I'm thinking more of the big bearings that hold the main gimbal frames.
I'm thinking more of the big bearings that hold the main gimbal frames.
Nthe big outer 6808s? hmmm they are still pretty smooth but i'll check next week
HIf those aren't perfectly seated - aka not perpendicular to the axis of rotation, it could make the whole assemble get stuck
HTo give you an idea - When I disassembled the gimbal to change the stick connector to my "stubby" version - after reassembling and only the 80mm grip connector as a "lever" - without belts attached, the gimbal moved freely and buttery smooth in every direction.
Nwith no belts attached, the gimbal has always been pretty smooth in linear x and y motion, no issues with the 6808 bearings there
Nbut with circular motion it has always had some issues with internal creaking that can be felt all the way up the grip
Nprobably at the beginning due to the grossly overtightened nut, maybe now due to internal damage
Noh well........the belts weren't expensive, at least 
HYou shouldn't overthighten the central bolt that connects the two core parts. I would even argue, that the bolt doesn't need to be fixated in the outer part at all - but I haven't tried that yet.
Ni'll certainly keep that in mind for the gimbal rebuild
Nwould honestly be helpful if there was a guide out there for how tight the main screws need to be
Nthe main bolt/nut of grip connector and core joint, the preload screws, etc.
HFor the free moving variant I have in mind, you would need a different outer core and bearings though. The "stock" gimbal works just fine. It is mainly the central bolt that connects the gimbal core that can't be overtightend.
Nhold on, are you using a 72T pulley? in combination with 12T motor pulley
HEverything else can and should be "moderately hand tight" as far as I'm concerned
HMe? Yeah the default one - 74T I think
KNope. I don't find anything in the configurator. I don't want a curvature in the force of the axis. I want a curvature in the value of the axis.
HI see. Well, generally speaking - that is undesirable with force feedback. Because a non-linear physical to logical position would mess up the ffb-effects (afaik). However - if it is the stick position in the forward trim that is concerning you, it may be worth considering to move the center point towards you, by manually changing the calibration value of the "push forward" position. I did that for the F-4 once, because it has a lot of forward trim and my arm was to short for comfort. Probably not exactly what you are looking for, but it may help to alleviate your problem.
AYes
WADone. Thank you.
NIMHO, even with regular sprung joysticks, curves are not the right solution to twitchy aircraft. Saturation works better. Unfortunately the saturation settings in DCS are also not compatible with FFB.
We have axis scaling in configurator, but it only allows for a positive saturation such that partial physical trave = full reported travel. It would also be useful to have negative capabilities such that full physical travel = partial reported travel.
You can accomplish this by manually increasing the calibrated range of the axis, but it would be nice to have a purpose built setting in configurator for doing so.
We have axis scaling in configurator, but it only allows for a positive saturation such that partial physical trave = full reported travel. It would also be useful to have negative capabilities such that full physical travel = partial reported travel.
You can accomplish this by manually increasing the calibrated range of the axis, but it would be nice to have a purpose built setting in configurator for doing so.
AAmazing service mate, thank you.
KI've found a workaround which make me happy until we found a better way.
I've described it here: https://discord.com/channels/965234441511383080/1098318539426889799/1258810327747924130
Maybe it is useful for other Hog drivers, too.
I've described it here: https://discord.com/channels/965234441511383080/1098318539426889799/1258810327747924130
Maybe it is useful for other Hog drivers, too.
KBut I think it should be useful to place a tip in the manual to disable curvatures in DCS for A-10C & Ka-50 (and probably other chopper with trimmer).
SI have mostly found creaking to be due to loose main gimbal bearings. Check all the retainers for tightness.
Dwhat does it want from me? 
SI get that message when I turn on my computer, but my Rhino isn't connected at the USB. Start there
SWait, did you already get and build your kit?
DYep
DManaged to take care of this message but didnt get much further lol
SUSB and power plugged in?
SStick beeped when you powered it?
DYep, its beeping at me
DI need to put the belts on and need that ~2000 motor position and no idea where to find it. also i am pretty sure only one motor is currently active
SYou'll find it in the Rhino config software, not TelemFFB. I think it's labeled raw_y and raw_x
SBeyond that I'll have to defer to the other green names in here
Dboth have nothing except -
Dpot_1 and 2 are working and the big red button
Dum nope. Motor X: OK Motor Y: Offline
HDouble checked the wiring?
DYep. only one green lamp thats MOT2
Hhmm… it sucks, but I guess you have to check all connections again.
RI’ve adjusted saturation, not curves in dcs and had no issues with rhino or teleffb. What doesn’t work about it ?
AI imagine curves could only be something done in telemffb or the configurator, at the firmware/hardware level before it reaches DCS
Nsame thing that happens with curves. The scaled axis position is not translated to FFB center offset so when you release the force trim button, the axis jumps to the scaled equivalent of where you let go.
Might not be apparent with fixed wing.
Might not be apparent with fixed wing.
RI havent had this issue at all with my rhino or software, using in game ffb or force hardware override. I only fly helicopters. Very weird.
Rright now I ve got the uh60 at 70 y saturation, so the physical stick doesnt move to 100% deflection to get the ingame stick to move to 100%.