CH A-10 HOTAS unveiled-pic inside.

[Eddie]

Crumpets, too

 

Well, if you find a way to make your stick dispence cold beers with the press of a button let me know. The number of times I've crashed/been shot down while running to the fridge for more beers is frightening.

[Pilotasso]

I think you've misunderstood my post mate. I've been programming HOTAS setups for years. I just for life of me can't work out how people could need MORE buttons than we've seen on the new CH, TM and Saitek offerings.

 

ah rgr :D

 

Ch's setup has plenty buttons however I find it difficult to put all those finger tip commands on all its buttons and hats due to ergonomic issues it has (I laso have it but its gathering dust).

 

The new X65 seems to be the sweetspot in that regard, it remains to be seen hows that force sensing tech is going to handle like, and publics reation to it (Saitek is taking a gamble on custumers wish-lists)

[herr_LaSk]

Its more about flexibility than using all the buttons on the HOTAS. Military aircraft controll systems comes in all shapes and sizes, and the more buttons and axis you have on your Hotas, the greater the likelyhood you will be able to get a close aproximation of how it would be to acctually controll the real aircraft.

 

Its about immersion really, its obviously always possible to put the shkval slew function to the ministick of the X52 pro, but it would'nt be as cool as to have an acctual two axis hat under your thumb on the acctual stick. You can allways just push the "g" key on the keyboard to raise and lower the landing gear, but would'nt it be awesome to acctually have an authentic gear switch that you can move for real with your hand?

 

The A-10C HOTAS as it is would work great as an all round simming controll system, however with just a few more additions, it could really be the ultimate simming hardware.

 

:joystick:

[*Rage*]

Decisions Decisions.

 

That CH Hotas looks sweet. Personally I prefer FS so im more inclined to the X65. Saitek just have to make sure they get it right....otherwise CH A10C Hotas it is.....

[Feuerfalke]

Well, good thing is, we don't have to make that decision now anyway.

 

Saitek intend to release their HOTAS in January/Februar 2010. By that time, there's probably at least some information on TM's and CH's versions.

[SUBS17]

I have to ask, what on earth do you guys program onto your HOTAS? I've never had to even use a second mode on a HOTAS profile, in fact I've only ever had to use a shifted button command 2 times in my F4 profile and that's because I have 2 less HATs on the X52 than the real jet.

 

Are you guys programming your sticks to make tea or something :D

 

For my Cougar on F4AF I have set it exactly like the F-16 MLU in the MLU tapes and it works perfectly. TMS, DMS, CMS,Paddle, pinky etc. My only issue is there is no IFF yet for those IFF buttons. In F4AF even the cycle A/G mode works just like in the MLU tapes and for OF the data link and UHF/VHF buttons work properly as well. Some guys program them to be able to do a full rampstart but in my view its a big drop in realism using the Hotas the wrong way.

[Vekkinho]

^^^^

I second that! Dash-34 mapping only!!!

[Eddie]

For my Cougar on F4AF I have set it exactly like the F-16 MLU in the MLU tapes and it works perfectly. TMS, DMS, CMS,Paddle, pinky etc. My only issue is there is no IFF yet for those IFF buttons. In F4AF even the cycle A/G mode works just like in the MLU tapes and for OF the data link and UHF/VHF buttons work properly as well. Some guys program them to be able to do a full rampstart but in my view its a big drop in realism using the Hotas the wrong way.

 

 

Exactly my thoughts, I've never put anything on a HOTAS profile that wasn't on the HOTAS of the aircraft in question. Apart from BS, and then I've just put a couple of things that the ruskies should have put on the HOTAS in the first place.

[sweinhart3]

Also make it possible to extend the stick, so that it would resemble the senter stick on the real A 10, and most WW1 and WW2 aircraft. Maybe an X-, Y axis hat on the upper left hand of the stick so you could operate the shkval with your right hand thumb like the real aircraft. I believe that most modern eastern aircraft also have a thumb slewable hat at that location.

 

They should retain the overall design of the A 10C Hotas, just make aditions to it. In addition, include buttons and switches that's common to most aircraft on the base of the throttle, like gear leaver, trim weels, light switches, weapons arm/disarm, and so on. If it even comes with FFB, and someone makes FFB peddals, I dont know what else one could need when it comes to simulation controlls.

 

:pilotfly:

 

Well everyone has their own tastes with what they want. Personally I want mine to be as authentic to real deal as possible. No added or subtracted buttons or axis. Plus the heavy duy metal construction feels much different than the cheap plastic you get from CH. But thats just me. Until one gets released, I will have to make due with modding a Suncom throttle for usb and incorporating the other switches found on the throttle panel.

[Feuerfalke]

I concur that putting commands on the HOTAS 1:1 as in the real plane is a great method of getting closer to how it works in reality.

 

But in the end, a fighter-pilot has no mouse to use buttons and switches in his cockpit and he doesn't even have to look at the controls to actually use them. Once you know the buttons positions and feel, you automatically utilize them without ID-ing the labels or looking at it.

 

While this may not be of primary importance for Falcon and BlackShark, as soon as focusing on targets visually get's important, you've to come up with either programmable keyboards or change your joystick programming to a more flexible alternative.

 

Same is for communications IMHO, unless you use a voice-recognition program.

 

So I personally wouldn't mind an additional axis or button or two.

