For DCS BS FFB or FS which way to go?

[rapid]

Im at a loss hear guys i keep reading the arguments for an against but still cant make my mind up about the whole deal.

Can we have a definative answer on the matter?:music_whistling:

For BS what is better FFB or FS? let me hear your thoughts your comments will not only help me but others as well.:thumbup:

 

FFB= Force Feed Back :Logitech G940

FS= Force Sensing : Saitek X65F FFB and Trustmaster hotas Warthog<<<<making a guess here:music_whistling:

Edited October 15, 2009 by rapid

[Eddie]

For Black Shark, FFB if you want most realistic control representation.

 

For more modern Fast Jets (Using FBW controls e.g. F-16) force sensors are the most realistic. (e.g. TM Hotas Cougar + FSSB, Saitek X65F)

 

And for Slightly older jets (which use mechanical controls e.g. A-10) a non FFB stick that has simple movment based sensors is most realistic. (e.g. Current Saitek range, upcoming Thrustmaster model)

[rapid]

Thanks for information...................but you forgot to vote:doh:

All inputs from readers i will read.:smartass:

[Eddie]

I didn't forget, both apply depending on what you fly/plan to fly in future. ;)

[rapid]

I didn't forget, both apply depending on what you fly/plan to fly in future. ;)

 

I see your point...point taken.:thumbup:

[CyBerkut]

For DCS:BS, (which is the poll question), FFB is the logical choice, if you seek to simulate/emulate how it works in the Ka-50. The Ka-50's cyclic moves, and it holds position when trimmed. FFB (properly implemented) can simulate the trim position holding of the cyclic. FFB rudder pedals could do the same for Ka-50's pedals.

 

Could a non-moving (or slightly moving) Force Sensing stick be easier? I suppose it could be argued that it could be easier than a conventional stick, since re-centering the stick after releasing the trim button would be a shorter trip. Would a FS be easier than a properly implemented FFB? With the possible exception of a few who are already highly accustomed to their FS stick, I don't see how it would be easier. With FS, you still have to use one of the work-around implementations of trimming that E.D. came up with for non-FFB users.

 

As for the upcoming DCS:A-10C (which was not the focus of the poll question), that will depend on, at least in part, on how trim is implemented in it.

[rapid]

Thanks for the input as it helps me understand what i need to do..............which is to get rid of my saitek x52Pro and buy me a Logitech. Plus im 100% rotor head.

Edited October 16, 2009 by rapid

[ericinexile]

Force feedback has a benefit even in virtual force sensor sims as it's the only feedback available for most of us--besides sound and visual cues. Buffeting through the stick provides some sense of the pilot's position in the envelope that aren't always there visually. But overall I think FFB is a fun, sometimes helpfull feature that MUST take a back seat to input accuracy. A bad stick isn't made the least bit better with FFB.

[ericinexile]

It's funny. I was playing LockOn for the first time with the G940 and trying to trim the Su25 but nothing happened. Wierd, I thought. Then I let go of the stick and the nose shot up. I was holding the stick in position despite my triming and failing to notice the extra pressure. This is exactly how the trim works in real life--at least in planes with a very light control force. We discuss the FFB trim implementation with the BS, but the benefit is just as apparent in planes.

[rapid]

Correct me if im wrong but I read that the DEVs implemented turbalnce into BS. Has anybody felt this while flying?

[AlphaOneSix]

Turbulence is modeled, and it's obvious that it's there. But if you mean "feel" as in through an FFB stick, then no. You wouldn't feel turbulence in the stick, anyway.

[rapid]

Thanks for the reply. erm.............you didnt vote:music_whistling:

[AlphaOneSix]

Well for BS it's a no-brainer, it's better to have FFB to experience the trim system properly.

[rapid]

Thank you:thumbup:

[some1]

Well for BS it's a no-brainer, it's better to have FFB to experience the trim system properly.

 

And that's true for most other aircraft as well, except F-16, F-22, F-35 and maybe couple others.

 

While most aircraft use hydraulic boosters and there's no feedback on the stick coming from control surfaces, the also use artificial force actuators to vary the force required to move the stick with speed and deflection, and to change the stick neutral position when manually trimmed.

 

So what we need for A-10 sim is good FFB joystick and good FFB implementation in game.

Edited October 16, 2009 by some1

[sweinhart3]

 

As for the upcoming DCS:A-10C (which was not the focus of the poll question), that will depend on, at least in part, on how trim is implemented in it.

 

Perhaps this might answer that statement.

[CyBerkut]

Interesting! That doc appears to be for the A-10A, but it seems reasonable that the same scheme would be retained in the A-10C. As for how E.D. would implement it in DCS:A-10C... Hmmm...

 

Just imagining here, but it would seem there could still be benefit to having an FFB controller for a simulation of that trim system, but that it would be less of an impact upon the experience than it is in Black Shark. Having only thought about it a little bit, it would appear that the whole 're-center the stick' thing would be inapplicable.

 

Can anyone confirm the A-10C's trim works the same way?

 

If so, I would think that for folks who really want to use an FS controller for DCS:A-10C, that it would be a pretty manageable adaptation.

 

For DCS:BS though... FFB is the way to go.

[rapid]

By the look of the voting its looking like FFB is the way to go.

[sweinhart3]

I know the emergency trim panel pretty much unchanged from A version. The stick is obviously different but likely it still uses one of the 4 way hat switches. Personally I dont plan to use a FFB implementation, just a good hotas upgrade, hall sensors and Uber2 mod. TM new stick might very well already use hall sensing. We'll have to wait and see about that.