PDA

View Full Version : Differential braking



BSS_Vidar
05-21-2004, 03:47 PM
Luthier1,
Can we have a second brake axis to assign differential toe braking? No Russian planes in this sim, right? For those that do not fly with rudder pedals, a key for the left and one for the right brake. Getting around the flight deck would be a real adventure using the current single axis IL-2 set-up with rudder pedals. Microsoft flight sims model this nicely.

S!

BSS_Vidar

BSS_Vidar
05-21-2004, 03:47 PM
Luthier1,
Can we have a second brake axis to assign differential toe braking? No Russian planes in this sim, right? For those that do not fly with rudder pedals, a key for the left and one for the right brake. Getting around the flight deck would be a real adventure using the current single axis IL-2 set-up with rudder pedals. Microsoft flight sims model this nicely.

S!

BSS_Vidar

BSS_Vidar
05-22-2004, 10:03 AM
What... No one cares about this? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif
Guess we'll see how everyone feels about this when they try to taxi out of the landing area and spot their plane on the flightdeck with the current set-up. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

BSS_Vidar

stansdds
05-22-2004, 10:36 AM
I understand the need for differential braking. It would sure be handy!

SKULLS Virga
05-22-2004, 11:19 AM
It is a good idea...

I thought it was already implemented by using rudder and pressing the brakes at the same time. I know the airflow over the rudder gives you some turning moment but I thought the brakes were coded to it too.

http://img68.photobucket.com/albums/v206/SKULLS_Virga/Signature_2.jpg

IV_JG51_Razor
05-22-2004, 11:29 AM
I certainly appreciate your concerns Vidar, but it's been said time after time that there won't be any major changes to the FB game engine. I don't know what constitutes a major change vs a minor one, but I'm pretty sure we won't see this.....despite how much as it will be needed. Another thing that will be a major problem for us while manuvering on the carrier deck, will be the current damage model for plane vs object. Just touch the island, or another plane with your wingtip and BOOM!!

I think the thing to do is look at this PF project as a good warmup for the carrier ops that we'll see in the future addons of BoB. I've no doubt that Oleg and Luthier will have learned a lot from this project, and will apply those lessons to the BoB engine.

Razor
IV/JG51 Intelligence Officer
www.jg51.net (http://www.jg51.net)

"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from poor judgement"

BSS_Vidar
05-22-2004, 02:29 PM
I'm no game developer dats 4 sure. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif But I'm going on the understanding that adding another axis is no big deal. The new LOMAC patch will have three additional axis for weapon systems control, and I'm sure in IL-2's history, axis have been added. I'm just hoping they can add this to the initial version.

Yes,braking is in IL-2 FB by pushing ONE button/axis, but it's not as effective as toe braking is. Locking up one wheele is essential for tightly taxiing around the flight deck.
I have CH Pro Pedals with the left toe brake assigned to braking in IL-2 with the right one not in use. In FS2002/4, and CFS2/3, I have left and right toe braking assigned to individual axis. I would like the option to assign my right toe brake as well. I paid $150 for deez CH bad boyz, and I want to get my moneys worth! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

BSS_Vidar

[This message was edited by BSS_Vidar on Mon May 24 2004 at 05:47 AM.]

Fliger747
05-22-2004, 08:13 PM
Differential braking is essential for the true "taildragger" experience! Usefull for ground manuvering, and sometimes correction on takeoff and (often) landing.

Manuvering without it on the deck? forget it!

9th_Spitin
05-23-2004, 04:20 PM
S~ BSS_Vidar,

Been many a day since we flew in CFS2 doing carrier patterns/landings. What a great time. Well, we are reforming the 9th Flying Knights for the upcoming PF and cant wait to get back into Pacific battles. I hope we get a chance to fly patterns with you again, was a very good learning experience.

As you said how usefull/necessary it is to have right and left brakes on a carrier deck. It is way too tight to be swinging around with only one. At least the collision bubble is realistic with IL2 unlike the one in CFS2 were we would blow up at 10 meters.

http://www.lordsofwar.com/public_uploads/Bloodfist/spitinfinalsig.jpg

VF2_Snowman
05-23-2004, 05:46 PM
Differential braking is nice to have on a runway and a necessity on a carrier deck. Hopefully most of the carrier based planes will also have folding wings which will greatly reduce wingtip collisons

BeoWolf_361st
05-24-2004, 12:39 AM
Go here if you have CH pedals, you can find out how to set differential toe brakes with what you have usin the CMS script files, it's pretty easy to do..... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://www.ch-hangar.com/forum/

ELEM
05-24-2004, 02:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fliger747:
Differential braking is essential for the true "taildragger" experience! Usefull for ground manuvering, and sometimes correction on takeoff and (often) landing.

