[Suggestion] Spring joystick control.

[FusRoPotato]

The correction would be off-center so it'd be disabled most of the time.

[Victory205]

I’m not sure if some of the commenters here understand how flight control systems work in a non-reversible hydraulic system typically found on conventional control tactical jets.

In such control systems, the pilot never feels aerodynamic loads on the controls, nor are the weight or balance of the controls themselves transmitted to the stick . Sitting on the ground where the aircraft can’t generate more than one G, a pilot displacing the stick from its neutral point only feels springs, bobweights and friction. Those forces get heavier in the air only as G loads are felt on any bobweights in the system.

Most of such systems move the stick during trim operations. Inputs such as Mach trim, or an integrated trim system inputs that independently offset flap, speedbrake and auxiliary inputs like DLC engagement or actuation generally don’t move the stick, nor do stability augmentation system inputs to the flight surfaces.

For a sim player with a spring stick controller, the physical stick’s location frequently doesn’t follow the virtual stick in the game. On the ground for instance, in the F14, F5, F86, etc, if the player actuates the pitch trim only without touching the physical stick, then the virtual stick will move on screen, but the player’s physical stick doesn’t. The two are out of synch, so to speak.

Another is that the physical stick has a symmetric throw in all axis, but the real aircraft don’t, with the neutral point well forward in the arc, so that more aft stick throw is available than forward stick. The F14 also has a physical pitch curve already built into its system, so you can see that the module’s virtual stick doesn’t follow the player’s physical stick in a 1:1 fashion.

For trimming, the only force available to produce an out of trim force is the spring in the stick. So as the player trims out those spring forces, he must concurrently move the stick opposite the trim direction. You can test this in the aforementioned aircraft by trimming at 500 knots, then slowing to 150 knots without trimming. Note the trimmed stick position at 500 knots against a reference point on the instrument panel, then decelerate while the back pressure against the spring. Note a reference the stick ends up. Then trim out the forces to maintain 150 knots. You will notice that the stick is in the same place with respect to the instrument panel, but you have unconsciously moved your physical stick to back to its center, neutral spring position.

If you don’t compensate, and hold your physical stick fixed in position while trimming aft during this exercise, then the virtual aircraft will enter a climb. The F-4E behaves the same way during this exercise, the only difference is that the stick moves slightly with trim inputs, which manifest just like trim inputs in the other jets listed. 

I’ll let Grover explain the F-4E pitch control system, he’ll likely blow your socks off, but hopefully this background information helps clear up the nuances and limitations of real trim vs virtual.

You can put me down for one of the guys who finds the F-4E solid and easy to fly because of its emulation of the bellows system. It’s very pitch stable in holding a constant G, and I’m not seeing any of the behavior you’ve describe during roll reversals (which I checked again today in a variety of conditions).  

I would add that I have a WingWing base with a 120mm extension, with the heaviest springs I could find and a pitch curve of 12. This provides a more familiar feel as I’m used to much higher stick force per G than most stock controllers provide. I’ve found that it makes tanking, carrier landings and trimming straightforward..

I was pretty comfortable in the F-4E module straightaway. It trims and flys similarly to a grossly overpowered A-4, but believe it or not, the A-4 was more sensitive in pitch and roll than the F-4E.

Edited May 27, 2024 by Victory205

[FusRoPotato]

I don't think anyone here is talking about control surface force. We're talking about the pitch oscillations that can be avoided with FFB but not non-FFB sticks, supposedly of which come from these weights and bellows. I can make mine behave like a normal spring stick and see clearly what is being talked about. The stick is very wobbly around center without FFB.

Turns out it doesn't seem like any modelling is necessary @kablamoman, at least for the oscillations. The extra motion can be mostly removed with a constrained PD according to my tests so far.

[Hunter2.1]

What is the problem for developers to make “stop holding the stick” a disabled option? I don't understand this forced promotion of their "achievements" in the simulation. The “everyone likes it” argument is not relevant, I am sure that the majority are don’t know because they have no real experience in flight.

—

sry for my English 

 

[FusRoPotato]

I don't know but I thought it was a little funny to see someone who decided comments aren't worth carefully reading point a finger at said comment with a much higher vote count and say they're in the minority.

Edited May 27, 2024 by FusRoPotato

[Smollet]

give us, the minority as you said, the opportunity to return the money.  Then you will feel how many people disagree with your decisions.  Many people simply do not sit on forums.  Many people simply don’t write because enough has already been said.

