My summer car joystick sensitivity software#

If you are satisfied with an 80% reduction in sensitivity, without it you can effectively command a control 5 times stronger than designed. The reverse is even more illustrative of the issue. Logically this is simply putting a bandaid over the problem. When large reductions in sensitivity are set, such as -80%, a physical input of 50% now only commands a simulated control input of 10%. When a 50% roll input from a joystick or yoke is commanded, it should represent a similar input to the aircraft, and relevant control surfaces.

To think otherwise does not acknowledge the majority of users and their system setups. Most aircraft also use near to liner control surface deflections (obviously FBW is different). The aircraft flight dynamics should therefore be designed to work with these input controls without drastic modifications. Unfortunately these improvements are severely hindered by the over sensitive nature of the actual aircraft dynamics.įirstly, Almost all consumer control devices have a relatively similar range of motion, which by default produces a liner input response.

My summer car joystick sensitivity software#

Effects such as up/downdrafts from terrain, thermals over differ ground surfaces, smooth air over water and many more are improvements never before seen in software of this level. I’ll preface these reasons by stating I think great strides have been made with the airflow modelling. I’ll try and keep the hyperbole to a minimum, as emotions are currently running higher than normal, but if you do think I’m exaggerating for dramatic effect, please understand that is not my intent.

I’ve been thinking about this out this for a few hours and can’t agree with the concept for a number of reasons. There has been a lot of talk here about the flight dynamics, and specifically reducing control sensitivity to make this more realistic.