109 trim different with FFB?

[malexx74]

Hello,

maybe someone can give me an explanation. I just fly with FFb Joystick. So when try to fly a 109 i have to use massive nose down trim in every situation, even straight flight. This massive trim reduce my stick response. Iam asking myself, is this normal or a FFB issue? I decided not to fly 109 any more, cause the whole feeling isnt right compared to other planes. What comes on top is that the FFB effect on the 109 are really poore. I mean to get a 109 into a stall you must really force it.

Simple question, are other FFB users having this issue too?And what are your trim settings in level flight, so you dont need to press the Stick extremly forward the whole time?

Thanks in advance ... 

[BOO]

You need to set either buttons or an axis that you are not using for something else to control the stabilizer for the 109. In the settings this is separate to the other trim items but can use the same key bindings.

 

Its not an ffb thing.

 

 

Regards

 

BOO

[malexx74]

Hi, you get me wrong. My trim buttons etc work fine. The Problem is i have to use massive trim in 109s and even with trim i have to press the stick forward way too much for level flight.  There is  too much nose up tendency.

All other planes feel good.

[EAF_51_FOX]

Yes, I confirm that behaviour of 109 too.. you have to give lot of negative trim in it and FFB strengh isn't much noticeable (I use MS FFB2 Joy)

[BOO]

Sorry for trying to teach you to suck eggs :-)

 

I also use an MS FFB2 and have no problem with the 109 - level trims at something like -65-75% in cruise and FFB whilst not jaw dropping is fine.

 

CONVERSELY - can I get the 88 or 111 to climb without constant back pressure? - NO! :-/

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

Try introducing a little bit of a deadzone around the center play of your MSFFB2.  I have mine set up to where there's a deadzone until I'm actually pulling against the forces of the stick on the pitch axis.  I set them in game.. and IL-2 BOS does deadzones right, where movement from center doesn't begin until you are out of the DZ as opposed to other software I've seen implement deadzones that just cancel out the movement from center to the edge of the DZ. That center play can easily mess with your perception of how the stabilizers are working in German planes from my experience.

 

My stabilizer settings vary based on my speed.. when above 400km/h if I remember correctly I'm anywhere from 74%-80%. Once I  start getting up to speeds of 520-600km/h or above in a dive it suddenly requires less nose down trim, like between 57-65ish to keep the nose going where you want it without stick pressure.   This is how I remember it with my logitech extreme 3d pro to be honest.. the only real difference is I get a stall shakes and my stick shakes (which ends up shaking my seat so i like it) when i shoot guns.   Bit different than the VVS planes where the stick moves with your pitch settings. 

 

 

 

*Edited - just plugged in my msffb2 and started a quick mission.. eliminating my memory and guess work in the above. 

 

Trim is something you adjust based on speed and weight load..and since the 109 only has the adjustable stabilizer for trim - the setting you use is all dependent on the speed you're going.   At slow speeds you need more nose up stabilizer, as you speed up, the more nose down stabilizer you add, until you hit the speeds mentioned above where it suddenly seems reversed. 

 

Just going from a slide slip to moving the slip ball to the center will cause the nose to pitch up without any adjustment to stabilizer. And pitch trim isn't the only thing effected by speed.  The effect of torque and propwash on the rudder behave in a similar fashion.  IN the FW-190 and BF-109 below 400km/h you apply right rudder to keep the slip ball centered.  Dive to a speed of 700km/h in a fw-190 suddenly you need to apply a lot of left rudder to maintain slip.  Trim is adjusted as you gain or lose speed, and some pilots may know what settings they like to use at low/high speed and correct manually inbetween. 

 

Retyping some of what my post looked like before hand I've been playing sims of more modern aircraft where Prop torque and prop wash are non-existant, because we developed jet engines.   The sim I'm talking about doesn't give you percentages for trim settings and even if the plane might have trim knobs I never look at them.  In a modern jet with a HUD, but no computerized autotrim - it's very easy to see how speed effects the pitch of the airplane and all my trim adjustments are made by feel, not a memorization of what the trim is set to.    Without the hud in our ww2 warbirds, it's up to our ability to judge the horizon, our altimeters, ADI's or climb indicators, and air speed indicators given what's available gauge wise in our cockpits.   (I.E. I'm speeding up and noticing I'm beginning to climb..time to adjust trim nose down rather than rely on any one setting)

Edited March 18, 2017 by headwarp

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Yep, with FF enabled compared to case when FF is disabled theres is huge difference in amount of % stabilizer need to be moved to achieve same AOA.

Edited March 17, 2017 by 307_Tomcat

[DD_Arthur]

Yep, with FF enabled compared to case when FF is disabled theres is huge difference in amount of % stabilizer need to be moved to achieve same AOA.

 

Agree.

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

Yep, with FF enabled compared to case when FF is disabled theres is huge difference in amount of % stabilizer need to be moved to achieve same AOA.

 

Agree.

 

See what happens when you put a small deadzone around the center of the pitch axis in the in game control settings. Set it so that center doesn't start moving until you feel resistance.   The center of my msffb2 has a little play. Very little pressure can cause movement.   And then post what power settings you're using, what speed you are maintaining, and what stabilizer amount. 

 

I have a couple non-ffb sticks laying around..I could test, but after adding the deadzone flying the bf-109 felt pretty similar to my experiences when I was using my non ffb sticks.  

 

-Was going to upload a video to demonstrate but I play in 3440x1440... and need to figure out how upload at a decent quality without cutting the edges of my in game screen off >.<   

 

*POST Edit*  - IMO don't use a deadzone with VVS planes.   The "center" of the stick does not move with the stick when you adjust pitch trim. To try and be more clear - when you adjust pitch in a VVS fighter the stick moves as a result and the axis in the control settings will reflect the position of the stick.. making the center deadzone somewhere where you would pull back. Could cause some weirdness when you pullback and actually do cross the center of the axis.   But with the FW-190 and the BF-109.. I highly recommend a small center deadzone on pitch axis with msffb2, as the stick does not move from center as you adjust the stabilizer.  Doesn't take much effort to set it to 0% if you decide to jump in a Russian fighter.  

