FW-190 Trim/Stabilizer

[donkeycods]

I searched the forums, but I could not find a specific answer to this problem I seem to have. Does the trim/horizontal stabilizer on the FW-190 not work? It works on all the other planes I've tried, but not this one. Am I missing something?

[LukeFF]

There are keyboard commands only for it.

Edited November 26, 2014 by LukeFF

[Sokol1]

In the pictures Arrow keys is personal preference - use what you want.

The tip is, use only two keys/buttons/HAT for all kinds of "pitch trim".

 

 

free photo upload

 

Sokol1

Edited November 26, 2014 by 1lokos

[-TBC-AeroAce]

I believe there are 3 different inputs for pitch trim

 

Look for "adjustable stabilizer" for 190, I believe there is two settings

[Jaws2002]

 

In the pictures Arrow keys is personal preference - use what you want.

The tip is, use only two keys/buttons/HAT for all kinds of "pitch trim".

 

 

free photo upload

 

Sokol1

 

 

 

Talk about retarded GUI. you don't get more confusing controls menu than this.

[1./JG42Nephris]

Didnt Loft say in May ,they dont want to use hundreds of buttons to not avoid new players joining already in the control menu?

I got annoyed each time again when flying the 190 as i had to add another two buttons for the basically same trim function.

[LukeFF]

Talk about retarded GUI. you don't get more confusing controls menu than this.

 

It's not "retarded" (geez, talk about being juvenile) at all. Adjusting pitch trim and a horizontal stabilizer are not the same thing, and the team has made that quite clear.

[kiershar]

You're right this is perfectly clear, that's why nobody ever have problems with it!

[JtD]

And apparently adjusting stabilizer and adjusting stabilizer are also not the same thing.

[Crump]

 

 

Adjusting pitch trim and a horizontal stabilizer are not the same thing, and the team has made that quite clear.

 

They are the same thing.  Your statement is akin to saying an Apple is not a fruit.

 

An adjustable stabilizer is a longitudinal (pitch) trim system.

 

 

 

 

Longitudinal or pitch trim can be accomplished in several ways.  On aircraft with a nonmoveable horizontal stabilizer, trim could be provided by a trimtab arrangement or deflection of the elevators in muchthe same manner as described for the lateral trimsystems

 

 

http://navyaviation.tpub.com/14018/css/14018_379.htm

 

 

Rather than using a movable tab on the trailing edge of the elevator, some aircraft have an adjustable stabilizer. ........... The trimming effect and flight deck indications for an adjustable stabilizer are similar to those of a trim tab.

 

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/pilot_handbook/media/PHAK%20-%20Chapter%2005.pdf

 

The major difference is the adjustable stabilizer offers some distinct advantages for control in the transonic realm of flight as well offering tremendous trimming power throughout the aircraft's envelope.

 

Because of the characteristics of transonic flight, it makes sense the devs would model an adjustable stabilizer seperately from fixed, servo, and antiservo systems.  Once the flow reversal associated with the normal shock engulfs the elevator no other systems besides the adjustable stabilizer would allow for any longitudinal control at all.

[Sokol1]

 

I got annoyed each time again when flying the 190 as i had to add another two buttons for the basically same trim function.

 

But don't take 2 minutes set - only one time - like in above picture, and use the same keys or buttons any plane in game.

Just avoid use modifier like default keys with Ctrl+key,this just add unnecessary complication.

[kiershar]

I would argue that calling a stabilizer a trimmer is the equivalent of calling an elbow a wrist.

[Crump]

 

 

I would argue that calling a stabilizer a trimmer is the equivalent of calling an elbow a wrist.

 

You could say that I suppose.  Pick up any aeronautical textbook covering control design and you would see differently.

 

 

 

But don't take 2 minutes set - only one time - like in above picture, and use the same keys or buttons any plane in game.

Just avoid use modifier like default keys with Ctrl+key,this just add unnecessary complication.

 

Exactly and it is a small price to pay for the coding constraints if they modeled the adjustable stabilizer transonic realm control advantages.

[Crump]

 

 

Another pitch-trim design varies the angle of incidence of the horizontal stabilizer via a jack screw attached to the leading edge of that surface. This is the pitch-trim system used on the Piper Cub, for example.

 

http://flighttraining.aopa.org/magazine/1999/August/199908_Training_Topics_Form_and_Function.html

[kiershar]

The trimmer moves only elevator, the stabilizer wheel moves the entire stabilizer so they are entirely different articulation. My anology is correct regardless of what your opinion is or what your books says. A trim tab and a stabilizer wheel may be both trim systems, but a stabilizer is not a trimmer and it absolutely does not function the same even if they are used for similar purpose.

