Force feedback Joystick from Moza

[HotTom]

Yes, the base shows up twice and I disabled one. I was pretty sure i kept the best one but it was just a (uneducated?) guess.

 I have  no idea why I got two.

What I need (instead of all those largely useless "What it feels like" videos where reviewers thank Moza for all the free gear they were given, is a simple step-by-step setup guide, a "for dummies" tutorial. First do this. Then do this...

Maybe Moza  base and the Warthog stick don't play well together? Maybe I need a Moza stick?

I'm stumped.

 

[Deezle]

There's supposed to be two, re-enable it. It works just fine with the Warthog grip.

Edited November 3, 2024 by Deezle

[HotTom]

uhmmmmmmmmmm...okay I'll give that a try....Thanks....

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

There are 2 bases showing up. In DCS, you need to figure out which one works, and rename/disable the other one. Fortunately, you only need to do it once.

[rapid]

Have you updated the Moza cockpit software and the Base firmware?

 

I have the TM stick too, the only issue I found was that I had to plug the USB direct into my PC and not use my powered USB.

Edited November 3, 2024 by rapid

[Mr_sukebe]

1 hour ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

There are 2 bases showing up. In DCS, you need to figure out which one works, and rename/disable the other one. Fortunately, you only need to do it once.

Did you disable it in DCS or windows?

 

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

In DCS.

[HotTom]

8 hours ago, rapid said:

Have you updated the Moza cockpit software and the Base firmware?

 

I have the TM stick too, the only issue I found was that I had to plug the USB direct into my PC and not use my powered USB.

 

 

I have updated both. My Moza is plugged directly into my computer. Still no joy.

7 hours ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

In DCS.

How???

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

This:

Edited November 3, 2024 by VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

[agrasyuk]

On 11/2/2024 at 7:42 AM, rapid said:

Yes gone waaaaay off topic and totally derailed. 

No. Shoddy practices by Moza the company is totally on topic when discussing their product. And IMO way more important then any kind of functionality quirks. 

 

Theft of code allegations look very plausible. very sad to see people defending this kind of practice. 

[rapid]

9 hours ago, agrasyuk said:

No. Shoddy practices by Moza the company is totally on topic when discussing their product. And IMO way more important then any kind of functionality quirks. 

 

Theft of code allegations look very plausible. very sad to see people defending this kind of practice. 

Nope! Not defending anything, just saying that this should be discussed in a separate thread and leave this thread to discuss setting up and issues found with certain sticks etc.

[Mr_sukebe]

Quick update.

Mappings are pretty much complete and I'm happy with it's re-positioning and orientation. 

Have to say that the combination of VR, the AB9 and jetseat make flying a good deal more immersive.  

Just quote a certainly fast food place, "I'm lovin' it".

[Biggus]

I'm really enjoying mine.  My main gripes with my setup were that the neutral position of the Phantom and Tomcat seem quite far forward while my chair is in a position where it is as close to the stick as it can be without limiting pitch nose-up too much.  Altering the offset for the pitch axis is one fix, but it reduces the output range pretty significantly with a workable value.  Limiting forward travel feels a bit like it's creating a curve on the positive side of the stick, the raw numbers from the ADC stay within the 0-65535 range but passing through the middle there is a bigger voltage step per unit of distance travelled.  Setting curves to compensate is a bit annoying right now because you can't decouple the forward of centre section from the rear of centre section.

I've just hacked a joystick cutout out of my horrific ancient office chair and I think this might be most of the problem solved.  Now I'm just interested in developing profiles, and I'm not sure where to start.

 

[rapid]

17 hours ago, Mr_sukebe said:

Quick update.

Mappings are pretty much complete and I'm happy with it's re-positioning and orientation. 

Have to say that the combination of VR, the AB9 and jetseat make flying a good deal more immersive.  

Just quote a certainly fast food place, "I'm lovin' it".

So I guess it was worth the wait?

I'm selling my AVA today only had it two minutes! Had it for about two months then when I saw the Moza advertised It was a no brainer....it had to go!

If I had known I would not of brought the TM AVA catch up technology, very late to the game TM were with the AVA.

Chap should be picking it up today.

Edited November 7, 2024 by rapid

[MAXsenna]

I'm really enjoying mine.  My main gripes with my setup were that the neutral position of the Phantom and Tomcat seem quite far forward while my chair is in a position where it is as close to the stick as it can be without limiting pitch nose-up too much.  Altering the offset for the pitch axis is one fix, but it reduces the output range pretty significantly with a workable value.  Limiting forward travel feels a bit like it's creating a curve on the positive side of the stick, the raw numbers from the ADC stay within the 0-65535 range but passing through the middle there is a bigger voltage step per unit of distance travelled.  Setting curves to compensate is a bit annoying right now because you can't decouple the forward of centre section from the rear of centre section.
I've just hacked a joystick cutout out of my horrific ancient office chair and I think this might be most of the problem solved.  Now I'm just interested in developing profiles, and I'm not sure where to start.
 

