http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e222/raaaid/st8.jpg
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e222/raaaid/st7.jpg
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e222/raaaid/st6.jpg
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e222/raaaid/st5.jpg
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e222/raaaid/st4.jpg
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e222/raaaid/st3.jpg
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e222/raaaid/st2.jpg
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e222/raaaid/st1.jpg

If you were a real engineer you would know that you can't just extrapolate a data set to suit your needs.

You could be right but you can't tell from that graph. It STOPS at 4000 grams. Therefore, according to that graph, the displacement STOPS at about 1.7mm. If you can find something that states the full deflection value of the Cougar mod then feel free to post it.

Not that it matters b/c a 9kg force would result in approximately 4mm of deflection per your graph. As a real engineer shouldn't you know that?

Here's something that's interesting from that site...

Feel free to explain what those numbers mean and how they fit into your claims.


Of course, once again, it's all moot because you fail to understand anything (as usual).

So, why won't you address my individual comments instead of just spouting the same thing over and over? Why won't you take the time to think about what I've posted?

Specifically...

and here's another one...

Your graph does NOT show CONTROL INPUT versus stick force. It shows DEFLECTION versus stick force. The SOFTWARE determines control input. The software can ignore ALL THE INPUT if so desired. You can hang a car off that freaking stick and if the software decides to ignore it, then it's ignored.

Oh wait, I just remembered, you're not here to learn or discuss anything. You're here just to go back and reread your same statements over and over.


--Outlaw.

thats irrelevnt

my original point is that a short run is an advnatge to pilot and the air wolrd apply it and the racing world doesnt

besides i know it by experience since in every racing game i gain two seconds going with 40º of lock insteead of 400º as mostly everybody does

the force IS the imput

and that graph shows the center WITH NO DEAD ZONE

Screenshots?
Seriously?

You should consider putting them into your CV...

i dont want to give my real name in case a future employer searches me

if someone searched my name he would just find top research on maths from my dad :)

thats why i can tell what i think here but not in real life

You really think McDonalds does a background checks on patty flippers?

What is irrelevant? Why do you refuse to be specific?

The relationship between your original point and your, "assinine BS" as you put it, is irrelevant to me because I never disputed your original point.

Since you bring it up though...

Are you seriously stating that the only thing an F-16 pilot needs from his aircraft is to ride the limit and that precision means nothing?


It's funny that you continue to ignore my specific posts.

You are clueless. The force is the input TO THE STICK, but, NOT THE CONTROL SURFACES. The COMPUTER decides how to move the control surfaces REGARDLESS of the stick position.

It shows no PHYSICAL dead zone which means NOTHING when there is a computer sitting between the stick and the control surfaces.

Here's an example you may be able to wrap your head around...

If I start my car and floor the gas with the shifter in neutral, the engine should blow up very quickly from over revving. However, the computer WILL NOT LET THAT HAPPEN. At 6200 rpm it kills the ignition, thus preventing engine damage.

So, NO MATTER WHAT MY FOOT IS DOING ON THE GAS, the computer will not let the engine over rev. In this case, my gas pedal has a 100% dead zone.

Now, when I get the upgrade for my car which has "no-lift shift" (to keep the turbo charger up to speed during shifts), when I press the clutch to shift I WILL NOT HAVE TO TAKE MY FOOT OF THE GAS. The computer measures the position of the clutch and reduces throttle while the clutch pedal is depressed and then gradually increases the throttle back to 100% as I release the clutch pedal.

In both cases, the COMPUTER is deciding how much "dead zone" is in the gas pedal and has COMPLETE control of what the engine is doing. Just like the stick in the F-16.

--Outlaw.

you bring to many points, most irrelevant

we are discussing if the f16 stick has a 6mm dead zone

i call that bs, dont you agree?

so you agree with my original point of short run being an adavantage and the airworld using it, cool

well by making this thread i learnt you can have avery short run with the advanatges it brings and you can still have high precision by settin a gradual force damping

at least you make points not like the others out reasoned just can resource to personal attacks

taking into account the imput is the force that graph shows beyond discussion not apreciable dead zone

Why are they irrelevant? You are the one posting a link to a GAME controller and then claiming that it is an EXACT DUPLICATE of the stick as installed in the F-16 Viper.

It is so obvious that it's NOT the same as the F-16 stick that I can't even begin to think of any living entity (including single celled animals, plants, bits of random RNA, etc.) that could not understand such.


Then why did you bring this up...

Which is it, the 6mm dead zone or your, "original point"?


How could you possibly ask that question? I've CLEARLY stated my position multiple times. Really, how is it possible to misunderstand me?

How much weed have you smoked today?


Where did I state that I agreed with your original point? How is it possible to get a degree related to the English language without being able to understand English?

First, the "advantages" you speak ARE NOT REAL AND DO NOT EXIST. However, if you assume that they do exist, IF YOU DAMP THE SIGNAL then you have lost the (nonexistent) "advantages".

You have not, "out reasoned", anyone. All of your statement have been decimated by everyone posting in this thread. This includes those that didn't even relate to your original post.


As I have said, SO WHAT? Why won't you respond to my posts where I CLEARLY state why that is irrelevant?

--Outlaw.