[[TGW]Echo]

Talk about retarded GUI. you don't get more confusing controls menu than this.

 

I didn't find it problematic at all. I've actually been quite pleased with the controls GUI. Some users just need more help finding basic controls than others. It would appear that the OP and you would fall into this category.

[Crump]

The trimmer moves only elevator, the stabilizer wheel moves the entire stabilizer so they are entirely different articulation. My anology is correct regardless of what your opinion is or what your books says. A trim tab and a stabilizer wheel may be both trim systems, but a stabilizer is not a trimmer and it absolutely does not function the same even if they are used for similar purpose.

 

The trimmer keeps the grass short around the mailbox at my house!     

 

Seriously, the language of aeronautics is pretty specific for a reason.  More confusion has been caused by condition of flight and language.

 

 

 

stabilizer wheel moves the entire stabilizer so they are entirely different articulation

 

The angle of incidence is generally changed by using a jack screw in most adjustable stabilizer trimming systems.  That is how it changed on the Bf-109, FW-190, and my personal airplane, Thorp T-18.  The Learjet series I fly at work does this.  In fact, it uses an adjustable stabilizer for mach trim as well.  It just reverses the same jack screw in mach trim.

 

What do you mean by a "stabilizer wheel"?

 

If you are referring to the cockpit control, the wheel, button, hat switch, lever or handle found in the cockpit to adjust trim can be used for any trim system.  Just because the Bf-109 uses a wheel to control trim does not mean it must have an adjustable stabilizer as its trim system.

 

 

 

 trim tab and a stabilizer wheel may be both trim systems, 

 

 

A trim tab system can have a wheel as the control, you know that right?  Look at any Cessna 172....

Edited November 26, 2014 by Crump

[Jaws2002]

It's not "retarded" (geez, talk about being juvenile) at all. Adjusting pitch trim and a horizontal stabilizer are not the same thing, and the team has made that quite clear.

 

 

 

This is from a later model FW-190. You can read it right there "trimmung":

 

 

 

It does the exact same thing it does in the BF109 and even though it uses different method of trimming the elevator, it does the same thing trimming does in any plane.

 Having to map three sets of controls for the same action is retarded. They all do the same thing. All you need to do individually from plane to plane is the speed of the mechanism.

    When we talk about flaps, then yes, you have a point, because in some planes you could select any position in the entire range of motion, in others you could only select certain positions.

 You don't need to confuse and complicate things, trying to model the actual buttons, levers, wheels in every plane. We don't have a different set of controllers for every aircraft.

A little common sense can go a long way. Model the action, not the stupid buttons.

[Jaws2002]

 

 

 

But don't take 2 minutes set - only one time - like in above picture, and use the same keys or buttons any plane in game.

Just avoid use modifier like default keys with Ctrl+key,this just add unnecessary complication.

 

 

This is exactly the perfect example why the system is retarded. Why the hell model three sets of controls, when the players will use the same two keys to do it anyway?

In all planes you have access to the whole range of motion, when trimming the elevators, so why not use some common sense and model them like other flight sims: Optional use of two buttons, (Up/down), or an axis, for all planes.

 

That's common sense.

Edited November 26, 2014 by Jaws2002

[Crump]

The major difference is the adjustable stabilizer offers some distinct advantages for control in the transonic realm of flight as well offering tremendous trimming power throughout the aircraft's envelope.   Because of the characteristics of transonic flight, it makes sense the devs would model an adjustable stabilizer seperately from fixed, servo, and antiservo systems.  Once the flow reversal associated with the normal shock engulfs the elevator no other systems besides the adjustable stabilizer would allow for any longitudinal control at all.

 

 

 

Why the hell model three sets of controls, when the players will use the same two keys to do it anyway?

 

Hi Jaws,

 

I think they did that so they could have a higher fidelity FM on the characteristics of the different trim systems.  The tabs do nothing for you in transonic flight and if they did a tab would work exactly the opposite of what you need. 

 

It is a guess, but an educated one!!! 

 

Not a computer guy but maybe that has something to do with the computer coding or game engine as the onset of compressibility effects will not be the same in the FW-190 and the Bf-109...close but not the same.  Having two sets of controls allows them to have two distinct  sets of flight behaviors.

 

Make any sense?

Edited November 26, 2014 by Crump

[reve_etrange]

 Having two sets of controls allows them to have two distinct  sets of flight behaviors.

 

It's just because the FW-190 uses buttons and the Bf-109 uses a wheel (in their actual cockpits). The control setting for the 190 requires "up" and "down" buttons, while the one for the Bf-109 requires an axis.

