Please make Radar elevation usable with rotary an option

Please ED, Just make this usability option a choice. It does not have to be now instead later in EA. I am sure there is a lot of people like me with a rotary unused and in need of more free buttons in the HOTAS that would be so grateful with this (unrealistic) addition.

I know its not realistic but i dont have a real f18 throttle either to control my radar elevation. Please, please, please...

.

 

I know its not realistic but i dont have a real f18 throttle either to control my radar elevation. Please, please, please...

 

No one has, there are no throttles on the market which work like that.

And even if there were such controls, we would need separate hardware to fly F16 or JF17, because this airplanes have the elevation axis implemented the other way.

I don't quite get it. Maybe my English limits me here but I have my radar elevation on a rotating knob. In fact I can choose between absolute elevation an relative elevation input. Am I missing something? Are the rotarys you are referring to some kind of pulsed incremental systems?

In fact I can choose between absolute elevation an relative elevation input.

Where can you change it?

Where can you change it?

I just checked and I see my memory tricked me. There seems to be no choice in the hornet between absolute and relative antenna input.

so I have mine on an axis of a rotating knob in the controls>axis>radar elevation control (HOATAS, throttle). that is not what you need, is it?

I just checked and I see my memory tricked me. There seems to be no choice in the hornet between absolute and relative antenna input.

 

 

so I have mine on an axis of a rotating knob in the controls>axis>radar elevation control (HOATAS, throttle). that is not what you need, is it?

Right now i have it with 2 buttons but it would be so convinient to free those...

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

...Are the rotarys you are referring to some kind of pulsed incremental systems?

Based on what Falcon says, ("... i need to move the rotary and return it quickly to center in order to stop the antena going all the way up...") I think he wants to use a Rotary Encoder which indeed is a pulsed device.

No one has, there are no throttles on the market which work like that.

And even if there were such controls, we would need separate hardware to fly F16 or JF17, because this airplanes have the elevation axis implemented the other way.

The TWCS throttle has a paddle that works perfectly with the radar elevation antenna.

I would like to buy a new throttle but i can't until they fix the rotary input.

No, cause that means that i need to move the rotary and return it quickly to center in order to stop the antena going all the way up. I need the relative elevation we have in the f16 or f15 as an option to make it usable with a rotary.

 

Right now i have it with 2 buttons but it would be so convinient to free those...

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I see. I have a deadzone of 15 to help me manage the elevation by axis but I'm completely with you there should be the option for a direct control of elevation wich you are asking for.

I think what's really being asked for here is the ability to bind antenna elevation as an absolute axis rather than a directional one. I doesn't matter what kind of device that axis gets bound to, but how the axis functions in game.

And I agree - I would also like to see antenna elevation as an absolute axis option.

I think what's really being asked for here is the ability to bind antenna elevation as an absolute axis rather than a directional one. I doesn't matter what kind of device that axis gets bound to, but how the axis functions in game.

 

And I agree - I would also like to see antenna elevation as an absolute axis option.

It does not mind if you use it in a rotary or in a slider, but it needs to be an absolute axis.

Right now the f18 antena elevation works as a directional one, and the degree of "off axis" (e.g all the way to the right/left) only affects the speed in which the antena moves in that direction. The reason this works like that is that the real hornet has a spring loaded mechanism to control the elevation, you can think of a rudder pedals that when you let it go or release pressure it goes inmediately to center on its own. This is very inconvinient if you use a rotary because you have to be the centering spring yourself... or use the keyboard buttons assigned to your hotas that i use now.

Its difficult to explain but easily undertandable if you go in game and asign the radar elevation to a rotary or slider in your hotas.

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I think what's really being asked for here is the ability to bind antenna elevation as an absolute axis rather than a directional one. I doesn't matter what kind of device that axis gets bound to, but how the axis functions in game.

 

And I agree - I would also like to see antenna elevation as an absolute axis option.

Yeah. That's what I meant with "direct". Was just a bit confused by the use of "absolute" and "relative" before.

So if rotary is half way up antenna should be half way up and stay there right? (ATM it moves up as long as rotary is above center.)

So again I support the OP's request. :thumbup:

 

So if rotary is half way up antenna should be half way up and stay there right? (ATM it moves up as long as rotary is above center.)

 

 

So again I support the OP's request.

