OT: Stick recommendations...

[JG27_PapaFly]

Originally Posted by Necrobaron

I know the realism of FFB is debatable but I do like it and would prefer to have it offered on whatever I get.

Hi Necrobaron, I've been using microsoft FFB sticks since they first appeared, and never looked back. I never saw a good alternative, so I'm stockpiling FFB2 sticks. Why not stick to the MSFFB2 for SOW? After becoming a student pilot last summer i began to appreciate FFB anew. It really IS realistic. Flying close to a stall in RL, i get the same gentle shaking i'm used to from my stick. My opinion: FFB absolutely rules.

I've deleted the overdone gun recoil ffb files from my game, however. FFB-wise, i'd love to see a better implementation of weather and runway effects. In RL, the stick really speaks to you, there's lots of input coming from air turbulence, ranging from tiny to huge. Propwash from a guy ahead e.g. is very uncomfortable and really bangs the stick!

Originally Posted by robtek

That feature is NOT depending on the Stick, but on the FFB-output of the game, afaik.

True m8. I really hope SOW will feature realistic trim. In RL, a flettner trim tab works like a second elevator that flies the actual elevator. You set the trim, the stick will stay in its momentary position, but the stick forces will disappear. Also, in RL you can't get more elevator authority in turns or dives by trimming tail-heavy. In fact, if you've pulled the stick all the way back and you want more pitch-up, you trim nose-heavy, this will move the trim tab upwards and increase positive pitch momentum.

S!

[Necrobaron]

Originally Posted by Chivas

I have the G940, but don't use it because of the reversal bug.

What exactly is this reversal bug?

Originally Posted by JG27_PapaFly

Hi Necrobaron, I've been using microsoft FFB sticks since they first appeared, and never looked back. I never saw a good alternative, so I'm stockpiling FFB2 sticks. Why not stick to the MSFFB2 for SOW?

Well, mine just seems to be getting a little long in the tooth and as far as I know, there is no longer any driver support for it. I've often heard that MSFFB2 is the best and I agree. Just a shame MS won't make a third one...
________
Wendie 99

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by Necrobaron

What exactly is this reversal bug?



Well, mine just seems to be getting a little long in the tooth and as far as I know, there is no longer any driver support for it. I've often heard that MSFFB2 is the best and I agree. Just a shame MS won't make a third one...

http://forums.logitech.com/t5/PC-Gam...e-or-software-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiwyBM7PXEo

[Artist]

The complete link (sorry Chivas):

http://forums.logitech.com/t5/PC-Gam...em/td-p/445318

I own a G940 and am deeply unhappy with the reversal bug: Its *not* a "Princess on a pea problem" as somebody said earlier in this thread.

Reversal Bug: You move an axis (throttle, proppitch, aileron, rudder, etc.) slowly in one direction: 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, 5%. The you carfully reverse your movement. You would expect to go back to 4%. It doesn't: It jumps to 2%. The G940 does that on all axis. Makes precise throttling, trimming, aiming, flying in formation really really hard as one constantly overcompensates.

As to be read in the above mentioned link, Logitech acknowledged is working on a solution at least for the x and y axis (ailereon and elevator).

[robtek]

This "reversal-bug", imho, just adds a bit more realism as the mechanical links
to the rudder, elevators and ailerons in the real planes had for shure more play then 2 or 3%.

[T}{OR]

Originally Posted by robtek

This "reversal-bug", imho, just adds a bit more realism as the mechanical links
to the rudder, elevators and ailerons in the real planes had for shure more play then 2 or 3%.

Nonsense.

What about trim tabs then? Because from what I was able to read they are 'infected' as well.

The reversal bug as it is is pure stupidity on the Logitech part. The only reason why it exists is to eliminate pots loosing precision over time, and this is why they won't eliminate it completely. MSFF2 is a FF stick and hasn't got 'reversal bug' - and people are using it even after 10 years.

[W32Blaster]

Originally Posted by robtek

This "reversal-bug", imho, just adds a bit more realism as the mechanical links
to the rudder, elevators and ailerons in the real planes had for shure more play then 2 or 3%.

And if you use Multi Throttel by MykkOwl it is fixed by his tool, so if you use it, no wonder you don´t realize anything wrong.

[Artist]

Originally Posted by W32Blaster

And if you use Multi Throttel by MykkOwl it is fixed by his tool, so if you use it, no wonder you don´t realize anything wrong.

Yes. And as an owner of a G940 I thank him daily for his fix for throttle and trims, proppitch, etc.

The aileron, rudder, and elevator is still reversal bugged. And as far as I read Logitech (see forum link abive), they'll only fix aileron and elevator in the forseeable future.

[Artist]

Originally Posted by robtek

This "reversal-bug", imho, just adds a bit more realism as the mechanical links
to the rudder, elevators and ailerons in the real planes had for shure more play then 2 or 3%.

Interesting point of view... But I doubt that the throttle would have jumped by 3% if you trottled down after having throttled up... And in any case: "Play" is something completly different from "reversal jump": With play, you push the first 3% and finally get the first 1% with the rudder slowly catching up... With the reversal bug, you push 1,2,3,4% and get nothing and sudddenly you get more than you wanted, never being able to adjust to 1,2, or 3...

[MasterTec]

Originally Posted by robtek

This "reversal-bug", imho, just adds a bit more realism as the mechanical links
to the rudder, elevators and ailerons in the real planes had for shure more play then 2 or 3%.

OK GUYS! I'm the one who created that youtube video and am very active in the Logitech forums about this bug. I registered here just so I could respond to this post.

If the "hysteresis" as Logitech calls it (or reversal-bug as we call it) worked like you described, most of us would have little to no problem with it. The problem is it doesn't work like that.

With no play in the controls at all in the rudder control and if you moved the rudders from center, to left, and then back to the right, it would look like this (with 0 being full left, 100 being full right):
Starting at center, then going left: 50,49,48,47,46
Now reversing and going back right: 46,47,48,49,50
That's pretty cut and dry.

If you pretend you were in a real plane and there was a little bit of slack in the rudder control and you moved the rudders from center, to left, and then back to the right, it would look like this:
Starting at center, then going left: 50,50,50,49,48,47,46
Now reversing and going back right: 46,46,46,47,48,49,50
The fact that it does not immediately change shows the play in the linkage that must be overcome.. this would be expected in a real aircraft.

Here's what the G940 does:
Starting at center, then going left: 50,49,48,47,46
Now reversing and going back right: 46,46,46,52
See how it jumps from 46 to 52? If it was simply mimicking play in the controls, that jump would not be present... *THIS* is what makes it so annoying.

I don't fee like going back and researching my figures, but IIRC the reversal 'jump' in the throttles was over 5%, and in the rudders and trims was over 3%. This is *HUGE* when precision flying is involved.

I can understand why Logitech decided to put some Hysteresis in there... to compensate for 'pot flicker' where very small adjustments upon reversal tends to produce some variance, but what they should have done is programmed it to 'pick up where it left off' rather than to 'compensate for the amount of hysteresis'