theGozr Posted January 25, 2014 Posted January 25, 2014 http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=119490 Here from the Beta to this 1.2.7 release. Fly it like you stole it..
theGozr Posted January 26, 2014 Author Posted January 26, 2014 (edited) Ok here a sample that is just bad. I'm not forcing and look at the stick shakes.. and everything else on that matter. All the Force feed Back of ALL aircraft are just overlooked. I cannot imagine something like this is not pointed out .. an Aircraft do not react like a CH or Saitek Joystick or anything other spring mounted sticks. Period.. ask any pilot.. Edited January 27, 2014 by theGozr Fly it like you stole it..
theGozr Posted January 27, 2014 Author Posted January 27, 2014 (edited) So shake at 100 is out of question working or not.. I made it at well 40% just because. now FFB is at 100% .. in the FFB2 when FFB is OFF or just by releasing the hand from the handle the trimming is centered as soon as you enable it the joy goes off center onto the right direction at list for me. now in windows the Stick is perfectly centered as ALL other sims. So I wonder why in DCS it is not.? We need also to really re-adjust the spring loaded effect on any directions. Is this going to be looked at ? Thank you for an answer. Am I really missing a setting somewhere ? Maybe Edited January 27, 2014 by theGozr Fly it like you stole it..
theGozr Posted January 27, 2014 Author Posted January 27, 2014 (edited) I found something weird By trimming my plane UP or Down it actually trim my Ailerons and center my Joystick at will. but it doesn't do anything to the elevators. unlike in the version 1.2.6 Is this a bug ? Both SU25's are affected. Edited January 27, 2014 by theGozr Fly it like you stole it..
theGozr Posted January 27, 2014 Author Posted January 27, 2014 (edited) Just in case. A copy paste this can be more precise in the FFB feel in relation with Joysticks that we are using . === The stick force gradient is the force required to change the load factor of the aircraft a given amount. The value of the manoeuvre stability of an aeroplane is 150 N/g. The load factor in straight and level flight is 1. The increase of stick force necessary to achieve the load factor of 2.5 is 225N. In straight and level balanced flight the aircraft is at 1g and the stick force when trimmed is zero. If the aircraft is now subjected to a positive g manoeuvre, stability of the aircraft resists the movement and control forces (stick force) increases. Since in the question the aircraft has a stick force gradient of 150N per g, the temptation is to multiply the stick force by the amount of g, but as stated in balanced trimmed flight at 1g stick force is zero. You must always subtract 1g from the g value given. So 2.5 g -1g = 1.5 x 150 = 225N. Stability increases in a manoevre due to changes in angle of attack on the aircraft, this is called aerodynamic damping. Increased stability increases stick forces. Source: (http://www.atpforum.eu/showthread.php?t=9693) The manoeuvre stability of a large jet transport aeroplane is 280 N/g. What stick force is required, if the aeroplane is pulled to the limit manoeuvring load factor from a trimmed horizontal straight and steady flight? (cruise configuration) The limit load factor is 2.5g. Rest of the logic is the same. Thus 1.5 x 280 = 420N which is the answer. If the maximum pull force acceptable is 50 lbs and the design limit g of the aircraft is 6g, what stick force/g must be achieved to permit the aircraft to be manoeuvred to its design g limit? Answer: 10 lb/g 6g - 1g (level flight) = 5g 50lbs / 5g = 10 lbs/g If a stick force of 20 lbs is required to pull 4g from the position of trim, the stick force gradient is: Answer: 6.6 lb/g 4g - 1g (level flight) = 3g 20lbs / 3g = 6.6 lbs/g The CG of an aeroplane is in a fixed position forward of the neutral point. Speed changes cause a departure from the trimmed position. Which of the following statements about the stick force stability is correct? a. An increase of 10kt from the trimmed position at low speed has more effect on the stick force than an increase of 10kt from the trimmed position at high speed. b. Increase of speed generates pull forces. c. Aeroplane nose up trim decreases the stick force stability. d. Stick force stability is not affected by trim. Option "A" is correct. Answer (b) Is incorrect. If the CG is ahead of the neutral point we will have a stable configuration, so an increase in speed would require a push force. © Is incorrect. If you trim nose up, you would have to keep a forward pressure on the stick to maintain straight and level. If you increase speed, the forward pressure would increase as the elevator become more effective, and that is in the same sense you would expect with a speed increase, so stick force stability increases. (d) Is incorrect. If you trimmed nose down you would require a pull force to keep the nose up, and fly straight and level. As you increased speed the pull force would increase, which is not what you would expect, so that is an unstable stick force. So trim does affect stick force stability. You can calculate the difference of a 10 kt change at low speed and high speed to prove the answer. It goes about the percentage change in lift. If you assume a CL of 0.3 in straight and level and substitute changes of speed maintaining the same angle of attack, then you will see that the percentage change in lift, and therefore stick forces, will be greater at lower speeds. L = CL x V2 (no change in the ? ? or S so we can leave them out, in this calculation) (I also left it in Kts, as it will not affect this specific calculation, but we should use M/sec). At Low Speed: e.g. V=60 kts L = CL x V^2 L = 0.3 x square of 60 L = 0.3 x 3600 L = 1080 After a 10 kt Change in speed from 60, V = 70 kts. L = CL x V^2 L = 0.3 x square of 70 L = 0.3 x 4900 L = 1470 Change of Lift 1470-1080 = 390 Change of Lift as percentage = 390/1080 x 100 = 36% At High Speed: e.g. V=120 kts L = CL x V^2 L = 0.3 x square of 120 L = 0.3 x 14400 L = 4320 After a 10 kt Change in speed from 120, V = 130 kts. L = CL x V^2 L = 0.3 x square of 130 L = 0.3 x 16900 L = 5070 Change of Lift 5070-4320 = 750 Change of Lift as percentage = 750/4320 x 100 = 17% So the change is more (36%) at low speed than (17%) at high speed. Thus option (A) is correct. Source: (http://www.atpforum.eu/showthread.php?t=647) Stick force per g is dependent on CG location. The magnitude of the stick force required to pitch, for an aircraft with manual controls, is determined by the distance the CG is forward of the neutral point. A high limit load factor enables the manufacturer to design for a "Lower" stick force per g - Correct statement. Passenger aircraft are stressed to 2.5 g, the normal limit load factor. As you manoeuvre the aircraft from trim you will feel a increae in stick force up to the limit laod factor. This is the stick force gradient (stick for per 'g'). The stick force limit is defined by cS25 so you cannot exceed the max value. If you were to increase the limit load factor the stick force per 'g' would decrease. Source: (http://www.atpforum.eu/showthread.php?p=48119) The stick force per g is a limitation on the use of an aeroplane, which the pilot should determine from the Aeroplane Flight Manual is an incorrect statement because stick forces are specified in CS23/25 the design requirements for an aircraft and not in AFM. Source: (http://www.atpforum.eu/showthread.php?p=48119) Stick force per g is independent of altitude - Incorrect statement. Stick force per g increases when the centre of gravity moves forward - Correct statement. 4.4 Stick-Force Characteristics ( just a quick idea ) http://flysafe.raa.asn.au/safety/zodiac_FAA_Review_Report.pdf Edited January 27, 2014 by theGozr Fly it like you stole it..
BelgarionNL Posted February 14, 2014 Posted February 14, 2014 can also report problems with the force feedback! it just stopped working and its all screwed up is pretty much the bottom line! trying to get this to work again....
Recommended Posts