Manuvering without it on the deck? forget it!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I fly a "taildragger" with just a tail skid, open tandem cockpit, no electrics/radio and NO brakes! Does that mean it's NOT a taildragger because it doesn't have differential braking?

And why this topic of FB NOT haveing differential braking keeps coming up just baffles me. It's possible to turn all the a/c very tightly by giving full rudder in the direction of the turn and applying B for brakes at the same time. This applies the brake on the one wheel only and it therefore turns in that direction. This IS differential braking as used on all a/c I've flown WITH brakes fitted. I think many people misunderstand the meaning. Differential braking is the application of the left or right brake independantly of the other, regardless of HOW this is achieved.

I wouldn't join any club that would have ME as member!

http://img35.photobucket.com/albums/v107/Elem_Klimov/I-16_desktop.jpg

[This message was edited by ELEM on Mon May 24 2004 at 01:58 AM.]

BSS_Vidar
05-24-2004, 06:33 AM
You shouldn't be so "baffled" about a very resonable request. Taxiing on a flight deck is like moving a marchingband through a crystal china shop. (20 years experience) http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

The Russian system is not true differential braking - Left or right are not "independant" from each other. It's good enough for field ops though (which is what the main concerns of Russian designers during the Great Patriotic War were). True, you can lock up one wheele, but only (like you said) IF you deflect full rudder to that side. I'm talking about the realistic capability that gives you the option to lock up one wheel and still have the ability to apply brake pressure to the other wheel without having to release pressure from the pivot wheele. In other words in a truel differential system, you can swing an aircraft around in a tight circle, you'll still have that braking option to slow the swing side. If you try this in the IL-2 model, slowing the swing means releasing the pivot point; therefore no longer maintaining that pivot point. That is the main reason taxiing on the flight deck will be very cumbersome with the current set up.


BSS_Vidar

[This message was edited by BSS_Vidar on Mon May 24 2004 at 05:53 AM.]

heywooood
05-24-2004, 09:13 AM
I think this is a valid point also..

I hope that it can be incorporated into the the game rather than it being something that I have to go find in the cms script... I am not a technerd nor do I play one on the piano.

SKULLS Virga
05-24-2004, 09:32 AM
Once again Vidar strikes a decisive blow to the heart of the matter. I had not thought of being able to 'slow the swing' with the outside brake. Hopefully this will be implemented - I would also like to invest in CH pedals.

http://img68.photobucket.com/albums/v206/SKULLS_Virga/Signature_2.jpg

Fliger747
05-24-2004, 12:59 PM
I have also flown "taildraggers" with a tail skid etc. However such a light aircraft in no way handles like a heavy, powerful WWII fighter type, or even a 185. Some of the larger aircraft of this type cannot even be taxied in a crosswind without use of differential braking. Ja just cann'a lift the tail and rudder her around with a brief blast of power. This even gets impractical with a loaded supercub.

BSS_Vidar
05-24-2004, 03:02 PM
Here'ya go Skulls Virga,

http://www.chproducts.com/retail/products.html

Click on the icon at the bottom thats says "buy elsewhere" for lower prices. Directly from the CH warehouse is a bit more pricey.

I've got my eye on the new multi-engine throttle quad. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif

With the addition of Track IR, my head, hands, feet, and TOES http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif are all incorporated into my PC flying. Makes it more than just a game, but a flight sim. As a professional pilot, that's a must. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

BSS_Vidar

BSS_Vidar
05-25-2004, 11:04 AM
Keep in mind, I'm not just asking for the extra axis input. I'ld also like to see keys to reflect differential braking as well. Examples from CFS2 key commands:

"B" Both brakes applied evenly
"," Left brake
"." Right brake

The only negetive with the button commands is they are either full-on or full-off brakes unlike the axis control you gain with pedals like CH Products has. You can apply as little or as much brake pressure to either side just like a real plane.

