Advanced Helicopter FDM Feedback

[gatordev 219]

VRS and settling with power are the same thing. Trust me I have been in it several time in real life and it's on both FAA exams.

---------- Post added at 08:43 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:57 AM ----------

From the FAA handbook under VRS:

The term “settling with power†comes from

the fact that the helicopter keeps settling even though full

engine power is applied.

The exact same thing can be said for Pr > Pa. It's not defining VRS as "power settling," but explaining the condition. I get it, you're quoting the FAA pub, but again, this is an often debated topic in aviation. Several months ago, even AOPA (which doesn't have a ton of super-helicopter rich content) had an "article" about the debate). If you go by the FAA pub, you can't descend more than 300 FPM into a hover, but that, too, isn't always accurate, depending on the aircraft.

FWIW, I have a hard time believing you've entered VRS multiple times and you're here to tell the tale. High descent rates with a good power pull at the bottom? Sure. Unfortunately, as I've said, I've been there a couple of times, including sling loading something that just was a bit too much for the varying winds over a superstructure (VERTREP'ing in Haiti was interesting with a full bag of gas).

This guys information is correct.

From the perspective of a R-22/44, sure. But it doesn't negate my information, as well.

Besides some wikipedia posts and a helicopter flight handbook and my word on what my flight instructors SAY...well I don't have any solid source.

Like you say, at the end of the day, the end result may be the same, but besides wikipedia, at the end of the day, you have to approach it from the aerodynamic perspective, since that's what we're discussing. And VRS specifically describes the condition. Power Settling, even as the FAA mentions it, can describe several stages of aerodynamic flight.

In the end, everyone is seeking the same thing...an accurate model. But if BIS is going to eventually model VRS, I just hope it's not overdone. Other than in my tail rotor, I've never experienced VRS in real life, even with some (relatively) pretty hellacious descent rates.

. Some helos like blackhawks even have a PBA (pitch bias actuator) that advances blade position at higher airspeed to allow the cyclic to have more effect without having to move so far.

In the interest of accuracy... The PBA doesn't give the cyclic more effect, it just readjusts the cyclic to a new position based off of airspeed. Cyclic control is still the same, it will just "move" the cyclic back to a more centered position as airspeed increases. Coupled with the FBW of the stabilator and the AFCS, this is what makes it so you don't have to have the cyclic buried in the dash when going fast.

It seems PBAs are on their way out, as the newer models of -60s don't have them.

[Henry Rollins 10]

Gatordev settling with power can be practiced at altitude, the instructors put you in it and you get yourself out of it. On that note there is a new way to get out of it beside 1) lowering collective 2) forward cyclic 3) pull collective. The new way they teach it is 1) aggressive right cyclic 2) pull collective 3) LEFT pedal (or the reverse). You lose less than half the altitude, something that is precious when VRS happens on accident on approach to landing.

[quickvenge 10]

I already fly "foresighted" (if that is the right word) So I stop the adjustment before the helicopter achieves the desired position. But for some reason even the ultralight littlebird flies like it would have a heavy input delay

Unfortunately this is the probably the result of the FCS dampener in rotorlib. It annoyed folks in TOH too. I had suggested in the helicopter DLC thread that they give us a GUI to control its dampening effect. It's there to filter wild input from players and ideally prevent wild oscillations. It doesn't quite do its job at high speed, and once you get use to your joysticks control sensitivity it becomes annoying as it creates the feeling of an input delay.

Quick 1/2 hour check to see if anything improved with dev build 1.27.126674. Is it just me or did the rotor sounds break? I don't hear them anymore.

[worldsprayer 0]

From the FAA handbook under VRS:

The exact same thing can be said for Pr > Pa. It's not defining VRS as "power settling," but explaining the condition. I get it, you're quoting the FAA pub, but again, this is an often debated topic in aviation. Several months ago, even AOPA (which doesn't have a ton of super-helicopter rich content) had an "article" about the debate). If you go by the FAA pub, you can't descend more than 300 FPM into a hover, but that, too, isn't always accurate, depending on the aircraft.

FWIW, I have a hard time believing you've entered VRS multiple times and you're here to tell the tale. High descent rates with a good power pull at the bottom? Sure. Unfortunately, as I've said, I've been there a couple of times, including sling loading something that just was a bit too much for the varying winds over a superstructure (VERTREP'ing in Haiti was interesting with a full bag of gas).

From the perspective of a R-22/44, sure. But it doesn't negate my information, as well.

Like you say, at the end of the day, the end result may be the same, but besides wikipedia, at the end of the day, you have to approach it from the aerodynamic perspective, since that's what we're discussing. And VRS specifically describes the condition. Power Settling, even as the FAA mentions it, can describe several stages of aerodynamic flight.

In the end, everyone is seeking the same thing...an accurate model. But if BIS is going to eventually model VRS, I just hope it's not overdone. Other than in my tail rotor, I've never experienced VRS in real life, even with some (relatively) pretty hellacious descent rates.