Edited March 18, 2017 by headwarp

[303_Kwiatek]

Its true with ff planes need different trim settings then without ff which is not good. There were some issues e.x. with VVS planes when they need opposite trim settings compared without ff. I think it is issue with ff enabled which cause wrong trim settings and disadventage here for ff user. E.x. for 109 F without ff you need about 35% trim nose down for level flight when with FF you need about 2 times more. These affect obviously elevator effectivness at high speed and cause ff disadventage here. Thats why i had to turn off force feedback effect and was forced to play without it

[malexx74]

Thanks for your answers. To be honest, before i turn off FFB, i just dont fly the 109. The Deadzone helps a little, but main Problem is that with about 70% trim in level flight and travel speed the plane becomes so unresponsive.It just dont give you a feeling like the other planes and i dont believe this behaviour is realistic. Without FFB all is fine in the 109s.

So my hope is the team will maybe try to fix this, since there are still some FFB users. 

[Dave]

@malexx74 - could you perhaps indicate at what airspeeds these various trim settings are needed for you.

 

WRT to realism, I have quite a few hours in a 1000+HP low-wing turboprop and can tell you that I spent a large percentage of my attention on trimming - particularly yaw and pitch. Its been over 20 years, but from memory in the PC-9A as you apply power the nose slews off to the left and pitches up requiring a LOT of rudder input and immediate pitch trim adjustment so you aren't holding a LOT of stick forward. Then, just as soon as you've trimmed that out, the airspeed has built up and you're trimming back left again as the prop wash on the vertical tail has reduced relative to slipstream.

 

My memory of the PC-9 was one of constant trim adjustment - with that much power spinning a prop it was a beast and took a fair bit of attention to trim. And thats only 1000HP. The 109 would produce another 30% more power in a smaller airframe without boosted controls.

 

So I'd pause and do a bit of mental arithmetic on the control forces concerned before concluding that this is unrealistic. Sounds pretty realistic to me. I think the real issue here is that without FFB the handling of the 109 is far too easy and extremely unrealistic but as this is the extent of many sim-pilots' experience they develop a very distorted expectation of hyper-maneuverability and effortless control deflection.

 

This does not explain any difference in absolute trim required between FFB and non-FFB. As I personally use the Warthog I can't compare for myself - but if there is a significant difference that is probably a bug. But is it a bug in the FFB version or the non-FFB version? It may just be the latter.

Edited April 16, 2017 by Dave

[69th_chuter]

I would add that (in RL anyway) trim response also varies considerably between aircraft types.

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

After many discussions in forums about the Bf-109 trim behavior, and after reading dozens of books, test report (british, russian, spanish, and Germans), I have the conclusion, that the Bf-109 trim behavior it is not accurate in all russians fligh sims.

I think that the all russian developer used as reference, the VVS test of a captured Bf-109 G2/R6 (with 2x100kg weight 20 mm gunpods under each wing), which have a few data mistakes.

The result of this mistakes, is that developer modeled a unrealistic tail-heavy behavior, (very badly modeled in the DCS:Bf-109K4) when the Bf-109 is a very nose-heavy fast airplane, equiped with more elevator trim travel for pitch up, than pitch down.

My squadron comrades, and me, performed this interview to Volker Bau, (a real Bf-109 pilot) and he told how he trimmed the G4 "Red-7".

http://youtu.be/EDMzZOOIFro?t=3m20s

Now the THS (trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer) in the Bf-109 F and G, and Trim behavior, is not too bad in the IL2-BoS, thanks to the developers have understand ours claims about this issue, that we performed years ago.

We can't said the same in DCS, becouse they don't understand how the THS, weight & balance, and airspeed are relacioned, and the forum admin are banning to all people who try to claim about this issue.

In addition, i have read a flight report of Mark Hanna when he flown the Bf-109 G-10 "Black-2" (now repainted as "Yellow-3") in the '90 years,and he said that the G-10 becoming nose-heavy when the aircraft increase the airspeed in a light dive, and that trim behavior is not modeled in none of IL-2 sims, or in DCS.

Edited April 19, 2017 by III/JG52_Otto_-I-

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

Honestly every complaint in this thread offers no specific airspeed or percentage of stabilizer settings, which leads me to believe there's a lack of understanding going on. Trim is something I find needs adjustment constantly.  Even when hitting the speed limitations of whatever power settings, there are still slight adjustments to be made as the plane hits its top speed and maybe drops in speed the slightest bit.  If you throttle up and leave it there, the plane will pretty much constantly try to gain speed until it can't.  If you ever watch a youtube of the cockpit of planes in formation flight, they are making constant adjustments to the throttle to maintain a set speed.  With only simulation experience on hand I can't comment on how realistic stabilizer adjustment and trim settings are in any of them.   Here's what I can say however.   The only planes I've simmed that DIDN'T require constant trim adjustment are USAF Fighter jets, for example the f-15C from DCS: World. 

 

It flies straight and smooth like butter.. but the reason that is, is because it has a flight computer that is making constant adjustments to the trim tabs of the plane for the pilot. The pilot still has trim functions if that fails or he has another reason for using it over stick pressure. 

 

In comparison, the Russian Su-27 requires CONSTANT pitch trim adjustment from the pilot, rather than a computer, with ANY change in speed.   It was explained to me that Russian fighter jet pilots preferred to be able to feel the speed of their aircraft.  I don't know how true that is.. but without knowing what specific indicated airspeed you are flying at, there is no information or response that can be given to tell you whether you are right or wrong. 

 

Here's what I can say.. if you're turning off an FFB stick and trying to fly with it, how certain are you that you're really holding the stick in center position?  The stick goes limp.   Turn the FFB back on and then.. if its an MSFFB2, reailze, that there is a small area where there are NO forces in the centering area of the stick with forces on.  Meaning, if you nudge it forward the slightest bit without a deadzone and take your hand off, you are off center.  Same with back.  The reason I ask you to try with a small deadzone is because it will tell you if you're holding the stick off center.  Heck..put the center deadzone at 50-80%.  You will definitely be able to fly the plane with stabilizer alone at that point, although personally I find that true level flight requires constant tiny adjustments to trim/stab settings with a bit of stick pressure to keep it level. 

 

Personally.. I don't fly with a deadzone even when flying german.. I'll either auto-level if the server allows for it, or trim enough that adding back pressure on the stick until i hit the force wall will keep me in level flight. 

 

Here's what I do know.. at 1.1 ATA, a IL-2 BOX edition 109 F-4 will top out just over 500km/h IAS.     from about 350 km/h up to about 500km/h my stabilizer is being adjusted from -60ish% to -80ish%.   somewhere between 550-650km/h suddenly the plane is nose heavy as Otto put it and requires -60ish% stab.

