Helicopter physics impressions - simplified

[KeyCat 131]

Are you using analog rudders Minoza?

/KC

[Minoza 11]

No, mapped on my flightstick keys.

[dharbert 0]

I haven't played anything from BIS since the original Operation Flashpoint, but I absolutely loved that game. Now that I've picked up Arma 3, I see that not much has changed except for the graphics. For a game touting itself as a realistic military simulator, there are gaping holes in the "realism" everywhere. This is prevalent in many areas of the game, but in this post I'm going to talk specifically about helicopters. It doesn't matter which helicopter because apparently they are all coded exactly the same.

Fire up the editor and hop into a helicopter as the pilot, it doesn't matter which one. Enable auto-hover and take the helicopter up to a height of 1,000 m. Now, cut off the engine. That's right, just hit that little button that turns everything off (supposedly). Now, from 1,000 m down to 350 m, the helicopter will drop from the sky like a ton of bricks. Miraculously though, at 350 m, the helicopter greatly reduces it's rate of descent and comes down nice and soft, automatically deploying the landing gear (even though all power is off), and lands in the exact same footprint that you took off from, and all of this without a speck of damage.

Now, what do you think would happen if you really took a helo up to 3,000 feet and just shut the engine off? A nice little auto-rotation glide back to the Earth without any damage at all and no crash landing? Not even the best pilot in the world could pull that off.

[iceman77 18]

To be fair it isn't a simulator. The flying and armored aspects have always been extremely lacking & unrealistic. Thus, it isn't a simulator. It may have "simulator bits" here & there (mainly infantry), but it's not a full blown simulator. Now... lets say somehow in a magical land far away, Arma + blackshark + Steelbeast were together in one package, I'd have no problem calling the game a simulator.

I agree though, these things should be addressed to make for a more realistic / immersive environment.

[dharbert 0]

To be fair it isn't a simulator. The flying and armored aspects have always been extremely lacking & unrealistic. Thus, it isn't a simulator. It may have "simulator bits" here & there (mainly infantry), but it's not a full blown simulator. Now... lets say somehow in a magical land far away, Arma + blackshark + Steelbeast were together in one package, I'd have no problem calling the game a simulator.

I agree though, these things should be addressed to make for a more realistic / immersive environment.

While I agree that it is certainly not an accurate flight simulator by any means, there are some issues that need to be addressed to make it even halfway believable.

Having said that, these issues aren't going to make me quit playing this game. Hopefully Arma 3 can be modified to the extent that I was able to do with Operation Flashpoint 10 years ago. I was able to have M109 Paladin artillery and MLRS way back then, as well as nukes and a whole host of other goodies, not to mention an insane amount of vehicles, armor, helo's and fixed wing aircraft.

[iceman77 18]

Btw, I laughed at the part about the landing gear haha. Cheers.

[dale0404 5]

Just tried this in a hummingbird and the OP is correct.

Steps followed:

1. Fire up editor!

2. Place down hummingbird at the airfield with me as pilot.

3. Preview.

4. Set auto-hover on.

5. Raise heli to 1000m.

6. Turn off engine.

7. Return to ground very slowly!

8. Land in same spot.

Only damage received was a red warning to the instrument panel.

Needs fixing I guess!

[dharbert 0]

Try it in the RAH-66 Comanche (sorry, but I'm going to use the real helicopter's name and not the fake one's BIS came up with) and you won't even receive a bit of damage. I guess maybe you incurred a little bit of damage in that Littlebird with the fixed landing struts because it's not as heavy duty as the other helo's.

I hope that I am able to modify this game as good as I was able to with Operation Flashpoint. I can't wait to have an accurately modeled and simulated AH-64D Apache Longbow or SH-60 Seahawk with sonobouys for hunting down subs and ships, as well as anti-ship missiles. An HH-60 Jayhawk for SAR missions would be nice as well. Actually I'd be happy if there was only one really, really accurate helo model and that would be the MH-53 Pave Low.

[relain 1]

Hi Harbert,

maybe you should try "Take on Helicopter" from BIS. It's easy, but has much better sim genes. :)

We all (well most of us) hoped, in ARMA3 we will see the same functions than in ToH. Didn't happen sadly. In my books the Helis are even easier to fly than in ARMA OA.

[progamer 14]

Hi Harbert,

maybe you should try "Take on Helicopter" from BIS. It's easy, but has much better sim genes. :)

We all (well most of us) hoped, in ARMA3 we will see the same functions than in ToH. Didn't happen sadly. In my books the Helis are even easier to fly than in ARMA OA.

It could still happen some time in the future.

[dharbert 0]

It could still happen some time in the future.

There were features and options available via player-made scripting and mods in Operation Flashpoint 10 years ago that still aren't available as standard features 10 years later. I wouldn't hold my breath.

[progamer 14]

There were features and options available via player-made scripting and mods in Operation Flashpoint 10 years ago that still aren't available as standard features 10 years later. I wouldn't hold my breath.