 

The pitch trim control for the other aircraft should allow both (since a wheel is used in some Russian aircraft), but that's another issue.

[Crump]

The pitch trim control for the other aircraft should allow both (since a wheel is used in some Russian aircraft), but that's another issue.

 

The trim on the IL-2 was a crank very similar to the Piper Cherokee and the La-5 a wheel (IIRC).   

 

You might be correct the devs did it because of the cockpit control but it makes little sense in terms of stability and control characteristics.   That would be a shame as retaining control in compressibility is a key advantage of an adjustable stabilizer.

 

The cockpit control has no effect outside of ergonomics.  Many electric trim controls use buttons even today.  It does not matter how you move a tab trim system.  While mechanically they are significant differences, Aerodynamically there is really nothing to distinguish them.  

 

Considering the aerodynamics though it makes perfect sense they would be divided along the lines the devs enacted.  Again, whether they did that or not, I do not know.

Edited November 27, 2014 by Crump

[1./JG42Nephris]

 

 

 

But don't take 2 minutes set - only one time - like in above picture, and use the same keys or buttons any plane in game.

Just avoid use modifier like default keys with Ctrl+key,this just add unnecessary complication.

I got more unassigned axis free on my hotas than buttons in BoS.

Using Axis is actually what one tries to achieve as it is rather comfortable and button saving of course.

Using an axis for e.g. the oil rad or the trim saves 6 Buttons for one axis.

The ability to use pimkies would give me one button again.

So the system used atm is far from being effective imho (pls no historic. correct arguments)

Edited November 27, 2014 by 1./JG42Nephris

[reve_etrange]

You might be correct the devs did it because of the cockpit control...the cockpit control has no effect outside of ergonomics.

 

I think it's because of realism; Wheel or axis controls in the actual a/c are bound to controller axes, and button or switch type controls are bound to controller buttons. I thought I had read some statements to this effect earlier in the year, but it may have been only speculation as I'm having trouble finding it now. In any event, this approach is applied inconsistently, e.g. with the Bf-109 flap controls.

 

For better or for worse, some games don't have these restrictions. When I first played CloD, I didn't understand the Bf-109E prop pitch control and had it mapped to a slider, which felt very odd. On the other hand, I don't think it really matters what kind of controls are available, given that there are smoothing functions which prevent arcade-style instant flap exploits and the like.

 

Having two sets of controls allows them to have two distinct  sets of flight behaviors.

 

I really doubt it's implemented like that. Standard practice would be to maintain a good separation of concerns between the flight dynamics system and the human input system. But I wouldn't be surprised if there are only a few types of input styles implemented, and the devs have to choose between seemingly duplicate configuration fields and odd restrictions on available control styles.

[BraveSirRobin]

I think it's because of realism; Wheel or axis controls in the actual a/c are bound to controller axes, and button or switch type controls are bound to controller buttons. I thought I had read some statements to this effect earlier in the year, but it may have been only speculation as I'm having trouble finding it now. In any event, this approach is applied inconsistently, e.g. with the Bf-109 flap controls.

 

That was probably me.  It was just speculation.

[Potenz]

To stop the nonsense argument trim tabs and stabilizer trim are two totally different mechanisms

while both are used for the same thing trim the plane, they both works in a totally different ways.

 

i will describe the differences for this sim.

 

1_ Trim tabs: there are tiny control correction surfaces on the main elevator that will trim the

aileron up or down

 

2_ 109 stabilizer trim: this mechanism  does the same thing as tabs, but changing the whole

AoA of the horizontal stabilizer moving the whole unit up or down, this is a mechanical mechanism

activated by a wheel in the left side of the cockpit.

 

3_ 190 stabilizer trim: works as the 109, but in this case is driven by an electrical motor, that is activated

by a switch located in the left panel in the cockpit.

 

so instead of complain for having to map the three systems separated, be happy to known that BoS models

each trim system separately. also where you can use axis like in the 109 you can set'em, but where there's switch

you have to use keys, that's why the different systems are modeled in a detailed realistic way.

Edited November 27, 2014 by GOA_Potenz

[DD_bongodriver]

 

 

so instead of complain for having to map the three systems separated, be happy to known that BoS models each trim system separately. also where you can use axis like in the 109 you can set'em, but where there's switch you have to use keys, that's why the different systems are modeled in a detailed realistic way.

 

the modelling of the different system types is good and the least we can expect from something calling itself a simulator, but then it gets completely offset by the weird decision to not allow mapping of the elevator trim on an axis.

[==LD==Lemsko]

just asking stupidly........