 

Unless I'm doing some sudden hard vertical maneuvers, Stabilizer or trim is the main source of pitch adjustment in ANY plane I fly.  I use it to help line up shots when in persuit of or diving down on an enemy aircraft, I use it to put myself into a steady climb, I use it to pull out of a dive when I'm going so fast that the slightest mistake with the stick will rip the plane apart, or full deflection of the stick simply isn't enough to pull out. I adjust it with ANY change in speed and personally I have yet to run out of nose down stabilizer to stay level in at least the 109-f4, the g2 from my memory seems to require slightly bit more percentage wise, but never to a point where I required much forward pressure on the stick.   

 

Personally, for me.. it was when I realized how sensitive the msffb2 was and that the center play allowed for being off center with forces on that the plane pretty much flies the same way it did with my non-ffb logitech extreme 3d pro when it comes to German fighters.. except that it shakes when I shoot, stall, or hit the limitations of an aircraft's critical speed. And the stick will get more or less stiff depending on air flow. 

 

If you want to say differently you are going to have to be way more specific, providing facts like IAS, Stabilizer %age, screenshots that when you disable ffb that you're still flying with your stick centered.. which I'm not sure it's an easy task to fly a plane while looking at your usb game controller settings via windows, or the game settings in game.  A better test would be to simply plug in a non-ffb stick to compare.. which provided a very similar experience for me flying german as stated above. 

 

And also.. you must specifiy the model of plane you're flying.. as the BF-109 G2 in my experience uses different percentages of stabilizer than the BF-109 F4. 

 

And lastly.. you must understand there is NO perfect trim setting. 

 

The speed (or rather the airflow against the body of the plane caused by speed which creates lift) you are flying at determines not only the amount of pitch trim or stick pressure you're using in any plane in the BoX planeset, but the amount or direction of rudder input required for slip, or in planes that allow for it, adjustment of the rudder trim tabs.  Go take a random flight in one of the free bi-planes in Rise of Flight, and notice how even at 1/3rd the speed of ww2 era planes how you have to apply more and more forward stick pressure not to pitch the nose up as you increase in speed. With the lack of trim settings it may help you understand what I'm getting at. 

 

If that speed changes even slightly your pitch and therefore amount of trim will change.  If you move the stick even slightly your aircraft's pitch will change. 

 

If you aren't flying with the slip ball centered you're probably not climbing or gaining speed with max efficiency and probably require less nose down trim.. and if after understanding most of this information, you still feel there's a problem, present it with more facts please rather than just "THIS IS BROKEN" without any facts backing up your claim.   I find that most planes are rather maneuverable regardless of the trim adjustment, and if I'm having to add too much pressure to the stick in areas where I need to keep my nose somewhere other than that plane of level flight, I simply adjust the stabilizer or trim to where it requires little to no forward/back stick pressure to keep me where I want to go.   Stabilizer and trim settings are very much a part of flying the plane, and if you're flying German fighters you should probably be diving and climbing or diving and gaining speed (with the help of the stabilizer and slight rudder input for slip) rather than trying to engage in a turn fight anyway.   If you have a serious altitude advantage, they will be hard pressed to defend against your exchanges from energy to altitude and vice versa. 

 

I think Dave and Otto have given the best information in this thread for you guys.

Edited April 19, 2017 by headwarp

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

.. With only simulation experience on hand I can't comment on how realistic stabilizer adjustment and trim settings are in any of them.  (1)

...In comparison, the Russian Su-27 requires CONSTANT pitch trim adjustment from the pilot, rather than a computer, with ANY change in speed.  (2)

 

...Here's what I do know.. at 1.1 ATA, a IL-2 BOX edition 109 F-4 will top out just over 500km/h IAS. from about 350 km/h up to about 500km/h my stabilizer is being adjusted from -60ish% to -80ish%.   somewhere between 550-650km/h suddenly the plane is nose heavy as Otto put it and requires -60ish% stab. 

..Unless I'm doing some sudden hard vertical maneuvers, Stabilizer or trim is the main source of pitch adjustment in ANY plane I fly. 

...And also.. you must specifiy the model of plane you're flying.. as the BF-109 G2 in my experience uses different percentages of stabilizer than the BF-109 F4... (3)  

..And lastly.. you must understand there is NO perfect trim setting. (4)

 

(1) If you never have flown in a real airplane, and never have grabbed the control stick of an airplane flying, ..It would be very difficult that you understanding how the trim work. ...but i will try to clear yours doubts. 

(2) & (4)  The first concept that "you must understand" is that, ALL airplanes (Messerschmitt Bf-109 included) were designed for flying TRIMMED on cruise, with all trimmer in NEUTRAL position, and without control surfaces deflected and with hands off. This concept, technically is named "trimmed aircraft" and the reason is minimize the aerodynamic drag, as small as possible. 

Obviously, each aircraft model or type, have his own cruise speed, and the cruise of two different types could be different. In addition, the Bf-109 have fixed trim tabs for minimize; the minor manufacturing errors, minor structural deformations, and for aerodynamic balance.

So, theoretically you must not need touch anything in the trimmers, controls or throttle, as long as, the weather, fuel consumption, or other things change the equilibrium of the aircraft during cruise. But this is theory only, and this is the reason for the existence of automatic pilots. Always minimal tweaks are needed if this things changes. (Minimal, means a very little bit, less than one degree.) 

For the same reason, if you are doing combat manoeuvres, or aerobic, is not needed trimming the aircraft constantly, because you are moving all the controls, and the most important is to conserve the neutral attitude of the airplane as more as possible.

(5) Regarding to IL 2-BoX and the Bf-109 flight model, You must know that some things are not fine, like I´ve explained in previous posts. The indication of the percentage in the "techno chat" for the elevator trim control is wrong, for the following reasons.

The Bf-109 F series have 9 degrees of travel in the THS (Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer) in the THS index (placed LH side of the cockpit and forward of the trim wheel)

is from -6 degrees (nose up) to +3 degrees (nose down).

The Bf-109 G series have 8 degrees , from -6 to +2 degress

But both airplanes have the NEUTRAL trim in ZERO position.

 

However in the Il2-BoS (ver. 2.009d)  for the Bf-109 F the "techno chat" show stabilizer  0% when the "index" is in -1.5 degrees, NOT in neutral position.

and for the Bf-109 G  "techno chat" show stabilizer  0% when the "index" is in -2 degrees, NOT in neutral position.

For the same reason, in the Bf-109 F the "techno chat" show stabilizer -33% when the "index" is in ZERO degrees, NEUTRAL position. 

and  in the Bf-109 G the "techno chat" show stabilizer -50% when the "index" is in ZERO degrees, NEUTRAL position.

 

But all of these things are explained in the video interview to Volker Bau, that i´ve posted before, and obviously, you have not saw .

