Well, it was unfortunately a long time since I had my trusty old CH Flight stick (it broke down after 10 years of heavy usage) - but I remember it was very exact. It also remember that it was a bit too much "defaulting" to the the four base axis if you understand what I mean. I have tried later versions but they basically feel the same. Sure, if you want the most exact stick it may be a CH stick, but the immersion? As an old IRL pilot I appreciate the stall buffeting more than the minor loss of accuracy caused by vibrations and no spring centering...

I other tests I've read the precision is on par with the CH sticks and better than Saitek and Thrustmaster, especially as it uses expensive Hall sensors and no potentiometers as many of the others use. It sure is more accurate than my old MSFFB2 at least!

Regards /Mazex

Nope - unfortunately. And the pedals and throttle connect to the stick with properitary connectors so no use selling them...

Yes, that is true, but flight sims don't act on your inner ear to make you aware of unintentional control input like real flying does.

Anyways, I wonder if there is a way to sping load the center dead space that occurs before FFB takes over, would that improve gunnery?

Not sure if it would be better, maybe it's the opposite...

Regarding the small "dead zone" on this stick and realism it's not that bad actually. I've flown many old aircraft with some "slack" in the aileron connections for example. That gives the same effect... Some millimeters of "no force" and then the air pressure giving the force.

Please keep us updated about your impression the goods and the bads in a long term

Actually, MSFFB2 also has that slack, dead force zone.
Is there noticeable difference between G940 and MS?

Damn man! Congrats!! G940 must be just awesome!!

Im a RL pilot too, and it's interesting cuz heavier and less self-centering pedals are all I want! Don't you dislike the excessive self-centerig of PC pedals (compared to RL flying) ? I fly small, old single-engined trainers (getting my CPL now), and the rudder reacts in a much heavier and "looser" way..

Yes, that's true - but it's a bit bigger on the G940 I think... I does not bother me and if I hadn't read the review that talked about it I don't think I would have thought of it.

The G940 actually feels very similar to the MS, which is good! It feels like subtle effects are less "edgy" than the MS. The MS rattles a bit when doing the stall buffeting, while the G940 has a bit more analogue feeling to the buffeting. Definately better. At the same time it really gets stiff when trying to pull out you 109 going 750 km/h in a steep dive close to the ground...

When trying an execercise I have for testing the precision it really excels over the MS. My test is to move in a small circle in one of the quadrants of the joystick, kind of a circle in the circle. With the G940 I can do really small sub-circles with no spikes at all...

/Mazex

/Mazex

Agreed there is a difference, but in my experience the weathervaning effect has a centering quality to the rudder by itself. Only in stall maneuvers does the rudder input slacken to a point that it doesn't self-correct to a point more equivalent to pc pedals.

At least that's been my experience.

The difference in speed and trim/yaw dampening on the rudder would affect self centering effect, compare a high speed fighter to a Cessna the low speed slackness especially around stall speeds would feel loose as compared to high speed stiffness through cable inputs although the electrical FW190 system would give a different effect motors and solid rods would induce a different feel on the control surfaces via FFB one would have thought !!

Not sure the differences are that subtle in IL21946 to make any comparisons but across different sims maybe its modelled to have a different feel on the stick between cables and hydro electro systems, I think the biggest asset of FFB sticks has always been the ability to feel stalls coming on and catch them before hand, at this point for me FFB is very important.