My A-10C preparation

[rocketeer]

Why else are we sharing our work here, to copy from each other! and to save each other the effort of figuring out some stuff, and hopefully learn from each other's mistakes.

 

eg. made this gear from acrylic sheet. At first I was quite happy with it. Then realised at 2.5" it's still too big. The slot on the VHF panel is about 2". Did another one at 2". fits ok, enough of the top sticking out, but then there is no room at the bottom to place the encoder as it'd be too near other stuff. So now need to use gears instead, in pairs, one to be turned above the panel, the other in sync below to turn the encoder, so that it can be several inches below where there'd be more room.

[rocketeer]

up down, up down. fuel lever done.

 

It's not obvious in the pictures, but I've replaced the old push buttons with four push pull buttons.

[rocketeer]

Not sure if you guys have noticed. Most toggles are two way, some three. But a few are 'special'. These are the ones I've noticed so far.

red circle: mom-off-mom

blue circle: on-off-mom

[rocketeer]

This is the backplate for the UHF panel, with pot, rotary switches and encoders.

 

Things can get a bit crowed underneath.

 

Obviously I can face the encoders outward but that could get in the way of other panels. Those of you building the pit will realize this too when you get there.

[rocketeer]

This part is my most challenging build so far, building concentric switches for the Tacan and ILS panels. On the right of the Tacan and the left of the ILS require a 45 degree rotary switch at the bottom knob and an encoder at the top knob. In the real panel it uses a series of gears, which I don't have any. So I tried doing the below.

 

 

the result is this.

 

I was able to rotate the bottom knob without moving the top knob (almost always). Still need some adjustments. Rotating the top knob definitely doesn't move the bottom knob since the rotary switch requires more force and the resistance of the rotary will prevent it from rotating easily.

 

How I did it.

1. The outer knob will be tied to the top switch. The inner knob to the bottom switch. That means the encoder will have to be connected to a small pipe or rod that goes through the middle of the rotary switch. I use a 3/32 pipe. Rod will be better, and brass would be better than aluminium, as it would be stronger and doesn't bend as much, keeping it straight.

 

2. Take apart the rotary switch. Do it in a plastic bag and pry it open slowly. In case the two ball bearings or springs jump out, they won't disappear if you use the plastic bag.

 

3. Remove the ball bearings and springs if they are still inside. Drill a hole through the top half of the rotary. Use a small hole size first and slowly increase it. Obviously using a drill press is better here. Drill until your pipe can go through it.

 

4. Drill the bottom half of the switch till the pipe can go through it

 

5. For the two springs, cut both a bit shorter. Again start small. I just cut them about 5 or 10% shorter. Why the need to cut them? We'd be putting the pipe in the middle through the rotary. The springs at both sides will be squeezed tighter/shorter by pipe in the middle. Trimming them will reduce the ball bearings from jumping out as much. You can't just drill a hole right through without taking it apart first as you won't be able to get the pipe in without separating the springs first.

 

6. The top half of the rotary is made of two parts. A shaft with the body and a case. Put the pipe through the shaft, then put both springs in, the one ball bearing. Rotate the body till it meets an opening at the bottom of the case. Press both together and use a small screwdriver to squeeze the ball bearing in and shut it in by rotating the body.

 

7. Align the hole with the other spring with the opening and put in another ball bearing. Again rotating it to lock it. Hold both body and case togeth will the springs and ball bearings may fall out.

 

8. Put the bottom half of the switch, threading the pipe through its middle first before closing the two halfs. Make sure the pipe stays in place. If you pull it too much the springs inside may close up then you can't put the pipe through again till you open it up again.

 

9. Drill a hole on the encoder till the pipe can get in. Seal it tight with super glue or hot glue.

 

10. Put rotary switch and encoder together while try not to bend the pipe. There you have it, a concentric switch.

 

It looks like many steps. It was intimidating to me at first too. After a few times you'd be ok with it, like stripping a rifle blindfolder with practice, well almost.

 

Though this works for me, some of you may prefer to use other methods, like adding a push action before it can be rotated etc. to prevent one knob from affecting the other.

 

The next challenge is the right side of the ILS. That requires an encoder for the top knob and a pot to the bottom knob. It seems to me that you can't drill through a pot as the middle is where the contact is. I'd have to try using a bigger pipe connected to a gear connected to another gear that drives a pot, then the inner pipe connects to the encoder directly. Got to get some gears now.

 

Hope this gives you some idea on how to tackle the Tacan and ILS. If you guys have better methods please share too. I'd like to know.

[Duckling]

Well done Rocketeer. Congrats to this guide also. Very well described approach and result

Gus

[rocketeer]

Moving on to the front console, as usual I begin by protyping to check dimensions and placements.

 

If IRL the AHCP is about 4"x6", which I've used above as a guide, then a 23" monitor is not going to fit even without the two panels at the sides. Everything in the 23" display will have to be condensed. That is fine if you are using a touchscreen monitor. But to pit builders, you'd realize that your left and right consoles are fairly accurate in size but the front console is small compared to the side consoles, at least that's what I found if I squeeze things into a 23".