Please, see the video before criticized my opinions. (You can activate the closed captions in English or Spanish if you don't understand the audio well)

Edited April 19, 2017 by III/JG52_Otto_-I-

[303_Kwiatek]

Most here dont understand there is difference between trim settings with ff enabled and without enabled which is bug or game error. When you disable ff effect trim settings were ok when you enabled it you need much higher trim settings for the same condition of flight. Example without ff in 109 f4 at 450 kph you need 38% trim nose down to level flight when you turn on ff effect you will need 2 times more about 75% trim down. Then with ff your elevator response with proper trim plane would be much worse in the same condition comparing to without ff. All planes are affected these.

Thats why i was forced to disable ff effect. These is obviously issue of game

Edited April 19, 2017 by 303_Kwiatek

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Kwiatek is right there is significant difference between FF enabled or disabled regarding amount of trimming/stabilizing is needed to fly "hands off" at exactly the same flight condition. One who do not have FF joystick can't know what this issue is about!

[Extreme_One]

Someone should post in the Bug Reports forum...

[unreasonable]

Before they do that they had better document exactly what it is, since I do not have this "bug".

 

I have a Logitech G940 which I fly with FFB enabled.  I have just tested the F-4 Moscow Map, Autumn, height 1km, rpm 2300, ATA ~ 1.14

 

To maintain hands off level flight once speed had stabilized at ~480-490kph  took ~ +0.25 degrees of stab trim. (ie nose down)  Ie you are still looking at the Zero on the indicator, but at exactly zero the plane showed a very slight tendency to climb. (I did not look at the "technochat").

 

I then paused and disabled FFB, then checked the flight. It made absolutely no difference whatever. So any problems people are having are due to something specific, perhaps to their particular brand of FFB stick, or how they have programmed it.

 

As to the technochat thingie: it is just that the centre point of a uniform scale from -6 to +3 is at -1.5   The alternative way of making the technochat scroll would be to centre it at zero, which would require that the scale was non-uniform. Ie the number shown in technochat would change much faster for a given actual movement in the range of zero to +3 on the trim indicator, compared to from -6 to zero. This is purely a matter of representation on the HUD and does not affect actual required trim in the least. 

Edited April 19, 2017 by unreasonable

[303_Kwiatek]

First try with FF enabled, get F-4, trim to level fly at the same speed - check % of trim nose.  Quit game turn off FF and check the same. Compare what % trim you need in both cases at the same speed for level flight. ( hand off). In my Saitek Evo Force there is ab. 35 % without FF,  and about 75% with FF.

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

First try with FF enabled, get F-4, trim to level fly at the same speed - check % of trim nose.  Quit game turn off FF and check the same. Compare what % trim you need in both cases at the same speed for level flight. ( hand off). In my Saitek Evo Force there is ab. 35 % without FF,  and about 75% with FF.

You must forget the "techno chat" indication, that "stabilizer x%" indication is worng, is a bullshit. You must use the real indication of the THS "index" as reference, like I´ve said in the previous post.

And remember that the neutral trim settings (ZERO position in the THS index) for a REAL Bf-109G4 is 1.05ATA/2.100rpm fliying about 440km/h in acording with Volker Bau said in the video.

 

 

Edited April 19, 2017 by III/JG52_Otto_-I-

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

You must forget the "techno chat" indication, that "stabilizer x%" indication is worng, is a bullshit. You must use the real indication of the THS "index" as reference, like I´ve said in the previous post.

And remember that the neutral trim settings (ZERO position in the THS index) for a REAL Bf-109G4 is 1.05ATA/2.100rpm fliying about 440km/h in acording with Volker Bau said in the video.

 

 

Regarding techno chat bullshit it's the same across both options (FF enabled or disabled) so one can judge difference and ignore that 0 on wheel is not neutral or else. But even so the difference is on wheel too.

Before they do that they had better document exactly what it is, since I do not have this "bug".

 

I have a Logitech G940 which I fly with FFB enabled. I have just tested the F-4 Moscow Map, Autumn, height 1km, rpm 2300, ATA ~ 1.14

 

To maintain hands off level flight once speed had stabilized at ~480-490kph took ~ +0.25 degrees of stab trim. (ie nose down) Ie you are still looking at the Zero on the indicator, but at exactly zero the plane showed a very slight tendency to climb. (I did not look at the "technochat").

 

I then paused and disabled FFB, then checked the flight. It made absolutely no difference whatever. So any problems people are having are due to something specific, perhaps to their particular brand of FFB stick, or how they have programmed it.

 

As to the technochat thingie: it is just that the centre point of a uniform scale from -6 to +3 is at -1.5 The alternative way of making the technochat scroll would be to centre it at zero, which would require that the scale was non-uniform. Ie the number shown in technochat would change much faster for a given actual movement in the range of zero to +3 on the trim indicator, compared to from -6 to zero. This is purely a matter of representation on the HUD and does not affect actual required trim in the least.

You just trayed it with limp joystick ? BTW try ju87 stuka it's even worse. Maybe not just pause but turn off the FF, quit game and use force test program to enable return to center effect (spring simulation) then check in game. Edited April 19, 2017 by 307_Tomcat

[unreasonable]

If I start the mission  having previously turned off FFB in BoX, exited the game, then restarted, I do get different results. Here are the outcomes, + being nose heavy

 

Level flight trim for Bf 109 F-4 Moscow Autumn map, 1km, full fuel quick mission, at stable speed, approximate reading from cockpit indicator 

 

rpm             FFB              no FFB

 

2300         + 0.25          - 0.75

2100         -  0.25          - 1.25       [just edited the rpms had them the wrong way round - past my bedtime!]

 

So a consistent 1 degree difference: I make no claims to be a perfect test pilot, but I am 99% sure that is not just my piloting error. So I agree that there is something odd happening.

 

Two points no notice, however:

 

1) It is possible as I said before to start with FFB on, turn it off in game, and not get any difference in the required trim. So whatever "it" is, it is not a simple FFB on/off issue, but rather something to do with initial settings at game or mission start.

 

2) The required trim with FFB on is, AFAIK, approximately correct. The readings with FFB off, at least in this case, look significantly wrong, if zero incidence is the trim for cruise power settings.

Edited April 19, 2017 by unreasonable

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

If I start the mission  having previously turned off FFB in BoX, exited the game, then restarted, I do get different results. Here are the outcomes, + being nose heavy

 

Level flight trim for Bf 109 F-4 Moscow Autumn map, 1km, full fuel quick mission, at stable speed, approximate reading from cockpit indicator 

 

rpm             FFB              no FFB

 

2300         + 0.25          - 0.75

2100         -  0.25          - 1.25       [just edited the rpms had them the wrong way round - past my bedtime!]

