New FFB Elevator Trim is Backwards

[Hiob]

8 minutes ago, Vakarian said:

After carefully re-reading the issue it seems you guys are reporting that the trim indicator and FFB trim are disconnected and are not following each other. Is that the correct interpretation? If so, then yeah, the devs should definitely fix it.

That can be fixed by reversing the FF-Direction in the control options. Which is a SEPERATE setting from axis input inversion.

[Vakarian]

Oooooooooooooooooooooh, I completely forgot that's an option  I didn't need it so yeah, it slipped my mind completely

[Panzuur]

3 minutes ago, Hiob said:

That can be fixed by reversing the FF-Direction in the control options. Which is a SEPERATE setting from axis input inversion.

Yea , Just tried it, that works Thanks. 

[motoadve]

5 hours ago, Vakarian said:

No, in fact they should not mess with it as that's precisely why there are so many options to tune the controls in the control menu.

Devs have no way of knowing how the physical device reports its position. Meaning you can have two potentiometers on the same device, one will report 100% value on the full left turn, the other can report 100% on the full right turn.

There's no way in hell the devs can account for all of that to work out the box, that's precisely why the inversion option is there

-----

EDIT: While what I said above stands, it seems that's not the core issue. Sorry for the rrant.

After carefully re-reading the issue it seems you guys are reporting that the trim indicator and FFB trim are disconnected and are not following each other. Is that the correct interpretation? If so, then yeah, the devs should definitely fix it.

And it used to work properly, this last update introduced the problem.

[dresoccer4]

just chiming in here instead of making a new post that i also just discovered I had to invert the FFB Y axis to have correct FFB trim. works well now, but it's the only module where I had to do this

null

[Stevecat]

Man I gotta tell you guys I did a little more testing with the Corsair tonight - all carrier quals.  I'm usually pretty much a 5 out of 5 successful carrier landing pilot or at least have been (I do five in a row to keep the skills up then fly other missions).  Now, I haven't played the Corsair in several weeks but what I experienced tonight was so bad, something had to be wrong.  And the "down is up" mistake made with the Vert Trim has me wondering now about other problems.  I had only one perfect landing and I had to come in well over speed to do it.  It seems now that the plane becomes very unstable at just at 100 knots.  and it's no longer possible to glide the plane on to the wire without slipping left or right first..  I was used to touching down around 90 knots or a little less with good control.  Could this be a by product of some of the recent tweaking? Aileron trim with the same issue?  Somebody commented above it's clear they are not testing these tweaks sufficiently and this has me wondering now.  It seems like the plane has gotten worse.  Putting it down for now and I'll try again tomorrow night.  oh PS.. I have never crashed a slick on a carrier take off, not even my first time, and tonight I had two.  Somethings up.

Edited 8 hours ago by Stevecat

[Art-J]

Maybe it's some unforseen side effect of stall tweaks mentioned in the changelog? Compromising low speed handling in general.

[ac5]

Very similar problem here, though only after the latest DCS update 2.9.2217790.

I was obliged to wrongly assign in the settings elevator trim up to down and elevator trim down to up.

Taking off is not a problem with this workaround, but landing has turned out as quite impossible…

Why? Because the trim has larger setting up than down! (See screenshots)

This being said, it is exclusively a bug that concerns the Corsair.  

All my other WWII birds, jets and helicopters (13) are NOT concerned by this newly introduced bug!

Please advise.

CH Products Combatstick, Throttle and Pedals

Edited 14 hours ago by ac5

[dresoccer4]

9 hours ago, Stevecat said:

Man I gotta tell you guys I did a little more testing with the Corsair tonight - all carrier quals.  I'm usually pretty much a 5 out of 5 successful carrier landing pilot or at least have been (I do five in a row to keep the skills up then fly other missions).  Now, I haven't played the Corsair in several weeks but what I experienced tonight was so bad, something had to be wrong.  And the "down is up" mistake made with the Vert Trim has me wondering now about other problems.  I had only one perfect landing and I had to come in well over speed to do it.  It seems now that the plane becomes very unstable at just at 100 knots.  and it's no longer possible to glide the plane on to the wire without slipping left or right first..  I was used to touching down around 90 knots or a little less with good control.  Could this be a by product of some of the recent tweaking? Aileron trim with the same issue?  Somebody commented above it's clear they are not testing these tweaks sufficiently and this has me wondering now.  It seems like the plane has gotten worse.  Putting it down for now and I'll try again tomorrow tight.  oh PS.. I have never crashed a slick on a carrier take off not even my first time and tonight I had two.  Somethings up.

I noticed this as well almost immediatly. I was attempting the carrier landing training mission and it specifically says approach at 95kts.

Well on approach when I got down to 100kts I lost pretty much all lift and sank like a rock. I was very confused as I was following the instructions to the T. So when I read your comment it vibed completely with what I experienced. 

[ac5]

35 minutes ago, dresoccer4 said:

I noticed this as well almost immediatly. I was attempting the carrier landing training mission and it specifically says approach at 95kts.

Well on approach when I got down to 100kts I lost pretty much all lift and sank like a rock. I was very confused as I was following the instructions to the T. So when I read your comment it vibed completely with what I experienced. 

Exactly that happened to me, not only attempting to land on the carrier, but even attempting to land on land.

As I mentioned in my post,  I was obliged to wrongly assign in the settings elevator

trim up to down and elevator trim down to up.

Though landing with this workaround has turned out as quite impossible…

Why? Because the trim has larger setting up (20) than down (10)!

Magnitude 3 LLC, please be so kind and correct this asap......

[GTFreeFlyer]

52 minutes ago, ac5 said:

Exactly that happened to me, not only attempting to land on the carrier, but even attempting to land on land.

As I mentioned in my post,  I was obliged to wrongly assign in the settings elevator

trim up to down and elevator trim down to up.

Though landing with this workaround has turned out as quite impossible…

Why? Because the trim has larger setting up (20) than down (10)!

Magnitude 3 LLC, please be so kind and correct this asap......

This was an older thread I started about the FFB effects being backwards, not about the new issue where up and down are reversed.  Someone else started a new thread about the new issue.  M3 prefers separate threads for different issues, so continue the conversation there.  I just posted that I also found the same thing as you, but there is actually no problem if using the keyboard binding for trim.  Check it out.  Cheers.

[ac5]

1 hour ago, GTFreeFlyer said:

This was an older thread I started about the FFB effects being backwards, not about the new issue where up and down are reversed.  Someone else started a new thread about the new issue.  M3 prefers separate threads for different issues, so continue the conversation there.  I just posted that I also found the same thing as you, but there is actually no problem if using the keyboard binding for trim.  Check it out.  Cheers.

Right.. BUT.. I could not find another thread treating this problem.

Please be so kind and point me to it with a link. Thanks.

[GTFreeFlyer]

No problem.  If you go back one page to the list of threads in this bug forum, it is currently adjacent to this thread.  Here’s the link: