Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: PJ_Godzilla on August 17, 2014, 08:57:42 PM
-
I took some extended family and kids to the Chicago museum of science and industry yesterday. They have some nice 2dof (pitch and roll) simulators there. My nephew and I burned a few rounds there. They charge 10 bucks a ride so it's just good fun.
Anyway, this got me to thinking, has anybody "gone there" in Ah? Yes, it would be a significant project, but I also suspect a lightweight 1man 2dof capsule could actually be built. Probably actuation is what would drive cost but I suspect feeding the data to the actuation would be the technically tricky part.
We do similar at work in some of the dyno testing... I used to run some of that back in my technical days... Anyway, I'm just curious. It strikes me as the ultimate.
Btw, best sortie for the kid and I in the f16: 7 kills... But they make it too easy with the AMRAAMS .
-
I have a cockpit...but no motion.
Yet. :D
-
A motion simpit is not worth the trouble because it won't feel anywhere near realistic without having a full g-force simulation implemented. It just would feel stupid to engage in a turn fight and start pulling g's and instead of being pushed deep in your seat you would hang cumbersomly and probably painfully on your side. Same thing for acceleration/deceleration, you would feel them just as much as you feel now in your stationary simpit.
-
A motion simpit is not worth the trouble because it won't feel anywhere near realistic without having a full g-force simulation implemented. It just would feel stupid to engage in a turn fight and start pulling g's and instead of being pushed deep in your seat you would hang cumbersomly and probably painfully on your side. Same thing for acceleration/deceleration, you would feel them just as much as you feel now in your stationary simpit.
Oh I know. I just think it would be neat to throw one together one day as a project. Probably won't ever get around too it...
-
Of course you're right. However, even using the 1g available to you is still one hell of a lot of fun. I'll probably never get to it either since I've got at least 2-3 years of work at work and projects at home. It sure would be neat, though.
-
A motion simpit is not worth the trouble because it won't feel anywhere near realistic without having a full g-force simulation implemented. It just would feel stupid to engage in a turn fight and start pulling g's and instead of being pushed deep in your seat you would hang cumbersomly and probably painfully on your side. Same thing for acceleration/deceleration, you would feel them just as much as you feel now in your stationary simpit.
Back at the '98 Warbirds Con, there was a guy from Alaska that built and sold motion sim pits that used the guts of a CH Force FX motors and gears along with an Epic game card for the motion simulator. While you couldn't feel any G's, it was hardly a 'stupid feeling' to engage in a turn fight, it was incredibly immersive and brought the game up to a whole new level.
ack-ack
-
Anyway, this got me to thinking, has anybody "gone there" in Ah?
Yes, with a bottle of rum. Best motion simulator ever.
-
Up 'til the point you yack. I have to say, Vulcan, you're kind of grouchy and skeptical but imaginative and "unboring". I'd call you my kind of scum but I'm sure that'd get me a torrent of invective. Nonetheless, I'm liking your direction here. :salute
-
Back at the '98 Warbirds Con, there was a guy from Alaska that built and sold motion sim pits that used the guts of a CH Force FX motors and gears along with an Epic game card for the motion simulator. While you couldn't feel any G's, it was hardly a 'stupid feeling' to engage in a turn fight, it was incredibly immersive and brought the game up to a whole new level.
ack-ack
Exactly... In that f-16 sim, even though you're only going to ever feel 1g, when you start turning hard - especially in a downward spiral to line up that turny Mig-21, it feels like nobody's bidness. Split-essing reminded me of an old movie I once saw in which the LW pilot's Iron Cross was hitting his chin. I have a fairly heavy celtic cross given to me by my mother years ago and it was interfering with my view. I was sweating when I came out of there - and paid again to go back in.
-
Check this one out http://mydreamflyer.com/
Youtube also has bunches of videos of home built 6-dof platforms
-
It's nice -but only +/-15deg on both axes.
-
It's nice -but only +/-15deg on both axes.
Only? Heh. That's enough. ;)
-
Check this one out http://mydreamflyer.com/
Youtube also has bunches of videos of home built 6-dof platforms
I was trying to find that one last night but couldn't find it.
