G940 Deadband

[Mace2004]

For those of you that have tried the Logitech G940 what are your opinions regarding the "deadband" reported on Logitech's forum (and others)?  Most seem to describe it as an area around the center where there is no "resistance to movement".  In other words, it appears that the FFB doesn't begin to resist movement until the stick is displaced some distance from the center point.  Some have claimed this is as much as 10% of the stick's movement.

To me, this sounds like it would cause a significant issue, especially for gunnery.  I've had Saiteks forever (X45 x2, X-52 x2, X-52 Pro x1) and the spring resistance system (spring and cone) for all of these have had similar problems caused by slop between the cone and the metal stick column.  Drives me nuts when trying to make small adjustments near the stick center such as trying to gun a runner from dead six or straffing a GV.  Yes, I know the X52 had a firmware deadzone that was fixed but it didn't fix the play in the spring/cone system that lets the stick "wiggle".

Logitech says: On the deadzones: There are none. To quote the product manager "No one's ever had to make games for a joystick like this before". To this end, we're working with developers to tune force feedback effects for this joystick. I think you guys will be pleasantly surprised to see this stick when it's put to its fullest utilization. The reason we do not have super expansive centering in the Logitech software is that there's no need to force the stick to absolute dead center with the control panel open, as forcing to dead 100% center while not playing a game would stress the motors.  In other words, it's the game developer's that are screwed up although they seem to admit there actually is a deadzone when talking about stressing the motors.

If, in fact, the issue is with the games themselves, how well do things work in AH?  Are you seeing any deadband and do the deadband and/or damping settings in game allow you to zero it out?

[RipChord929]

I haven't had a single problem with mine yet... Feels great...

When going slow, heavily loaded, you have a heavy stick...(as it should be)
After speed is built up, it reacts smoothly to the lightest touch.. SWEET!!!
Haven't experienced any "deadzone" in the sticks travel yet.. (no jerkiness while aiming)
That sounds completely goofy to me, have NO idea where that is coming from..
I actually had to ADD a tiny tick of deadband..  About 2 on a scale of 0>100, (almost nothing)..

While at speed, if your horse on the stick, it gives plenty of pushback..
But hand pressure can overpower the motors, otherwise they'd break..
So you get a "kicking" feeling, which is a little odd, but understandable..

I have the feeling that a million ppl, are going to have a million opinions
about this stick.. Then there are those with ulterior motives as well...
And the "product review assassins" are out too... Pretty funny to me!!!

It is a major departure from what ppl are used to, no doubt...

RC

[FLS]

I believe the deadband for not stressing the motors only refers to having the profiler open since they mention "while not playing a game". They have also said that you can tape over the activation sensor since it won't hurt the motors to always be active. This seems to mean stress won't break it but it's better to avoid it.

There is no deadband as far as control input is concerned unless you set deadband in the Profiler or application.

The resistance you feel from trim forces has a region in the center where you don't feel much resistance. It's about 1" total movement, i.e. 1/2" from center in each direction. I believe this is what Logitech is referring to as being up to the developers to address with their individual FFB implementation. Assuming current FFB implementation is based on older hardware with less capability this makes sense. It isn't zero resistance, it's just very light. I'm hoping HiTech gets a G940 so that he can play with this issue. I haven't found that this is a problem so far in AH, I'm just hoping for improvement in the future.

LOMAC doesn't have force FFB but it models stick position changing with trim. I hope this doesn't mean it's one or the other since I want to have both in AH. There is the same region of easy movement around the center with a consistent heavier resistance for the remaining travel.  Again, the input change is always there, it's just that the resistance is light.

Ripchord's description of slow flight seems opposite from mine. When I'm slow, whether heavy or light, the trim forces are light. When I'm fast the trim forces are heavy. I don't know if it's our experience or perceptions or just description that's different.

[RipChord929]

Heavy stick, to me, means slow reaction to control input.. Requiring more input to get the desired reaction from the machine..
Light stick, is obviously the reverse of that.. Requiring less input to achieve the same desired reaction..
Stiffening of controls, as you get faster, is also pretty self explanitory.. Right up to the point where overspeed compress locks them up tight...

RC

[FLS]

I thought that might be it RC. It was just confusing because heavy could have a different meaning regarding the FFB stick itself rather than the AH flight modeling.

[RipChord929]

FLS, yep, thats why I made the clarification.. LOL, no disagreement, just using slightly diff terminology is all...
I already knew that tho...