 

So, to keep things in proportion, and the stubborn old me wants to do things the hard way by placing real switches infront of the monitor rather using the easy way of touch screen, I arrived at the layout above. Then I realized that a 30-32" display would be required if I want to cover the side panels (gear and fuel). Oops! That's much bigger than I planned. I can shrink things down, but not too much for leg space as to be in between the two side panels, and ideally the Nav and TISL panels should be as wide as the ADI and HSI. Ah, design decisions.

 

If you insist on placing real switches over a glass cockpit like me, you'd have to use switches with small body to keep the height of the panel down so that they are 'closer' to the surface of the monitor. I realized with delight after protyping that I can get the gear panel and fuel panels done without having them too high. Else they won't look good and then I'd have to move the flaps and fuel gauge further in to which I don't like.

 

This is how I plan to do the gear/flap panel.

The landing light switch and the gear lever will both use flat toggles. One is 3 way and the other 2 way. Then both shaft will have a horizontal slit to fit the flat toggle. This way it won't rotate. Then both just flip up and down.

The gear lever won't look as nice as what some of you have designed but it's again my quick and dirty way of building things and is simple and functional.

The two levers above are just protypes. I'd make better looking ones and without the masking tape!

 

 

Checking the height including the thickness of the board that will be partially covering the monitor shows that the total distance from base board to the panel will be max 3/4". I can live with that. I can further reduce it a bit by bending the legs of the switches sideways.

 

Here's the fuel panel.

 

Bending the legs reduce the height a bit.

 

What do you guys think of this approach of putting switches infront of glass cockpit. I do it because I'm trying hard to preserve all the positions of the panels. Is this stubborn or stupid?

[rocketeer]

Thanks Gus. It's nothing compared to what you've done.

[Feed]

Rocketeer, again, you're fiddling with stuff I've been pondering as well. I've been fighting with myself over how much room to "sacrifice" by mounting things in front of the 'instrument panel' monitor vs. how much to rearrange things around it.

 

My main concern has been the force transferred to the monitor face - which is going to happen with any pushbutton. The only other alternative is to mount the monitor face further back away from the panel. If you're mounting toggles and rotaries, then it probably forces you to mount it further back, anyway. I can't help but wonder how the glass gauges will look set that far back from the front panel, or whether the panels with switches would look 'funny' jutting out from the panel as an alternative.

 

One of the ideas I had (that I haven't done any testing on) is whether it might be possible to mount fresnel lens material into gauge openings that would make the glass gauges appear to be closer than the monitor really is. I suspect that wouldn't be a satisfactory option, though.

 

So far, I'm fairly well resigned to rearranging the glass instruments to fit the confines of my monitor, and rearrange the various cockpit controls around it, even though that means some things may be located fairly far off from where they "should" be. I may attempt mounting a rotary or two within the panel itself (e.g. the knobs on the ADI/HSI), but that's probably it.

 

I'll be very interested to see whatever you come up with!

[Succellus]

You guys are awesome, i don t even want to think of the insane amount of wiring that you will have to do.

[Alex_rcpilot]

Good job, you deserve to fly ahead of all of us. :pilotfly:

[rocketeer]

Thanks Alex. Haven't seen you around for a while. Welcome back.

 

Succellus, the wiring will be a pain. But the motivation is for each one wired it'd become operational. So looking forward to it, but I still have a lot more to go with the building part.

[Alex_rcpilot]

I've relocated, now I live in a city surrounded by various suppliers. Need to refresh my mind about what's possible.

 

BTW, I tried fast prototyping a month ago. I designed a plastic case full of hyperbolic surfaces and this company fabricated the sh*** with a 3D printer. The then had it painted, silk skin printed and shipped to me. Gosh it was like an industrial final product.:)

[rocketeer]

Since parts are cheap and manufacturing highly developed in China you should build a CDU or UFC and sell it. There'd be DCS fans who'd buy them. and you'd be doing them a favor. Not everyone is crazy like the few of us in trying to build things from scratch. Time and skills are limited. But for you it'd be easy. Get the panel cut and engraved by machine. Parts readily available. Even making of PCBs. Better yet just just one USB connection like Go Flight panels. Besides the HOTAS and MFDs, nothing more useful than the CDU and UFC.

[Feed]

I agree ... possibly THE single most marketable item (past the HOTAS and MFDs) would be the UFC ... small, generic shape, nearly indispensable functionality.

[rocketeer]

My main concern has been the force transferred to the monitor face - which is going to happen with any pushbutton.

 

I can't help but wonder how the glass gauges will look set that far back from the front panel, or whether the panels with switches would look 'funny' jutting out from the panel as an alternative.

 

I may attempt mounting a rotary or two within the panel itself (e.g. the knobs on the ADI/HSI), but that's probably it.

 

Feed, to address some of your concerns here.

