New HOTAS!!

[335th_GRSwaty]

Take a look to the banner at Thrustmaster Web site

http://www.thrustmaster.com/

All we can see is the weight (6 kg)!!And of a part of the HOTAS!

Has anyone more to share?

G940 ,X65 and now this one!!!

PS.I found this but are totally different products.
http://www.ch-hangar.com/SiteFiles/I...d_IITSEC_2.jpg

[fuzzychickens]

The cylinder on top of the warthog makes me think it is force sensing because it doesn't look like there is room for gimbals based on where the pivot point is.

So, like the x65, this won't be useful for most prop simmers unless they make the stick move a reasonable amount.

Looks like the CH fighterstick is still the best option on the market until CH gets their civilian warthog stick out.

[l88bastard]

Originally Posted by fuzzychickens

The cylinder on top of the warthog makes me think it is force sensing because it doesn't look like there is room for gimbals based on where the pivot point is.

So, like the x65, this won't be useful for most prop simmers unless they make the stick move a reasonable amount.

Looks like the CH fighterstick is still the best option on the market until CH gets their civilian warthog stick out.

Seriously, the CH fighterstick is a piece of crap compared to the logitec G940. The G940 force feedback is simply amazing in IL2.

[Feuerfalke]

Originally Posted by fuzzychickens

The cylinder on top of the warthog makes me think it is force sensing because it doesn't look like there is room for gimbals based on where the pivot point is.

So, like the x65, this won't be useful for most prop simmers unless they make the stick move a reasonable amount.

Looks like the CH fighterstick is still the best option on the market until CH gets their civilian warthog stick out.

I recommend checking out the DCS-Forums. Considering their upcoming simulation is about the A-10C, there is a huge interest in a realistic joystick and also to provide some data.

The TM stick uses HALL-Sensors for all main axis, so the stick is NOT force-sensing like the X65F. Besides that, the TM Warthog's Throttle models not only the split-throttle like CH does, but also the switches located on the throttle-panel and even the complete panel just behind that.

[ECV56_Lancelot]

Does the wathog throttle have a hat that can be used like a mouse like the one to control the radar on the F16 throttle?

[BadAim]

Looks like EVERYONE is getting in on the action. Seems like the flight sim genre is not so dead after all? For my money, my x52 is fairly new and still works, I'm going to wait till SOW is out or nearly out and see how the playing field fleshes out.

Unless a rich uncle that I didn't know about dies and leaves me several million dollars that is, then all bets are off.

Several million aught to cover a House, a Car, a HOTAS, and a year or two's living expenses for full time SOW playing.

[fuzzychickens]

Originally Posted by Feuerfalke

I recommend checking out the DCS-Forums. Considering their upcoming simulation is about the A-10C, there is a huge interest in a realistic joystick and also to provide some data.

The TM stick uses HALL-Sensors for all main axis, so the stick is NOT force-sensing like the X65F. Besides that, the TM Warthog's Throttle models not only the split-throttle like CH does, but also the switches located on the throttle-panel and even the complete panel just behind that.

I haven't seen thrustmaster state what is in the warthog as far a sensors go.

Nothing more than flash ads so far.

[fuzzychickens]

Originally Posted by l88bastard

Seriously, the CH fighterstick is a piece of crap compared to the logitec G940. The G940 force feedback is simply amazing in IL2.

It is nice for FFB and nothing else in my experience. I spent an entire week trying to get the 940 working well enough before returning it, but the dead floppy stick in the center means that I lost accuracy esp when properly trimming out my plane - trying to aim around the center screws everything up.

No matter what FFB setting used on the 940, the CH fighter stick is better where it counts for me, getting bullets into your enemy instead of the other way around.

You can knock the fighter stick for not being fancy, but at least it does what I expect with regards to control inputs. That's better then making a nice buring hole in the ground with fancy FFB effects.

[l88bastard]

Originally Posted by fuzzychickens

It is nice for FFB and nothing else in my experience. I spent an entire week trying to get the 940 working well enough before returning it, but the dead floppy stick in the center means that I lost accuracy esp when properly trimming out my plane - trying to aim around the center screws everything up.

No matter what FFB setting used on the 940, the CH fighter stick is better where it counts for me, getting bullets into your enemy instead of the other way around.

You can knock the fighter stick for not being fancy, but at least it does what I expect with regards to control inputs. That's better then making a nice buring hole in the ground with fancy FFB effects.

Funny, I am 10x more precise with the G940 and I had a year with the CH fighterstick. I dont' know what deadzone you are talking about, but the center of my G940 is very small and I can make all kinds of precise micro adjustments before any kind of FFB gets in the way (just like a real plane).

The CH stick is loose, sloppy and very toylike. It gave me no aid in putting holes in the enemy and it could care less if I was about to stall, because it never gave me any kind of heads up.

Don't even get me started on the throttle and pedals. IMHO the CH sticks are the most over rated piece of hardware periphal that I have ever used and saying that they are the best because of their build quality is like praising a for pinto that is guaranteed to last for 20 years of driving

[AdMan]

vowed never to buy a thrustmaster product again after purchasing one of their gamepads. My Saitek works just fine and has HOTAS and great force feedback