Just got a force sensing F16 stick... "This changes everything".. ;)

[Scott-S6]

1 hour ago, Mr_sukebe said:

My apologies, but I can't bring myself to read or watch any thread of video that includes the statement "this changes everything".  After all, my dog still looks the same to me.

Please don't encourage others to continue to abuse the English language in this way.

A shame that you didn't read the first sentence of his post which references exactly that.

[AlexCaboose]

On 3/4/2023 at 8:18 AM, darkman222 said:

So what youre saying, or more or less confirming is, that RS got it right, or at least at right as you can get the behavior and movement of the real F16 stick with a FFB replica. Correct?

Yes, although it is not FFB. Force Feedback uses a motor to provide resistance or hold the stick in a given location. This is force sensing. Similar sounding name, but very different.

 

On 3/4/2023 at 10:19 AM, Mr_sukebe said:

My apologies, but I can't bring myself to read or watch any thread of video that includes the statement "this changes everything".  After all, my dog still looks the same to me.

Please don't encourage others to continue to abuse the English language in this way.

It’s a significant departure from a typical center or side stick with a gimbal. Seems like you’re being deliberately obtuse about his meaning. 

 

Edited March 6, 2023 by AlexCaboose

[darkman222]

On 3/7/2023 at 12:11 AM, AlexCaboose said:

Yes, although it is not FFB.

Yeah, sorry. My bad usually I know the difference very well

But does anyone know if the way the Winwing force sensing stick can be changed to a "realistic" continous movement like in the real jet? According to @void68there is option c) which is like in the real jet. Can someone confirm or disprove?

  

On 2/28/2023 at 11:18 AM, void68 said:

That's a feature. You can choose between 3 different settings:

a) 5mm movement like a default stick and then force sensing

b) no movement and only force sensing

c) just movement (I think, can't verify at the moment)

 

[void68]

vor 17 Stunden schrieb darkman222:

But does anyone know if the way the Winwing force sensing stick can be changed to a "realistic" continous movement like in the real jet? According to @void68there is option c) which is like in the real jet. Can someone confirm or disprove?

Sorry for confirming my own opinion / knowledge :), but I got the usual "full movement stick" accessories (or better: for Force Sensing removed parts like cams and springs) in an extra package. I don't recall if it was the extra package with 3 different cams and springs or just the spare parts. Also telling from Winwings h/p you can change back to full movement stick.

 

However: Winwing wrote that they don't recommend installing the MFSSB on your own, in fact it came installed. So it looks like it's a one way street. Once back you are lost. No knowledge of installing the force sensing module myself.

c) option just gives you the movement within 5mm range, i.e. 5mm range for full deflection of rudders, no matter how much expo, that's insane. And no, that's not like in the real F16. It's option a)

 

 

[darkman222]

Okay to sum it up. What winwing offers here is

20 hours ago, darkman222 said:

a) 5mm movement like a default stick and then force sensing

b) no movement and only force sensing

c) just movement (I think, can't verify at the moment)

a) The option that winwing considers the most realistic and useable. But which is still not like the real jet though. Because the full range of motion should reflect the full amout of possilbe input. I would call this approach a non-realistic hybrid

b) which is like the early F16 days when the stick had not displacement or motion at all. Maybe like the Saitek X65F that I once owned, which was awful.

c) must be just over sensitive and not useable, if you can really configure the stick to behave like it.

That makes me seriously wonder if there is any reason that winwing sells those sticks if we have the RS FSSB around, except for the lot cheaper price for something that does not replicate the F16 stick correctly (at all). Might be interesting for space simulators though

Edited March 9, 2023 by darkman222

[darkman222]

Got my Winwing Base now. To demistify all of the modes, I have made a video to illustrate.

First things first: I think the Winwing base is an F16 "inspired" force sensing base, but no mode really replicates the behavior of the real jets stick. Even if I changed the stick physically to a "force sensing only"-stick, disabling the displacement totally, it would become like a Saitek X65F which does not move at all. As it is known the modern Vipers have a small displacement in the stick,  only the very first Vipers did not have any displacement at all. And we, or at least I am looking for the behavior in the sticks from the modern Vipers Block 50 - 52.

