Saitek X65F

[Hielor]

Saitek's answer to the Logitech G940, apparently:

http://www.ironhammers.co.uk/home/2009/10/29/saitek-pro-flight-x65f-control-system-announced.html
http://www.saitek.com/uk/prod/x65f.html

They're planning on releasing it "in time for the holiday season," so should be soon.

Some highlights:

In a world first for a manufactured simulation controller, the X65F’s stick does not move; instead, like those found in real modern fighter jets, it responds to pressure that you exert on the handle, resulting in a fast, accurate and realistic response that will make you the ace in your squadron. With no moving parts and a shaft that is made from high grade steel, this provides incredible reliability and longevity.

Interesting choice. Browsing the intarwebz, I've seen a lot of people complaining about this choice. Honestly, I don't think it was a good idea. Very few planes actually use this, and the primary reason they do is so the pilot can still use the stick under high G loads. Somehow, I doubt that "high G loads" will be an issue in a simpit, meaning that this is entirely wasted.

Personally, I'd bet that they could make it for less expense using this method than normally, so they did it to save money and are billing it as a feature.

Metal construction for the ultimate in realism and durability

Similar to that fancy CH stick. Interesting.

There's a few cons that I see:
-No rudder pedals, uses a twist stick (I guess force sensitive?). I already have to increase the deadzone on my twist sticks a bit because a bit of unintended twisting is normal when you rest your hand on it, but if it's force-detecting...ugh.
-Only two rotary controls (on the throttle). The G940 has two rotary knobs on the throttle, and in addition three rotary knobs for trim on the stick base. Although, Saitek's knobs probably have a center detent (which the G940 apparently lacks), but still--with the Logitech, you could have all three trim axes, mixture, and prop pitch bound to analog controls without needing mode switches. On the saitek, you'd need mode switches for that.
-$400, whereas the G940 is only $300. If you want a "full realism" set, you'll have to add rudder pedals (Saitek's are an additional $120), so you're looking at $520 for the Saitek system versus $300 for the Logitech system. I really don't think the Saitek system is worth an additional $220, but maybe I'm just cheap.

Still, it's good to see competition in the high-end stick market.

 

[n72.75]

I'm happy with my X52 for now.

although...

 

[TSPenguin]

I agree with Hielors points regarding the stick.
IMO it was wrong to position this as a rival against the Logitech system. Last time I checked pressure responding sticks have been replicas of the F-16 stick and where quite expensive. So this would only be interesting for people looking specifically for a pressure sensitive stick without being limited to F-16 like sticks.

 

[Urwumpe]

I would really like using pressure sensitive sticks... I already have the sensibility in most simgames set so high, that I can reach full deflection with minimal stick motion.

EDIT: From the other thread this this one...how much would somebody pay (reasonable) for a USB THC or RHC?

 

[scuba_steve]

I've read on some random online review that the G940 stick dosn't center. The review said there's no springs or anything, so if you push it to one side it stays there?

Does anyone know if this is true? If so, I think that the stick would be near useless for RCS thrusters?

 

[Urwumpe]

If it is a pressure sensitive stick, it doesn't even get deflected at all...

 

[TSPenguin]

If it is a pressure sensitive stick, it doesn't even get deflected at all...

As he said, he refered to the G940 which is a regular stick.

 

[Hielor]

I've read on some random online review that the G940 stick dosn't center. The review said there's no springs or anything, so if you push it to one side it stays there?

Does anyone know if this is true? If so, I think that the stick would be near useless for RCS thrusters?

It's a force feedback stick. The centering force is provided by the force feedback mechanism, not static springs. When it's turned off, the force feedback mechanism isn't active, which means that there will be nothing centering the stick, and yes it will "flop" to one side.

When you turn it on, though, the mechanism activates and it centers itself.

 

[Wraith]

One more drawback for the X65F - won't do for helicopters.

 

[Urwumpe]

One more drawback for the X65F - won't do for helicopters.

Why? I don't see any missing axis, just the yaw part is a bit annoying maybe.

 

[BHawthorne]

The Saitek looks like a better build quality than the Logitech. Looking at pictures and using are 2 different matters though. Anyone want to buy me both so I can find out? :rofl:

I've been toying aroun with racing sims mostly lately. Just picked up a Fanatec Turbo S wheel and the clubsport pedals, so my budget is blown for flight goodies till b-day in spring.

 

[scuba_steve]

When you turn it on, though, the mechanism activates and it centers itself.

Ok... that abates some of my concerns with the logitec system. Sounds like it would be great for regular flight sims (or atmospheric flight in orbiter), but i'm still not convinced it would be good for orbital attitude maneuvers where short pulses of RCS are required. I spend most of my time tapping the stick with two fingers.

I think the force sensing aspects of the Saitek X65F would be better suited for RCS. I've never used a force sensing stick though so i'd probably need to try it out first.

