sydost

Yes, that is the primary benefit. No. The only advantage I can think of is to having one USB device less.

Hello, could you add me to the waiting list?

I'm using single HTC Vive v1 base station with 8KX so yes those work also. Although I am having some trouble getting my 8KX to detect the base station but I think the problem lies in the HMD or then it is with my motherboard USB ports.. With my 5k+ it gets detected immediately and tracking works well but 8KX is a bit troublesome. I am still experimenting with different USB ports and such. Some others have had this kind of problems also and support has made some firmware updates to their headsets to fix the issues so I think this might be fixed later with a general firmware update. About the HMD itself I think it is quite nice and picture quality is good. I have previous experience with OG Rift, Index, Reverb gen1 and 5k+. I have only i7-6700k @ 4.5 and 1080Ti so performance is a bit of an issue and I need to use small or potato FOV with DCS now to get playable FPS until I upgrade my equipment. I think the biggest problems are with the canted lenses as Trigen described. I have around 67 IPD and my solution was to decrease the mechanical IPD so that I will get the sweetspot for both eyes to be straight ahead (both eyes sharp when looking at instruments) and then I adjusted the software IPD to get a pleasant view for my eyes. I ended up with mechanical IPD at minimum and software IPD +3. Also the sound with the MAS is nothing spectacular but it is playable if you don't need great quality. For me the MAS is unusable as it leaks too much sound. One night my wife was sleeping in next room and she woke up to the sound of a rally game as it was so loud. So I have ended up using my Beyerdynamic headphones which fit under the MAS until I get the DMAS I ordered (and basestations and controllers ;) ).

I tried again both of the positions and actually flew a while so that one pedal was higher and the other one was lower and I have to take my earlier words back as I now found out that I preferred the lower position. It was more comfortable for a longer flight. So disregard what I said earlier and no need for the lowest row for me. Maybe someone else likes it though. 43 ;) . No need to make the pedals super smooth and it seems that quite many like the grippy surface. And just to be more precise I only sanded off the sharp edges on about two 2mm wide strip where the ball of foot touches the pedals. That was too grippy for me (and my socks) and it really is not a big job to fine tune it. Great job anyway :thumbup:

I prefer to use the pedals on the higher position but the new model seems to not have the lowest row of holes. Is it possible to add those? On the ones you sent me the recesses for the bolt heads were slightly too small and I had to enlarge those a bit to install the pedals. Especially on the wholes which were on the thick part of the pedal. Also I had to smooth the surface a little bit with sandpaper as the coarse surface was ruining my woolen socks ;) . Other than that those have worked fine so far.

Try turning FFB off from DCS options and see if that cures the problem. If the problem goes away then it is probably FFB related. For me all problems disappeared if FFB was turned off.

I tried all sorts of things to get rid of these problems. Here are my findings if these can help fixing the problem. I encountered the FFB problems when I was quickly trying modules in 2d during the free for all month and then I started problem solving. In c101 and Mig-15 modules the problems went away when I closed background services for my Pimax headset (piservice, pilauncher etc). Problems with F-14, AJS-37 and I-16 still prevailed though at slightly reduced state. I never really got rid of the problems in these modules in 2d. Then I tried it in VR and quriously I didn’t have any FFB problems when flying in VR. So all is good for me. With F-14 I sometimes had very long pauses where the controller didn’t update the position especially during trimming. The longest pauses were over five seconds long and sometimes caused me to crash if close to ground. With Viggen the pauses usually happen when the stick shaker activates. Also I noticed that the F-14 and Viggen FFB works differently compared to other modules. Couple years ago ED changed the system so that you need to have at least one axis bound to the FFB controller for the FFB to work. In Heatblur modules FFB seems to work even there is no axis bound to the FFB controller. I have no idea does this observation matter. To me it seems that with HB modules the problems seem to be the most persistent. I use a dual MSFFB2 setup and it also seems that having more FFB devices plugged makes the problems worse. If I unplug one of the MSFFB2s I get fewer and shorter pauses.