RC

[Mace2004]

Thanks for the inputs guys.  One of the big drawbacks to computer gaming has always been the lack of feedback through the stick which makes "seat of the pants" flying more difficult than it should be.  Spring systems are not realistic, at least for the full range of the flight envelope but, unfortunently, there have been no new FFB systems with HOTAS.  The G940 looks to be a very good addition but I've never been a fan of Logitech sticks as, to me at least, they've always seemed to be cheaply made.  Go to Best Buy and all the Logitech sticks were usually broken (of course, so were many others I suppose).

If the FFB is as well implemented as you've suggested and the quality is high it looks like a great option.  Of course, the other big option out there now is the Saitek X65.  While not FFB, the idea of a force sensing stick suggests that Saitek may have solved the problem most other sticks have with the center position since there are no gimbals or springs or motors.  This will require some thought.  

[FLS]

If you buy it from Amazon.com you can try it and if you don't like it just send it back within 30 days. At worst you'll be out the cost of shipping it back.

[Mace2004]

If you buy it from Amazon.com you can try it and if you don't like it just send it back within 30 days. At worst you'll be out the cost of shipping it back.

That's true, it would be even greater to have a side-by-side comparison.  Maybe I'll wait until the X65 is released and order them both then keep the one I like the best.  Decisions, decisions. 

[boomerlu]

To be clear, the X-65's supposed to be a force sensing stick? As in: the stick itself is absolutely stationary and the control input is proportional to the force you exert on the stick?

If so, check this out: http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_079a.html

Enthusiastic Viper sticks got tired of the Cougar not being realistic enough  .

[oboe]

My G940 is just over 30 days old, and I am experiencing terrible spiking on the rudder pedal axis.  Calibrates OK, but as soon as I push a pedal on way or the other, lots of spiking occurs.   The causes the rudders to oscillate rapidly and instantaneously.  Obvisously not great for air combat.

Have sent an email to Logitech support, and their support webpage has a big apology for how long support is taking.

Not a happy camper and disappointed with the G940.   Thought this was supposed to be Hall Effect and free form spiking/calibration issues?

[RTHolmes]

I assume the hall sensors are only on stick X,Y axes like the X52, rudder seems to be a pot. this is not good as the major problem with logitech seems to be their shoddy quality pots which start spiking after a month or 2, requiring very large deadband to make them usable.

I'm quite surprised that anyone has even bothered with the 940 given logitech's deserved reputation, their sticks have been around for years and they havent bothered fixing the spikey pot issue.

[humble]

So far mine is outstanding, biggest issue was the lack of calibration for the "mini joystick" on the JS itself. Compared to my CH propedals the 940 pedals have a short traverse and are not as easy to intuitively center. Overall quality seems far above the X52 and on par with any CH stuff I've used. Profile can manage all deadbands very well and the FFB is very configurable....big big improvement overall for me...

[mef4ud]

For those of you that have tried the Logitech G940 what are your opinions regarding the "deadband" reported on Logitech's forum (and others)?  Most seem to describe it as an area around the center where there is no "resistance to movement".  In other words, it appears that the FFB doesn't begin to resist movement until the stick is displaced some distance from the center point.  Some have claimed this is as much as 10% of the stick's movement.

To me, this sounds like it would cause a significant issue, especially for gunnery.  I've had Saiteks forever (X45 x2, X-52 x2, X-52 Pro x1) and the spring resistance system (spring and cone) for all of these have had similar problems caused by slop between the cone and the metal stick column.  Drives me nuts when trying to make small adjustments near the stick center such as trying to gun a runner from dead six or straffing a GV.  Yes, I know the X52 had a firmware deadzone that was fixed but it didn't fix the play in the spring/cone system that lets the stick "wiggle".

Logitech says: On the deadzones: There are none. To quote the product manager "No one's ever had to make games for a joystick like this before". To this end, we're working with developers to tune force feedback effects for this joystick. I think you guys will be pleasantly surprised to see this stick when it's put to its fullest utilization. The reason we do not have super expansive centering in the Logitech software is that there's no need to force the stick to absolute dead center with the control panel open, as forcing to dead 100% center while not playing a game would stress the motors.  In other words, it's the game developer's that are screwed up although they seem to admit there actually is a deadzone when talking about stressing the motors.

If, in fact, the issue is with the games themselves, how well do things work in AH?  Are you seeing any deadband and do the deadband and/or damping settings in game allow you to zero it out?

Does anyone have a good profile fro the G940 they would be willing to share?