So, tell me please....

Hummingbird takes just people's opnions and says "this doesn't work in DCS like it should" while he also uses only those that fit him the most, but he ommits negative or less positive opinions about the 109. It just becomes tiresome realy to argue with him and all those 109 "fans" that want it to be something it was not IRL.

 

Its the main goal to achieve "superiority" instead of creating good FM.

:megalol:

What about the testimony that the 109:

"you had to treat the 109 as you would treat a diva, you had to handle it with care like a raw egg or something that needs to be loved and cared for" Hans- Ekkehard Bob

 

... they had to be careful with it. And its a talk about the 109E and not the K4 which is even heavier and has even more torque from the engine.

https://youtu.be/moreRketqek?t=1m47s

 

If you rely so heavy on the pilot feedback, why do you ommit comments like that?

First of all he's talking about the Emil which as already explained not only featured a different slat mechanism (one that was prone to jamming) but also a different wing. Secondly what does his comment have to do with stall behavior?

Seriously if anyone is cherry picking comments to fit his own agenda it is you Solty, which is only confirmed by the fact that you were the first one in this thread to go for persona attacks instead of addressing the subject.

Guys, stop making this personal, stick to the topic, if you can discuss in a mature fashion, dont post. Getting tired of repeating myself with the same few guys.

Didn't see this until now, but agreed :thumbup:

This is still in beta, correct?

I believe it is still beta and completely agree with you on the current trim, it is simply ridiculous as currently implemented, a time delayed rotation allowing us to use a rotary pot as it is meant to is the most sensible answer.

There's nothing immature about my description of it.

Please try and be constructive and mature in your posts about your issues, the trim works fine right now, yes an axis option would be nice, but its hardly a blocking issue, certainly probably not one of their highest priorities...

 

I have it set to one of my hat switches on my x55, and for the amount I move trim on the 109 it works just fine.

Yes it works with a HAT switch but the axis input is there and it seems unnecessary to eliminate it just because it's tricky for some people to handle. If the real result of swinging the trim from fully negative to fully positive is damage to the airframe then let's have it. If it's a case that full trim movement in a quick rotation of a Rotary is unrealistic them slow it down. Currently it's completely at odds with the aims of ED/DCS which are to give as realistic as possible a simulation. It works fine in the P-51D, how is that done?

Of course any change should not allow you to operate in an unrealistic fashion, obviously making it so you could turn it fast wouldnt be correct. I am sure ED would consider that if/when the option might be added.

That's just the point SithSpawn, the option of an axis is already there, its just that it's been porked to turn it into a 'banded' pot.

Still I think we've done this to death, I only hope the design team are seeing this.

That's just the point SithSpawn, the option of an axis is already there, its just that it's been porked to turn it into a 'banded' pot.

 

Still I think we've done this to death, I only hope the design team are seeing this.

It simulates the 109's manual crank, as you have to use one of your hands to keep the wheel cranking. You can't just set it into one position and wait for it to set itself. You need to keep it moving all the time. If it was an axis you would just push it to max and it would turn on its own and you wouldn't have to be distraced and that would make for an unrealistic simulation of manual crank of elevator trim/flaps. In P-51 it is automatic so it works there.

The 109 trim wheel is just a trim wheel exactly like the p-51's, they both take x amount of time to manually crank through their range, the 109 wheel should work exactly the same way the P-51 wheel does, currently trying to use the weird trim on the 109 in the oculus it is massively distracting as you can often find yourself with a trim wheel constantly turning one way or the other if you don't have the axis re-centered and you just cant get precise trim.

The 109 trim wheel is just a trim wheel exactly like the p-51's, they both take x amount of time to manually crank through their range, the 109 wheel should work exactly the same way the P-51 wheel does, currently trying to use the weird trim on the 109 in the oculus it is massively distracting as you can often find yourself with a trim wheel constantly turning one way or the other if you don't have the axis re-centered and you just cant get precise trim.

In P-51 you can turn it with one movment of your wrist. The 109 has a big wheel that you need to turn in a cramped place. Check this 109 video of flaps deployment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcMjhihuuX8.