S!

BSS_Vidar

SKULLS Virga
05-25-2004, 11:30 AM
I can see where they have a ton of work to do and adding stuff like this only increases the pile. I do however agree with you Vidar and think it is a needed and do-able change for PF. The only question is whether it is as important to the developers.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

http://img68.photobucket.com/albums/v206/SKULLS_Virga/Signature_2.jpg

Fliger747
05-25-2004, 11:43 AM
Vidar:

This may be causing the thread to anastamose a bit, but some comments on the "Track IR"? Have you had a chance to use this device yet? It seems possibly like a good idea, but as you move your head then you are starting to look away from the monitor, is this a problem or not?

The quad throttles look good. This is a problem in practcing for the 4 holer that I fly as far as any engine out work goes.

Thanks for the link!

BSS_Vidar
05-25-2004, 12:59 PM
747,
I've been using Track IR for 4 months now. It's incredible. You only move your head about 15-20 degrees left or right and you're looking over your shoulder. You get a bit of virtigo at first, but you completely adjust to it. Rolling scissors are a piece of cake because you can watch the tgt and you allways know which way forward is by a snap of your head. I've talked 5 other BSS members into buying it. They went through the same transition period but now absolutly love it!

Here's the homepage for Track IR. Look how much that dude moves his head...
http://www.naturalpoint.com/trackir/index.html

If you get it, make sure you get the ballcap with it.

We laugh when we go play CFS2 for carrier ops. We all catch ourselves moving our heads to panview with nothing happening. CFS2 doesn't support Track IR because there's no mouse view.
Full cockpit ops in Pacific Fighters will make Track IR a necessity- plus it frees up your hatswitch to program something else.

S!

BSS_Vidar

BSS_Vidar
05-26-2004, 10:57 AM
BTW...
I also use it in FS 2002/04. I can zoom in on the instrument panel and easily scan for IFR airwork.i.e. station tracking, Holds, and approaches. I can pop my head up anytime to take a look outside.

Now... Back to differential braking. Skulls may be right. Not one chime-in by developers. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif
I hope we all don't end up trying to precision taxi in American and Japanees made aircraft on a flight deck with a Russian braking system.
FYI.
Russian aircraft modified to fly off the Kuznetzov i.e SU-33 SuperFlanker, and MiG-29 Fulcrum variant have been emplemented with a tailhook AND a true differential braking system. The old "brake handle and rudder pedals" wasn't refined enough for deck ops.

S!

BSS_Vidar

Tully__
06-27-2004, 11:44 AM
ATTENTION PLEASE:

During world war 2 there were two different methods of differential braking system in use. The British/Soviet system is modelled in ALL aircraft in the game (except perhaps the TB3 which I understand has NO wheel brakes http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif).

This system has a single actuator and controls brake balance using the rudder pedals. It is in the game and it works!!. I know it may not be what you're used to, but it is there! Apply brakes and full right rudder while stationary then run up your throttle. You will make a right turn practically on the spot. Ditto left turn for brakes + left rudder.

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

IL2 Forums Moderator
Forum Terms of Use (http://www.ubi.com/US/Info/TermsOfUse.htm)
Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

stansdds
06-27-2004, 11:50 AM
That is good to know! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Texas LongHorn
06-27-2004, 06:11 PM
Y'know guys, I hate to burst anyones bubble, but... We have NO IDEA how movement of AC will be handled on the Carrier deck. It could well be scripted and once you land and come to a stop a "cut scene" will show your aircraft being moved. The same type of thing could be used for spotting before takeoff. I personally would love to see differential braking but it may well be completely unneeded in the finished sim. Just food for thought. All the best, LongHorn

http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v149/msdavis/My_Sig_Image2.jpg

Fliger747
06-27-2004, 06:39 PM
Chezh out BSS Vidar's squadron site, and VF-15 has a good one as well for some info on carrier ops. For these gentlemen a carrier ops flight sim is more than just another location for a shoot-em-up, but a satisfying challenge to operate as their forfathers did in a difficult and demanding environment. I other words to "measure up".

So deck ops, launch and recovery with a squadron of real individuals is a satisfying dance and ritual, part of making the whole experience "real".

We can hope for the best!