Exactly

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Terminology "Rotary"

...So if rotary is half way up antenna should be half way up and stay there right? (ATM it moves up as long as rotary is above center.) :thumbup:

For many of us, a "rotary" is a Rotary Encoder. That's a kind of bidirectional rotary switch with 2 contact outputs, that produces short contact closures (pulses) on either of the 2 contacts as you turn it CW or CCW. The ones on my button box for example produce 16 pulses during a full 360° rotation. That kind of device could not possibly provide input for an absolute axis position.

You obviously mean a "knob" with a potentiometer, i.e. a true analog input signal. I don't want to be a "Schulmeister", but I would recommend not to use the term "rotary" if you mean a potentiometer.

For many of us, a "rotary" is a Rotary Encoder. That's a kind of bidirectional rotary switch with 2 contact outputs, that produces short contact closures (pulses) on either of the 2 contacts as you turn it CW or CCW. The ones on my button box for example produce 16 pulses during a full 360° rotation. That kind of device could not possibly provide input for an absolute axis position.

You obviously mean a "knob" with a potentiometer, i.e. a true analog input signal. I don't want to be a "Schulmeister", but I would recommend not to use the term "rotary" if you mean a potentiometer.

Ok. Thanks for explanation!

For many of us, a "rotary" is a Rotary Encoder. That's a kind of bidirectional rotary switch with 2 contact outputs, that produces short contact closures (pulses) on either of the 2 contacts as you turn it CW or CCW. The ones on my button box for example produce 16 pulses during a full 360° rotation. That kind of device could not possibly provide input for an absolute axis position.

You obviously mean a "knob" with a potentiometer, i.e. a true analog input signal. I don't want to be a "Schulmeister", but I would recommend not to use the term "rotary" if you mean a potentiometer.

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Ok so you are right and we use that term wrongly, it just happen that for analog axis controlled by a "rotary" wheel in many throttles like the TWCS or X56 they normally use the term rotary, probably a marketing thing.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

This is not about being right or wrong. The term "rotary" only means that the input device is rotated. It can be a rotary (multi-position) switch, a rotary potentiometer (as opposed to slider potentiometer), or a rotary encoder. So the term "rotary" by itself is ambiguous and can lead to misunderstanding. Now if I sound like a Schulmeister again so be it and I leave it there.

This is not about being right or wrong. The term "rotary" only means that the input device is rotated. It can be a rotary (multi-position) switch, a rotary potentiometer (as opposed to slider potentiometer), or a rotary encoder. So the term "rotary" by itself is ambiguous and can lead to misunderstanding. Now if I sound like a Schulmeister again so be it and I leave it there.

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

This is something I would be against simply because it doesn't work this way in the real thing. The real plane's avionics don't support an input in this fashion, nor moving an elevation dial "instantly" from one point to another. It's designed to be moved up or moved down in relative terms, not absolute ones, with some speed of movement. I want the simulation to be close to the real thing and that includes input. No one is at a disadvantage here either as far as I can tell - buttons work perfectly fine for this type of elevation control. And rotating dials work if you put in a large dead zone, too. I suppose some enterprising players could even mod a spring into their dials.

This is something I would be against simply because it doesn't work this way in the real thing.

That's pretty ridiculous. Almost none of us have real Hornet throttles with controls that work the way they do in the real jet - so right there perfect realism is out the window. Also, I don't think any of us here are asking ED to *change* the way Antenna Elevation works, just asking for an additional option to bind it as an absolute axis - like the "Realistic TDC Slew" option for the Hornet. If you would like to keep playing with it as-is, that's just fine by me. But it's shitty to force other people to deal with weird controls just because that's not how you like to play the game.

+1 for absolute antenna control. I have a dial in front of the throttle which is made for it.

This is something I would be against simply because it doesn't work this way in the real thing. The real plane's avionics don't support an input in this fashion, nor moving an elevation dial "instantly" from one point to another. It's designed to be moved up or moved down in relative terms, not absolute ones, with some speed of movement. I want the simulation to be close to the real thing and that includes input. No one is at a disadvantage here either as far as I can tell - buttons work perfectly fine for this type of elevation control. And rotating dials work if you put in a large dead zone, too. I suppose some enterprising players could even mod a spring into their dials.

Also i'm asking for an option, as said beford ED needs not to change any code or antena speed, just to add this binding option. Funny enough during the first 2 weeks of the f16 it worked like this for the viper so you could not use a "rotary" axis, they recently added it.

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

+1 for absolute axis

Makes perfect sense to include an option like this at some point, I'd imagine almost nobody here has a hotas with a spring loaded wheel that returns to center like the real Hornet, what the OP is asking for would be a significant quality of life improvement for many.

+1