I would think of the visual effects for the control surfaces as eye candy and not attempt any calibration based on what you see there.

 

And you would be wrong, as long as the developer has defined the movement of those surfaces to accord with real-world equivalents - not difficult when the type certificate sheets for every design must contain such measurements.

 

As a starting point FULL = FULL is going to eliminate many problems with the operators computer and NULL = ZERO will serve the purpose of eliminating controller lag and/or highlight technical deficiencies with the users system, hardware or calibration. Fact is, if Full ≠ Full you are either not getting a full response in-sim to your controller, or the controller is over-sensitive and reaching its limit before the simulated control surface. 

 

Either is a complex problem for solving via a forum.

Just wondering?  My Control stick has a set amount of travel for fore & aft, as well as side to side. The real airplane can easily be set with stops for elevator & aileron travel which isn't exactly the full range of the desktop joystick. Wouldn't that amount to having a simulation stick do nothing as it moves past the real life stop settings?  With the real life plane, the stick just might not move full fore & aft, with the same range as the desktop control.  There is nothing to stop a desktop stick or yoke from doing so. 

Louisdecoolste,

 

I would be surprised to hear of developers referencing type data sheets. Those aren't documents that one can get access to. A Maintename manual will provide details on limits of travel but not so much on surfacd position relative to stick position.

 

Lastly, the sim isn't affected by the visual model, which is why I would suggest ignoring it. If one checks the aileron movement on the default Maule this is very obvious.

Sure wish this thread was still about the Comanche.

^^ What he said!  

Louisdecoolste,

 

I would be surprised to hear of developers referencing type data sheets. Those aren't documents that one can get access to. A Maintename manual will provide details on limits of travel but not so much on surfacd position relative to stick position.

 

Lastly, the sim isn't affected by the visual model, which is why I would suggest ignoring it. If one checks the aileron movement on the default Maule this is very obvious.

 

Actually, it is. The rate of roll is dependent on the aileron control vector in the .air file. Just not the positive (+) or negative (-) element. This is then sometimes modified in the aircraft .cfg.

 

Of course, in FSX many of the old .air elements that were influential now have no effect, but that's a complex issue for another day - the A2A Commanche does NOT reference the flight model in the .cfg file (getting back on topic). Therefore the advice given is valid, as it reinforces that given by the developer. Unless you think they're wrong about their own product ?

louisdecoolste,

What you have proposed--using curves to achieve a correspondence between max deflection of your control with max deflection of a visible animated control surface, is just not achieving anything. It isn't necessary. If your max/min values are 16384, I don't care what curve you have in there, comparing hardware limits to animated control surface limits will always result in the same thing, Full=Full. If the 3D modeller has built in the ability for the model to deflect some extra amount, it really doesn't matter, because you won't know it, and can't get there anyway. For a standard controller, the range is +/- 16384, and if that's what its says you're getting when you move your controller to the limit, then that's what you're getting. Maybe some of us are simply misunderstanding the advice you've given above, but that's how I interpret what you're saying.

As I pointed out in an earlier post those with FSUIPC4 don't need to alter curves just try setting the 'detent' values to zero.

This will work with the Comanche 250.

you can do this in the config file, ie

 

 

Rudder=-16384,0,0,16383

Aileron=-16253,0,0,16128

Elevator=-16253,0,0,15616

ElevatorTrim=-16384,0,0,16192/8 (Saitek trip wheel, if you have it)

 

your values may vary

 

bob

I've come to realize it is what the a/c does that counts. The modeler could have chosen not to show any control surface movement in the external model, but the a/c could still respond correctly to movement of the yoke. So for the Comanche it is the response of the airfile / aircraft config file combination to yoke movement that counts. The accuracy of the external view control surface modeling is just a "nice to have".

Al

 

 

Elevator=-16253,0,0,15616

 

bob, I'd double check your calibration on the elevator.  I've noticed with my Saitek yoke that there's quite a bit of resistance at the extreme ends of the elevator so you may not have gone full travel when you calibrated.  If you had, your output numbers should match your aileron numbers.  Look, and you'll see that the values you're outputting to FSX are NOT matching the input values coming from the yoke.  And FYI, if you set your nulls to zero and your Saitek has much mileage on it, you'll most likely have to live with some jitter in the VC yoke.  What I recommend is to start from the FSUIPC default (which, I believe, is +-512) and work your way down until you start to see VC yoke movement at rest.  This is easiest to do by editing the FSUIPC.ini file, as setting the null in the GUI is a bit fiddly.

