Question about FFB implementation

[PawlaczGMD]

I just got the Moza FFB base, and tried the Tiger in Direct mode. AFAIK, this is supposed to use the in-game implementation of FFB.

Is this the "best" setting I could be using for this aircraft?

I've noticed some issues, such as:

-The trim for level flight seems to be different than non-FFB. I need to trim all the way down and then push the stick more for level flight at high speed (600 kts)

-The physical stick doesn't move with trim, the in-game one does

-I did not notice any noticeable stick force increase at high speed and ripped my wings, which I have not done in a long time with non-FFB. Are the "bobweights" implemented?

 

I'm looking for suggestions more than complaining.

[Weta43]

Can't talk for the Moza, but for MSSFFBII (assuming you've removed any input curves)

• I don't have the Tiger installed any more, but once trimmed it wasn't necessary to push the stick manually at any speed.
• Trimming forward (right, left etc) will move the physical stick forward as for the in game one.
• For most aircraft forces should be dependent on speed and you should be able to ride the edge of the stall for most aircraft on feel alone.

You do have to have straight 'curves' with the full range of movement in the axis set up and the FFB turned on in-game for it all to work correctly though.

[PawlaczGMD]

1 hour ago, Weta43 said:

Can't talk for the Moza, but for MSSFFBII (assuming you've removed any input curves)

• I don't have the Tiger installed any more, but once trimmed it wasn't necessary to push the stick manually at any speed.
• Trimming forward (right, left etc) will move the physical stick forward as for the in game one.
• For most aircraft forces should be dependent on speed and you should be able to ride the edge of the stall for most aircraft on feel alone.

You do have to have straight 'curves' with the full range of movement in the axis set up and the FFB turned on in-game for it all to work correctly though.

My new stick just died ;_; I had all that set correctly. I think with Moza the telemetry FFB might work better. I got to try their Hornet profile before the tragedy, and it felt completely different than Direct. I will test it again after replacing this junk.

[Bucic]

When you increase the airspeed after trimming the aircraft a forward pressure on the stick is going to be required.

 

The weight bob is a single small weight that works upon acceleration only (G). There is no airspeed dependent force feel mechanism in the F-5 family of aircraft.

Edited February 14 by Bucic

[Abburo]

Don't know about Moza, but i own a Brunner. This one is natively supporting both DirectX and its own software. I have to say that I preferred to stay with their software which is by far more precise than the DirectX. On helis, while trimming with DirectX it is not remaining in exact position as is supposed to and i need to actively correct it, quite similar with the  OP statement... i don't know the reason and I did not went on a deep diving for tuning. While using the native software from Brunner, the trimming part is extremely precise as this particular function is set directly in their software. There are some up's and down's using the native software as well, for example the variety of effects is slightly poorer then DirectX. FFB is still at its beginning and probably DCS needs to consider to create its own API for this and not using the limited native DirectX.

Also is already known that not all DCS module are properly supporting FFB, especially looking on jets.

[nairb121]

The F-5E's FFB support is rudimentary at best, and operating in Direct mode is not going to give a realistic response. I use mine in "integrated" mode, so I can augment the in-game FFB with telemetry-based FFB. I will attach my preset later if you'd like to try it.

[Bucic]

15 minutes ago, nairb121 said:

The F-5E's FFB support is rudimentary at best, and operating in Direct mode is not going to give a realistic response. I use mine in "integrated" mode, so I can augment the in-game FFB with telemetry-based FFB. I will attach my preset later if you'd like to try it.

Could you please give an example of what's wrong or missing?

Edited February 14 by Bucic

[nairb121]

31 minutes ago, Bucic said:

Could you please give an example of what's wrong or missing?

The bobweight loading is completely absent, the force output is just a (fairly weak) linear spring response regardless of speed/g-load. Force by g-load is absolutely critical for a hydromechanically-controlled aircraft, and without it FFB is borderline pointless. The Moza software lets me approximate it and add it on top of the game's forces, but it'd be better for it to be implemented in the game itself.

What does work:
1. Trim centering (though supplemental hardware trim is also needed if using Integrated mode)
2. Aileron spring stop

There are no vibration effects like you get from the Heatblur modules, but that's OK with me. Aircraft vibrations don't really come through the stick anyway... it's just a compromise since not everyone has a seat shaker or similar.

[Bucic]

4 minutes ago, nairb121 said:

The bobweight loading is completely absent, the force output is just a (fairly weak) linear spring response regardless of speed/g-load. Force by g-load is absolutely critical for a hydromechanically-controlled aircraft, and without it FFB is borderline pointless. The Moza software lets me approximate it and add it on top of the game's forces, but it'd be better for it to be implemented in the game itself.

