I’ve always wondered this too, in racing sims FF is just absolutely a given for any slightly good gear. Fanatec for example makes fantastic wheels, with exchangeable rims, and wheel basis with different strengths etc. When I got back into flightsim I was kind of expecting to find a similar ecosystem.
I’m not unhappy with my Honeycomb setup, but compared to like a racing sim and a proper wheel it really feels disconnected.
Here’s to hoping MSFS will get popular enough that someone will attempt it. Probably has to be a big company to test the waters against the patent trolls and absorb some legal battles before the likes of Honeycomb risk it.
All good, but are those vibrations being caused by the right inputs? If you watch that video you will see that Austin points out some issues, like a low RPM engine feeling like a lawnmower, and when in flight at engine idle in a dive, there is no vibration at all.
What is your experience of this within MSFS? If the vibrations generated aren’t accurate, then you may as well have someone standing behind you shaking your shoulders!
Lower frequency vibration from low RPM, higher frequency for high RPM, and also include buffeting from the wind striking the airframe, and control surfaces, including turbulence. That kind of thing.
Does the Brunner software allow for multiple inputs with MSFS? How configurable is it actually?
Their product page goes into a little detail:
Simulated effects: engine, ground, turbulence, real trim, autopilot, stall etc.
Dynamic pressure dependent force profile
Out of all of those I think the real trim aspect is probably single greatest value add you would get over a non-FF yoke.
I’m not a pilot in real life so I don’t have a frame of reference as to how realistic it is vs real aircraft, but for me it is convincing and adds a lot to my experience and that is good enough for me.
I don’t know about the ng yoke, it costs less but is still expensive and has a much shorter amount of yoke travel, so I think it is better to get the mk one even though it costs more. I’ve seen a few posts where people were disappointed with the ng yoke for that reason.
Thanks, I just had a look around. It looks very configurable, so definitely GIGO.
I like the inclusion of the profile cloud, which is similar to what SPAD has. I didn’t see anything MSFS specific, but according to the change log on 21/03/2022 it makes some mention of a plugin, so I assume the MSFS plugin is the connector between the sim/Simconnect, and the Brunner software. So you may not need to be concerned over how it’s doing it, only that it does, and what you can configure is in the CLS2Sim software, which for those that don’t like SPAD are going to horrified by.
I’d be interested to know what you feel with those same tests that Austin did.
What does the vibration feel like when doing a run up, between idle, and full power?
What does it feel like when in flight, at idle, slowing right down then going into a dive? Do you feel a change in vibration as the airspeed builds even though you are at idle?
I assume Austin is a real pilot so I’m not sure I’m qualified to comment in the same way as him.
It will take more time and experience with tweaking it for me. I can say that I’ve had to dial down the turbulence effects because it sometimes just felt like the controls were being jerked around randomly with the default percentages. Similar with the ground vibrations and the pedals, had to dial that down a little too.
I am using spad.next with all of my controllers but for the Brunner the axis for yoke and rudders is managed entirely by the Brunner software, not configured at all in the sim or in spad.next. Only the buttons on the yoke can be used in sim or spad.next settings.
I do feel the pressure from wind and have to counter that with my own inputs on the controls and that feels pretty real to my inexperienced judgement.
I can’t seem to find where I read this, but this video has gotten some negative feedback because they tested the yoke out of the box and didn’t spend time to configure it properly. Their reaction I think was that for a product with this price it should be pre-configured better.
This is a really pro class yoke that is meant for the really ’serious simmers’ out here, who know what they want and what they are doing. It’s highly configurable.
I think that xforcepc did a second take after the criticism, but I’m not sure.
Yes, that was why I mentioned the GIGO aspect of it. If not configured correctly, then you will get poor results.
It looks like it would take significant tweaking to get it feeling right, but worth the effort if you can. It’s one of those things I would want to go somewhere to try out before buying.
Here is the video you mentioned I think. They explained they used the profile that Mr Stefan Brunner made himself, so it doesn’t seem like there is any great controversy there. It just didn’t do what it should do, which is not what you would expect if you are flying the default 172, using a 172 profile created by Mr Brunner himself.