 

For those who seem a bit perturbed at this side discussion, I would note that many A2A users have found it quite enlightening and helpful for flying the Comanche.  Yes, it's a side issue, but it is related to the Comanche and other A2A aircraft.  It's given more than one A2A user an "ah, hah!" moment.  This is one of the problems (noted with discussions on a couple of RealAir releases as well) where the lack of a product specific forum leads to long and diverse threads under a single topic as the discussions, while relevant, do tend to take some detours that not all are interested in.  I'd still prefer to err on the side of getting good information out there, rather than getting too upset about the diversions.

 

As they say... just my opinion.

 

Scott 

Last paragraph was well said, ttocs

 

Does the Comanche autopilot manipulate the trim setting? Reason I ask is that the Cherokee autopilot doesn't manipulate the trim, it beeps at you to add it in manually, and that is very important to be able to use the Saitek Trim Wheel without having a conflict with the autopilot. I would rather use "electric" trim on the yoke rather than the Trim Wheel if the plane has an ap that manipulates the trim and fights the trim wheel.

Flown the aircraft for few hours I love it! Handles like a dream and a challenge to perfect your landing.

Sounds and the vibration in the airframe are awesome.

I've got the A2A 172/82 & the elevator is over sensitive in both, especially during flare but also in cruise, I had to change to "elevator_effectiveness=1" to make them flyable.

 

But the important question is why doesn't RealAir, F1, Carenado, PMDG, Magestic, well all other developers suffer from this issue?

Even the A2A P-51/40, B-17, Spitt are ok in pitch.

 

It seems only A2A's GA's are "over sensitive" in pitch?

 

 

Does the Comanche autopilot manipulate the trim setting?

 

According to the AP discussions, it does not.  Trimming is up to the pilot, even with AP engaged.

 

 

 

I've got the A2A 172/82 & the elevator is over sensitive in both, especially during flare but also in cruise, I had to change to "elevator_effectiveness=1" to make them flyable.

 

I know it's a long and dense thread, but I'd recommend you go back a few pages and read some of the comments from A2A's Scott G. on controllers and controller settings after several others noted this issue with their A2A aircraft.  Taken in total, he makes a very effective argument that this is a controller issue, not a plane issue.  I would definitely NOT recommend messing around with reducing elevator_effectiveness or any other item in the aircraft.cfg in an A2A plane, as many of the settings are done in order to assist in the way Accusim manipulates the plane.

 

If you have FSUIPC and use it for controls, a curve may help with fine tuning.  But read Scott's comments first before proceeding.

 

(not A2A) Scott

Still don't have Comanche yet, but on the Cherokee, I wondered if it had just a little too much elevator authority right before the stall. While I'll bet that most of the overpitching problems that people have is that they are just a couple of knots too fast, I still wonder if they should have made the plane just a little bit more mushy down there. I also sometimes get the impression that it seems so slick when you're coming across the threshold, and it feels like it takes forever to slow down and settle in. It's hard to tell if it's me and poor technique, if it's that I'm using a saitek yoke that isn't the world's best game controller, or if it's the plane. Sometimes after reminding myself 20 times to not overpitch during the flare, I've then barely flared at all, and have even occasionally wheelbarrowed! These behaviors are not a big deal, but they are things that frequently leave an impression after a landing and I find myself thinking about as I turn off the runway. Come to think of it, with all this discussion of FSUIPC curves, even though I'm generally not a fan of curves, I might go in an impose a very small one on the Cherokee, just so that it requires a little more of a smooth pullback while flaring. It also stands true that I have to do much more experimentation with it, at various weights and CG's using the full right sensitivity settings suggested in this thread, and I haven't gotten a chance to fully explore my impression of the Cherokee and other planes with those modified settings.

 

@Rodd-if you have your elevator assigned in FSUIPC, have you considered changing the DELTA value? It defaults to 256, but you might benefit from changing that to 128, or 64, or something, just to see if that provides you with a little more precision control over the flare. Might make it a little less jerky and less prone to overcontrol.