-
I was trying to find that one last night but couldn't find it.
Try this one: www.jackdaniels.com
-
Only? Heh. That's enough. ;)
I wonder... It would be nice to try one out. Some dude named Noon had a full 180 degree roll machine, but it looks like that dried up about a decade ago. It also was a good deal more expensive and relied on a mount that could react the fairly considerable force generated (2500 pounds, up to, iirc). This one looks good, is more affordable, and doesn't require input power. There are also powered platforms, looks like, with similar levels of displacement.
-
I wonder... It would be nice to try one out. Some dude named Noon had a full 180 degree roll machine, but it looks like that dried up about a decade ago. It also was a good deal more expensive and relied on a mount that could react the fairly considerable force generated (2500 pounds, up to, iirc). This one looks good, is more affordable, and doesn't require input power. There are also powered platforms, looks like, with similar levels of displacement.
Rolling cages are not only difficult to build but potentially hazardous for your health. Hydraulics / electric motors moving steel bars and body parts combined = recipe for disaster.
-
Yes!!! Isn't it excellent?
-
Rolling cages are not only difficult to build but potentially hazardous for your health. Hydraulics / electric motors moving steel bars and body parts combined = recipe for disaster.
Safe stuff is boring.
With that said, I kind of agree with Ripley. A split-S is the best example I can give. So you roll inverted, you get lateral G. You're then hanging upside down from your harness. Now as you pull up, in the plane you'd be getting pulled down into your seat, but in the real world you're hanging upside down, then as the plane pulls through you are hanging forward until you're right side up again. Really doesn't match what would be happening in the plane at all.
Wiley.
-
Safe stuff is boring.
Yes but one can see why commercial efforts with this sort of stuff have been cut short. It's a law suit waiting to happen even if you try to make it fool proof. Imagine a child sticking their hand between the cage while he/she watches you play...
-
That's probably why the Noon dude is no longer making his sting-mounted sim seat. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn3F1kBHlqU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn3F1kBHlqU)
Maybe some idiot mounted it to 2x4 framing and ripped a structural wall down.
-
Yes but one can see why commercial efforts with this sort of stuff have been cut short. It's a law suit waiting to happen even if you try to make it fool proof. Imagine a child sticking their hand between the cage while he/she watches you play...
Oh yeah, it'd have to be fully enclosed, and even then stuff can go wrong. You can't engineer something like that for the lowest common denominator, which is what everything needs to be.
Wiley.
-
It's not just safety. Rolling past 15 or 20 degrees with out centrifugal force to counter gravity becomes less immersive and just more a headache.
-
That's probably why the Noon dude is no longer making his sting-mounted sim seat. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn3F1kBHlqU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn3F1kBHlqU)
Maybe some idiot mounted it to 2x4 framing and ripped a structural wall down.
LOL you cannot put a VR headset on that. It'd screw up the tracking.
-
LOL you cannot put a VR headset on that. It'd screw up the tracking.
I tend to agree. The refernce point for the VR headset is like an h-point fixed w/r the aircraft. Conceivably, moving it with respect to ground wouldn't net you a view change - unless that reference point was coded to be somewhere else. In that case, your head motion w/r the seat + the seat relative to ground would net your view, but i see no such evidence of coding like that in an off-the-shelf headset.
Once again, Vulcan, you make a skeptical and credible point. I'm starting to think you must've eaten the worm in that last bottle of gusano y rojo...
-
On further review, it's even worse than that: the seat is only moving with limited translation. The motion of the seat w/r ground frame + head relative to seat still wouldn't get it.
It'd be easiest to use the hood and track w/r the cockpit frame.
All that said, if you got any miscellaneous body parts in the way of those plunging actuators or, worse, in the chain drive, you'd definitely make some hamburger.
-
Check this out. Probably never make it but one can dream.
http://www.feelthree.com
-
Re HMD. If tracking camera is mounted on moving platform that moves with seat, seems it would be the same as having a monitor mounted on moving part. Only difference is the body is moving to match (or approximate the view).
If I can get my Rift to work with DCS, I will give it a try😀