guess that burns a loooot of time getting there. Doing the hardware, dealing with software stuff and what not. That's not really an option for me.

[lesthegrngo]

I have a NRL V3 unit, and use it extensively for Sim racing in concert with a VR headset - but the few times I have used it with DCS has left me very much in the 'no thanks' camp.

On its own in DCS, it just doesn't feel right, and with the VR, sorry to say that I'm one of those who can't take it due to motion sickness.

For the sim racing though, it has been very very good - in fact it was the cure for me for the Sim racing motion sickness that VR caused. With the V3 it really helps to make you feel that you are there, and vastly enhances the experience. I would imagine it would help with DCS in VR as well if you were able to stomach it

Les

 

[parkerfly51505]

If you want to go down a never-ending rabbit hole and spend countless hours of your life... then yes, motion is for you.  

I have a 3DOF based on the eRacingLab 150mm actuators and GT Omega Prime cockpit.  I built it to eventually go back and forth between different DCS flight modules and possibly racing.  I'm building side panel consoles for the F14 module now.  Using SimRacingStudio software is very quick and easy but left me with a very arcade like experience and I always had trouble with heave motion working effectively.  FlyPTMover was what changed the experience for the better but man that has been a journey.  It's a very high learning curve, at least for me, for how it's implemented but it can do just about whatever you want it to.  This is where the time comes in.  

Again, I would never go back but definitely try the Butt Kicker first.  I did.  I haven't hooked it back up since adding motion but I plan to soon.  Both together should be great.  Here's an early on photo of my rig.  Plenty of details have changed but the basics have not. 

[LowGlow]

Yeah, I see. So currently you can either choose to spend a lot of time, or a lot of money, or both. 

Either way, for me that's a high price while not even knowing how much it adds to my personal VR experience. Hopefully things become cheaper in future, but I'll follow how it evolves.

[clayvt]

There is another option...The Bergison G seat.  It incorportates both motion and the feeling og pulling G's.  

Bergison's Site

You can buy the plans for 100 euro and then build it yourself.  I am 80% done building mine but have all of the parts and total so far I have spent around $1500 .

I got to try one out at a co-creators house and holy crap...I was planning on doing it as a slow build over the coming year, but after experiencing it, I decided to go full ham and build it as fast as possible.  

Edited January 28, 2023 by clayvt

[Merlins51]

Hey Clayvt. Fancy seeing you here!  Your build is looking absolutely fantastic, and can't wait to see it in action.

[LowGlow]

Am 28.1.2023 um 10:06 schrieb clayvt:

There is another option...The Bergison G seat.  It incorportates both motion and the feeling og pulling G's.  

Bergison's Site

You can buy the plans for 100 euro and then build it yourself.  I am 80% done building mine but have all of the parts and total so far I have spent around $1500 .

I got to try one out at a co-creators house and holy crap...I was planning on doing it as a slow build over the coming year, but after experiencing it, I decided to go full ham and build it as fast as possible.  

 

So that's a 3 DoF seat mover and addtionally it pulls harness to somewhat simulate pulling you into the seat under Gs. Interesting idea. The question is whether that harness system pays off. I mean for the price you can get a simple seat mover, just without the harness system.

Will you keep us updated on your process?

[clayvt]

The harness and moveable flaps do a very realistic job of giving you the feeling of pulling G’s. I did a cat shot and trap in Merlin’s seat (poster above) and it was to say the least, freaking amazing. 
Im now about 98% done and starting hardware/software integration. Hopefully by this weekend I’ll have a fully functioning G seat. 
 

merlin, the parts of your seat cover are cut, I just gotta find the time to sew them up. Been working on the seat…

Edited February 1, 2023 by clayvt

[LowGlow]

What do you mean with "movable flaps"? Something I missed in the demo?

[Merlins51]

There are a number of sensory elements to the seat.

1) 3-DOF movement in pitch,roll, and heave.   The extent of the movement is intended to replicate what your body would do inside the cockpit under similar forces and g-loads, thereby negating the need for any motion cancellation in VR. 

2) Variable geometry seat that adds or removes pressure from the seat back and seat pan to simulate sustained g-force through the use of movable "flaps".

3) Seat belt tensioning/loosening.

The combination of the three together provide the full experience.

[LowGlow]

Ah, it also has something inside the seat, OK, I missed that. I thought it would just change seat belt tension. OK, I can imagine that this combination really makes a difference to immersion for jet sims.

I wonder if somebody also experimented with a G-suit solution.

[winghunter]

DOF H3 or Yaw2 looks interesting for jets

 

 

Edited February 27, 2023 by winghunter

[theskyisthelimit99]

On 1/16/2023 at 4:40 PM, metalnwood said:

I used to have a dedicated flight rig and a dedicated racing rig.  When i got motion (sfx100 3dof) i decided i had to put them together in one rig so i could use motion on both of them.  I did that for a while but after a bit of time I thought I was missing out on having an ideal setup.   This was not because of motion but because of inevitable compromises with a rig I used for both racing and flying.