Shown in the video:

a) Force + Displacement. Displacement first, until you hit a "wall", that can be felt and even heared in the video. Then the force sensor takes over. You can see the blue and red bar mixing together in Simapp Pro.

Conclusion: Useable, works good but not realistic. Displacement should be possible up to max deflection not only for the first part of the input.

b) Force only mode. The displacement is deactivated and you end up with a big deadzone on every axis.

Conclusion: Not useable and totally unrealistic.

c) Fully realistic mode. Only the little range of displacement is used to input full deflection. The force sensing part is basically disabled.

Conclusion: Not useable, way too sensitive and not precise because full deflection does not use force sensing at all.

 

General conclusion: Unless it is possible to change the hardware to get force sensing behavior while the stick is being displaced until the input limit is reached there is no way to consider that base to behave like the real thing.

Let me know your thoughts, and if you know of such, link me to a document or video that shows how to get the base behave like an actual F16C stick.

 

Btw, sorry for hijacking this thread as it started as a Realsimulator thread, but I ordered my RS Ultra just now and its about to arrive soon for more testing.

Edited March 13, 2023 by darkman222

[13WELT_JankeS]

I recorded a video with the range of displacement of the R3L stick at maximum forces. Unfortunately, the base did not last a year in my cockpit. I wonder if in the ULTRA version the strength has increased or decreased by increasing the deformation of the metal plate with sensors.

https://youtube.com/shorts/ix0bQzVVUGw?feature=share

[AZDane]

21 hours ago, darkman222 said:

Got my Winwing Base now. To demistify all of the modes, I have made a video to illustrate.

First things first: I think the Winwing base is an F16 "inspired" force sensing base, but no mode really replicates the behavior of the real jets stick. Even if I changed the stick physically to a "force sensing only"-stick, disabling the displacement totally, it would become like a Saitek X65F which does not move at all. As it is known the modern Vipers have a small displacement in the stick,  only the very first Vipers did not have any displacement at all. And we, or at least I am looking for the behavior in the sticks from the modern Vipers Block 50 - 52.

Shown in the video:

a) Force + Displacement. Displacement first, until you hit a "wall", that can be felt and even heared in the video. Then the force sensor takes over. You can see the blue and red bar mixing together in Simapp Pro.

Conclusion: Useable, works good but not realistic. Displacement should be possible up to max deflection not only for the first part of the input.

b) Force only mode. The displacement is deactivated and you end up with a big deadzone on every axis.

Conclusion: Not useable and totally unrealistic.

c) Fully realistic mode. Only the little range of displacement is used to input full deflection. The force sensing part is basically disabled.

Conclusion: Not useable, way too sensitive and not precise because full deflection does not use force sensing at all.

 

General conclusion: Unless it is possible to change the hardware to get force sensing behavior while the stick is being displaced until the input limit is reached there is no way to consider that base to behave like the real thing.

Let me know your thoughts, and if you know of such, link me to a document or video that shows how to get the base behave like an actual F16C stick.

 

Btw, sorry for hijacking this thread as it started as a Realsimulator thread, but I ordered my RS Ultra just now and its about to arrive soon for more testing.

 

I am just getting into DCS and recently purchased WinWings MFSSB stick. I have no experience with RS FSSB, but I have 2000 hours on the real SSC, so I know what it is supposed to feel like. 

Your observations pretty much match mine. I would add the following:

A) Force + Displacement: If you add more blade springs it will feel more gradual and hitting the limit where force sensing takes over won’t be as noticeable. 

Still not the same as the real stick, but it’s the configuration I have chosen for now with added blade springs. 

