I agree, but it still leaves the question, how does MSFS trim without a trimmable horizontal stabilizer and without moving the elevator? The picture @LincolnSixE posted above also makes zero sense.
I would think the disconnect between your hardware and the “in-sim” yoke to be more realistic. i.e. when trimming full down and then move your joystick full down nothing happens as the in-sim yoke is already full down, the disadvantage would be that the neutral to full back now represents the full elevator range until back in trim. Is there any sim which works like this? I’m interested to know if this would be more realistic.
Without having access to MSFS, it appears that the deflection of the elevator and the trim-tab are dictated by the control input position and trim setting only. The actual mechanics are obviously not simulated.
I can only assume that pitch trim is achieved by varying the up- or down-load of the horizontal stabiliser to achieve equilibrium at the desired pitch. I also assume this would then be obvious when visualising the force vectors associated with the horizontal stabiliser in game?
I think this is a better way of simulating trim than the current implementation:
“The deflection of the control from its spring loaded neutral position is taken as the force the pilot applies to the control, rather than the controls absolute position.”
DCS started out with with fly by wire aircraft and then servo types, the former there is no mechanical link, the latter the pilot is isolated from feeling the full force by the hydraulic system.
when it comes to the older aircraft with mechanical linkage they could be fudging things by leaving the “visual” part where it is and just trending back the none visual physics part, otherwise you would notionally have infinite strength pilots capable of exerting maximum deflection at any airspeed, which in itself would be wrong.
Weirdly MSFS already does approach the joystick input as force rather than absolute control surface position with regard to airspeed. So they have chosen a very weird approach were it is a mix. The joystick position controls absolute control surface position on the ground but becomes more force based at higher speeds…
Approaching the joystick inputs as force rather than absolute control surface position makes sense considering they are already doing this at higher speed to simulate higher stickforces.
I’d need to retest, and perhaps its a per-aircraft setting, but I have wrested control away from AP if your inputs are sufficiently large/strong, shall we say.
It does kick the AP offline at some point indeed, but below this threshold control inputs need to be ignored. In every single aircraft I have ever flown, there is not one where I control the aircraft with the AP engaged, you can’t physically move the controls.