1. Where there is no switch but an opening to show the glass cockpit that is fine. Where there is a switch infront, there'd be a base board as the 'floor'. In fact the picture I showed will be the base, with many openings to show the gauges. Then where there are switches, they'd be protected by the base. Also I'd mount the switches so that the legs don't even touch the base. Thus no force should be transferred to the monitor surface.

 

2. It may still look funny with some parts jutting out. We'd minimize it by keeping it as close to the monitor as possible by using smallest possible switch bodies. Also, I think cutting a larger opening than necessary will help prevent the switch panel from blocking the view of the gauges due to the panel sticking out further. I'd experiment with that tonight.

 

3. I am also going to use rotaries for the ADI/HSI knobs. Can't use the CTS288 though. They'd be too big. You can find some that are shorter and smaller, not solder lug type but PC pin. They are like half the size of the CTS288.

 

Isn't this challenging and fun?

[Feed]

Yes, VERY fun! Addicting fun, to be sure.

 

I'd caution you about simply using a 'baseplate' under your switches and relying on that to eliminate force transferred to the monitor. Unless you have a very strong material or method of construction, there will likely be some flex when you push on a button, and some of that force is likely to transfer to the monitor unless it's separated enough from the monitor face. I admit that I may be concerned for nothing, and that the small force (spread over a larger area by the backplate) wouldn't do any harm.

 

In any case, I look forward to seeing what you come up with, as I'm sure that we'll all learn something from it one way or another. :D

[Alex_rcpilot]

Yes that's what I've been doing. I'm redesigning the CDU structure now. Correcting demensions and seeking a better way to build buttons with backlight.

 

Currently I'm planning to have some buttons 3D printed. Then I'll use silicone mold and clear resin to multiply the prototype. After that, a layer of white paint with a layer of gray paint on its top. And finally CNC engraving. Probably another clear protective paint for the finishing product?

 

But then I was thinking, why do I have to deal with this paint sh** every single time? In my mind: it smells, it takes long to dry, it's hard to keep consistent thickness, it's also inefficient to secure that many buttons to engrave with a CNC, and finally, in case you'll engrave too deep, it takes several trail cuts to get the right thickness of material removed.

 

What if I build each character with clear resin into a signet shape with a solid base, and then use gray resin to soak it in a mold and form a composite structure? With 3D printing technology, I'm not too worried about accuracy. I will try it.

 

By the way, do you mind if I append some figures in your thread so we can discuss about CDU dimensions? I don't think it's necessary to start a whole new thread. lol.

 

At the end, the most important point though, is how we export the CDU text. It's already been discussed here but there's no official response from ED. So when the hardware is completed, it's still gonna be sitting there waiting for the data feed.

[rocketeer]

No problem Alex, you can post anything you want here.

 

Ok, now with a better prototype, with correct dimension and a cutout to view the gauges. Now I've put the board on a small table and viewing it vertically.

 

the view of the flaps is a bit blocked. Guess it's not that bad?

I'd widen the cutout more to the right. Also I'd move the gauges down some more in helios. Other than that I'm happy with it. This is the front panel that I'm most concerned with the view of the gauges being blocked by switches. The rest are less of a problem. The slight adjustments that I have to make within the front panels to get a good view of the gauges are nothing compared to if I were to shift the gauges to undesired locations. Guess I'm going to stick to this layout!

 

Feed, I'd make sure the panel is mounted higher up so that the switches don't touch the base at all, including bending the legs sideways. So I think that'd be safe from pressing against the monitor. :huh:

 

I think this is doable.

[Succellus]

One great advance would be to build some Wireless transmissor for switches, like CH and ergomex (or something like that have for buttons) would simplify things a lot and be a quick hit for all kind of pit builder, Hardcore or casual.

Pressing a monitor is good but flipping a swtch is being there, if you get my meaning, thats one of the strong points of TM WT.

[Feed]

I'd agree that it's doable, and judging from your mockup, it may not look bad at all, especially since you can account for viewing angles through the panel cutouts to the LCD surface.

 

Have you already got the monitor you plan to use for this? My mind is working overtime on the possibilities and trade-offs of doing something similar. I'm leaning toward building the gear/flaps/fuel gauge panels and incorporating physical instruments (stepper motor/servo driven) for those, while leaving everything in-between as 'glass' instruments. I could still go this route for the AHCP ... hmmmm

[rocketeer]

Succellus, I'm not going the CH or ergodex route as those are just push buttons, no toggles, encoders or pots. But that's just me. You are right. Its better than touchscreen. Others can use this method, like what warriorX has done for the ufc.

 

Feed, I'd be getting the same small body big bat toggles for the ahcp. I don't have the monitor yet. I might also build steam gauges through OC next time but that'd take a long time.

[rocketeer]

Now I don't have all the toggles yet but you get the idea. Can you tell that the AHCP is 5/8" above the baseboard?

 

[rocketeer]

 

[Feed]

Ok, I've been a bit skeptical of this the whole time - but I have to say that doesn't look bad at all.