Hello, I have this problem too. Today I tried all my installed modules (everything else than F-16 and JF-17) and found out that the problem is present at I-16, Mig-15, F-14 and C-101. Others worked flawlessly. Everything works smoothly when standing still on the runway but when you start to accelerate the lagging starts. With F-14 the lagging is barely noticeable during takeoff run but when you get airborne it is worse. Whenever there is lag it affects all controls (axis, buttons even keyboard). By lagging I mean the controls freezes to present position for a moment and when they unfreeze the controls jump immediately to the position you have moved them during the freeze. Makes flying very difficult. Out of the other modules the I-16 was interesting as the problem stops when speed increases above 270 km/h and starts again when speed is reduced below 270 km/h. I have all my controllers plugged to a powered USB 3.0 hub. I have tried three different USB ports in my computer (MB USB 3.0, MB USB 2.0 and PCIE USB 3.0 card) and there was no difference in the results. Problems stop if I deselect force feedback in DCS.

I have a setup with two MSFFB2 sticks working together and pretty much every time I start DCS using VR one of the sticks has non functioning FFB and sometimes both don’t have FFB. When the FFB doesn’t work only generic centering force is prevent. My way of fixing this is that I first start DCS then shut it down. Then I activate some FFB effect on both sticks separately using forcetest.exe and start DCS again. Then the FFB works properly. On my case this problem arises only when using VR but I don’t remember has it been the same with all the headsets I’ve had or only the Pimax 5k+ I use at the moment. Might be a long shot but maybe you could try this? You can download forcetest.exe from here http://www.fs-force.com/support.php .

I would say that the inside/out 3DOF is not enough for flight sims. It drifts a lot so you need to be constantly centering the view. I used it for a while but quickly decided to buy one basestation to get 6DOF with no drifting.

Hello Miles, I was wondering about to which headsets you have designed mounts for? At the moment I am between headsets and I have been holding off my order until I know for certain which will be my next headset. I think it would be a good idea to update the first post with available mounts. Are the mounts individual or are some mounts usable with more than one type of headset? If I remember correctly you had some tracking problems with the low emission angle of the IR LEDs. If you haven't solved that one yet I have one suggestion to try out. When I built my own freetrack device I had the same problem with the visible angle being very low and that made the device unusable. I was able to solve it by filing the tip of the led flat instead of the normal rounded tip. That increased the IR emission angle quite a bit (maybe to around 45 degrees or so don't remember how much exactly). Also I think that as the tip was now matte instead of clear helped to scatter the light around. Though, I have no idea does it harm the led to file the excess plastic off and it might be a bit too much work to individually hack all the leds.

It's in the first post:

Thanks! That would be great if I could buy their controller. Have to look at it a little closer :thumbup: .

Hello! I would be interested in getting a T-50CM2 grip for my DIY stick. At the moment I use TM Cougar grip with Cougar electronics. My understanding is that with Cougar electronics I couldn't use all the functions of the stick. Is there any DIY electronics with which I could use all the buttons and especially the analog brake lever or do those work only with Virpil electronics?

Yesterday I made a not very scientific measurement of the force provided by my modified dual MSFFB2 setup. I have cougar grip in it and the stick should have around four times the force of the original MSFFB2. I got out a 1,1kg force measured at the top of the stick which is 35cm from the gimbal. That is around 3,7Nm from the motors so it is quite close to what this stick has to offer and I say that it is quite good for such a small stick. I am definitely interested in this one. In my stick the cougar grip is on an 15cm extension and there is no big problems but my stick additionally has a counterweight which helps the situation quite a bit. Adding a counterweight below the stick improves the handling with extensions and heavy grips remarkably and it actually removes the problems. So I would suggest to FoxHoundcn that it could be a good idea in the future to add an option for a counterweight to your sticks if it could be easily done. This video shows what I mean by counterweight https://www.veoh.com/watch/v16515202T5KXeDX7?h1=Cougar+FFB+Mod It would be enough to have a possibility to remove part of the bottom plate and be able to screw an additional shaft to the gimbal and then users could add correct amount of weight to counter the weight of the used grip. How well does this stick support VPC Mongoos T-50CM2 grip. Does all functions like the analog hand brake work or is it the same as the Mongoos grip attached on to a Cougar or Warthog? Do you have any estimate when this will be available? Now we just need to have ED to have one of these sticks when they are released so they could start to improve the FFB support :joystick: . Good times :thumbup:

At least on my install "Clear category" removes all mappings of the selected device with three clicks. The "clear category" button mentioned here is at the top row in case you confused it with the "clear" button which removes single mapping at a time.