 

 

 

 I think that "techno chat" indication for  stabilizer  0%, must be match with the trim stab indicator in ZERO too, in all cases.

[unreasonable]

@Otto - just to clarify: when you say "must be match" I assume you mean "it would be better if it did match?"  

 

I agree that would probably cause less confusion, though there would then be people posting that there is a bug because the rate of change in the technochat % number suddenly speeds up!

 

Or even better, perhaps you meant get rid of the % number altogether and simply replace it, in the technochat thingie, with the angle as shown in the cockpit indicator? 

[unreasonable]

Further to what is going on, I believe that the initial position of the horizontal stab is 1 degree different in the two cases (for the F-4) - starting with FFB enabled, as opposed to not enabled. This is before any controls are touched.

 

I am not certain, however, because it is impossible to move the free camera exactly enough to get identical screen shots on different occasions. However, with a runway start, it is possible to take a screen shot then draw a line along a part of the picture where the top edge of the stab forms a straight line, and if you do this the extension of the line crosses the camouflage pattern at different points in the two cases.

 

This still could be an artifact caused by different angles etc, so ideally someone who knows how to place a fixed camera in a mission could do that so that the pictures could be compared from an identical angle and distance. I do not know how to do that. 

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

@Otto - just to clarify: when you say "must be match" I assume you mean "it would be better if it did match?"  

 

I agree that would probably cause less confusion, though there would then be people posting that there is a bug because the rate of change in the technochat % number suddenly speeds up!

 

Or even better, perhaps you meant get rid of the % number altogether and simply replace it, in the technochat thingie, with the angle as shown in the cockpit indicator? 

@unreasonable - Both things would be fine,  If the "stabilizer x%" indication in the techno chat, show the same number than THS index, it will be perfect.

The acceleration( number suddenly speeds up) that you said, is another bug, because is impossible for me, move the THS step by step, typing a key. Now I must be push the key and wait a second for the reaction.

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

Still just see a bunch of "there's a bug there's a bug" and nobody mentioning what speeds they're flying at.  

 

 

 
(1) If you never have flown in a real airplane, and never have grabbed the control stick of an airplane flying, ..It would be very difficult that you understanding how the trim work. ...but i will try to clear yours doubts. 
(2) & (4)  The first concept that "you must understand" is that, ALL airplanes (Messerschmitt Bf-109 included) were designed for flying TRIMMED on cruise, with all trimmer in NEUTRAL position, and without control surfaces deflected and with hands off. This concept, technically is named "trimmed aircraft" and the reason is minimize the aerodynamic drag, as small as possible. 
Obviously, each aircraft model or type, have his own cruise speed, and the cruise of two different types could be different. In addition, the Bf-109 have fixed trim tabs for minimize; the minor manufacturing errors, minor structural deformations, and for aerodynamic balance.
So, theoretically you must not need touch anything in the trimmers, controls or throttle, as long as, the weather, fuel consumption, or other things change the equilibrium of the aircraft during cruise. But this is theory only, and this is the reason for the existence of automatic pilots. Always minimal tweaks are needed if this things changes. (Minimal, means a very little bit, less than one degree.) 
For the same reason, if you are doing combat manoeuvres, or aerobic, is not needed trimming the aircraft constantly, because you are moving all the controls, and the most important is to conserve the neutral attitude of the airplane as more as possible.
(5) Regarding to IL 2-BoX and the Bf-109 flight model, You must know that some things are not fine, like I´ve explained in previous posts. The indication of the percentage in the "techno chat" for the elevator trim control is wrong, for the following reasons.
The Bf-109 F series have 9 degrees of travel in the THS (Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer) in the THS index (placed LH side of the cockpit and forward of the trim wheel)
is from -6 degrees (nose up) to +3 degrees (nose down).
The Bf-109 G series have 8 degrees , from -6 to +2 degress
But both airplanes have the NEUTRAL trim in ZERO position.


However in the Il2-BoS (ver. 2.009d)  for the Bf-109 F the "techno chat" show stabilizer  0% when the "index" is in -1.5 degrees, NOT in neutral position.
and for the Bf-109 G  "techno chat" show stabilizer  0% when the "index" is in -2 degrees, NOT in neutral position.
For the same reason, in the Bf-109 F the "techno chat" show stabilizer -33% when the "index" is in ZERO degrees, NEUTRAL position. 
and  in the Bf-109 G the "techno chat" show stabilizer -50% when the "index" is in ZERO degrees, NEUTRAL position.

 

But all of these things are explained in the video interview to Volker Bau, that i´ve posted before, and obviously, you have not saw .

Please, see the video before criticized my opinions. (You can activate the closed captions in English or Spanish if you don't understand the audio well)

 

 

At what point did i criticize anything in your post and at what point did you think I was directly responding to you? 

At the bottom of my post I said you and Dave had the best information in the thread bud, so before you begin to jump all over me, please understand that I was talking to the people that have jumped into this thread saying "bug bug bug " without providing any facts or information to help verify their claims.  I.E. not telling us how fast they were going and what amount of stabilizer.  And if they aren't providing their IAS I'm inclined to believe they don't get how going faster pitches the nose up and going slower can cause the opposite. And while yes, the simulated airplanes we fly are trimmed on the ground for cruise speed, the amount of stabilizer required to level out is a different number based on the speed I'm going.    My comment was simply.. that while I CAN NOT comment on how realistic the simulator is depicted.. I can share my experiences with various simulators that reflect the same behavior of pitching up as you gain speed.  The ground trim settings are reflected in that area between 400-500 km/h where the slip ball is centered without rudder input from the pilot, but in most instances of flight the plane still requires nose down stab.   I'm not trying to claim whether this implemented right or wrong.  What I am saying, is that once I took into consideration the amount of center play where no forces are in a MSFFB2, my findings were that it's performing very similar to my Logitech Extreme 3d pro which is just a spring centered stick. We have no way of knowing if "cruise speed" to one person is topping out at 1.0 ata, or 1.1 ata, or max continuous, and even then there are other factors that could prevent them from reaching a specific air speed (I.E. slip)    In order to test something like this we kind of need to all be on an equal playing field.  We need to know the indicated air speed of the aircraft. 