[kablamoman]

@Super Grover

Sorry to bug you again, but in the process of trying to put together a video a thought occurred to me, and I wanted to run it by you to see if there was something I was missing.

I think we all understand the concept of the bob weights attached to the stick and the bellows creating a balancing force. I think everybody here understands and accepts that and also that a sudden increase in load on the bob weights would cause an imbalance and throw off trim.

My main problem with all of this has always been the uncommanded stab deflections, and according to your simulation, it's due to the modulation of the trim neutral point when load is put on the plane -- but my question is this:

Did you take into account that in this control system, when a pilot is pulling on the stick, or indeed if he were to suddenly relax his pull, that he is still gripping the stick and holding it in place, and thus supporting the increased load of the bobweight?

If this is the case, the moment caused by the increased load of the bobweight should not be fed back into the system to throw off the trim neutral point, therefore, it should not be modulating erratically as it does with load.

If this is indeed an oversight, I believe it would pretty much resolve the issues I'm seeing with the pitch oscillations.

What do you think? Is it perhaps one of those engineering oversights where one might be so zeroed in on the complex interactions of the system that one forgets to put the system into its proper context? ie. The pilot's arm in real life is actually there, and doing the work of supporting the increased load. It's not an isolated system -- a human is meant to be part of it providing forces of their own.

 

Edited May 27, 2024 by kablamoman

[felixx75]

1 hour ago, Smollet said:

give us, the minority as you said, the opportunity to return the money.  Then you will feel how many people disagree with your decisions.  Many people simply do not sit on forums.  Many people simply don’t write because enough has already been said.

Considering the amount of F-4s you see on various servers (including my DCS colleagues) who seem to use the module without any problems and the number of people complaining about it here on the forum, it's pretty obvious that it's only a minority who have a problem, especially since it's actually only a psychological and not a "physical" problem (the visual implementation of the stick), as Heatblur keeps repeating. It's bad enough anyway that Heatblur says how the system works, but players seem to know better and say "no, that's not true".

And why should you get a refund because the module works exactly as it should.

[Rifter]

1 hour ago, felixx75 said:

especially since it's actually only a psychological and not a "physical" problem (the visual implementation of the stick)

When I hide the flight stick there is no distraction by an out of sync effect. But I am still a little bewildered by  the oscillation effect, which is indeed part of the physics of the flight stick system and the aircraft itself and not a perception problem. The whole flight stick system is a spring-mass-damper system. I was amazed by the little damping in the system. Is that true to the real aircraft? Can I provoke such pronounced oscillations around the pitch axis on a real F-4 by simply flipping the stick or let it go when its force loaded?
Besides of that, Heatblur build a kind of generic “standard pilot” for the non-FFB-sticks, who is (virtually) holding the stick in a reasonable way. I guess some people consider that as an encroachment on their pilot freedom…

Edited May 27, 2024 by Rifter

[kablamoman]

2 hours ago, Victory205 said:

I’m not sure if some of the commenters here understand how flight control systems work in a non-reversible hydraulic system typically found on conventional control tactical jets.

In such control systems, the pilot never feels aerodynamic loads on the controls, nor are the weight or balance of the controls themselves transmitted to the stick . Sitting on the ground where the aircraft can’t generate more than one G, a pilot displacing the stick from its neutral point only feels springs, bobweights and friction. Those forces get heavier in the air only as G loads are felt on any bobweights in the system.

Most of such systems move the stick during trim operations. Inputs such as Mach trim, or an integrated trim system inputs that independently offset flap, speedbrake and auxiliary inputs like DLC engagement or actuation generally don’t move the stick, nor do stability augmentation system inputs to the flight surfaces.

For a sim player with a spring stick controller, the physical stick’s location frequently doesn’t follow the virtual stick in the game. On the ground for instance, in the F14, F5, F86, etc, if the player actuates the pitch trim only without touching the physical stick, then the virtual stick will move on screen, but the player’s physical stick doesn’t. The two are out of synch, so to speak.

Another is that the physical stick has a symmetric throw in all axis, but the real aircraft don’t, with the neutral point well forward in the arc, so that more aft stick throw is available than forward stick. The F14 also has a physical pitch curve already built into its system, so you can see that the module’s virtual stick doesn’t follow the player’s physical stick in a 1:1 fashion.

