Helicopter Flight Characterics

[lanshark 0]

The Apache flies like a pig. Slugglsh and non-responsive. When 150 kts airspeed is indicated, it appears to be moving a 5 kts. Everything I've read about the Apache indicates that it is fun to fly in the real world and very responsive.

What do you think? Is this somehow my setup or is the flight physics flawed

Thanks

LANshark

---------- Post added at 10:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:34 PM ----------

I'm referring to ARMA 2: OA flight model

Thanks

[meade95 0]

Not sure about your question - In terms of flying it, manually (though I doubt ARMA 2 will give an in-depth, real life experience as would a full born Apache Flight sim game).

With that said, an AI flown Apache is amazing to watch - Just had it fly CAS over an insurgent filled village and it brought destruction and death for over 15 mins over the target zone......KIA over 90%......

(Though I do wonder, if the enemy AI should be tweaked to simply enter "HIDE" mode and stay inside if an attack helicopter is overhead).

[CombatWombat 10]

The helicopter physics model is definitely simplified. It doesn't model torque, vortex ring states, asymmetric lift, rotor RPM and a whole heap of other factors which make choppers so difficult to fly in RL.

Having said that, in my (RL fixed-wing but not rotary-wing pilot) opinion the ArmA Apache is probably pretty indicative of the actual aircraft.

Going with data from Jane's All the World's Aircraft, the AH-64D has a maximum level speed of 143kts/265kph and g-force limitations of +3.5/-0.5 (compare that with +7.5g for an F-35B and +9g for an F-35A/C).

If you're doing 150kts then you're travelling pretty close to its max speed. Think about going flat out in your car: You're not going to make it round a narrow right-angle corner at that speed, are you?

Also a fully-loaded Apache weighs in at close to 10,000kg. It's a big vehicle and it's not exactly going to carve up the skies or pull a u-turn on a dime.

In RL Apaches aren't about going fast, they're about going LOW (typically flying below 30ft in combat), and they're built accordingly.

Flying it in ArmA, I find the Apache is most manoeuvrable at low-medium speeds. It also makes a difference how much collective (throttle in this context) you've got on: If you throttle back to zero you're basically gliding on momentum, so it becomes less responsive.

Cheers,

-=[CW]=-

[savagegoose 10]

do they have all that fly by wire stuff in the ah64? so its not really the pilot in control he just tells the controls what he wants and the cpu figures out what to throttle and tilt?

[max power 21]

Responsive in terms of a helicopter, a car, an aircraft in general, your imagination? What? What do you think 'responsive' means? I've heard from pilots on TV that an CH-47 Chinook flies 'like a sports car'. Do you think it actually has handling like a Ferrari? Corvette? Bugatti? Toyota Supra? Volkswagen R32? Or do you think maybe that was relative to other helicopters? And if it's relative to other helicopters does that really give you any information regarding its absolute handling characteristics if you don't know how a helicopter handles?

edit: Also, was that in a clean configuration, with a full warload, or at maximum takeoff weight?

Since ArmA doesn't simulate changes in aircraft weight as it expends ordinance or burns fuel, what configuration is the best one for arma to simulate solely? A heavy one? An empty one? Something in between? Is that best configuration 'responsive'?

Edited August 5, 2010 by Max Power

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Everything I've read about the Apache indicates that it is fun to fly in the real world and very responsive.

Rofl. BIS, you need to add more "fun" to the flight model. :rolleyes:

:j:

FPDR

[Mudkip 0]

They should add a PP effect where the sides of the screen blur when going fast in a vehicle like when you're running.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

I have a version for FSX and it's behaviour in the air isnt realy so extremely different.

[celery 8]

They should add a PP effect where the sides of the screen blur when going fast in a vehicle like when you're running.

Do you get blurry peripheral vision when you're in a fast moving vehicle IRL?

[Nightrain 10]

Do you get blurry peripheral vision when you're in a fast moving vehicle IRL?

No which is why it was a dumb suggestion.

[nominesine 0]

You do indeed have your peripheral vision blurred when travelling fast in a helicopter or plane that is close to the ground IRL. It wouldn'd be such a dumb idea IMHO, if you could apply the effect outside of the helicopter. I fear that this isn't possible though. Witch the current system the inside of the helicopter would get blurred as well. And that wouldn't look so good.

[KeyCat 131]

The Apache flies like a pig. Slugglsh and non-responsive. When 150 kts airspeed is indicated, it appears to be moving a 5 kts.

What height are you flying at? Try keep the bird between 5-30 m height all the time and you will have much more fun and greater sense of speed (this is also how real heli pilots fly NOE in combat).

As others said, it's not DCS: Black Shark level of modelling but great fun and I highly recommend joystick with rudders + FreeTrack/TrackIR if you like to fly helis in A2:OA.

/KC

Edited August 5, 2010 by KeyCat

[bobby budnick 0]

I have a version for FSX and it's behaviour in the air isnt realy so extremely different.

FSX does not simulate helicopters correctly by default either. The Dodosim 206 being one exception. The only realistic simulation of an AH-64 is Jane's Longbow II.

What I don't understand is why people continue to make excuses for the awful flight model in Arma and Arma II. BIS is never going to fix it if people keep saying it is accurate.

People if you are trying to make a realistic mission, please leave aircraft out of it! Not one aircraft in this game is up to the standards set by the infantry and armored combat aspect of the game.

[arthur666 10]

...The only realistic simulation of an AH-64 is Jane's Longbow II.

You beat me to it. Although the Arma helo FM is not very hi-def, I think they did nail the whole "sluggish" aspect. It really feels about like Longbow II at speed, and is still a little too spritely from a hover. People tend to think combat helicopters are super agile, but they are not. Just google some RL videos and you'll see.

