The flight model, a stick extension and stick movement, what is a realistic behavior?

[F4ttyRider]

A question about the flight model and the stick extension. I know this is pretty much a personal preferences thing, but how stick curves and saturations should be adjusted to get the most realistic stick behavier for the Hornet? Let's say you have a TM gimbal with 10cm extension and TM Hornet handle attached. With those angle limits that the gimbal have, should you use a modified curve or not. And if so, what kind of curve is recommended to use? And how about saturation settings? I'm asking this question just a stick movement, not a needed controll force, in mind.

[Jackjack171]

2 hours ago, F4ttyRider said:

A question about the flight model and the stick extension. I know this is pretty much a personal preferences thing, but how stick curves and saturations should be adjusted to get the most realistic stick behavier for the Hornet? Let's say you have a TM gimbal with 10cm extension and TM Hornet handle attached. With those angle limits that the gimbal have, should you use a modified curve or not. And if so, what kind of curve is recommended to use? And how about saturation settings? I'm asking this question just a stick movement, not a needed controll force, in mind.

Hello,

I use a Win Wing F/A-18 setup. The Super Taurus setup with the stick centered between my legs. From what I've read and what I use is zero curves. The saturation can go all the way to 100. I have played with a little negative curve, but it makes the FM to twitchy or it feels mushy, so I went back to zero. From some of the forum post that I've read, curves are needed mostly for those that have the desk top type of sticks. 

[Nealius]

There is no "most realistic" in this case. Play with the curves/saturation until you're able to fly as precisely as you can. I'm on a Warthog, stock springs, 20cm extension, no curves, 100% saturation, and that gives me the most precision in the Hornet. And in most modules with a few exceptions. I do have a small deadzone, maybe 3~5, because the Hornet's autopilot doesn't like to properly engage for me unless my stick is DEAD center. 

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

I used to have a deadzone of 1 for both pitch and roll, but I removed that after the FM update: to me it feels better without those.

The AP engagement no longer requires deadzones: mine works just fine but there still is a predefined deadzone in the Virpil software so it might depend on your setup…

[Hiob]

On 3/2/2024 at 3:06 PM, F4ttyRider said:

A question about the flight model and the stick extension. I know this is pretty much a personal preferences thing, but how stick curves and saturations should be adjusted to get the most realistic stick behavier for the Hornet? Let's say you have a TM gimbal with 10cm extension and TM Hornet handle attached. With those angle limits that the gimbal have, should you use a modified curve or not. And if so, what kind of curve is recommended to use? And how about saturation settings? I'm asking this question just a stick movement, not a needed controll force, in mind.

Since you're input device and the control stick in the aircraft have very different length and throw, there isn't a good solution to match that. Using curves, you trade mild reaction at the center vs. wild reaction towards the edges or vice versa. With Saturation you have the problem that you may be unable to fully deflect the stick.

So it's best to not worry about realistic and just adjust it to your needs. Soften the reaction at the center is often the goto adjustment, though I would recommend not to overdue it with the curvature, to keep a somewhat linear and predictable deflection gradient.