Question Motion Cueing ?

I personally think of cued events like the rumble motors in a game-pad, and I do really think cued events make sense for some things, like Video Ride Playback.
It would be a blast to be able to trigger feet ticklers, misters, strobe lights etc, all triggered from a video ride film.

But for a simulator, we want to just reproduce exactly whats happening on the screen as close as we can. One problem with using triggered events, is we can introduce motion sickness, where the predefined events causes the sim to move unlike whats happening on the screen.
Let's say we just want to add some rumbling when we are off road or something.
Again, I would just want to increase the resolution and or speed of the axis so they simply get more rumbling when off road.

Just my 2 cents anyway...
(If it's a penny for your thoughts, why do we have to put in 2 cents? Seems like a scam)
Take care,
yobuddy

Personally I consider this to be somewhat schematics, with a dash of marketing fluff, in that what is being considered is how washout is utilised.

Stepping back for a moment, washout is itself a false cue that aims to hide that fact by falling below perceptual acuity of humans, by exploiting physiological and psychological processing weaknesses.

Washout, in one form or the other, is used in-turn to hide the physical movement limitation of a particular rig design. In other words it is all about compromises and physical limitations, in circumstances where it is impossible to accurately recreate all experienced real world forces in a simulation.

From the user perspective context also matters. For example, an unconstrained passenger on a big enough aircraft in a sustained dive will experience that movement as weightlessness, little input at all, while at the same time the strapped in pilot will have a great deal of physical input signals. I am cheating a bit, even IRL the aircraft does not have an endless axis to sustain the weightlessness, 'as it is itself a fancy simulator for what is a simulation'.

If you use washout predicatively, the greater the axis travel the more the possible benefit, but there are also other factors I would suggest are limitations, and when it comes to DIY, far better alternate options.

Take a very basic 2DOF and consider surge. If you are headed down a strait and have a known breaking area approaching then you could use washout predicatively and subtly tilt the rig back, so there is more axis range for surge than would otherwise be available. But the washout needs to below perceptual thresholds and even then there is a limit, as at a certain attitude of tilt a user will notice it.

So in my view, a small benefit for a controlled circumstance, and the greater the axis range the bigger the benefit if those conditions are not exceeded, though speed and precision of movement also come into play.

But for DIY motion simulation, designed for large range of games and possible rigs, there are better and more efficient options for generating actual sustained motion cues that don't rely on but can compliment tradition axis, such as a motion controlled harness or G-Seats. Those will give far more bang for your buck in providing a sustained surge cue in a way that rig movement alone can't.