On 1/16/2023 at 2:19 PM, Rifter said:

For sim racing the sun shines bright when it comes to motion platforms:
With a 4-DOF system you are well equipped to get a lot of useful immersion, because you are able to interpret the wheel load of each of your (virtual) wheels and also the composition of the road surface. Add belt tensioners for even more immersion. And the software was optimised over years simply because sim racing has a bigger user base as flight sims.

First problem you have to solve concerning a motion platform for a flight sim is your expectation.
Second problem is the motion software itself respectively your settings.

I use a simple 2-DOF seat mover for DCS. Main problem from the very beginning were the aracadish default settings.

Why would you want your motion platform to tilt sideways synchronous to the roll manoeuvers of the aircraft? In a coordinated flight there are no lateral forces on the pilot. Why would you want your platform to pitch accordingly to your climb and sink? In an accelerated dive (nose down attitude) the pitch down movement creates the wrong feeling of a decelerating aircraft.

When I started to emphasis the vertical G-force (as the main force felt during a flight) in my settings, things became interesting. I maxed out the pitch and roll impulse (intermittent pitch and roll) and set sustained pitch and roll to zero. Suddenly the rather limited possibilities of the 2-DOF platform created a lot immersion. Of course you can’t get G-forces. But in VR the directional force impulse fools the brain in a fascinating way.

 

Im curious, as i spotted this thread and cant find a ton of info out there on all of this..  at least in here it sounds like motion rigs arent ideal for flight, which kinda surprises me, in recent days vr flight sim guy has the dof reality h2 setup and has shown it on his yt channel.  He seems pretty enthused about it and says it feels like really flying in the aircraft he tried in his initial video at least.   

It had me hyped enough i figured i'd go for the dof h3 with upgraded motors, but now after spotting this thread im not so sure.  I dont know much about dof vs others with actuators and such, still learning the terms here.  My main use would be for MSFS and some dcs use as well.  I have the honeycomb alpha/bravo and mfg pedals and VR (aero).

 

[Rifter]

On 3/10/2023 at 4:55 PM, theskyisthelimit99 said:

Im curious, as i spotted this thread and cant find a ton of info out there on all of this..  at least in here it sounds like motion rigs arent ideal for flight, which kinda surprises me, in recent days vr flight sim guy has the dof reality h2 setup and has shown it on his yt channel.  He seems pretty enthused about it and says it feels like really flying in the aircraft he tried in his initial video at least.   

It had me hyped enough i figured i'd go for the dof h3 with upgraded motors, but now after spotting this thread im not so sure.  I dont know much about dof vs others with actuators and such, still learning the terms here.  My main use would be for MSFS and some dcs use as well.  I have the honeycomb alpha/bravo and mfg pedals and VR (aero).

 

From my experience most motion system vendors don’t understand the basic physics of flight and the associated forces on the pilot. They grew up with sim racing. In most situations during a flight there is only the normal force acting on the pilot. No sustained lateral forces, no sustained rolling forces, no sustained pitching forces.
So if you take yourself the time to modify the default settings to something more meaningful you will definitely create a lot of immersion. I use a simple 2-DOF platform (next level racing). Out of the box it’s terrible. After I modified everything it’s now like my initial VR experience - there is no way back.

Hence that without VR the motion experience is very limited and not worth the money, because in VR you don't have a reference for the movements and therefore your brain gets totally fooled.

[metalnwood]

On 3/11/2023 at 4:55 AM, theskyisthelimit99 said:

Im curious, as i spotted this thread and cant find a ton of info out there on all of this..  at least in here it sounds like motion rigs arent ideal for flight, which kinda surprises me, in recent days vr flight sim guy has the dof reality h2 setup and has shown it on his yt channel.  He seems pretty enthused about it and says it feels like really flying in the aircraft he tried in his initial video at least.   

It had me hyped enough i figured i'd go for the dof h3 with upgraded motors, but now after spotting this thread im not so sure.  I dont know much about dof vs others with actuators and such, still learning the terms here.  My main use would be for MSFS and some dcs use as well.  I have the honeycomb alpha/bravo and mfg pedals and VR (aero).

 

I certainly liked motion with flight and if I had two motion platforms then no doubt I would have motion on both.

    My issue, was more to do with which rig to put the motion on.  There were a few things in my decision - I race more than I fly these days.  Racing is a more intense than flying and motion integrates with that feeling better.  It was already mounted to my racing rig and would require upgrades to flying rig to put motion on there.

    If I was still flying and racing on the same rig I would use motion on both.   Don't let me put you off, my decisions are based on circumstances rather than if motion was good or not with flight.

[winghunter]

Good overview of 3 DOF vs 6 DOF for flying

 

Edited March 12, 2023 by winghunter

[winghunter]

another 3DOF vs 6 DOF