Port STICK-FORCE-PER-'g' and the effect of dynamic pressure on flight controls from c172p

[hbeni]

Port STICK-FORCE-PER-'g' and the effect of dynamic pressure on flight controls from c172p

See: c172p-team/c172p#1472 (comment)

While at this, do it in such a way that the control surfaces are decoupled from input, so we might easier support dual control later on.

[Murmur79]

While at this, do it in such a way that the control surfaces are decoupled from input, so we might easier support dual control later on.

What do you mean precisely? With dual controls you mean manual+autopilot?

[hbeni]

Its is mandatory that the autopilot will work like before.

with "dual control" i mean, that currently the tie between the yoke and the control surface is so tight, that the FGFS dual-control module cannot be used to induce yoke movements from the copilot instance.
This is something what would be enabled when you implement it, because we then get a layer of "technical indirection" between the actual yoke input and the effect on the flight controls surfaces.
In other words: For the yoke position (and resulting effects) we can more easily add another "pilot effort", from the copilot.

[TheFGFSEagle]

I guess the aileron, rudder and elevator from FG should be used as a force applied to the yoke, instead of translating it directly to the surfaces.

[hbeni]

Yes Eagle, and no.
It hugely depends on the individual assumed model (effort based vs. movement based) and the used input device.

We had a lenghty discussion about this in the c172 ticket.