If the product works only as well as the data being fed to it, if you feed it the wrong data then you won’t get a good outcome.
The tests Austin was doing was to extrapolate whether the vibration felt in the yoke was simply arbitrary rumbling or whether it was being derived from relevant data.
The first disconnect was the vibration felt when at low RPM. The second was the vibration felt at idle, when in a dive. It seemed like it was tied solely to the throttle position, so as he throttled back, then went in to a dive, no vibration at all was felt, even though the prop was now spinning much faster due to the dive.
It may have improved since then, and I did see in one part of the documentation that vibration could be indicated by IAS. But it looks like it could take a lot of work to get a profile that links in the correct simulated forces to get a convincing simulation.
But that’s all part of the fun!
What it would probably take is for a pilot certified on type to create a profile that is as close as possible to what they feel in real life. For us sim-pilots, trying to configure FF software to give realistic feedback on a plane we have never flown, and have no experience of is a classic GIGO situation. It may as well be educated guesswork.
And I think that is where the profile system could shine.
Going back to the original question, as an IRL pilot and long-time simmer (including using the Sidewinder FF Stick), I think the real issue would be the difficulty in modeling real-life force feedback. We have a lot of very dedicated simmers who, I think, would have continuous complaints about the accuracy. Combine that with the cost and limited market, I think that it ends up being a niche thing, and therefore not a high priority for developers.
What I think would be fantastic, however, would be an accurate (or at least some) representation of trim. That is the biggest thing that takes me out of the reality when flying the sim.
I’d really like FFB for flight sim, almost entirely to make trim feel realistic. If not using an AP then trim is a crucial part of flying. Really I should be trimming nearly all of the time, but with the inability to accurately trim without FFB then I find I’m holding the stick off centre and only trimming occasionally. Without FFB then trim is largely a case of do a bit then wait and see what happens whereas it should be entirely by feel and much quicker.
I am not a real world pilot but was given stick/yoke + rudder twice for half an hour. The most noticeable difference to my experience from 30 years of flight simming was the forces acting back upon the controls.
I would buy a FF yoke plus pedals, but not for the price of having to live from water and bread for a year. All below 500 $ per device would get me interested.
Sadly, all it does is make me want to try one out now.
I had to visit one of my favourite ever websites, https://www.wolframalpha.com/, as I didn’t have a good either of visualising what 110N of force actually is, or is equivalent to.
It would be like having 11kg sitting on your hand.
So I’m guessing when the E pushes back, you really feel it.
I figured FFB with flight sims is a hold out for me. Rather then chasing the costs and frustrations of personally laying out money for the bleeding edge in tech when nobody making the software seems very interested in spending resources on it themselves. For driving, it’s a given, and even a $200 plastic fantastic will give you a sense of driving with an xbox game that will give you a decent experience. Sure $2000 setups work better, but at least both the peripherals manufacturers and the game designers both CARE about it and invest in that aspect of the game/sim greatly. I’m happy with my $2K+ of driving hardware, but am just as happy with my sub $500 in flight sim yoke/pedals.
Feel like if I even was to throw $10k at flight simming for the ‘experience’ of FFB, I’d be on an island of my own of misery trying to ever make it feel ‘right’. Think I’m just waiting it out until I feel the love for it for both hardware and software producers. The ROI for sim software manufacturers just doesn’t seem to be there like it is for driving sims, where you’ll get crucified for the ‘game’ if it’s not done well because it’s so embedded in the genre. Right now, MSFS can’t even get the splash screens right.
There have been huge improvements in FF steering wheels since I bought one years ago. Sadly it no longer works on modern computers, so I threw it out. It was an earlier belt driven Thrustmaster one, and was great fun.
Modern ones are now these fancy direct drive things, where the motor alone, with no steering wheel or mount can cost you a thousand or more!
I have had two sets since around 2009 and still use them today. Excellent with XP Force and were it not for these sticks along with the MS Sidewinder FFB, I would possibly give up as I couldnt take the loss. The sim would lose everything for me. As it is, nearly 25 uears of force feedback and still counting.
. It’s been a while that I watched this video. True enough though, what you’re saying.