I might have misunderstood you. You are complaining about the more realistic position of the stick with the less travel and displacement forward? Interesting as that's a first to be honest. Personally I find it easier.
Second. Messing with curves is not a great idea regarding FFB. It's generally known that it's not supported.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Biggus]

20 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

I might have misunderstood you. You are complaining about the more realistic position of the stick with the less travel and displacement forward? Interesting as that's a first to be honest. Personally I find it easier.
Second. Messing with curves is not a great idea regarding FFB. It's generally known that it's not supported.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk
 

Not so much a complaint, more of an observation with my particular hardware configuration.

People put travel limiters on Rhinos regularly, particularly with extensions like mine.  The centre position of the stick in those particular modules is roughly 3/4 arm extension with my setup.  I'm just looking for a way to limit the total throw to something a little more comfortable.  I'm not touching curves in DCS at all though, just experimenting with the Moza software to find a compromise.  I'm not convinced that all of the settings within the axis travel page work entirely as intended right now, though.  The software limiter appears to function slightly differently at the ends of the pitch axis travel.

[MAXsenna]

Not so much a complaint, more of an observation with my particular hardware configuration.
People put travel limiters on Rhinos regularly, particularly with extensions like mine.  The centre position of the stick in those particular modules is roughly 3/4 arm extension with my setup.  I'm just looking for a way to limit the total throw to something a little more comfortable.  I'm not touching curves in DCS at all though, just experimenting with the Moza software to find a compromise.  I'm not convinced that all of the settings within the axis travel page work entirely as intended right now, though.  The software limiter appears to function slightly differently at the ends of the pitch axis travel.

I see.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Rifter]

On 11/7/2024 at 3:10 AM, Biggus said:

Altering the offset for the pitch axis is one fix, but it reduces the output range pretty significantly with a workable value.  Limiting forward travel feels a bit like it's creating a curve on the positive side of the stick, the raw numbers from the ADC stay within the 0-65535 range but passing through the middle there is a bigger voltage step per unit of distance travelled.  Setting curves to compensate is a bit annoying right now because you can't decouple the forward of centre section from the rear of centre section.

As I understand MOZA on their Discord channel they are working on a solution for that.

On 11/7/2024 at 3:10 AM, Biggus said:

Now I'm just interested in developing profiles, and I'm not sure where to start.

Profiles for modules without explicit FFB support are ideally handled with the option 'Telemetry FFB'. But for that you need information about the force curves respectively force gradients of the real aircraft. Those force gradients are hard to come by.

From those few I am aware of, it looks like there is sometimes a breakout force to create a defined centre for the flight stick and to prevent unintentional stick movements.
Further more there is usually no symmetry between the roll and pitch axis. Roughly seen the roll axis is just one half or even less of the force level of the pitch axis. But then again in landing configuration the force curve of the roll axis is artificially increased to prevent unwanted roll movements during landing caused by excessive control inputs. This is also true for many (if not all) civilian jets. This cannot be reproduced at the moment with the possibilities of the MOZA software. I think Heatblur reproduced this behaviour for the Tomcat with the built-in FFB.

Soooo...

...bring us the flight control force gradients of our DCS jets and the profile development can begin!

Edited November 8, 2024 by Rifter

[shagrat]

Am 1.11.2024 um 17:20 schrieb trev5150:

Y'all need to chill. Consider the fact that these companies are all writing code based libraries based on the embargoed IP from the patents that just expired. Coders are lazy, and they are cooperative. If they get into a legal pissing contest their just gonna waste time and money like Apple and Samsung have been doing for the last 15 years. FFS people it's boutique FFB joystick bases for flight sims. Niche of a niche market. Hundreds of dollars are at stake! OMG!! That is not the kind of business where billions hang in the balance.

 

The concern is not about money, at all!

It can't be, as it is OPEN SOURCE, so not actually something expected to pay for.

The thing is that GPLv3 Open Source license is a valid license as much as Moza's EULA or any other terms of use.

Moza simply needs to release its derivative work and source code to the public and adhere to the GPLv3 license agreement. They don't even need to pay a single cent to be in legal compliance.

If somebody would copy Moza's Software, they sure would fight them in court tooth and nail.

The reason GPLv3 was introduced is exactly to prevent this shady practice of stealing open source code from the public, to sell it back to the public at a margin.

If you caught someone who stole the books you donated to a public library (with your intent being to make them available for others to read for free). And now the thief is selling them in his "book store" to make a profit, you wouldn't exactly argue "it's just a couple hundred dollars"...or would you? 

