Plane Design Spitfire vs RealAir spitfire

[Guest allcott]

Another thing: The way the spade control was setup in all marks of Spit, the roll control would actually have been somewhat closer to what we have, a la desktop - the `pole` hinged on the floor for elevator control, but slightly below the circular spade grip for roll control.The cockpit was too tight to permit the range of movement that a floor-leveraged roll control would have required - the pilots legs would have got in the way.The Messerschmitt favoured the floor mounted gimbal. Now I have no idea to what extent this would have affected the way the controls felt, but it is obvious that it would have affected the designers choices as far as leverage ratios and rate of control surface response was concerned. I fly both yoke and stick aircraft and generally, the yoke offers less feedback than a stick, but considerably frees cokpit space. YPYMYTYC. And no matter what controller you use, you aren't even going to get close to that variation in a sim. The ONLY way to set these flight models up for comparable response is to actually sit in the VC and physically match the controller movement to the virtual one. One-to-one, and different for every aircraft. FSUIPC is the only way to achieve that, AFAIK.FS also models the virtual-control-to-controller movement in a non-linear fashion, and its the aircraft developers choice to use a flight model that damps this down, works with it, or highlights it.Allcott

[Jwcfly 0]

Paul: Very inspiring! It looks like you riped the Spitfire seat right out of Shockwave's "Battle of Britain II Wings of Victory!That looks like it could be weeks, months (a lifetime?) of fun.Seeing projects like yours makes me want to "start turning wrenches" myself. Maybe one of these days I'll screw on the courage to make an attempt.Now where did I put those Spitfire blueprints...

[Jwcfly 0]

Allcott: Thanks for responding. Pity about CH. I certainly agree they may be missing the boat.I know many of them are more "shoot em up" guys, which mystifies me even more. One would think some kind of WWII era floor mounted joystick would be right in their "swing zone". Oh, well, I have three of their products and will probably buy more from them in the future.Saitek does seem to be riding a sim world wave. I bought their Aviator for the ability to use it either with the left or right hand. Might want to buy an Airbus or a Columbia one day :)

[Jwcfly 0]

"Another thing: The way the spade control was setup in all marks of Spit, the roll control would actually have been somewhat closer to what we have, a la desktop - the `pole` hinged on the floor for elevator control, but slightly below the circular spade grip for roll control."Yes, yes, exactly! Because of the narrowness of the CH pedals, and the design of the Spit joystick, this would make an ideal combination."The Messerschmitt favoured the floor mounted gimbal. Now I have no idea to what extent this would have affected the way the controls felt, but it is obvious that it would have affected the designers choices as far as leverage ratios and rate of control surface response was concerned. I fly both yoke and stick aircraft and generally, the yoke offers less feedback than a stick, but considerably frees cokpit space. YPYMYTYC."I have read that the 109 pilot at high speed could only apply one-fifth the leverage for roll due to the cockpit confines. "FS also models the virtual-control-to-controller movement in a non-linear fashion, and its the aircraft developers choice to use a flight model that damps this down, works with it, or highlights it."Partnerships with other flight sim companies seem to be the business model of the future, maybe there is still hope that a joystick and software manufacturer might get together and come out with a bundle specifically complementing each others wares. As "The Donald" says, it "would be HUGE".I see Corgi has just released a model of the prototype Spit. Throw that into the bundle and I'm there!

[Guest allcott]