B) Force only: Agree completely unusable due to the large dead zone. From taking the MFSSB apart to install blade springs, I don’t see a way to adjust the size of this dead zone. You can only adjust the center of the dead zone. So even if you wanted a stick that didn’t move and just worked off of force sensing, it’s not possible. 

C) Movement only. They actually call this mode the realistic mode in their video. Useless with one blade spring. You need 2 or 3 blade springs or it will be way too sensitive. I still think it’s too sensitive even with more springs, but maybe I can fine tune the curves to make it feel more realistic. Still haven’t gotten myself a decent sim pit where I can support my arm for fine motor skills, so I will revisit this configuration when I get one to see how it feels. But in this configuration you are not using the force sensing circuit at all, so this configuration could’ve been implemented significantly cheaper by itself, just with the blade spring modules. 

In hindsight I should’ve spent the extra money on the RS. I’ll see how good I can get this stick tuned after I get it attached to a sim pit with good arm support. I did a little air refueling with the stick just suction cup mounted to my desk and found it quite challenging compared to the real SSC. 

As far as realism compared to the F16s SSC, it’s not there obviously. 

As far as usability in the displacement + force mode, I think it will be fine for most tasks. Where I predict problems is when you need to be precise in the range right where it changes from displacement to force. If for example you are flying close formation under load (wing work) or employing the gun during A-A. 

Someone mentioned the fact that WinWing doesn’t want you to install the MFSSB kit yourself, yet they give you the regular cam and springs so you can switch. Personally I wouldn’t be too concerned about going back and fourth. As long as you are careful and follow their videos. Also, it’s obvious that this is not something you want to do on a daily basis. The parts are not made for that kind of abuse. 

Darkman222 do you know if the Winwing stick is compatible with the FSSB-R3L MKII base? Might have to upgrade down the road. 

Edited March 14, 2023 by AZDane
Font size

[Scott-S6]

1 hour ago, AZDane said:

Darkman222 do you know if the Winwing stick is compatible with the FSSB-R3L MKII base? Might have to upgrade down the road. 

It's not. WW did their own thing with grip attachment where most others went with a more or less TM compatible system.

WW sell a kit to make their bases TM compatible but I'm not aware of anyone selling a kit to make their bases WW compatible and RS certainly don't.

Edited March 14, 2023 by Scott-S6

[darkman222]

Winwing and RS/Thrustmaster is not comapatible. Even if you could adapt the electric connection, the mechanical connector works completely different than the Thrustmasters.

@AZDaneThanks for your opinion. So we might agree that with the current Winwing MFSSB is not possible to make it work and feel like the real F16 SSC. I really dont understand why Winwing went with that "hybrid" approach.

I realized the additional blade springs in the MFSSB package. Are they to be used to make a stronger resistance or to convert the base back to a traditional gimbal? I did not dare to open the base, to see what they'll do. I will be selling the base on ebay now.

How do you come to have 2000 hours on the real F16 SCC?

Edited March 14, 2023 by darkman222

[AZDane]

23 minutes ago, darkman222 said:

Winwing and RS/Thrustmaster is not comapatible. Even if you could adapt the electric connection, the mechanical connector works completely different than the Thrustmasters.

@AZDaneThanks for your opinion. So we might agree that with the current Winwing MFSSB is not possible to make it work and feel like the real F16 SSC. I really dont understand why Winwing went with that "hybrid" approach.

I realized the additional blade springs in the MFSSB package. Are they to be used to make a stronger resistance or to convert the base back to a traditional gimbal? I did not dare to open the base, to see what they'll do. I will be selling the base on ebay now.

How do you come to have 2000 hours on the real F16 SCC?

 

Thank you, I figured it wouldn’t be that easy. 
 

I believe the reason for the hybrid approach is because it’s not that easy to implement. Anyone take the RS apart to see how they did it?

The blade springs are there to add resistance. You pretty much have to use them to get something useful out of the displacement only mode.
The regular springs and cams are there to convert it to a traditional base. 
Check this video out:

also this video is helpful if taking the unit apart:

I flew F16s 10 years ago. 