 

Regardless of real life.. no matter what stick I use the BF-109F-4, BF-109 G2, the FW-190 A-3 in IL-2 BoX requires nose down stabilizer and the amount of such depends on the speed I'm currently traveling.. and I'm personally saying that I haven't noticed much difference in behavior regardless of what stick I choose to fly with FFB or Non.  At first I thought maybe something was messed up..but I realized I was probably holding the stick off center. 

 

Regardless of real life.. in simulators, the characteristics of adjusting stabilizer or trim that I described remain the same.  Speed up.. trim/stab nose down.. slow down.. trim/stab nose up.  That's just a characteristic of flight as the aircraft gains speed it's generating more lift due to the airflow. And if these guys aren't taking into account the center play of a stick like the msffb2 that could very easily be throwing off the feeling of it.  It's almost the same thing as holding on to the stick while adjusting trim in a VVS plane.  The force isn't strong enough to move your arm and hand for you so it just sits at the same pitch until you let go.  Letting go of an msffb2, the stick can very easily be sitting slightly forward or slightly aft of center. 

 

I'm not the one claiming anythings messed up.. and I even gave you kudos for your post.   

 

And quite frankly I'm not wrong in saying people need to provide data with their claims of bugs.   You can't just say "FFB is different than non FFB" and provide no information to back up your claim.   There are factors, mainly speed, that are kind of important to the amount of stabilizer you need.  I don't need experience flying a real aircraft to understand this concept.  MY comment of "THere is NO perfect trim setting" alludes to the fact that even slight changes in air speed can change the orientation of the aircraft, if you're not correcting with trim/stab or stick and rudder input. 

 

I'm not convinced by "disabling FFB" unless they're using the stick in a method that provides centering forces and even then the msffb2 can easily be nudged off center within the small center area that doesn't provide any forces. If disabled in flight the stick will go limp and good luck finding the center.  Hence, introducing a dead zone to the stick, and trying to level out with stabilizer and then comparing it to the same tests with a NON FFB stick would be a much better test than simply disabling FFB to see if it is pilot error or indeed a bug.  And both tests require flying at the same speeds.. maybe even altitudes that much I'm not going to try to guess at. 

So.. where you think I was disagreeing with you I will NEVER know.. but.. you weren't the target of my post. K thanks. 

 

If your claim is that the 109's trim/stabilizer functions are not implemented correctly that's a different topic than "FFB is different than non FFB" and a topic I personally would not attempt to participate in.  I have made several posts requesting that people report the speeds they're flying at, what amount of stabilizer, which model of bf-109 and explained the necessity of such information in and the simple basic concept that change of airspeed is change of orientation. I don't think a pilot's license is required to grasp that.    Without such, the claims just may as well be speculation. 

Edited April 21, 2017 by headwarp

[unreasonable]

@headwarp -  I have given you the conditions of my test including map, weight, altitude and throttle setting.  I did not give IAS since this does fluctuate a little through the test over a few kph as finding perfect trim in a 109 is virtually impossible: there will always be a slight porpoising inducing speed changes unless trim or the stick is constantly used.  Apart from anything else, with no aileron trim, hands off the F-4 tends to roll slightly.

 

I could run the same tests again and write down the speeds but I think I am not going to bother. Better for a more experienced "test pilot" to take up the task if they wish to confirm or refute the hypothesis.  My stick has spring centering enabled, so is not a "limp stick" with FFB disabled, but of course it is not guaranteed to be inputting exactly the same value every time it is left hands off, whether FFB is on or off.  I did, however, run my tests more than once and the results for each condition - FFB on vs off - appeared to be identical on each occasion. 

 

Another way of observing the difference the trim setting makes is not to try to find level trim, but put it on a fixed setting at a given stable speed and then observe the tendency to nose down or up.

 

All of my conclusions are provisional - but only the developers can do flight tests without the possibility of error, since we simply do not have to tools.

 

In addition, there is the point that the stab perhaps appears be set at a different angle at mission start. This could provide indisputable evidence that there is something odd going on - or not.  But again, it is very difficult to be 100% sure when it is impossible (for me) to place the camera exactly.

 

As I write, I have just had an idea - the external cameras (Alt-F3?) can be configured - it should be possible to create one looking in at the tail for the F-4. I will do this sometime today if I have the time and inclination, unless someone else can beat me to it. 

[Guest deleted@50488]

There's yet another factor that might contribute to differences, although not having a FFB controller I can't test it.

 

The 109s come with their elevator trim tabs deflected towards nose-heavy. In an external view you can see that the trim tab is deflected slightly Up, hence pushing the elevator down, and causing a

pitching down moment, irrespective of the stabilator trim settings.

 

On ground as propwash increases, and in stick-free state, one can notice the elevator starting to deflect down.

 

I wonder if this default elevator trim tab setting differs from FFB to non-FFB modes in the sim ?

[unreasonable]

Too busy today to do camera adjustment. 

 

"Is there anybody else?"  

[Guest deleted@50488]

From here:

 

"F l i g h t r e p o r t   Nr. 879/270         
 Bf 109, W.Nr. 9228, TH +  TF      Days: From the 28th January till 4th February 1943 – total 9 flights. Duty: Investigation of the flight characteristics. Result: The first flights were made with a throttle position equivalent to a boost of 1.0 at sea level. (automatic propeller pitch). With a dive angle of 45° from 8.5 km altitude over sea level a speed of IAS-Va= 730 km/h at 4 km was reached. The trim setting of + 1.0° (cruising speed) had to be changed 0.5° more nose heavy, because without this the pilot's strength is insufficient to hold this speed."

 

​meaning the typical cruise stabilator settings are +1.0 not 0.0. The elevator is aligned with the stabilator ( minus the deflection caused by it's ground adjusted trim tab ), so, any arguments regarding additional drag because of a non-neutral trim setting are void in this case, I believe...

Edited April 21, 2017 by jcomm

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

@headwarp -  I have given you the conditions of my test including map, weight, altitude and throttle setting.  I did not give IAS since this does fluctuate a little through the test over a few kph as finding perfect trim in a 109 is virtually impossible: there will always be a slight porpoising inducing speed changes unless trim or the stick is constantly used.  Apart from anything else, with no aileron trim, hands off the F-4 tends to roll slightly.

 

I could run the same tests again and write down the speeds but I think I am not going to bother. Better for a more experienced "test pilot" to take up the task if they wish to confirm or refute the hypothesis.  My stick has spring centering enabled, so is not a "limp stick" with FFB disabled, but of course it is not guaranteed to be inputting exactly the same value every time it is left hands off, whether FFB is on or off.  I did, however, run my tests more than once and the results for each condition - FFB on vs off - appeared to be identical on each occasion. 