Compatibility with TOH? Like take on helicopter rearmed.

[defk0n_NL 2]

To be fair it isn't a simulator. The flying and armored aspects have always been extremely lacking & unrealistic. Thus, it isn't a simulator. It may have "simulator bits" here & there (mainly infantry), but it's not a full blown simulator. Now... lets say somehow in a magical land far away, Arma + blackshark + Steelbeast were together in one package, I'd have no problem calling the game a simulator.

I agree though, these things should be addressed to make for a more realistic / immersive environment.

Yeah sure,

I recall not so long ago people saying. "OMG, ArmA most realistic simulator, ever..."

I'm getting pretty irritated by the BIS apologists trying to handout sh** as gold.

At least actually give it how it is. The dayz goodwill have been depleted. ArmA 3 was supposed to incorporate TKOH flight mechanics.

They didn't, and neither did they do the a list of other things they promised.

I have yet to hear from BIS any formal statement about what went wrong, whats going on.

But every time i start up ArmA i just get extremely pissed off. Not because i feel entitled to play a good game but because

a) this could have been easily avoided if they did not try to please the DayZ market by redeveloping ArmA 1 from scratch with better graphics and instead stayed with A2 engine + improvements

b) its been advertised and sold like its the greatest game in the world while barely playable as either a simulator or casual game.

I am not trying to troll/flame or be offensive to anyone personal. I'm just pretty pissed off.

Edited October 10, 2013 by defk0n_NL

[Flash Thunder 10]

LOL just tried this in the Blackfoot and took NO damage and I hit the tarmac with reasonable amount of force even landing gear shouldn't had been able to sustain.

[nodunit 397]

Since the models aren't made to crumble and break, the best option they could have is to make the engine red and kill the occupants, a real problem in ALL vehicles, no simulation of death on impact.

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/14405261@N06/3193099390/

http://cdn.abclocal.go.com/images/ktrk/cms_exf_2007/_video_wn_images/6600340_600x338.jpg

Funny thing is that almost NO features from TKOH were brought over, not just the flight dynamics but also the interaction system, the sling roping, heck not even the radio system.

Stranger still is a great inconsistence between the heli's in certain ways. For example the TKOH birds (light/heavy aka mh-9 and mohawk) shear their rotors (okay the whole assembly) but when other aircraft hit the rotors they either disable the whole heli or blow up.

kinda pisses me off greatly, I and a few other heli enthusiasts were licking our chops at the idea of bringing our birds to Arma 3..take on helicopters and all of these other new features? It was a dream come true!..Oh well, such is a dream, figment of the mind.

Also OP what did you mean by an "accurately simulated and modelled AH-64D" cause there might sorta be somethin for that

[chops 111]

The "it's not a simulator" argument gets trotted out every time someone raises an issue with Arma III. Helicopters floating to the ground with the engine off and landing undamaged is a bug in any manner of arcade-type game, let alone Arma III, which is supposedly:

"Powered by PhysXâ„¢, Arma 3 represents a significant leap forward in the simulation of physics in the Arma series. Bringing improvements ranging from the behavior of vehicles, land, sea and air, to the behavior of a thrown grenade, PhysXâ„¢ allows for an even more authentic experience."

Anyway, I won't consider the game to be in any kind of real release state until the campaigns are out. The actual "release" was just a big patch for those of us with the beta, and a price increase for those late to the party. I fully expect that this kind of thing will get repaired in uncoming patches. I'd go so far as to say those who've paid for the game are entitled to it be addressed.

[iceman77 18]

The "it's not a simulator" argument gets trotted out every time someone raises an issue with Arma III.

Well I only trott it out because the statement "it's a simulator" is wrong. Not because I'm defending BIS. The flight models and armor in Arma are not a simulation of anything, aside from BIS's imagination on how the vehicles should work in their game. The functionality of flying & armor aren't even close to the real thing to warrant the title "simulator". Go play real simulators like black shark or steelbeast to se how to simulate the respective vehicle type. Whether or not BIS themselves labeled it as such doesn't make it a true simulator. Anyone can put labels on things. The question asked by consumers: Is it truthfully a simulator? Well It's not. I will give you that infantry is simulated well. Or it used to be in any case. Too bad the game as a whole isn't just infantry.

I'm not trying to make excuses for such behavior as seen with the helicopters either. That needs to be fixed. Obviously BIS would want things to work as intended, within their guidelines.

Edited October 10, 2013 by Iceman77

[Sandy* 10]

Even if BIS once touted Arma to be a simulator, it was for the infantry side and tactics. Vehicles have always been there just to appear semirealistic from the point of view of infantry.

[Fulcrum90 10]

I never heard the "ARMA IS NO SIMULATOR!!!" arguments before the release of ArmA III....Back then you would have gotten flamed to the ground if you had called ArmA anything else than a "Military Simulator". It even was on the box of the game...