In the interest of accuracy... The PBA doesn't give the cyclic more effect, it just readjusts the cyclic to a new position based off of airspeed. Cyclic control is still the same, it will just "move" the cyclic back to a more centered position as airspeed increases. Coupled with the FBW of the stabilator and the AFCS, this is what makes it so you don't have to have the cyclic buried in the dash when going fast.

It seems PBAs are on their way out, as the newer models of -60s don't have them.

So it gives the cyclic more effect at higher airspeed. The faster you go, the rate of cyclic to blade change changes a bit. Same effect, different words. Ive replaced so many of those back when I was avionics it was nuts. I think now the flight managers are taking over the job, since a PBA was sensitive enough to voltage changes that the 9volt batteries we used to test them could burn up a slightly weak one. Obviously the stab had a big effect as well, I think the pba was an add on idea someone had at some point.

---------- Post added at 06:08 ---------- Previous post was at 06:02 ----------

From the FAA handbook under VRS:

The exact same thing can be said for Pr > Pa. It's not defining VRS as "power settling," but explaining the condition. I get it, you're quoting the FAA pub, but again, this is an often debated topic in aviation. Several months ago, even AOPA (which doesn't have a ton of super-helicopter rich content) had an "article" about the debate). If you go by the FAA pub, you can't descend more than 300 FPM into a hover, but that, too, isn't always accurate, depending on the aircraft.

FWIW, I have a hard time believing you've entered VRS multiple times and you're here to tell the tale. High descent rates with a good power pull at the bottom? Sure. Unfortunately, as I've said, I've been there a couple of times, including sling loading something that just was a bit too much for the varying winds over a superstructure (VERTREP'ing in Haiti was interesting with a full bag of gas).

From the perspective of a R-22/44, sure. But it doesn't negate my information, as well.

Like you say, at the end of the day, the end result may be the same, but besides wikipedia, at the end of the day, you have to approach it from the aerodynamic perspective, since that's what we're discussing. And VRS specifically describes the condition. Power Settling, even as the FAA mentions it, can describe several stages of aerodynamic flight.

In the end, everyone is seeking the same thing...an accurate model. But if BIS is going to eventually model VRS, I just hope it's not overdone. Other than in my tail rotor, I've never experienced VRS in real life, even with some (relatively) pretty hellacious descent rates.

In the interest of accuracy... The PBA doesn't give the cyclic more effect, it just readjusts the cyclic to a new position based off of airspeed. Cyclic control is still the same, it will just "move" the cyclic back to a more centered position as airspeed increases. Coupled with the FBW of the stabilator and the AFCS, this is what makes it so you don't have to have the cyclic buried in the dash when going fast.

It seems PBAs are on their way out, as the newer models of -60s don't have them.

I think the reason many don't stop with the FAA definition is because its not complete. According to that definition, vrs is settling with power because it does describe the final consequence of vrs. But it doesn't limit the definition though. Hitting your max limits during a takeoff for example and falling back down would be an example of settling with power that isn't vrs, but you won't find an example of vrs that isn't settling with power. so one is the other, but the other is not necessarily the first.

[worldsprayer 0]

Since this is about the helicopters of arma 3 dev right now, I would like to point out that in the latest patch, you can no longer hear the engines/blades in the cockpit anymore. If you go to 3rd person mode you hear them fine, but if you switch to first, it quickly fades away to completely silent.

---------- Post added at 09:19 ---------- Previous post was at 09:15 ----------

Also I want to say that roll on landing survivability...MUCH BETTER. The helos still try to flip out on you on the ground from weird traction physics, but that'll probably just have to be us being careful on the pedals. Much improved.

---------- Post added at 09:30 ---------- Previous post was at 09:19 ----------

And question to the dev if this is seen: I've been browsing the rotorlib documentation from their website and looking at the part copied on the Arma wiki page, and a lot of the issues we are having in the game are supposed to be answered by the rotorlib middleware. It seems their is a vast amount missing that rotorlib is supposed to provide (at least according to the docs). Is there a specific reason for this that is known?

[blackpixxel 53]

Okay, as quickvenge said, there is definitely some kind of "joystick-smoothing", just like the optional mouse smoothing, but not adjustable. When you push the cyclic to the right for a splitsecond and release it then, the helicopter will react about half a second after you made this little correction. This is absurd and not realistic. He should slowly start to move after when you push the stick, not half a second later. This makes it very hard to controll the helicopter while hovering above ground for landings etc., since you have to make a lot of little but fast adjustments. This input delay lets me often oversteer the aircraft, which would not be the case if there would not be a delay.

So please, BI DEVs, remove the joystick smoothing. There is no reason for this. And if it makes the controlls easier for Mouse + Keyboard, why not make a controller/joystick smoothing slider in the controll options next to the mouse smoothing slider? Joystick don't really need this smoothing, the input is already smooth because it is proportional.

It does not make a lot of fun to fly with the anoying delay (next to the random explosions when landing buttersmooth on buildings and structures).

