the tecs hasn't been officially revealed, just some proof of concept picture teases
the tecs hasn't been officially revealed, just some proof of concept picture teases
Jthe real joke from vkb is them not wanting to publicly admit people key to the project can't get back into the country to work on it
Pthey did release pics of the dev model they're passing around internally for testing
JCrazy to think collectives weren't even on paper little alone mainstream with multiple grips from multiple bigger name companies when the tecs was first announced
JAt this point I won't be surprised if Virpil releases a new throttle before TECS comes out
DI know WW are looking at releasing yet another throttle
JFor their entry level line?
DTECS was in design before WW were even on the board as a consumer peripherals
Poh they really need to do an A10 grip for their throttle
DWould F15 do?
JThey've got 2 entry level bases with 2 different throttle grips + collective grip, and then the massive OG base that only takes the f18 grips
D
Pyeah A-10 & F-15/F-15E are basically the same grip aren't they?
DVery similar afaik, only 1 switch or toggle less I think
Jthe real question is f15 front panel when 
or f16/a10 front panel they set a wonderful precedent with the f18 panels i hope they fill out the rest of their stick and throttle catalogue with more panels
or f16/a10 front panel they set a wonderful precedent with the f18 panels i hope they fill out the rest of their stick and throttle catalogue with more panelsPmaybe a hybrid, or do like with the f18 & make some of the switches 4way + push instead of just 2 or 3 way
Phaving the coolie on the throttle as well as the trg des switch
DThey did fantastic on the panels, I think they would consider F15 panels if it gained enough interest
Pthey teased a flip down f16 ufc, really that's all they need to do, just have different ufc's
Jtrue
DThe F16 flip down was always on the cards. They tried various concepts before they went with that
DThey actually had 3 or 4 concepts
Jif they release more panels I'd definitely be interested in such an ecosystem
Jthe main appeal ofc being having less diy required
Pthey did a good job making the mfd have extra buttons by using the button diveder things as buttons too
RI'm Working up a design now that will allow for both a stick or post style yoke.
RP-38 says "what you just say?"
JP38 would be heavenly
JWill we ever see it in DCS?
RNo, but there's still IL-2 and MSxplaineFS
JP38 dcs would be phantom levels of excitement for me
YI would swoon with the f4u and p38 in DCS.
It even fits completely in what seems to be their Pacific path
It even fits completely in what seems to be their Pacific path
Dwell. corsair is being made
Dbut with all these american planes, and brit planes, there is like what 3 german ones?
UStuka would be interesting - Sitting in the rear in VR could be a hoot!
WHey guys, I've managed to improvise a moving trim implementation for the Harrier with telemetry!
Apparently you can completely override DCS input subsystem and send back X/Y axis commands directly using
So in essence TelemFFB becomes two way telemetry.
So the caveats are: DCS input system overriden for control axes and FFB Spring control is overridden with TelemFFB too. But since the harrier has static FFB, no loss there.
This also opens up more possibilities to enhance DCS FFB experience
Apparently you can completely override DCS input subsystem and send back X/Y axis commands directly using
LoSetCommand functions.So in essence TelemFFB becomes two way telemetry.
So the caveats are: DCS input system overriden for control axes and FFB Spring control is overridden with TelemFFB too. But since the harrier has static FFB, no loss there.
This also opens up more possibilities to enhance DCS FFB experience
NDoes overriding the input subsystem break the Integrity Check that DCS runs?
WI don't think so, since no DCS system files are modified
NThat’s pretty cool regardless but even more so if it doesn’t
R@walmis so does that mean that it'll actually move the jets trim position in game?
WOpposite, since razbam did not bother to implement moving ffb center point with trim, I managed to remedy this 
V:package: 
RHINO #0081 Has Shipped!
RHINO #0081 Has Shipped!
VCool...
But this will be configurable on aircraft bases?
But this will be configurable on aircraft bases?
WWhat do you mean?
It should work on any aircraft including the upcoming F-15, if they don't implement it there too.
The way it works is I take virtual cockpit stick position, real physical stick position, do some math and send back adjusted input x,y values back to DCS. This way real stick (Rhino) is offset from center (trimmed), but DCS thinks it's at center.
It should work on any aircraft including the upcoming F-15, if they don't implement it there too.
The way it works is I take virtual cockpit stick position, real physical stick position, do some math and send back adjusted input x,y values back to DCS. This way real stick (Rhino) is offset from center (trimmed), but DCS thinks it's at center.
VI mean if i want to use on the harrier but not on other aircraft which has proper trim implementation
WAh, yes ofcourse
VSo something that depending on the module can switch options or profiles on the fly
WIt's the same telemFFB based config.ini
KGreat news Walmis. I can't wait to try it, as I fly the harrier with VMA513! Is this available in a new version of telemFFB soon?
WYeah, need to clean up the code a bit before releasing
KUnderstood. Thank you for all your work on this!