I've flown in a Hughes500(same as a OH-6) that was doing aerobatics, while they can change direction really fast for a helicopter, some of the maneuvers you can pull off in Arma are just ridiculous.

[meade95 0]

Question - Outside of the Apache flight dynamics...... With regard to it within the game/sim. Can small arms fire bring it down?? MG / MMG fire?

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

FSX does not simulate helicopters correctly by default either. The Dodosim 206 being one exception. The only realistic simulation of an AH-64 is Jane's Longbow II.

What I don't understand is why people continue to make excuses for the awful flight model in Arma and Arma II. BIS is never going to fix it if people keep saying it is accurate.

People if you are trying to make a realistic mission, please leave aircraft out of it! Not one aircraft in this game is up to the standards set by the infantry and armored combat aspect of the game.

Not claiming otherwise, just giving a benchmark damnit! :D

[max power 21]

What I don't understand is why people continue to make excuses for the awful flight model in Arma and Arma II. BIS is never going to fix it if people keep saying it is accurate.

Define 'awful'. Please, let it not be, 'not as realistic as a dedicated flight simulator'. I'm sure everyone can see what's wrong with that argument. My crew cab pickup truck doesn't handle like Spyder >:(

[kremator 1065]

Wow let's all listen to Bobby and his 54 posts. There is NOTHING wrong with the flight model as it is now (with a few minor tweaks)

Hate to say it but .....LEARN TO PLAY whiner!

[bobby budnick 0]

Wow let's all listen to Bobby and his 54 posts. There is NOTHING wrong with the flight model as it is now (with a few minor tweaks)

Hate to say it but .....LEARN TO PLAY whiner!

I try to only post when It is needed except for in situations like this when I am attacked for some reason.

I actually joined the forum before you did. If your posts are anything like the one you just made the number of them is pretty meaningless.

Let me preface this by saying I live for PC helicopter simulations and have had the privilege to be aboard several real life helicopters, military and civilian.

If you want me to explain some helicopter flight effects that are not modeled or modeled incorrectly I will do just that.

1. Flight Control System and associated avionics on helicopters that feature this in real life.

2. Autopilot and associated avionics on helicopters that feature this in real life.

3. Rotor Yaw - is nonexistent on all helicopters

4. Translational Lift - modeled improperly on all helicopters (more response needed when pulling up on stick)

5. Tail rotor authority - modeled improperly at low and high speeds on all helicopters, V-22 has almost zero rudder authority

6. Realistic start-up times and procedures. My Rationale for this one? It would keep the inexperienced players out of the complex and expensive aircraft and prevent their misuse. If new players want to fly, then they can fly a bi-plane or something.

7. Altitude effects on the rotors and engines.

8. Realistic damage modeling - helicopters are much too resilient as it is.

9. Dynamic rollover and the necessity to land "easy" in real life (ties into #8).

10. REALISTIC TARGETING SYSTEMS!!! Spamming tab and letting them fly is not how they do it...

So with this said, please explain to me where I need to "learn to play".

Edited August 5, 2010 by Bobby Budnick
Spacing

[Big Dawg KS 6]

FPDR

Flight model is accurate enough for now. BIS might continue to improve it, but if you're complaining about it then you are entirely missing the point of the game, or you're just looking for something to complain about...

[bobby budnick 0]

FPDR

Flight model is accurate enough for now. BIS might continue to improve it, but if you're complaining about it then you are entirely missing the point of the game, or you're just looking for something to complain about...

How about stop trolling and actually post a compelling reason for your argument. Otherwise stay out of the discussion. "Big Dawg".

Seems to me some people just seem threatened that their arcade-style shooting sprees may come to an end.

Edited August 5, 2010 by Bobby Budnick

[WarriorM4 10]

My biggest complaint about the helicopter model is how fast it accelerates and how slowly it decelerates.It doesn't make for the precision kind of landings you can get in FSX or Xplane or any of the combat helicopter sims.It takes longer to fly into an LZ and land without damaging the airframe or crashing in Arma 2.

I know this isn't a flight sim but it certainly could use some serious tweaking to make it better.

Edited August 5, 2010 by WarriorM4

[max power 21]

How about stop trolling and actually post a compelling reason for your argument. Otherwise stay out of the discussion. "Big Dawg".

Seems to me some people just seem threatened that their arcade-style shooting sprees may come to an end.

Not everyone who is disagreeing with you is trolling.

Any feature or simulation accuracy comes at a cost- actually, at several. You have the cost of computing resources while running the simulation, and those associated with developing the simulation. I would love for this game to have everything in it and be everything to everyone. Unfortunately, that won't happen. There is definitely a fine line to walk when you are suggesting improvements to the flight model in terms of scope. To suggest that the flight model is 'awful' I think is a little outside of the scope. It lacks perspective. I think the flight model in this game is the finest one I've played outside of a dedicated flight sim.

So please indulge me and define 'awful'.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Seems to me some people just seem threatened that their arcade-style shooting sprees may come to an end.

Who's the troll now? :confused:

My post was completely valid. ArmA 2 is NOT a flightsim. Deal with it.

[Esch0 10]

ArmA 2 is NOT a flightsim. Deal with it.

From Ofp time...still in present day, is the most pathetic response;i'm sick of it.

In what game u have the the opportunity to make CAS(flying some wings) for your infantry/vehicules who are fighting on the ground.NONE

So...yes, BIS we need a proper flight model(..........), physics but something not very complicated as DCS or Falcon, but a LOFC2 simplified version.