[AZDane]

3 minutes ago, AZDane said:

 Check this video out:

One thing I want to add to this video. 
They mention that their test team recommended using one spring on the front and two on the rear and one spring on the right side and two on the left. 
Pretty sure what he means is the opposite. If you choose different spring forces, you want more resistance pulling back than pushing forward and more resistance moving the stick left than right. So this actually required two springs on the front, one on the rear and two on the right and one on the left. 
This is because it’s easier to pull than push and easier to move the stick left than right just because of your difference in arm strength in the different axis. 
Personally I think 2 springs in all axis might be the better option, but I will wait until I have a better mounting system to make my final adjustments. 

[AZDane]

5 hours ago, Scott-S6 said:

It's not. WW did their own thing with grip attachment where most others went with a more or less TM compatible system.

WW sell a kit to make their bases TM compatible but I'm not aware of anyone selling a kit to make their bases WW compatible and RS certainly don't.

 

Thanks Scott-S6. Too bad. I think they did a pretty good job on the stick, but then again, I haven’t really tried any of the other implementations that are out there. 

[AZDane]

This video actually has a really good discussion about the MFSSB stick compared to the real SSC and it also addresses the spring force and the forward tilt of the stick. 
 

 

[303_Kermit]

I have also FSSB Ultra II. It came about 3 weeks ago. It's nothing like I expected. Definitely not for everyone, and not for every plane. Properly used however, allows you to perform maneuvers with insane precision. Short:
"-"
Getting "used to it" take time. It's not intuitional.
Software is complex, and instruction is not that clear - it's written for every possible scenario and there's a lot of possible configurations
my Ultra "clicks" by going through "0" position. It don't affects precision, or handling, but it's annoying.
"+"
Better precision
Fast adjusting precise position of ailerons and elevator during aerobatic / dogfight. No searching for right AoA. It's "just there" in a split of a second.
Very well thought software and many combinations, make Ultra very adjustable.

To make it more fair I'm testing it on... P-47D. Works very well.

My best regards
Kermit

[darkman222]

Thanks @303_KermitKermit for the summary. I have my traditonal gimbal and the FSSB. It takes time to get used to. So I switch between them.

The biggest problem I have with it is while pulling Gs to adjust the gun funnel. Pulling Gs and rolling the jet the same time is very unpercise for me. I just end up in a pendulum-like rolling the jet, or pilot induced oscillation around the roll axis, you might call it too.

16 hours ago, 303_Kermit said:

my Ultra "clicks" by going through "0" position. It don't affects precision, or handling, but it's annoying.

What do you mean? You mean the audible clicks by software or mechanical clicks? Mine does not do that. Maybe yours is faulty.

 

@AZDane Now I can compare all of the three. I have an older Realsimulator FSSB Lightning ( less movement) and a new Realsimulator FSSB Ultra ( 1/4 inch movement) realistic as Realsimulator claims. Maybe you can confirm or disapprove. Might be hard to tell by just watching my videos though.

So to sum it up, between the Winwing MFSSB, RS Lightning and RS Ultra.

1. The Winwing hybrid base is sensitive around the 0 position. But I guess just because they use the traditional displacement gimbal underneath. But its unrealistic, so I am selling it.

2. The RS Lightning is very hard to get used to due to the little displacement. But very sensitive around the 0 position.

3. The RS Ultra is much easier than the Lightning to get used to. Due to the bigger displacement wich makes it easier to adapt to, it feels more sluggish around the 0 position.
 

I test the sensitivity with air refueling and the precision while pulling Gs while dogfighting. So its the two extremes.

Please watch my videos of the Lightning and the Ultra. And dont mind the music. I am digitizing some of my fathers old magnetic tapes

@AZDanelet me know your opinion on these two force sensing bases too. As youre saying you have 2000 hours in the F16: Did all the later F16 SSC have the same amount of displacement between blocks? Or was even between modern blocks a difference in SSC displacement?