 

Edited November 9, 2024 by shagrat

[trev5150]

1 hour ago, shagrat said:

The concern is not about money, at all!

It can't be, as it is OPEN SOURCE, so not actually something expected to pay for.

The thing is that GPLv3 Open Source license is a valid license as much as Moza's EULA or any other terms of use.

Moza simply needs to release its derivative work and source code to the public and adhere to the GPLv3 license agreement. They don't even need to pay a single cent to be in legal compliance.

If somebody would copy Moza's Software, they sure would fight them in court tooth and nail.

The reason GPLv3 was introduced is exactly to prevent this shady practice of stealing open source code from the public, to sell it back to the public at a margin.

If you caught someone who stole the books you donnated to a public library (with your intent being to make them available for others to read for free). And now the thief is selling them in his "book store" to make a profit, you wouldn't exactly argue "it's just a couple hundred dollars"...or would you? 

 

That would make sense if the product they're selling was the software, but it isn't. Your analogy doesn't work. Their mods to the open source code can be proprietary IP. If I write a Cliff's Notes to your example library book and sell it in a student bookstore, that' not stealing and reselling the book. It's me writing a book about a book. Sorry, Shag,none of this holds up in my court of common sense. Additionally, it's mods to open source code for the purposes of making hardware product work.

This is the same kind of noise that got shot down in court as the lawsuit against Ed Sheeran for writing a song similar to Marvin Gaye's "Let's Get It On", basically, the money grubbing estate lawyers for Marvin's family trying to copyright a set of chord progression that's pretty much universal, so that they can sue everyone in perpetuity forever. It's the same as patent trolling It doesn't hold up and it's a waste of everyone's time, including yours and mine. The only people who are gonna care are the wild-eyed feverish fanatics on this forum. We as a flight sim community need to knock it off for the sake of the hobby otherwise that thing that makes this community so toxic are going to limit it forever. You also spelled "donated" incorrectly. Cheers!

 

Edited November 9, 2024 by trev5150

[Cab]

Still no one experiencing issues with heat after prolonged use? I remember this was a concern because of the absence of vents in the case.

[Aapje]

@trev5150

A few chords is different to copying an entire software package.

Your personal preferences/morals simply don't reflect the legal reality, and that poses a risk to buyers of the product.

Quote

We as a flight sim community need to knock it off for the sake of the hobby

We are not a hive mind and you do not speak for 'we'. Everyone gets to make up their own mind whether they support this ethically and consider the legal risks to Moza.

Edited November 9, 2024 by Aapje

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

51 minutes ago, Cab said:

Still no one experiencing issues with heat after prolonged use? I remember this was a concern because of the absence of vents in the case.

I cannot tell as so far, I do not use it continuously for over 30 minutes. Nor stress test it. So far so good.

[shagrat]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb trev5150:

That would make sense if the product they're selling was the software, but it isn't. Your analogy doesn't work. Their mods to the open source code can be proprietary IP. If I write a Cliff's Notes to your example library book and sell it in a student bookstore, that' not stealing and reselling the book. It's me writing a book about a book. Sorry, Shag,none of this holds up in my court of common sense. Additionally, it's mods to open source code for the purposes of making hardware product work.

This is the same kind of noise that got shot down in court as the lawsuit against Ed Sheeran for writing a song similar to Marvin Gaye's "Let's Get It On", basically, the money grubbing estate lawyers for Marvin's family trying to copyright a set of chord progression that's pretty much universal, so that they can sue everyone in perpetuity forever. It's the same as patent trolling It doesn't hold up and it's a waste of everyone's time, including yours and mine. The only people who are gonna care are the wild-eyed feverish fanatics on this forum. We as a flight sim community need to knock it off for the sake of the hobby otherwise that thing that makes this community so toxic are going to limit it forever. You also spelled "donated" incorrectly. Cheers!

 

 

It's not about "making sense". The GPLv3 is a legally binding license.

It protects the intellectual property of the creator and a violation is potential grounds for a law suite.

And the key point is NOT the money.

Per GPLv3 they are legally required to provide the source code, put information about the changes into their code, name the original creator and add the license agreement to their software.

As they didn't do any of these, they are in violation of the GPLv3.

There's a reason big companies implemented code verification and anlysis into their product development to identify potential open source snippets in their code before the software gets published or integrated into a product, as the liability in case someone decides to go to court and wins is nightmare in the making.

Edit: Thanks for the pointer to donated. Missed that while typing.

Edited November 9, 2024 by shagrat

[Mr_sukebe]

3 hours ago, Cab said:

Still no one experiencing issues with heat after prolonged use? I remember this was a concern because of the absence of vents in the case.

none so far, though I’ve not flown for my than 90 mins at a time, and those have been fairly relaxed flights, not fighting with the controls