And now? "Hey when my helicopter comes crashing down from 10.000 feet it suddenly activates some kind of anti-grav engines...". "AND? ARMA IS NO SIMULATOR!!!! IS PERFECT GAME! ALL HAIL BIS!!!".

[nodunit 397]

I never heard the "ARMA IS NO SIMULATOR!!!" arguments before the release of ArmA III....Back then you would have gotten flamed to the ground if you had called ArmA anything else than a "Military Simulator". It even was on the box of the game...

And now? "Hey when my helicopter comes crashing down from 10.000 feet it suddenly activates some kind of anti-grav engines...". "AND? ARMA IS NO SIMULATOR!!!! IS PERFECT GAME! ALL HAIL BIS!!!".

Kinda sorta, while "Arma is not a simulator" was not common, seeing "It's not a helicopter simulator" was not uncommon..it could have been with rotorlib..could have..I'm going to go cry in a corner now.

[dmarkwick 261]

Well I only trott it out because the statement "it's a simulator" is wrong. Not because I'm defending BIS. The flight models and armor in Arma are not a simulation of anything, aside from BIS's imagination on how the vehicles should work in their game. The functionality of flying & armor aren't even close to the real thing to warrant the title "simulator". Go play real simulators like black shark or steelbeast to se how to simulate the respective vehicle type. Whether or not BIS themselves labeled it as such doesn't make it a true simulator. Anyone can put labels on things. The question asked by consumers: Is it truthfully a simulator? Well It's not. I will give you that infantry is simulated well. Or it used to be in any case. Too bad the game as a whole isn't just infantry.

I'm not trying to make excuses for such behavior as seen with the helicopters either. That needs to be fixed. Obviously BIS would want things to work as intended, within their guidelines.

I agree. Further to this: speaking personally I couldn't care less about what happens when you do an unlikely act, like switching engines off at 1000m, I'm more interested in what happens when you just want to use it as a helicopter, for military purposes. ArmA is not meant to simulate a helicopter, it's meant to simulate a helicopter's use. This means that, within reason, I should be able to jump in and use it for purpose while seeming realistic enough that realistic flight is observed.

And, lets face it the flight model in OFP was rather "special" :) it cannot be said that what we have now is a retrograde step. OK its not ToH (which I haven't played) but for ArmA purposes I think it's suitable.

---------- Post added at 07:23 ---------- Previous post was at 07:15 ----------

I'm getting pretty irritated by the BIS apologists trying to handout sh** as gold.

....And people also get tired of people seeing shit where there isn't shit. The flight model in ArmA is by no means "shit". It's not simulator standard - but then it's also not arcade nonsense. It's a flight model suitable for the use.

But every time i start up ArmA i just get extremely pissed off. Not because i feel entitled to play a good game but because

a) this could have been easily avoided if they did not try to please the DayZ market by redeveloping ArmA 1 from scratch with better graphics and instead stayed with A2 engine + improvements

b) its been advertised and sold like its the greatest game in the world while barely playable as either a simulator or casual game.

So there's half the complaints that says ment from DayZ has not made it into ArmA, and the other half that says it's gone too much toward DayZ. DayZ seems to be everybody's whipping boy, something you don't like about the game? Blame the people who play DayZ for steering the development that way. It sounds to me like these people only ever wanted to buy ArmA2 all over again, right down to the vehicles and maps. At some point its probably better to just man up and see ArmA3 as a different development from ArmA2.

[sektor 2]

The more i read this topics, the more i'm feeling sad realizing that this game could be sooooo much better. I hope that with patches BIS will turn A3 toward simulation direction.

[relain 1]

The question is: How much money would we be willing to pay to BIS, to get the ToH functionality and toys into ARMA3? I would totally pay another 20 Bucks as DLC for it. I really, really, hope they make this possible. We need to start a petition/Kickstarter - whatever!!!

Imagine THIS in ARMA3...sigh:

[Azzur33 1]

A3 toward simulation direction.

Arma as a Tank/Driving/Helicopter/Jet/Flying/Infatry/Weapon/Tactics/Medical/Environment/Weather/Nature/Space/Life -simulator?

Arma is still more like a Combat/Military -simulator as a game.

Players are able to manage it's vehicles and weapons without years of military experience.

But they take a Role in a game, for example as a "Pilot with years of military experience". The Pilot knows already what every button in his vehicle does, or else he wouldn't be at the combat, of course.

The player can now concentrate in the Combat aspect which is the main thing in the game.

There's still a lot to learn to be a Good Arma Combat Pilot/Crew, even if the your vehicle is not fully simulated.

But of course, the simplifying should not make things (too) unrealistic or wrong.

Edited October 10, 2013 by Azzur33

[sektor 2]

I don't know, there are many games that you can concentrate on combat aspect, Arma stands for something more complex and authentic. People stick with this game because it gives them extra feel of simulation IMHO, and are always looking for more (ACE).