I realy realy like the idea of dual throttles in both the Saitek and the Logitec systems, however, call me old fasion but i'd much prefer a good ol spring centered, stick with high to medium resistance....

what i realy want is a Thrustmaster Cougar-like stick, with a X65F or G940 like throttle!...:thumbup:... oh ya... and someone to come out with a 3-axis THC!:headbang:

 

[Urwumpe]

I could maybe build one... the pure mechanical stuff or bringing it on a USB port is not hard, the question is more the price, since you won't do this in 5 minutes.

Of course, the Connexion stuff is the best alternative you can get for less than 100 Euro.

 

[Wraith]

Why? I don't see any missing axis, just the yaw part is a bit annoying maybe.

Because helo controls are very different. In flight, trimming must be constantly re-adjusted by the pilot for a given horizontal speed and cyclic setting. Helo-style trimming is just a button that removes the force load from the collective stick, resetting its zero position to the current one. On consumer-grade joysticks it can only be properly simulated with FFB and a moving stick.

 

[Urwumpe]

Helo-style trimming is just a button that removes the force load from the collective stick, resetting its zero position to the current one. On consumer-grade joysticks it can only be properly simulated with FFB and a moving stick.

Yes, but that part of the moving stick is not making sense to me yet - shouldn't it also be the same with current pressure on the stick being set to be the calibrated zero position?

 

[Wraith]

Yes, but that part of the moving stick is not making sense to me yet - shouldn't it also be the same with current pressure on the stick being set to be the calibrated zero position?

Yes, sorry, I mixed collective with cyclic.

But no, it's different. In real helicopters, there's a limited degree of deflection for the cyclic stick. The stick controls a very sophisticated piece of machinery called 'swashplate', that in turn deflects main rotor blades. The blade deflection is pretty much hard-wired to the stick, so there's a direct correspondence between the stick deflection and that of swashplate/rotor blades.

Now, when a helicopter is in flight, the blade deflection required for a normal horizontal flight is not constant, it's a very complex function of horizontal speed, and requred collective setting (the massive lever beside the pilot) which itself is a function of current weight. Plus there are external things like air density. So in order to fly straight, the pilot is required to hold the cyclic at some position for the duration of the flight.

It's not like you push the stick outwards, and then release it, and the helo flies straight ahead. No, the stick must be held at the required position all the time. This is where the trimmer comes into play: the pilot pushes a lever (probably a button on contemporary craft) and the trimming mechanism simply 'unloads' the stick at its current position. It's just the supporting springs are adjusted so that the current cyclic deflection becomes the new 'origin', so the pilot releases the stick, it'll go into that position.

Well, obviously, the X65F is designed in a different way.

 

[Urwumpe]

It's not like you push the stick outwards, and then release it, and the helo flies straight ahead. No, the stick must be held at the required position all the time. This is where the trimmer comes into play: the pilot pushes a lever (probably a button on contemporary craft)

Yes, at least according to the DCS:Black Shark manual for the Ka-50 helicopter.

and the trimming mechanism simply 'unloads' the stick at its current position. It's just the supporting springs are adjusted so that the current cyclic deflection becomes the new 'origin', so the pilot releases the stick, it'll go into that position.

Yes, but in terms of effect on the swash-plate, this is equivalent of making the current swash-plate deflection standard.

Well, obviously, the X65F is designed in a different way.

Yes, but I am more interested in user interface than actual technical implementation. And that would also work equivalent well on a pressure sensitive stick. If you release it after trim, the swash-plate should be in the new neutral position.

 

[Wraith]

Yes, but in terms of effect on the swash-plate, this is equivalent of making the current swash-plate deflection standard.

Yep.

Yes, but I am more interested in user interface than actual technical implementation. And that would also work equivalent well on a pressure sensitive stick. If you release it after trim, the swash-plate should be in the new neutral position.

Yes, but that won't be reflecting the joystick position, any more because, well, the stick itself is fixed. That's the whole point. The cyclic stick position in a real helicopter is a tremendous cue to the pilot about the swashplate deflections.

 

[C3PO]

OK, so I've tried to gather info on the X65F from several reviews.

The main problem seems to be lack of information about force sensing tech. With force sensing you can have a much more precise control, but there are drawbacks too.
A sensitive stick (FS or "normal") needs more attention to the ergonomic placement. If you just bang it on a table that is too high, you will have unintentional back-pressure on the stick, and cross coupling is almost unavoidable.
IMHO you will need some kind of arm rest (like the Airbus cockpit), if you don't have a simpit with the stick between your legs. If your arm isn't in a perfectly "natural" position you will have problems with cross coupling.

Some reviewers mention problems or missing functions with the software, but I suspect Saitek will address those things in an update. (They did with the X52).

Personally I don't like sticks that are exact copies of a real ones, because they are too specialized. X52 was right on the money IMHO, except for the fact they went kinda overboard with all the lights.