For trimming, the only force available to produce an out of trim force is the spring in the stick. So as the player trims out those spring forces, he must concurrently move the stick opposite the trim direction. You can test this in the aforementioned aircraft by trimming at 500 knots, then slowing to 150 knots without trimming. Note the trimmed stick position at 500 knots against a reference point on the instrument panel, then decelerate while the back pressure against the spring. Note a reference the stick ends up. Then trim out the forces to maintain 150 knots. You will notice that the stick is in the same place with respect to the instrument panel, but you have unconsciously moved your physical stick to back to its center, neutral spring position.

If you don’t compensate, and hold your physical stick fixed in position while trimming aft during this exercise, then the virtual aircraft will enter a climb. The F-4E behaves the same way during this exercise, the only difference is that the stick moves slightly with trim inputs, which manifest just like trim inputs in the other jets listed. 

I’ll let Grover explain the F-4E pitch control system, he’ll likely blow your socks off, but hopefully this background information helps clear up the nuances and limitations of real trim vs virtual.

You can put me down for one of the guys who finds the F-4E solid and easy to fly because of its emulation of the bellows system. It’s very pitch stable in holding a constant G, and I’m not seeing any of the behavior you’ve describe during roll reversals (which I checked again today in a variety of conditions).  

I would add that I have a WingWing base with a 120mm extension, with the heaviest springs I could find and a pitch curve of 12. This provides a more familiar feel as I’m used to much higher stick force per G than most stock controllers provide. I’ve found that it makes tanking, carrier landings and trimming straightforward..

I was pretty comfortable in the F-4E module straightaway. It trims and flys similarly to a grossly overpowered A-4, but believe it or not, the A-4 was more sensitive in pitch and roll than the F-4E.

 

I don't think anybody is disputing anything you wrote. Good description of how our control interfaces in sims work. I also don't see anybody in here confused about flight control systems.

I have no problems flying the thing. As in, I can take off, fly around, shoot things and drop bombs just fine.

I just think it handles pretty terribly in pitch in one specific area because there is a pretty gnarly error in how they've tried to shoehorn feel forces into the processing of control inputs -- it directly, and adversely affects stick/stab position being selected by the pilot. It manifests as a pronounced bunting and ensuing oscillation in pitch when unloading after a pull. You cannot control it because direct control of the stick is not possible, as it would be in real life -- as it is in other non-FBW modules. It stands out to me as a small, but still glaring error in an otherwise amazing accomplishment so far. I'll see if I can get a video up describing my problem with it, comparing the relation of physical stick inputs to the control surfaces of a couple other modules juxtaposed with the Phantom.

[kablamoman]

3 hours ago, FusRoPotato said:

Turns out it doesn't seem like any modelling is necessary @kablamoman, at least for the oscillations. The extra motion can be mostly removed with a constrained PD according to my tests so far.

Neat. Should post a video of it in action if you can get it working.

I think for me I'm most interested in understanding what's going on... Helping if I can, and being humbled if I can't. If I'm way off base and turns out they've modelled it accurately I would not want them to change a thing.

Edited May 27, 2024 by kablamoman

[Aero4000]

I continue to fly this module patiently and read carefully.

But. Do you know what the most unpleasant thing is? HB constantly hints that too few users are dissatisfied with the control system and FM in general. Should statistics be collected and there is some minimum threshold of dissatisfaction so that HB stops saying that they will not change anything on this issue? No. In many other requests, we will get an instant response and a desire to address the problem. Many many people do not complain, based on gratitude for the module as a whole. Many people are not greedy, so as not to repeat what has already been written, or do not feel competent enough in the field of controlling real aircraft. So do we have a problem with statistics or are we dealing with double standards?

Another interesting point: are SME reading this topic or is HB saving their nerves?

[FusRoPotato]

1 hour ago, kablamoman said:

Neat. Should post a video of it in action if you can get it working.

I think for me I'm most interested in understanding what's going on... Helping if I can, and being humbled if I can't. If I'm way off base and turns out they've modelled it accurately I would not want them to change a thing.

 

The thing is, there isn't much claim to modeling it accurately because it's not a model of the plane or its components that is producing the effect you're seeing. It's a modeling of a virtual pilot who is receiving force from a stick. In mission validation, we normally only hit the required stick free and fixed stick analysis because it covers all we need to know. What degree of impulse the stick absorbs due to an imparted reaction force from a lax and unsuspecting pilot's arm might be considered for something in stabcon, but there are no feedback reactions here from aerodynamic forces. What we are seeing in this F-4E module is probably close to what you'd get in such a case, but the thing is, it's unlikely a pilot would be so lax all the time, especially during combat or moments when precision is desired.