I have Pimax 5k+ and I have no problems with SSA or SS Wheels. I don't have the lighthouse sensors yet so not exactly the same case. Pimax gyro tracking works fine (well, at least as fine as it usually works) with SSA. Maybe you should try to disable lighthouse tracking from PiTool and see does it work with the gyro tracking.

Of the input value. I haven't found a way to eliminate the FF deadzone.

I think your method of connecting the wires is ok for buttons (on or off) but with accurate analog signal I think it might produce some unwanted noise. Of course it doesn't hurt to try it first if you prefer it that way and see how it works. Sokol knows more about the magrez sensors but I think that if there is nothing wrong with your pots then there is not much point in upgrading those now (even the rel4y kit seems very nice). Only reason to change is if rel4y stops making the magrez sensors and you can't get those anymore when / if your pots eventually turn bad. You can check from windows calibration if there is any jitter or spikes in your existing pots. There is an option to see the raw values and if the numbers are quite steady you are good to go. I have several MSFFB2 sticks and none of those has bad or defective pots even the sticks are real old. The MSFFB2 pots are located right next to the FFB motors in a quite tight spot and the FFB motors might interfere with the magnetic field of the magrez sensor.

Yes, exactly. That's how I have it and it works perfectly. Birdstrike, yes the A board is a lot smaller and cheaper too. And for your purposes it is enough to connect only red and green wires to Bodnar. About the 2-pin wire, the connector is perfect for the A board since the pins you want to use are next to each other so you'd get away with buying only one. You just need to figure out a way to connect the open ends to MSFFB2 wires if you don't want to solder.

Yeah those are correct. You need to connect only the two input wires to the bu0836x. Red wire is x-axis pot output and green is y-axis pot output. On the Bu0836x you connect the wires respectively to x input and y input. On the picture those are second and fifth connector from left on the bottom row. I stripped a small section of the wire midway and soldered the wire to the bu0836x there and then put some electric tape to cover the stripped part. That way you don't have to remove the gimbal to rech the pots. You must keep the original wiring to the MSFFB2 intact and just tap the output information to bu0836x to keep the FFB working as it should. To get it working in game you map the x and y axis to bu0836x and in addition you have to assign one axis to MSFFB2 (yes you have dual binding). I usually assign roll to either the MSFFB2 rudder or throttle axis as I don't use those and then increase the deadzone for that input to maximum so that it doesn't send any information to DCS. This has to be done to activate FFB in DCS.

Add me to the list, please.

Have you tried it? Same MAP with higher RPM should give you more power and thus more speed.

Excellent news! Thanks for the answer :thumbup: .

I like to think about it in that way if someone would make a top notch support for FFB then there would be greater demand. Now many see FFB in flightsticks to be just a gimmick which shakes the stick when you fire and thus makes you less accurate and that is why people don't even want FFB or it is considered only to be good for helicopters or WW2 aircraft but not for modern aircraft. The FFB support should be good enough and realistic mimicking the forces of the real aircraft for players to want one as it makes flying easier and make you a better pilot. I counted the FFB sticks in the ED primary controller poll and there was around 115 FFB users. That is around 4% of all the answers which is not much but still quite many considering that no new equipment has been made in years. Of course the count could have been slightly higher if FFB sticks had been in the poll options. We'll just have to hope that there will be new and better FFB sticks when the old patents open up. Anyway I hope we'll eventually get at least basic FFB support for F-14 which pretty much is correct trimming logic for the aircraft.