 

Another way of observing the difference the trim setting makes is not to try to find level trim, but put it on a fixed setting at a given stable speed and then observe the tendency to nose down or up.

 

All of my conclusions are provisional - but only the developers can do flight tests without the possibility of error, since we simply do not have to tools.

 

In addition, there is the point that the stab perhaps appears be set at a different angle at mission start. This could provide indisputable evidence that there is something odd going on - or not.  But again, it is very difficult to be 100% sure when it is impossible (for me) to place the camera exactly.

 

As I write, I have just had an idea - the external cameras (Alt-F3?) can be configured - it should be possible to create one looking in at the tail for the F-4. I will do this sometime today if I have the time and inclination, unless someone else can beat me to it. 

 

I saw that and I appreciate the fact that you provided as much information as you did.   And I appreciate the value of your tests and everything. 

I'll probably play around with it soon myself as I haven't been in game since some time last week. 

 

I agree with you on the impossibility of perfect trim,  I happen to find it requires at least some stick input, and the amount may vary depending on any given change in speed. 

 

I am not trying to downplay the effort you put into your tests, and you've actually given us something we might be able to compare to. 

 

I still however think that at least that we should be discussing the IAS involved with such tests, and perhaps stating clearly whether we are correcting for slip via rudder or not as these in my experience have drastic effects on the pitch of the plane, that way people with the required peripherals can jump in and fly under those circumstances for comparison. The more specific and the more details we get the more we can attempt to obtain that equal playing field and compare results.  As far as fluctuation of IAS, this is to be expected so maybe in the format of  ranges.   As in xx-bb km/h(xx to bb) it took between this much and this much nose down stabilizer to go from climbing to a near level dive. 

 

Personally I do kind of have set percentages I fly at with any given plane and take advantage of technochat, but I'm almost always fiddling with my stabilizer or trim settings aiming for less need for stick pressure, and as stated in previous posts I use my stabilizer for assistance in many situations.  I'm not sure if a real pilot would do so, but it works pretty well for me in IL-2. 

 

However reading some of the info in your post the next time I'm in the mood to log in, possibly later tonight,  I will look into the other things you bring up.. such as difference in stabilizer position when you start up.  I'm not sure what factor causes that, and also my stabilizer is set to an axis, I'm used to moving it to what I find acceptable for take off at the start anyway, so I'll set it to buttons or keypresses to get a more accurate idea of what you're describing. 

 

I'll also make a point to observe the stabilizer index.  I'll also do some comparisons between my msffb2 and one of my non ffb sticks and share my results.  My thing is.. I felt like things might be a little off when I first got my msffb2 not too terribly long ago..but as I got used to that center area and how easily it can affect the position of the elevators, the more it felt like I was flying with my old joystick. I've never felt any lack of maneuverability because I tend to adjust my stabilizer if I feel I'm not diving or climbing at the pitch I'd like to. 

 

I'll post again with my findings and who knows..I might prove myself wrong.. but I'll do my best to give plenty of details one way or the other if anybody would like to compare there results to them. 

 

 

 

 

I wonder if this default elevator trim tab setting differs from FFB to non-FFB modes in the sim ?

 

Nice thinking.  I'll also check this out when I log in later.  

Edited April 21, 2017 by headwarp

[unreasonable]

From here:

 

"F l i g h t r e p o r t   Nr. 879/270         

 Bf 109, W.Nr. 9228, TH +  TF      Days: From the 28th January till 4th February 1943 – total 9 flights. Duty: Investigation of the flight characteristics. Result: The first flights were made with a throttle position equivalent to a boost of 1.0 at sea level. (automatic propeller pitch). With a dive angle of 45° from 8.5 km altitude over sea level a speed of IAS-Va= 730 km/h at 4 km was reached. The trim setting of + 1.0° (cruising speed) had to be changed 0.5° more nose heavy, because without this the pilot's strength is insufficient to hold this speed."

 

​meaning the typical cruise stabilator settings are +1.0 not 0.0. The elevator is aligned with the stabilator ( minus the deflection caused by it's ground adjusted trim tab ), so, any arguments regarding additional drag because of a non-neutral trim setting are void in this case, I believe...

 

What the cruise stab setting is will also depend on the weight/balance of the aircraft, plus the setting of the movable trim tab, so I suppose there is no universally correct number. What was odd about my tests was simply that the required setting appears more tail heavy if you start the game having previously turned off FFB, than when you start with FFB on, all else being equal, as far as humanly possible.     edit - Also note that the very first page of that report (thanks I did not have that) says that the elevator trim tab was non-standard, so universalizing from this aircraft on this issue may be unwise. 

 

Given that the FFB on setting was close to zero, and the FFB off setting even less, whether the cruise should be at 0 or +1 the setting with FFB on is closer to the correct value than with it off.  

 

Edit: re the visual check of the stab at mission start. This should be done first selecting parked or runway. There is no need to touch the stick or rudders at all, so the only thing being examined is the physical stab position eliminating any issues of speed, slip, roll or stick centering. If anyone can prove that the stab is either in the same or different positions in the two cases that would be a step forwards.

Edited April 22, 2017 by unreasonable

[unreasonable]

Just update on the visual check: I think my first impression was an artifact from not having the same angle.

 

By modifying the Atl-F2 camera view to look in at the tail from a fixed position, superimposing the two images - FFB on or off - shows no visible difference for the starting stab position for the F-4. 

 

I could only get this camera angle to work while airborne for some reason - but by taking screenshoots without touching any control gives an identical visual picture of the stab angle. That does not prove that the FM thinks the stab angle is the same, of course, but is indicative.

 

Anyway, I am not spending any more time on this. As far as I am concerned, the trim works realistically - with FFB on - which is how I always play, so issues with FFB off or with the technochat indicator is not really my problem.  

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

From here:

 

"F l i g h t r e p o r t   Nr. 879/270         

 Bf 109, W.Nr. 9228, TH +  TF      Days: From the 28th January till 4th February 1943 – total 9 flights. Duty: Investigation of the flight characteristics. Result: The first flights were made with a throttle position equivalent to a boost of 1.0 at sea level. (automatic propeller pitch). With a dive angle of 45° from 8.5 km altitude over sea level a speed of IAS-Va= 730 km/h at 4 km was reached. The trim setting of + 1.0° (cruising speed) had to be changed 0.5° more nose heavy, because without this the pilot's strength is insufficient to hold this speed."