So I presume that this trim wheel and flap wheel does that in intervalls just to simulate turning of the wheel with the hand.

Or is it something else that I didn't understand from your description :/

In P-51 you can turn it with one movment of your wrist. The 109 has a big wheel that you need to turn in a cramped place. Check this 109 video of flaps deployment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcMjhihuuX8.

 

So I presume that this trim wheel and flap wheel does that in intervalls just to simulate turning of the wheel with the hand.

 

Or is it something else that I didn't understand from your description :/

it's something else, the P-51 trim wheel does not move to full range in one single movement, just like any trim wheel it is a multi turn, the size difference between the two has no relevance, even your linked video shows operation of the big wheel is completely unrestricted and easy to do.

it's something else, the P-51 trim wheel does not move to full range in one single movement, just like any trim wheel it is a multi turn, the size difference between the two has no relevance, even your linked video shows operation of the big wheel is completely unrestricted and easy to do.

With an open cannopy and on the ground, not in flight. I mean tell me what happens in DCS? When you hold the button it it stops and you need to push it again? Sorry but my DCS is not working (I need a new PC) so that I can't tell what is the issue.

With an open cannopy and on the ground, not in flight. I mean tell me what happens in DCS? When you hold the button it it stops and you need to push it again? Sorry but my DCS is not working (I need a new PC) so that I can't tell what is the issue.

At no point do we see the persons arm/elbow needing to go outside the cockpit to operate the wheel, the canopy is irrelevant, so is being on the ground irrelevant, the aircraft does not change shape or anything once airborne and trim wheels do not stiffen with aerodynamic loads like controls do.

What happens in DCS? is just plain weird, you can assign the trim (and flap) wheels to an axis on the controller but they function as if operated by a switch (what is the point of that?)

what this means is that when you turn the assigned rotary axis on your controller the wheel begins to move in the corresponding direction but it will not stop turning until you return your axis input to the centre (with 20 years of real world flying and using rotary trim wheels I can tell you this is a difficult trick get accustomed to) so you end up having to assign it to buttons instead, which flies in the face of ultra realistic/historical simulation and wastes buttons on your HOTAS that could better serve the myriad of other functions that could be usefull, all you have to do is allow the functions to work exactly the same as the P-51 trims with a corresponding and humanly realistic speed of rotation and bob's your uncle.

What happens in DCS? is just plain weird, you can assign the trim (and flap) wheels to an axis on the controller but they function as if operated by a switch (what is the point of that?)

what this means is that when you turn the assigned rotary axis on your controller the wheel begins to move in the corresponding direction but it will not stop turning until you return your axis input to the centre (with 20 years of real world flying and using rotary trim wheels I can tell you this is a difficult trick get accustomed to) so you end up having to assign it to buttons instead, which flies in the face of ultra realistic/historical simulation and wastes buttons on your HOTAS that could better serve the myriad of other functions that could be usefull, all you have to do is allow the functions to work exactly the same as the P-51 trims with a corresponding and humanly realistic speed of rotation and bob's your uncle.

But then again, does your hardware controller have a trim wheel that turns many times along it's course, just like the real one ?

Probably the available course of such axis on most controllers is rather limited, compared to the number of full turns you will be able to do in the p51, or even worse, the 109... And that's where the problem lays IMO - it could probably be exploited in the heat of the battle...

But then again, does your hardware controller have a trim wheel that turns many times along it's course, just like the real one ?

 

Probably the available course of such axis on most controllers is rather limited, compared to the number of full turns you will be able to do in the p51, or even worse, the 109... And that's where the problem lays IMO - it could probably be exploited in the heat of the battle...

most controllers don't have rotary pots like that, but what if I was a pit builder and made one?

it couldn't be exploited if the speed of rotation in game is limited to a realistic rate (just as the P-51's is), I just don't see where the problem is in that, and for that matter what exactly is the advantage of having instantaneous trim or flaps, it's more likely to cause damage than give an advantage.

How so, if the speed is set in game then how can you exploit it?