Fixed stick should have been assumed at all times, what is described as the tightest a pilot would hold it. Based on how the descriptors of the torque responses are in the manual and video, it's really hard to believe the stick would be moving that much with anything other than a very loose grip or the arm of a 97 year old pilot.

Edited May 27, 2024 by FusRoPotato

[Maksim Savelev]

HB people here, who are “against” your stick to nonFFB joystick linking, are very much educated and completely understand what is going on with the system itself, and glad you’ve got a deep dive into the simulation of it’s proper work. Please try to hear what we keep saying. There is no problem in system simulation! And it works like it should (well almost) but benefits of the simulation are only could be seen on FFB devices or real aircraft. Spring joysticks require adaptation of this simulation to work in proper way. That’s it. Do you understand that simple statement?

All of these kind gentlemen here not only bought your module appreciating by this all of your hard work, but spending a lot of their’s time providing you very qualified feedback and support for free. 
 

Edited May 27, 2024 by Maksim Savelev

[Phantom12]

When people make concentration camp comments they come off less educated and qualified and more hyperbolic and emotional. More than a little ridiculous. Im still not sure what the problem is? The video doesnt mention what settings were used and mostly seems to demonstrate behaviour on the ground. As grover mentioned its a special case and anyway not really relevant for handling the airplane since it isnt moving.

 

I had a try with my WH yesterday and none of it really struck me as unusual or unintuitive. Actually it felt pretty good. I had no problem flying at combat speeds or setting up for an onspeed approach. In a few ways once trimmed it was easier than with my FFB stick, since the axes are higher resolution and the forces dont slacken off like with FFB. Of course if you snatch the stick the nose will oscillate, but this happens even with EDs implentation.

Admittedly in this quick test I didnt see a huge difference between blending on or off, and I also eagerly await grovers write-up on how exactly this works and what its doing.

[felixx75]

1 hour ago, Maksim Savelev said:

HB you can mark us here and send to concentration camp...

Are you serious? With this statement you completely disqualify yourself and everything that follows can no longer be taken seriously.

Such comparisons are absolutely inappropriate!

30 minutes ago, Phantom12 said:

As grover mentioned its a special case and anyway not really relevant for handling the airplane since it isnt moving.

But he's just one of the developers, so he has no idea what he's talking about! (just to be sure, that was irony!)

In the meantime, for the most part (not for everyone) it's no longer about understanding or improving something, but only about being right and remaining stubborn. HB can say what they want, they (players) won't listen because they don't want to.

Edited May 27, 2024 by felixx75

[BIGNEWY]

please keep all feedback civil and constructive or I will have to moderate this thread. 

Please stay on topic and take a look at our forum rules at the top of the page. 

thank you 

[Nealius]

The fact that so many people are reporting the same points to there being an issue somewhere. That is an undeniable fact, as is the fact that the hardware and software used by devs, SMEs, and beta testers is not representative of what the average end-user has. It's also a fact that the devs and SMEs are going to be biased towrads perfection of simulating the real deal, practical usability for the average customer be damned. From a purely logical and objective, unbiased perspective, this should be an option. To be clear, it should not be removed, but the choice to turn it off should be available so the end-user can tweak the controls simulation to work better according to their hardware/software. 

Edited May 27, 2024 by Nealius

[Renko]

Cant wait for that post about the system that SuperGrover will do. I'm sure it will get more understanding of the systems to continue the discusion if necesary, and maybe clear some doubts about it.
And Its great to see some SMEs like Victory chime in.

@IronMike, could you guys consider make a video explaining the discussed behaviour? To accompany the explanation of the future SuperGrover text. Featuring a SME will be great.
Could clear things about expected spring stick behaviour in a more direct way, and complement the text.
If time permits and you consider that it will make more good than harm

Edited May 27, 2024 by Renko

[Victory205]

6 hours ago, kablamoman said:

…It manifests as a pronounced bunting and ensuing oscillation in pitch when unloading after a pull. You cannot control it because direct control of the stick is not possible, as it would be in real life…

Can you post a video that includes the control stick and controls indicator of the specific problem that you are having as describe above? Include the aircraft load out and fuel state and altitude. We should be able to see the rest.