Merlin (FZG_Immel)
06-27-2004, 06:53 PM
there will be no problem to manoeuver on the deck with the brakes we have now. thats for sure.

now, if we can have diff brakes, why not-

------------------------------
www.checksix-fr.com (http://www.checksix-fr.com) Il2/FB/AEP co-webmaster
------------------------------------------------------------
Slot 2 pilot of the Virtual Haute Voltige team, and live video director

http://www.haute-voltige.com/virtualHVteam/concept.htm

BSS_Vidar
06-27-2004, 11:51 PM
Quote: "there will be no problem to manoeuver on the deck with the brakes we have now. thats for sure."

Really? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif
I've been evaluating this braking set-up since I first started flying IL-2 - all ways with the thought of doing carrier ops with it. "Precission" taxiing is gonna be a real pain in the @$$ with a single axis brake input. Once you release full braking to one side to slow the swing side your plane starts to roll forward. That CAN NOT happen when you start stacking the flight deck. The only safe thing is to have the independant braking system so possition can be maintained during a "ground loop" to stop the swing side.

The Blacksheep know how to pack a deck to clear for ops...

http://www.blacksheep214.com/screenshots/cfs2/page_01.htm

I got a bad feeling developers are blowing this off. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif Please gents, let's make this as realistic as possible for those of us that consider themselve more like re-inactors of history, rather than just the run-of-the-mill PC gamer. USN and IJN carrier-based aircraft had differrential 'independant' Toe Brakes. Make this sim reflect that.

Steppin' off the soap box,

S!

BSS_Vidar

Fliger747
06-28-2004, 04:39 AM
For some the flight model and operating fidelity are more important than the latest graphics. If the MS sims have any advantage it has been in the open arcitecture allowing 3rd parties (such as Avhistory) that really care to craft aircraft that can take ther most advantage inherent in the flight model. Still one buts the head against limitations not built in. CFS III would have been much better for some of us had the ability to have moving carriers and traps built into the engine.

One can hope that we are not left with limitations built from using an old engine.

Merlin (FZG_Immel)
06-28-2004, 08:04 AM
is CFS3 a flight sim...?

I mean, you talk about flight model..? hum well..

(sorry, kidding you)

------------------------------
www.checksix-fr.com (http://www.checksix-fr.com) Il2/FB/AEP co-webmaster
------------------------------------------------------------
Slot 2 pilot of the Virtual Haute Voltige team, and live video director

http://www.haute-voltige.com/virtualHVteam/concept.htm

Tully__
06-28-2004, 08:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BSS_Vidar:
Quote: "there will be no problem to manoeuver on the deck with the brakes we have now. thats for sure."

Really? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif
I've been evaluating this braking set-up since I first started flying IL-2 - all ways with the thought of doing carrier ops with it. "Precission" taxiing is gonna be a real pain in the @$$ with a single axis brake input. Once you release full braking to one side to slow the swing side your plane starts to roll forward. That CAN NOT happen when you start stacking the flight deck. The only safe thing is to have the independant braking system so possition can be maintained during a "ground loop" to stop the swing side.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

When I was regularly flying coops with a squad we nearly always finished the mission with formation parking. There's plenty of control to park within cm of other aircraft (with a little practice) in staggered formation. I even recorded a track to demonstrate but my ISP ftp is not playing at the moment. Maybe tomorrow...

Edit: Here we go.... deckstack.ntrk (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/deckstack.ntrk)

2nd Edit: Bear in mind this is the first time I've parked like this in months, so it can get a lot smoother than this http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

IL2 Forums Moderator
Forum Terms of Use (http://www.ubi.com/US/Info/TermsOfUse.htm)
Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

[This message was edited by Tully__ on Mon June 28 2004 at 07:35 AM.]

Fliger747
06-28-2004, 11:57 AM
The 1% planes (avhistory.org) fly quite well in CFS II and III, mainly because the basic flight engine is fairly good and the planes have been developed by people who care about this. There are other issues which one may have issues with, but mine is flight fidelity.

So may we hope for the best!