Of course I know the first F16s did not have any SSC movement at all, but have those F16 (A models ?!) been used in service? Or did just the prototypes have the SSC with absolutely no displacement. I'm curious about that.

Edited March 15, 2023 by darkman222

[AZDane]

2 hours ago, darkman222 said:

Thanks @303_KermitKermit for the summary. I have my traditonal gimbal and the FSSB. It takes time to get used to. So I switch between them.

The biggest problem I have with it is while pulling Gs to adjust the gun funnel. Pulling Gs and rolling the jet the same time is very unpercise for me. I just end up in a pendulum-like rolling the jet, or pilot induced oscillation around the roll axis, you might call it too.

What do you mean? You mean the audible clicks by software or mechanical clicks? Mine does not do that. Maybe yours is faulty.

 

@AZDane Now I can compare all of the three. I have an older Realsimulator FSSB Lightning ( less movement) and a new Realsimulator FSSB Ultra ( 1/4 inch movement) realistic as Realsimulator claims. Maybe you can confirm or disapprove. Might be hard to tell by just watching my videos though.

So to sum it up, between the Winwing MFSSB, RS Lightning and RS Ultra.

1. The Winwing hybrid base is sensitive around the 0 position. But I guess just because they use the traditional displacement gimbal underneath. But its unrealistic, so I am selling it.

2. The RS Lightning is very hard to get used to due to the little displacement. But very sensitive around the 0 position.

3. The RS Ultra is much easier than the Lightning to get used to. Due to the bigger displacement wich makes it easier to adapt to, it feels more sluggish around the 0 position.
 

I test the sensitivity with air refueling and the precision while pulling Gs while dogfighting. So its the two extremes.

Please watch my videos of the Lightning and the Ultra. And dont mind the music. I am digitizing some of my fathers old magnetic tapes

@AZDanelet me know your opinion on these two force sensing bases too. As youre saying you have 2000 hours in the F16: Did all the later F16 SSC have the same amount of displacement between blocks? Or was even between modern blocks a difference in SSC displacement?

Of course I know the first F16s did not have any SSC movement at all, but have those F16 (A models ?!) been used in service? Or did just the prototypes have the SSC with absolutely no displacement. I'm curious about that.

 

Regarding your issues with controlling roll while pulling Gs. Is you arm supported? Having your arm resting on something is in my opinion key when using a SSC. 
 

Can’t really determine a whole lot from looking at the videos, but looking at the displacement/force graphs of the 2 sticks tells me that neither are really realistic since force required for max output is significantly less than the real SSC. So both are really a compromise. 
MK1 follows the initial curve of the real SSC, so it’s going to feel the same in your hand, but the actual output to the plane will be different since you have to reach max output with less force/deflection. You could make it 100% comparable, but then the max output would only be a fraction of the output needed to max perform the plane. 
MKII will be comparable to the real SSC in amount of deflection, but not in force required. Probably easier to fly, but still not 100% realistic. 
Only flew Block 15 Classic and MLU, so don’t really know if there is a difference between blocks. 

[303_Kermit]

4 hours ago, darkman222 said:

What do you mean? You mean the audible clicks by software or mechanical clicks? Mine does not do that. Maybe yours is faulty.

I think it's malfunction

[darkman222]

@AZDane

1 hour ago, AZDane said:

Is you arm supported?

With my testing of the MK1 I had an arm support, but pulling the stick back with force at the same time while the roll input has to be done in very small and precise doses it is very difficult for me to coordinate. Thats why I still keep my traditional gimbal stick for dogfighting.

I might mount my MK2 stick to where I had the arm support. At the moment it is on my desk mount, as you can see in the videos. But I'll give that another try.

I see what you mean considering the graph shown for the MK1. If the green line went on up to 25 lb force, it would be as real as possible. But 12 lb force on a desk mounted or even sim pit mounted stick in a simpit that does not throw you around like in a moving jet feels already quite like a lot of force.