It would help if you would share the technique are you using during roll inputs, and exactly what you mean by “unload after pull”? Are you referencing a roll reversal during a high G turn or a transition from turning flight to a zero G unload for an attempted bug out?

Also include your stick model, extension if any, rudder pedals and curves, etc. Does your rig allow you to rest your forearm on your thigh or the arm of your chair?

I’m not seeing problems during such maneuvers.

[Aero4000]

By the way, pitch oscillation is observed at speeds of about 220 knots due to the cyclic operation of external automatic slats. This does not look like a bug, unless of course it is observed on a real plane.

[IronMike]

37 minutes ago, Aero4000 said:

By the way, pitch oscillation is observed at speeds of about 220 knots due to the cyclic operation of external automatic slats. This does not look like a bug, unless of course it is observed on a real plane.

Actually we need to investigate if a bug, really. We currently think it may not be, the oscillations are mentioned in the manuals, and the advice is to kill them by changing speed immediately. We're currently looking into it with the SMEs. Another way to override it, is to use slats out or slats override if prolonged flight at such a speed, where it occurs, is planned.

4 hours ago, Renko said:

Cant wait for that post about the system that SuperGrover will do. I'm sure it will get more understanding of the systems to continue the discusion if necesary, and maybe clear some doubts about it.
And Its great to see some SMEs like Victory chime in.

@IronMike, could you guys consider make a video explaining the discussed behaviour? To accompany the explanation of the future SuperGrover text. Featuring a SME will be great.
Could clear things about expected non-spring stick behaviour in a more direct way, and complement the text.
If time permits and you consider that it will make more good than harm

Thank you that is a good idea. I won't promise it for now though, as we're currently still busy fixing all the launch issues. But if time permits, I like the idea.

Edited May 27, 2024 by IronMike

[kablamoman]

4 hours ago, Victory205 said:

Can you post a video that includes the control stick and controls indicator of the specific problem that you are having as describe above? Include the aircraft load out and fuel state and altitude. We should be able to see the rest.

It would help if you would share the technique are you using during roll inputs, and exactly what you mean by “unload after pull”? Are you referencing a roll reversal during a high G turn or a transition from turning flight to a zero G unload for an attempted bug out?

Also include your stick model, extension if any, rudder pedals and curves, etc. Does your rig allow you to rest your forearm on your thigh or the arm of your chair?

I’m not seeing problems during such maneuvers.

Here's what I'm talking about. The behavior is there at all speeds and weights, varying at bit of course with aerodynamic damping, loading (on the plane) and moments of inertia, I'm sure, but all showing the oscillating stab.

It is nothing to do with roll input. By unload after pull, I mean move the stick (and stab) back to its original trimmed position before the pull while still gripping the stick. I am not referencing roll reversal -- nobody in this thread mentioned that.

I am using a VKB gunfighter with a 200mm extension and 2x #50 springs on each axis for a total of 4 with the soft center avia cams. It is the heaviest feel I can get on my stick. Like you, I crave a heavy stick because heavy control forces are what I'm used to IRL. My stick is center mounted, I typically don't rest my arm on anything, but as you can see from my flying of the other modules and my control indicator I have no trouble being precise with it. I was using a curve of 15 in the video, but started initially with 20.

Apologies for the first few seconds, I was trying to show that in-game stick was locked to my inputs while pulling, but my lower FOV was cut off by the VR mirror.

Edited May 27, 2024 by kablamoman

[Renko]

26 minutes ago, IronMike said:

Thank you that is a good idea. I won't promise it for now though, as we're currently still busy fixing all the launch issues. But if time permits, I like the idea.

Sure, you guys must be busy.
In addition to having a video with Glover's explanation, I thought that having that video as demonstration of the expected behavior of a non-FFB stick could help detect possible errors induced by the configuration of the hardware. If there is any.

Edited May 27, 2024 by Renko

[lengro]

13 minutes ago, kablamoman said:

Here's what I'm talking about. The behavior is there at all speeds and weights, varying at bit of course with aerodynamic loading and moments of inertia, I'm sure, but all showing the oscillating stab.

Thanks for that video, it is very clear what you are talking about.

It would be nice if anyone with a FFB stick could make a similar video, as I understand the claim is, this is not happening at all with FFB?

Hopefully HB can clear some things up when they get the time to make the more detailed write up.