[Feuerfalke]

Just to add a bit to this conversation from the Thrustmaster's advance on the Warthog:

 

If you take a close look at the banner on http://www.thrustmaster.com you will notice that TM infact listened to our wish of the additional buttons. While making an exact copy of what appears to be the whole engine-console, including starting switches for engines and APU, they obviously have ported the paddle-switch from the COUGAR, which is not present on the original A-10C-control-stick.

 

Seems this request is not taken out of thin air after all - at least for me, this is a big pro for the TM-Stick, even though it is not 200% accurate.

[Vekkinho]

Yes a TM Hog stick is slightly incorrect, but so is Cougar. There are minor differences like button alignment, handle shape etc. compared to real Blk50 HOTAS.

[Feuerfalke]

Yes a TM Hog stick is slightly incorrect, but so is Cougar. There are minor differences like button alignment, handle shape etc. compared to real Blk50 HOTAS.

 

True. But I think that's good reasoning - after all we all have much different circumstances when flying compared to real pilots ;)

[Eddie]

I concur that putting commands on the HOTAS 1:1 as in the real plane is a great method of getting closer to how it works in reality.

 

But in the end, a fighter-pilot has no mouse to use buttons and switches in his cockpit and he doesn't even have to look at the controls to actually use them. Once you know the buttons positions and feel, you automatically utilize them without ID-ing the labels or looking at it.

 

While this may not be of primary importance for Falcon and Black Shark, as soon as focusing on targets visually gets important, you've to come up with either programmable keyboards or change your joystick programming to a more flexible alternative.

 

Same is for communications IMHO, unless you use a voice-recognition program.

 

So I personally wouldn't mind an additional axis or button or two.

 

 

I disagree somewhat, I've never had any 'accessory' command mapped to my stick, and I've never needed to. If you're engaged in either A/A or A/G combat there should be nothing in the pit you need to touch, unless you made a mistake during your fence checks or initial start-up checks. The only things you should ever need to touch once over the FLOT are the MFDs, and then only sparingly prior to an attack run. You should be able to do any 'combat actions' using the HOTAS, anything else should be an unnecessary distraction. I think you can too easily produce an over complicated HOTAS profile. I know guys who programmed all but the kitchen sink onto their HOTAS, and have on several occasions ended up ejecting/shutting down engines over enemy territory when they hit a button while being accidentally in the wrong mode.

 

I will however admit, that the Black Shark's HOTAS doesn't seem to have been designed with ergonomics in mind. So I can understand having to add the odd thing, I've added countermeasures, skhval reset and a couple of autopilot functions which I'm frankly amazed aren't there in the first place.

 

Not sure what you're getting at with you comment on communications/voice recognition. Every HOTAS I've ever used/seen has PTTs for both radios on the throttle.

[SUBS17]

I concur that putting commands on the HOTAS 1:1 as in the real plane is a great method of getting closer to how it works in reality.

 

But in the end, a fighter-pilot has no mouse to use buttons and switches in his cockpit and he doesn't even have to look at the controls to actually use them. Once you know the buttons positions and feel, you automatically utilize them without ID-ing the labels or looking at it.

 

While this may not be of primary importance for Falcon and BlackShark, as soon as focusing on targets visually get's important, you've to come up with either programmable keyboards or change your joystick programming to a more flexible alternative.

 

Same is for communications IMHO, unless you use a voice-recognition program.

 

So I personally wouldn't mind an additional axis or button or two.

 

On most Hotas including the real F-16 Hotas there is a microstick or RDR Cursor control. My issue with the Cougar is the Cursor axis don't appear to be setup correctly and so I never use it.:doh:

[Feuerfalke]

Not sure what you're getting at with you comment on communications/voice recognition. Every HOTAS I've ever used/seen has PTTs for both radios on the throttle.

 

Well, at least I've never seen a HOTAS with a button to order the AI-wingman to form up or clear your six. ;)

[Eddie]

Well, at least I've never seen a HOTAS with a button to order the AI-wingman to form up or clear your six. ;)

 

Ahhhhhh. Well now that's why I only fly online with humans, can't stand flying with chimps (AI).

[Sokol1_br]

Pictures in simHq:

 

http://simhq.com/_air13/air_440a.html

 

Sokol1

[Feuerfalke]

Ahhhhhh. Well now that's why I only fly online with humans, can't stand flying with chimps (AI).

 

So you also don't ask for AWACs and landing persmission, it seems. Aerial refueling maybe? CAS-missions perhaps? BARCAP?

 

Well of course it's easy to decline something, if you don't use it. :D

[Eddie]

So you also don't ask for AWACs and landing persmission, it seems. Aerial refueling maybe? CAS-missions perhaps? BARCAP?

 

Well of course it's easy to decline something, if you don't use it. :D

 

Well yes, but it takes a second to hit q,1 or q, q, 2 etc. Not something I see the need to have on my stick at all. As sad as it is, I can do awacs and tower radio functions almost from muscle memory, it's one of the things that makes me realise I've been flying Falcon WAAAY too long.

[WildBillKelsoe]

It looks more professional than TM WH.. IMHO. How much would you rate the MSRP if it gets OK'd for civie release? I bet 600 USD

[531-Ghost]

I concur with the above posters. A few additional axis won't hurt. That's the one big major flaw of previous fighter-segment CH products.

 

I've "fixed" that ;)

[Corrigan]

additional axes

 

;)

[Flim]

I bet at least $10,000 ... built for military!

[elchacal]

Nice!