 

 

arnt they exclusive trim options? 

if a plane has a movable stabi it has no additional trim with trim tabs in that axis, correct?

 

if correct, what does prevent you to map both pitch trim variants to exact same keys?

[MiloMorai]

Button control of the 109 trim would better represent the actual controlling of the trim.

 

The trimming of the 109 would be in steps as the pilot had to take his off the wheel to rotate the wheel more.  (The same for the flaps)

 

One tap on the button = a certain degree change of the AoA of the stab.

[DD_bongodriver]

 

 

if a plane has a movable stabi it has no additional trim with trim tabs in that axis, correct?

 

Correct

 

 

 

if correct, what does prevent you to map both pitch trim variants to exact same keys?

 

Nothing, it is how I have it mapped, the problem is the fact we have to use buttons to control a system that was actually on a rotary axis (trim wheel), only the 190 actually used a button trim system.

 

 

Button control of the 109 trim would better represent the actual controlling of the trim.

 

I would keep it on an axis, but I would have the game implement a means of slowing it's rate of turn to better represent it real world use.

[Potenz]

the modelling of the different system types is good and the least we can expect from something calling itself a simulator, but then it gets completely offset by the weird decision to not allow mapping of the elevator trim on an axis.that

that's because of the nature of the system for the trim of stabilizer, a rotary axis

on a switch control system would be unrealistic. same goes for prop pitch 

[DD_bongodriver]

that's because of the nature of the system for the trim of stabilizer, a rotary axis

on a switch control system would be unrealistic. same goes for prop pitch 

 

I'm not sure you quite understand my point here, the 190 in real life has a switch control system for stabiliser trim....the game has this correct, the 109 has a rotary wheel for stabiliser trim....the game has this correct too, considering the rest of the aircraft in game in real life use a traditional elevator trim system with rotary trim wheel control why on earth have the devs not made this mappable to an axis? only 2 German aircraft have a realistic implementation the rest do not.

 

a small note to your last point, some German aircraft did use a switch system for prop pitch control.

[Crump]

 

 

The trimming of the 109 would be in steps as the pilot had to take his off the wheel to rotate the wheel more.

 

Why is that?  

 

 

Depends on the realm of flight and for 99% of the envelope...no.  In that small percentage, only aircraft equipped with electric trim systems run off motor would not have the same issue.  Fly an airplane with a wheel trim control like the 172.  There is a reason why a wheel is the most common type of cockpit control input for longitudinal trim .

 

Having flown several airplanes with electric trim controls, they just don't have the feel or precision of a trim control wheel.

 

 

 

that's because of the nature of the system for the trim of stabilizer, a rotary axis on a switch control system would be unrealistic. same goes for prop pitch 

 

Why?  The only difference in the "nature of the trim control system" is the trimming power of an adjustable stabilizer and the transonic realm behavior.  

[Crump]

 

 

that's because of the nature of the system for the trim of stabilizer, a rotary axis on a switch control system would be unrealistic. same goes for prop pitch 

 

 

To make things clearer.....

 

The major difference is control surface movement at the trailing edge of the airfoil vs leading edge of the airfoil.  They both exert a trim moment about the CG.

 

In transonic flight, the trailing edge becomes ineffective in compressibility while a leading edge input remains effective throughout.

 

End of story.

 

The method of commanding that control surface to move is not going to change the basic aerodynamics of the trim system.

[Potenz]

Why?  The only difference in the "nature of the trim control system" is the trimming power of an adjustable stabilizer and the transonic realm behavior.  

How the 190 stabilizer was activated in real life???

and how is activated in game???

[PatrickShiva]

 

 

An adjustable stabilizer is a longitudinal (pitch) trim system.

You meant the lateral axis trim system, correct?Banking is done around the longitudinal axis, right?

[DD_bongodriver]

An adjustable stabilizer is a longitudinal (pitch) trim system.

You meant the lateral axis trim system, correct?Banking is done around the longitudinal axis, right?

 

longitudinal control is pitch, it simply happens around the lateral axis.

[PatrickShiva]

longitudinal control is pitch, it simply happens around the lateral axis.

ok, again: longitudinal for roll, lateral for pitch. So says my flight school book. Do we agree, bongo?

[DD_bongodriver]

ok, again: longitudinal for roll, lateral for pitch. So says my flight school book. Do we agree, bongo?

 

I agree that pitch is a longitudinal control around the lateral axis.......and that is what I was taught and is what I teach.

[PatrickShiva]

I agree that pitch is a longitudinal control around the lateral axis.......and that is what I was taught and is what I teach.

allright, we are saying the same thing lol