 

​meaning the typical cruise stabilator settings are +1.0 not 0.0. The elevator is aligned with the stabilator ( minus the deflection caused by it's ground adjusted trim tab ), so, any arguments regarding additional drag because of a non-neutral trim setting are void in this case, I believe...

That cruise speed "stabilator" setting was specifically for a maximum speed DIVE RECOVERY TEST.  Diving at 730km/h IAS at 4km, ( about 890 km/h TAS) That is not normal cruise flight. That is not the normal setting

 

 

Note that with more stabilator angle than +1º 15' (nose down) was necesary recover the dive using the elevator trim handwheel, due to was impossible pulling with the stick. 

Note too, that the real Bf-109K4 had a MAXIMUN "stabilator" angle of +1º 10´ ONLY

Edited April 22, 2017 by III/JG52_Otto_-I-

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Ju87 Stuka has 100% fuel and one 1800 kg bomb, prop and throttle 75%, no elevator inputs :  all same in both videos

Joystick is SideWinder Force Feedback2

 

 

Video no.1  FF enabled 

 

 

Video no.2  FF disabled (turned FF off, exited the game, run forcetest app with Spring Center option enabled and run il2 again) 

 

 

 

You can see cleary the big difference in amount of elevator trim is needed to fly level with FF on and FF off (40 vs 100 ) %

 

100 % with FF disabled is nose high attitude, when with FF is enabled 100 % is  enough to neutral.

 

 

[=IL2AU=ToknMurican]

Okay so..a little embarrassed at my previous posts after doing some testing myself.  I did two QMB flights in BF-109 F4 at 1000m alttidue, 63% throttle or just under 1.2 ata aka max continuous.  Here's what I noticed - regardless of whether I was using my warthog or my msffb2 the stabilizer index vs %ages in technochat remained the same. 

 

 

There is definitely something weird going on.  My flight. pretty much consisted of gaining form about 400km/h to a bit over 500km/h, and the amount of nose down stabilizer required to level or go from climbing to diving seemed DOUBLED with the FFB stick. 

 

I'm convinced this is somehow tied to the position of the elevators seeing as the stabilizer index values remained consistent with the technochat %ages between both sticks.  I applied just a slight amount of aft pressure to the warthog stick, like maybe 1/8th or so of the travel from center to full aft deflection, it began to fly about how I'm used to with the MSFFB2 with no aft pressure and perhaps even a bit of forward stick pressure due to the center area of the msffb2. 

 

Further testing is required to determine if the elevator actually changes position between the two sticks while centered, or if as jcomm mentioned the possibility of, that somehow the elevator trim tabs are set different between the two sticks. 

 

Am I going to start flying with my warthog instead?  No, the BF-109 F4 felt equally maneuverable no matter which stick I was using, just that the msffb2 requires more nose down stab for level flight.  It doesn't seem to affect my ability to gain speed or maneuver, and even with the msffb2 I still have enough room left with nose down stab to use it to put myself into a dive. 

 

In both cases, 0% stabilzer via technochat equated to 1.5 degrees of nose down stabilizer.  Flying at about 520ishkm/h the warthog required around -35-40ish% nose down leaving the stick centered to be doing anything other than climbing.   At the same air speed, the msffb2 required about -75-80% of nose down stab. 

 

I intentionally added aft stick pressure on the warthog, and it didn't take much pressure to get me to a point where I required 80% to stay level.  So I don't know what's going on but it almost seems as if the game is detecting the center point of the msffb2 stick to be slightly aft of center in the actual plane..and thats with me even nudging the stick forward to the force wall so if anything the physical stick was slightly forward.  Looking in the game options, the stick is actually showing being slightly forward of center. 

 

I have no idea what bug is causing the difference.. but my apologies to anyone for not just doing this test sooner and making assumptions about peoples understanding of speed vs lift.  I do still think it's necessary to demonstrate that both tests were at the same airspeed. 

 

I have very much gotten used to the amount of stabilizer required to fly with my msffb2 and I don't think it's really much of a hindrance.. but yes.. this is probably a bug and should be submitted via bug report with as much details as possible to the dev team. 

 

My conclusion - this isn't an issue with the stabilizer itself, but more to do to either the position of, or the trim tab settings of the elevators when switching between at least the MSFFB2 and any non ffb stick.  With that being said I'll quit speculating in this thread and eventually get around to submitting a bug report.  I don't feel this is a total game breaker.. but it is worth mentioning the difference and hoping for a fix.   As far as my earlier statements of saying things felt pretty similar, there is every chance that my memory was based on different models of bf 109 as the g2 seems to have less stabilizer travel and therefore shows as a higher %age via technochat.  Again I apologize for not just doing this test sooner. 

 

Just to add some experience to my opinion that we're still capable of flying the plane effectively. .  I have recently been flying fw-190's and bf-109's with someone who does not use an ffb stick and we often communicate where the throttle is set to to keep in formation with each other, so I'm inclined to believe the added stabilizer angle  isn't causing additional drag or anything. I could be wrong.  If we discussed our stabilizer settings it may have thrown in some confusing discussions between the two of us, but having not done so.. neither one of us seems to have trouble staying together in a climb or on the other's wing.  I may do further tests to see if I can notice a change in stick position in the aircraft between the two physical sticks, but I believe this is going to take a slight bit of effort and some screenshots for it to be noticed if there is any. 

 

 

- Last thought.. I am reminded of the much more complex and adjustable control settings found in Rise of Flight, the previous title based on this sim engine, where you could actually change where the center of your joystick was reflected in any given plane. I.E. you could adjust the curve so that center stick equaled level flight at top speed rather than having to hold forward stick pressure to keep from climbing.   Hopefully it's just a simple adjustment on their end, as we don't have these options in IL-2 BoX. 

Edited April 22, 2017 by headwarp

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

 

Just to add some experience to my opinion that we're still capable of flying the plane effectively. .  I have recently been flying fw-190's and bf-109's with someone who does not use an ffb stick and we often communicate where the throttle is set to to keep in formation with each other, so I'm inclined to believe the added stabilizer angle  isn't causing additional drag or anything. I could be wrong.  If we discussed our stabilizer settings it may have thrown in some confusing discussions between the two of us, but having not done so.. neither one of us seems to have trouble staying together in a climb or on the other's wing.  I may do further tests to see if I can notice a change in stick position in the aircraft between the two physical sticks, but I believe this is going to take a slight bit of effort and some screenshots for it to be noticed if there is any. 

 

But as you see in my Stuka example i can't trim it to just little tail heave to steady climb, i have to hold elevator instead.

 

BTW Thanks for recheck.

Edited April 22, 2017 by 307_Tomcat