BSS_Vidar
06-28-2004, 06:31 PM
Thnx Tully,
I too am real good at taxiing in IL-2, very good. But, I also want this to be accurate. I'm not looking at this as a game, but rather a flight sim. IL-2 has differential hydrolic braking and reflects the system Russian planes had. USN and IJN planes had independant toe braking. Make PF reflect that realizm just like IL-2 did. That's all I'm asking. Even as good as we are taxiing in IL-2, you'll find a marked improvement in your ability to control your aircraft on the ground if they make this happen.

This should not be that big of a deal to make happen. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

S!

BSS_Vidar

Tully__
06-29-2004, 05:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BSS_Vidar:
Thnx Tully,
I too am real good at taxiing in IL-2, very good. But, I also want this to be accurate. I'm not looking at this as a game, but rather a flight sim. IL-2 has differential hydrolic braking and reflects the system Russian planes had. USN and IJN planes had independant toe braking. Make PF reflect that realizm just like IL-2 did. That's all I'm asking. Even as good as we are taxiing in IL-2, you'll find a marked improvement in your ability to control your aircraft on the ground if they make this happen.

This should not be that big of a deal to make happen. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

S!

BSS_Vidar<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand your desire and to some extent mirror it, however if it turns out that the game engine can't be modified to support this, it wont make deck stacking impossible.

I'd expect that the single/dual brake axis option would be available on later sims, however I'm not about to get my hopes up for PF. I would be delighted if it did get in though http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

IL2 Forums Moderator
Forum Terms of Use (http://www.ubi.com/US/Info/TermsOfUse.htm)
Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

Fliger747
06-29-2004, 05:52 PM
Of course the game engine CAN be modified, it runs down to whether or not the designers feel this is an important enough of an issue to devote any effort in that direction (whether it be great or small). I understand that this IS (Clintonian emphasis) a commercial product, designed to appeal to a wide varieity of individuals.

Those of us who care about flight and control fidelity and related issues may be a small proportion of these.

May we hope for the best!

heywooood
06-29-2004, 11:43 PM
can I please have my flaps on a slider instead of the four position situation we have now?

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/3tbm_avenger.jpg
Goin'fishin'

CPS_Shadow
06-30-2004, 12:01 AM
Heywood...

My flaps are on a slider, but I'm ok with it if your's aren't. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

(I'm assuming you have looked in the HOTAS section of the controls at some point. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif )

http://www.speakeasy.org/~word/My6.jpg

Tully__
06-30-2004, 04:35 AM
Heywood, check the section under the "HOTAS" heading at the bottom of the control assignment screen in the game http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

IL2 Forums Moderator
Forum Terms of Use (http://www.ubi.com/US/Info/TermsOfUse.htm)
Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

Fliger747
07-12-2004, 12:08 AM
Having just installed FB on my "mainframe" (was on the laptop) I find that I cannot configure the game to work with a Saitek X45 and CH pro pedals combo. The game thinks that the elevator and aileron axis should be assigned to the left and right brakes on the pedals, without regard to HOTAS or any other attempts at making assignments.

The controller "controls" seems to be a bit sparse here! Any ideas? (besides disconecting the pedals?).

BSS_Vidar
07-12-2004, 02:02 AM
I think you may have a conflict with the rudder input on your throttle. Rudder Pedals notoriously do not work with that set-up, but I have heard of a file that over-rides the throttle rudder rocker switch.

I suggest finishing out your set-up with the CH Fighterstick and Pro Throttle for combat sims. CH has a powerful Control Manager software that runs everything for you. If you have FS 2002/04, CH has a new multi-engine throttle quad with 6 levers. Enough to assign Throttle, Prop Pitch, and Mixture to axis for a twin.

BSS_Vidar

Fliger747
07-12-2004, 10:21 AM
I was able to use that setup for CFS2 after finding each seperate "joystick" and assigning the appropriate axes to each control. it is a good control assignment setup, once you figure out hoew it works. For FB, I will probably have to play with the CH control software, which though powerfull, is about like reading Kanji.

It is an interesting excersize to "fly" a plane by foot control only, full left brake makes a roll to the left, no left brake a roll to the right. The elevator is similarly controled by the right brake, and of course the rudder works OK.

Fliger747
07-12-2004, 08:59 PM
Finally got it to work! The problem seemed to stem from a too small deadband on the brake axes, causing them to register in preference to the rudder axis! Some re-calibration and carefull movement of the controls fixed that problem, though it seems to have disrupted some other things that now need to be re-assigned.