Are Control Forces Modeled?

Does the input for stick and rudder include a factor for the control force? It seems like it’s too easy to throw the plane around. In reality I figure this would require a great amount of force on the stick which wouldn’t be easily done. It makes the plane feel weightless. Having never flown a Spitfire before I can’t say if that’s realistic or not. In the WWII birds I find myself pretending that there is force on the stick in order to fly controlled.

Within a FFB stick, this can't be simulated. And even then, the forces are competitively weak, especially in the 109.

Does the input for stick and rudder include a factor for the control force? It seems like it’s too easy to throw the plane around. In reality I figure this would require a great amount of force on the stick which wouldn’t be easily done. It makes the plane feel weightless. Having never flown a Spitfire before I can’t say if that’s realistic or not. In the WWII birds I find myself pretending that there is force on the stick in order to fly controlled.

Sent from my Redmi 5 using Tapatalk

My main concern is with the rudder and even the rudder trim, that remain too responsive even at high speeds / dynamic pressure…

It's easy to overcorrect with rudder or rudder trim. Just a slight touch and it wobbles.

I believe that the Spitfire rudders were known to be stiff ?

Ah, now I get it. I was under the idea that the other warbirds didn't have simulated stick/pedal forces because they were much easier to handle (compared to the 109) in real life.

Either way, ED won't change anything about it. Their planes are out now, and they'll most probably not make any significant changes such as this.

I think you guys may be a bit confused or comparing to that other sim and the sluggish bricks that fly over their....:joystick:

if it comes to max deflection of control surfaces its modeled you can't deflect stick or rudder to max at high speeds

if it comes to max deflection of control surfaces its modeled you can't deflect stick or rudder to max at high speeds

I think you guys may be a bit confused or comparing to that other sim and the sluggish bricks that fly over their....

You people always try to compare to other sims in which aircraft are somewhat "homogenised" to a similar standard so you can fly more or less whatever aircraft seeming more or less the same and using whatever configuration and hardware setting, but that's absolutely opposed to real life where you have no two equal aircraft flying the same, and I mean no two of them even the same model of the same aircraft with no controls being or feeling the same.

I still recall Yo-yo's words stating the Spitfire would be exactly as Mitchell designed it with regard to controls and "silk hands" would be needed in other to fly her properly, and that was when he first started to look at the FM. Now you have the best Spitfire rendition in a PC but that's a problem, because "it doesn't match other sims"…

Does the input for stick and rudder include a factor for the control force? It seems like it’s too easy to throw the plane around. In reality I figure this would require a great amount of force on the stick which wouldn’t be easily done. It makes the plane feel weightless. Having never flown a Spitfire before I can’t say if that’s realistic or not. In the WWII birds I find myself pretending that there is force on the stick in order to fly controlled.

S!

I can authoratively tell you that at speeds up to 250IAS the Spitfire control forces were in no way an impediment to full control deflections.

Ailerons were heavier by a good margin than the elevator, but I was doing full deflection rolls without difficulty.

I can authoratively tell you that at speeds up to 250IAS the Spitfire control forces were in no way an impediment to full control deflections.

 

Ailerons were heavier by a good margin than the elevator, but I was doing full reflection rolls without difficulty.

yep that is what i expected in dcs deflection is reduced at higher speeds like 400IAS you can clearly see that stick movement is reduced

According to pilot reports, the Spit always felt very light on the controls ("flying within a penny" and all that), and a NACA report on the Mk.V lists a required force of around 5lbs/G of stick force, which at the time was below the recommended 6.

In sim that translates to a frankly ridiculous sensitivity in the pitch axis, with maximum lift and accelerated stall being reached with around a 3rd of travel only.

I used to hate the Spit because of that, but I've since found that adding a deadzone near the center followed by curve on the pitch axis helps making the plane more stable. Means you really have to positively pull on the stick to get a reaction from the controls, and it's less sensitive to slight changes in stick pressure.

What's you hardware if I may ask? What you're describing is how easy you can move your joystick, not the aircraft model itself.

 

 

S!

My hardware is in my sig. Not ffb if that’s what you’re wondering.

It's part of the design philosophy of DCS. In general, DCS tries a "what you do is what you get" in terms of the stick deflection. Meaning, you pull your physical stick back at this speed to this deflection, the DCS control will try to do the same. It does not look at any sorts of physical limitations of the pilot in that regard. Exception is the 109 to give credence to the control stiffening at high speeds (and that was a topic of hot debate for a while). The result is that all planes in general in DCS feel quite a bit twitchy because we lack a lot of feedback we would have in real life. We only have the visual feedback which is pretty late for when it comes to judging how strongly we pulled back on the stick.

Other sims start to add delay or sluggishness as speed increases. That has the advantage that it avoids strong deflections at high speed which is one of the major sources of wing ripping in DCS. The disadvantage is that there's a huge disconnect between the control the physical input and the ingame input. The ingame stick basically chases the physical stick with a delay. This also has one advantage in that it smoothes over the smaller movement range of our gaming joysticks compared to the real things.

There's no "proper" way to model this in a game until we get lawnmower engine powered force feedback devices:). The biggest issue is probably that other sims used the second approach and DCS feels wonky to many simmers due to that.

I was searching the forum for force feedback being too light when flying the spitfire. It always feels like I am flying with force feedback turned off in terms of stiffness, regardless of the speed and with some forces kicking in when making abrupt movements on the stick. Is this your experience?

Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk

What FFB stick do you have john4pap?

What FFB stick do you have john4pap?

I still have my good old MS sidewinder FF2

It's particularly noticeable, not only in the Spitfires, regarding rudder stiffness.

At any dynamic pressure you can step on the rudder and expect the exact same response.

It's particularly irritating when trying to trim the rudder, in cruise, since the aircraft will bounce considerably because no stiffening effect is modeled in that axis, at least that I can notice...

My hardware is in my sig. Not ffb if that’s what you’re wondering.

S!

I see, CH Fighterstick. Well, not a bad Joystick but a bit old design definitely. Really soft springs IIRC, that requires curves for sure in order to have a good enough control of the Spit. By default, with such soft springs, of course you can mess from a extreme to another but that's your joystick setting, not the module.

 

 

S!

Problem is that, even with stiff rudder control systems, you will never be able to overcome the effects of trimming the rudder - it'll respond the same way no matter if you're ate 120 MPH or near VNE...

Problem is that, even with stiff rudder control systems, you will never be able to overcome the effects of trimming the rudder - it'll respond the same way no matter if you're ate 120 MPH or near VNE...

S!