What does work:
1. Trim centering (though supplemental hardware trim is also needed if using Integrated mode)
2. Aileron spring stop

There are no vibration effects like you get from the Heatblur modules, but that's OK with me. Aircraft vibrations don't really come through the stick anyway... it's just a compromise since not everyone has a seat shaker or similar.

So bob weight implementation is missing. Thanks for the info.

[PawlaczGMD]

Looks like I had a:

-faulty stick

-didn't set up telemetry and profiles correctly.

I replaced it now, and my original complaints are mostly gone.

I will do more testing of pulling high G at high speed, but trim works correctly now.

7 hours ago, nairb121 said:

The bobweight loading is completely absent, the force output is just a (fairly weak) linear spring response regardless of speed/g-load. Force by g-load is absolutely critical for a hydromechanically-controlled aircraft, and without it FFB is borderline pointless. The Moza software lets me approximate it and add it on top of the game's forces, but it'd be better for it to be implemented in the game itself.

What does work:
1. Trim centering (though supplemental hardware trim is also needed if using Integrated mode)
2. Aileron spring stop

There are no vibration effects like you get from the Heatblur modules, but that's OK with me. Aircraft vibrations don't really come through the stick anyway... it's just a compromise since not everyone has a seat shaker or similar.

Would you mind sharing your Moza profile?

[nairb121]

3 hours ago, PawlaczGMD said:

Looks like I had a:

-faulty stick

-didn't set up telemetry and profiles correctly.

I replaced it now, and my original complaints are mostly gone.

I will do more testing of pulling high G at high speed, but trim works correctly now.

Would you mind sharing your Moza profile?

Preset's attached. You will probably need to rebind the hardware trim buttons to fit your grip.

{7f4a0c12-987c-4990-9f79-ec6d9dcfc42f}.preset

[PawlaczGMD]

21 hours ago, nairb121 said:

Preset's attached. You will probably need to rebind the hardware trim buttons to fit your grip.

{7f4a0c12-987c-4990-9f79-ec6d9dcfc42f}.preset 8.02 kB · 6 downloads

Thanks. I have serious issues trimming the jet with this preset. It seems like hardware trim is not synced with the indicators in the jet. Without hardware trim, trim just doesn't work. Is there a way to not use hardware trim?

Edit: it seems to match much better with following rate 2. But still, is there no way to not rely on it and sync it with the game automatically?

Edited February 15 by PawlaczGMD

[Bucic]

16 hours ago, PawlaczGMD said:

Thanks. I have serious issues trimming the jet with this preset. It seems like hardware trim is not synced with the indicators in the jet. Without hardware trim, trim just doesn't work. Is there a way to not use hardware trim?

Edit: it seems to match much better with following rate 2. But still, is there no way to not rely on it and sync it with the game automatically?

I'm all for flying per RL procedures but the the reality is the in-cockpit indicator is barely useful. It almost always gives a configuration that is too nose-up. And the default trim settings at mission start are far worse.

So if the indicator is your only problem, forget about it and enjoy the flying.

[PawlaczGMD]

9 hours ago, Bucic said:

I'm all for flying per RL procedures but the the reality is the in-cockpit indicator is barely useful. It almost always gives a configuration that is too nose-up. And the default trim settings at mission start are far worse.

So if the indicator is your only problem, forget about it and enjoy the flying.

I actually found trim is not working at all for me in the Spitfire or P-47. Indicators and trim tabs move, but don't change the flight model.

I also found that the F-5 has a special option for FFB trim following, but again it doesn't seem to work.

Overall, something is fishy.

[nairb121]

On 2/15/2025 at 5:16 PM, PawlaczGMD said:

Thanks. I have serious issues trimming the jet with this preset. It seems like hardware trim is not synced with the indicators in the jet. Without hardware trim, trim just doesn't work. Is there a way to not use hardware trim?

Edit: it seems to match much better with following rate 2. But still, is there no way to not rely on it and sync it with the game automatically?

DCS doesn't export the stick center position, so currently the Moza software doesn't know what center point is being commanded in-game - its own center position is independent. The best we can do right now is try to match the in-game speed with Moza's hardware trim movement rate, so their centers more-or-less match. Hopefully this will change at some point in the future - this would be a very helpful export value for DCS to implement, with more mainstream FFB sticks being introduced after a long period without any.