If you can operate a trim wheel via an axis in the P-51 you should be able to do the same in another aircraft simple. :)

Bongo,

If you use the proper hardware... :thumbup:

The rotaries in "HOTAS" - X-5x, G-940 have few degrees of turn and low resolution in that axis - typically 8 bits (256 points),

not really suitable for proper trim, but good for the il-2 (2001) cheater "trim on slider". :)

Bongo,

 

If you use the proper hardware... : thumbup:

 

this works with the DCS 109? how?

- and trim wheels do not stiffen with aerodynamic loads like controls do.

Actually, this is not entirely true for the 109, as a recently posted dive report shows:

There were complaints about the trim wheel stiffening up at high speeds, and also, that it was very easy to trim in the tail heavy direction, but hard to trim in the nose heavy direction.

At ultra high speeds it was almost impossible to move the trim wheel.

Additionally the trim wheel seemed to get stuck at high altitudes due to low temperatures.

Would be fun if ED would introduce these quirks also. :)

Apart from that, I think the current implementation is fine for buttons.

I think an axis implementation, where you "request" a certain setting, and the trim wheel takes the necessary time to get there would be ok also.

So, a sort of "delayed axis".

But who knows, maybe they will do that later?

 

I think an axis implementation, where you "request" a certain setting, and the trim wheel takes the necessary time to get there would be ok also.

So, a sort of "delayed axis".

 

But who knows, maybe they will do that later?

Surely it already exists in code as it's exactly what the P-51 does.

I said before this problem with that axis in 109, but is not the only axis with that behaveour. Flap and other control in dashboard too.

About the explanation for anti-exploits don't think is for that, because with actual system, I can use a axis controler and move to extreme for automatic movement of flaps.

For add more reasons for implement a system like actual P51 controls. I have a Logitech G25 wheel without use and I thought fixed in a chair leg in vertical position simulating the wheel of 109. Ok in BoS y can't to use the axis bacause it only works with buttons but in Cliffs of Dover the 900 degrees of turn of the G25 (with FFB disconected) is GREAT. I am a little disapointed because I can't to use that in DCS 109 for trim or flaps. Using G25 for trimming the P51 feels soooo good too...

In short, The actual implementation of that axis is more explitable than the P51. I have 1 lever of Saitek throttle for flaps and I only must move the other extreme and forget while the flaps slowly down.

Don't forget look at the other axis of cockpit too.

I'd like to get us off this point because I feel guilty about introducing it. It wasn't what the OP wanted to hear. I only asked the question because I thought it was a '1.5' problem. I realise looking back that I ran into problems because since last fighting the 109 off the runway, many months ago, I have installed a 10-turn trim pot system and before that I was using my X-52 pots which I always zero'd by the markings on the rotary which my new pots don't have. I now have to zero them by the cockpit indicators/markings which is where the problem became evident. I never bothered with 109 elevator trim for takeoff before anyway but now my pots are often way off neutral when I get into the cockpit. (Cockpit checks have become vital!)

HOWEVER, I think this whole Trims issue has been driven off track by a myth. You will have noticed that when trimming the 109 elevator the stick moves. Why? Because you are applying aerodynamic force and therefore movement to the elevator with the aerodynamic force you cause at the trim tab when you adjust it. That elevator movement moves the stick via the control cables. The elevator only has a limited physical range of movement. I believe that is the case whether you move the stick forward/back with your sweaty hand on the stick or you get the Trim tab to do the job for you. Whatever manual deflection you apply or whatever aerodynamic force you apply through trimming there is only the same limit of movement the elevator can make.

So where's the myth? It has been said that the argument for not providing trimming on a single turn pot is that it could provide unfair advantage (exploitation) by enabling the elevator to be moved rapidly with a twist of the trim pot. Moved beyond what? The elevator has finite mechanical limits achievable through the control column. The trim tab can't take it beyond that and its quicker to pull back the stick than wind the trim tab even with a single turn pot. I suppose you could pull fully back, hold it there and wind on some extra 'up' elevator by applying Down trim (the tab moves UP). But is that really going to make much difference? Aren't you more likely to live or die by your tactics than in a perfect turning circle fight? And doesn't your opponent have a similar system anyway?

If I've misunderstood the argument then perhaps someone could explain otherwise I think the basic argument for removing pot-trimming doesn't have any value.