>Allcott: Thanks for responding. >>Pity about CH. I certainly agree they may be missing the>boat.I know many of them are more "shoot em up" guys, which>mystifies me even more. One would think some kind of WWII era>floor mounted joystick would be right in their "swing zone".>Oh, well, I have three of their products and will probably buy>more from them in the future.>>Saitek does seem to be riding a sim world wave. I bought their>Aviator for the ability to use it either with the left or>right hand. Might want to buy an Airbus or a Columbia one day>:) >>Yep, outside the military only armchair aviators and the occasional SF260 owner or Vans builder get to go P1 with Right hand stick, Left hand throttle, yet that is the standard combo from the joystick manufacturers. No-one in their development shop ever fly a real plane? Wait, CH Prooducts is Chuck Hayes and he owns a Turbine Lancair 4P!Which makes CH's reluctance all the more difficult to comprehend - a substantial part of the their business is with REAL flight and industrial controllers - including a sidestick controller where they make a feature of the ambidextrous grip!http://www.chproducts.com/oem/aircraft.htmlIncreasingly, hardened simmers are setting up home cockpits which don't need the short-throw desktop joystick. I can't think it would be too hard to create a long-handled one that electronically damps the more sensitive response of a greater `throw`. And I'm not talking the expensive, computer-milled helicopter joystickshttp://www.simcontrol.co.uk/newheli.htmIt's also an easy thing to test on a stick - just grip the stick with the little finger and palm right on top, then fly like that in the sim for a bit. Instant control response kama!;)Allcott

[mgh 89]

for aircraft of the Spitfire's vintage, a key parameter is stick force per g - ie how much force the pilot has to apply to pull 1g. Stick movement per g (which is all that non force-feedback sticks can manage) is almost totally unimportant. A pilot doesn't react to how far he's pulled the stick back, but to how much force he's applied.Quite a few years ago there were attempts to reduce the cross-section of fighters by putting pilots in the prone position. A figher was converted to incorporate a prone pilot in the nose in addition to one in the conventional position aft. The prone pilot was provided with a very small side-mounted stick. One series of experiments involved making the stick rigid (to get rid of the additional mechanical complexity) and to use strain-gauges at the base of the stick measure the forces the pilot applied. It turned out that the aircraft was still perfectly flyable and controllable.I don't know what the actual stick forces on a Spitfire are. I do know that the design criteria for maximum single-handed forces on a stick used to be:- Emergency for short period 70lb- Normal for short period 30lb.I suspect that even with 30lb stick force an aircraft-sized FS stick would need to the screwed/bolted down, which would rather limit its market.I think this is an area where we're running up against the limitations of a $50 simulator flown by sitting in a chair in front of a computer screen!

[Jwcfly 0]

Thanks very much for the links. Nice to know my contributions to CH Products are going to someone who looks like he can truly enjoy the fruits of his labor. I am envious.Maybe he and Lou Betti could get together and work up something:D Or Flight1 since they have Mr. Rhoads' specialty division ?I really believe the future looks bright for us flight simmers.By the way, considering the cost vs functionality factor, I have been pleased with my Saitek Aviator. I'll get a CH joystick sometime later, but for now, I am happy with it.

[Paul J 349]

JWCFLY: - Naaah. . . .I think it's out of an Anson or some inglorious aircraft. It has a flat area for a thin leather cushion, whereas the Spit has a deep hollow for the parachute. Both styles are damned uncomfortable - that's why I swapped it for a car seat. The original column was copied from a Spit, and worked quite well, but I'm afraid we have too many nice toys attached to our joysticks, so the spade had to go.Man - you should just go ahead and do it. I stripped all of the components off the base of my Logitech Wingman Interceptor and just mounted them on home-made hardware. Anyone can do it for less than 20 bucks and not too many hours. Just have to figure the hinges; whether to use springs on both or just one axis (I only "springify" the elevator), and how to mount the handgrip part. The wiring between the pot and the circuit board is cat5 network cable. A long (27" floor to handgrip base) gives you the smooth control you need when you get slow and loose. For example, you can nibble at a stall, and with pedals you can achieve a falling leaf, and slipping is so much more precise. I always found a standard joystick "unnatural", having difficulty in doing many maneuvers properly - even a steady, straight takeoff. Anyway - this has been a good topic, even if it did drift off subject a bit. Here's a nice link if you enjoy learning more about the differences in performance between the Bf109 and the Spitfire:http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.htmlShockwave has done both for FS9 and 10 (two in one in the "Solo" versions).Regards,

[Guest dswo]

>Here's a nice link if you enjoy learning more about the>differences in performance between the Bf109 and the>Spitfire:>>http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.htmlThanks for this link, pj -- meaty and useful!