I dont know, but the MK2 feels a lot easier to handle to me. Will keep on testing.

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by darkman222

[Scott-S6]

On 3/14/2023 at 7:54 PM, 303_Kermit said:

my Ultra "clicks" by going through "0" position. It don't affects precision, or handling, but it's annoying.

This is most likely your grip, not the base. If you've got an RS grip then make sure the four screws around the bottom of the grip are tight. If you're using a TM then check the two screws that hold the tailpiece - one is at the bottom rear the other is inside. In both cases I recommend using a suitable thread locker (loctite 819) so that they stay tight.

[303_Kermit]

15 hours ago, Scott-S6 said:

This is most likely your grip, not the base. If you've got an RS grip then make sure the four screws around the bottom of the grip are tight. If you're using a TM then check the two screws that hold the tailpiece - one is at the bottom rear the other is inside. In both cases I recommend using a suitable thread locker (loctite 819) so that they stay tight.

I hoped so, unfortunately it's not the case. The clicks come from Realsimulator device. In spite of these I am really happy from the choice I made. I'll report myself after I report reclamation. So far I have good opinion about device and the company.

[Scott-S6]

3 hours ago, 303_Kermit said:

I hoped so, unfortunately it's not the case. The clicks come from Realsimulator device. In spite of these I am really happy from the choice I made. I'll report myself after I report reclamation. So far I have good opinion about device and the company.

If you get any feedback about the problem I'd be very interested. I'm curious to know what defect is causing that because they are mechanically very simple.

[303_Kermit]

15 hours ago, Scott-S6 said:

If you get any feedback about the problem I'd be very interested. I'm curious to know what defect is causing that because they are mechanically very simple.

Update:
I solved the problem. I disassembled the grip again. It was the TS grip - RS base connection. 0,2mm play = one paper layer. Probably buying RS grip will be good idea. But I like it already as it is now. Thx for advice

A true testimony for the precision of sidestick is my improvement  ín 1 on 1 situations. Yesterday I was able to win a circle fight in P-47D40 against Bf-109K4 having 50% full auxiliary tank. I was able to keep the plane on the edge through 5 circles, wait until I burn the fuel from auxiliary. It was very clear that any hard pull would end up the fight. Steering by adding force not by the translation of axis makes a wonders. Next plane F-86F  ... probably in 2-3 months

 

With my best regards
Kermit

Edited March 24, 2023 by 303_Kermit

[Scott-S6]

2 hours ago, 303_Kermit said:

Update:
I solved the problem. I disassembled the grip again. It was the TS grip - RS base connection. 0,2mm play = one paper layer. Probably buying RS grip will be good idea. But I like it already as it is now. Thx for advice

A true testimony for the precision of sidestick is my improvement  ín 1 on 1 situations. Yesterday I was able to win a circle fight in P-47D40 against Bf-109K4 having 50% full auxiliary tank. I was able to keep the plane on the edge through 5 circles, wait until I burn the fuel from auxiliary. It was very clear that any hard pull would end up the fight. Steering by adding force not by the translation of axis makes a wonders. Next plane F-86F  ... probably in 2-3 months

 

With my best regards
Kermit

 

I replaced the tailpiece of the TM grip with a steel one that has the forward rake built in and epoxy bedded it into the grip. No play inside the grip and no play between the grip and base.

https://www.shapeways.com/product/XRFBJD5SX/thrustmaster-joystick-tailpiece-13-deg-angle-m?optionId=58918864&li=shops

[BaronVonVaderham]

Why not go for the 13 degree angle adapter from RS instead?

 

 Another question: so what is the invictus adapter like? Has anyone used it? It should give a very realistic look with their f-16 mount. Unfortunately invictus has no technical information whatsoever on their website. Nothing about the 13 degree angle, nothing about force range, nothing about deflection, nothing about software or adjustments, nothing about anything really. 
they also have forever on their website that they are working on a version for the current TM sidestick. 

all this makes me very dubious about their support, and even makes me wonder if they still exist.