[Bucic]

14 hours ago, PawlaczGMD said:

I actually found trim is not working at all for me in the Spitfire or P-47. Indicators and trim tabs move, but don't change the flight model.

I also found that the F-5 has a special option for FFB trim following, but again it doesn't seem to work.

Overall, something is fishy.

Please submit a bug report with a track. I don't have any FFB devices.

[nairb121]

14 hours ago, PawlaczGMD said:

I actually found trim is not working at all for me in the Spitfire or P-47. Indicators and trim tabs move, but don't change the flight model.

I also found that the F-5 has a special option for FFB trim following, but again it doesn't seem to work.

Overall, something is fishy.

Enabling "force feedback" in DCS settings causes it to ignore all in-game trim effect - in theory it should be moving your physical stick instead, for the same effect. This is correct behavior - if you hold the stick steady and push back against the changing stick forces, there will be no change in flight characteristics. (Only for aircraft with actual changes in stick position/force with trim, not FBW or similar.) If it's not moving your physical stick, then something may be wrong with your settings in the Moza software.

[PawlaczGMD]

I've found the issue. I had a vJoy device recognized as a FFB device, and all the direct game input was going there. I wasn't getting it in my actual FFB base.

Now F-5 trim works without hardware trim, although it doesn't appear perfectly synced with the indicator. That's fine for me now.

Edited February 17 by PawlaczGMD

[PawlaczGMD]

11 hours ago, nairb121 said:

DCS doesn't export the stick center position, so currently the Moza software doesn't know what center point is being commanded in-game - its own center position is independent. The best we can do right now is try to match the in-game speed with Moza's hardware trim movement rate, so their centers more-or-less match. Hopefully this will change at some point in the future - this would be a very helpful export value for DCS to implement, with more mainstream FFB sticks being introduced after a long period without any.

I see what you mean with the default trim though. The fact it is not synced with the game won't let me trim nose down enough. It's not really flyable without hardware trim. Is there a bug report for this?

[nairb121]

14 hours ago, PawlaczGMD said:

I see what you mean with the default trim though. The fact it is not synced with the game won't let me trim nose down enough. It's not really flyable without hardware trim. Is there a bug report for this?

I don't think so, but I also don't think this would be considered a bug - it's performing as designed, but the implementation doesn't combine well with external FFB forces/effects. If there is a "bug", it's that the FFB implementation in the F-5E is unrealistic... but that's probably more of a wishlist item.

Another general DCS wishlist item would be a spring center export, so external FFB software could center their own forces correctly. Until then, hardware trim is the only way IMO. I just set it to the same buttons I have bound in-game and it works well enough.

[PawlaczGMD]

1 hour ago, nairb121 said:

I don't think so, but I also don't think this would be considered a bug - it's performing as designed, but the implementation doesn't combine well with external FFB forces/effects. If there is a "bug", it's that the FFB implementation in the F-5E is unrealistic... but that's probably more of a wishlist item.

Another general DCS wishlist item would be a spring center export, so external FFB software could center their own forces correctly. Until then, hardware trim is the only way IMO. I just set it to the same buttons I have bound in-game and it works well enough.

I have actually found two ways to fix this/workaround.

First, if you set spring to 0 in Moza, the stick and trim positions will be corelated. But then you lose most/all of the Moza telemetry I suppose?

Second, if you set the Y axis travel to a strong progressive (concave) curve with 100% spring, the positions are almost correct - good enough for flying.

 

I am planning on mounting my Winwing stick to the base with a cable bypass, so I will not have hardware trim when I do so...

Edited February 18 by PawlaczGMD

[VPS_Choki]

i have the VPForce Rhino and my only issue is that i cannot set curve or i end up at the same issue as you that i have to push even on level flight. Also i asked some real life F-5 pilots from switzerland and they say the stick doesnt move when you trim

[Bucic]

9 hours ago, VPS_Choki said:

i have the VPForce Rhino and my only issue is that i cannot set curve or i end up at the same issue as you that i have to push even on level flight. Also i asked some real life F-5 pilots from switzerland and they say the stick doesnt move when you trim

It's highly likely there has been a miscommunication between you and the pilots. Maybe they meant the stick doesn't move on them in-flight.

[VPS_Choki]

my question to them was does the trim move the stick? and the answer was no the stick doesnt move it stays while trimming

[nairb121]

14 minutes ago, VPS_Choki said:

my question to them was does the trim move the stick? and the answer was no the stick doesnt move it stays while trimming

They might view it more as trim changing the stick force - that seems to be the way it's often framed IRL. Functionally it's the same, it's just a matter of perspective.