[dr. hladik 231]

rev 126703: Added new parameter for description.ext - "forceRotorLibSimulation". (0 - default,options based; 1 forced On; 2 forced Off)

also, collective will no longer start engine

Edited August 13, 2014 by Dr. Hladik

[CaptainObvious 95]

also, collective will no longer start engine

Super!

[goldenfiver 11]

I apologize in advanced if this was discussed before, but:

can you guys make the functioning wheels available for all helis even without enabling the new flight model?

[blackpixxel 53]

also, collective will no longer start engine

In the todays dev-update? Collective still starts the engine there.

But it is great to see an improvement there. Finally autorotations will be possible, and you can turn the engine on and off manually (Just map the scrollwheel-menu to one of your joystick buttons and middle mouse button too. The Saitek X52 benefits from his built-in scrollwheel here ;) ).

[maddogx 13]

In the todays dev-update?

Nope, probably tomorrow's. He says "rev 126703", today we're only at rev 126692.

[nodunit 397]

I think what you're describing is the visual representation of "stress damage" which does have an option in the menu. The helicopter doesn't shake when flown correctly and not damaged in my experience at least. During start up, keep the collective lowered and wait for the RPM to reach max speed (you will know it when you hear it), slowly raise the collective until you are in a low hover. Once in a low hover, either move forward and allow translation lift to gain altitude, or increase collective more while watching torque and rpm.

If you are doing a proper take off, I'm not sure what shaking you're referring to.

Sounds about right, he should be glad the shaking is actually fairly mute compared to this

[blu3sman 11]

I would suggest devs to change tail rotor simulation type from "MomentumTheory" to "BladeElementTheory". It produces more realistic behaviour, especially solves excessive yaw authority at high speed.

[Henry Rollins 10]

Since this is about the helicopters of arma 3 dev right now, I would like to point out that in the latest patch, you can no longer hear the engines/blades in the cockpit anymore. If you go to 3rd person mode you hear them fine, but if you switch to first, it quickly fades away to completely silent.

---------- Post added at 09:19 ---------- Previous post was at 09:15 ----------

Also I want to say that roll on landing survivability...MUCH BETTER. The helos still try to flip out on you on the ground from weird traction physics, but that'll probably just have to be us being careful on the pedals. Much improved.

---------- Post added at 09:30 ---------- Previous post was at 09:19 ----------

And question to the dev if this is seen: I've been browsing the rotorlib documentation from their website and looking at the part copied on the Arma wiki page, and a lot of the issues we are having in the game are supposed to be answered by the rotorlib middleware. It seems their is a vast amount missing that rotorlib is supposed to provide (at least according to the docs). Is there a specific reason for this that is known?

Can you provide a link so that we may read your findings?

[gatordev 219]

Gatordev settling with power can be practiced at altitude, the instructors put you in it and you get yourself out of it. On that note there is a new way to get out of it beside 1) lowering collective 2) forward cyclic 3) pull collective. The new way they teach it is 1) aggressive right cyclic 2) pull collective 3) LEFT pedal (or the reverse). You lose less than half the altitude, something that is precious when VRS happens on accident on approach to landing.

Interesting. I've never had to practice it, and didn't realize it was in the PTS. I guess the new way "slides" you off the bubble instead of nosing over the bubble. Thanks for the info.

So it gives the cyclic more effect at higher airspeed. The faster you go, the rate of cyclic to blade change changes a bit. Same effect, different words. Ive replaced so many of those back when I was avionics it was nuts. I think now the flight managers are taking over the job, since a PBA was sensitive enough to voltage changes that the 9volt batteries we used to test them could burn up a slightly weak one. Obviously the stab had a big effect as well, I think the pba was an add on idea someone had at some point.

Now I see what you're saying. And yes, it was added on. I want to say the -60A didn't have it, but we had it in the -60B. I'm pretty sure the -60F/H had it, but the -60R does not. The trim and autopilot just program it back now.

I think the reason many don't stop with the FAA definition is because its not complete. According to that definition, vrs is settling with power because it does describe the final consequence of vrs. But it doesn't limit the definition though. Hitting your max limits during a takeoff for example and falling back down would be an example of settling with power that isn't vrs, but you won't find an example of vrs that isn't settling with power. so one is the other, but the other is not necessarily the first.

Completely agree.

[Most 1]

Like other people have said, an RPM gauge rather than just a light on the virtual instruments would be great, but I would like to see something similar for torque as well instead of the light so you had more of an idea of how much headroom you had. Can we get some specifics on how the torque system works? Is stress based failure determined by a hp system where every time you over torque you lose some of that hp and once you run out you crash? Or is it more so a system where the helicopter crashes after a certain amount of time is spent in the over torqued state continuously? Is yellow on the meter considered a lesser state of over torque or is it just a warning? It also seems very sudden to me to go from a perfectly working helicopter to suddenly falling out of the sky with no indication of what happened. I was flying a hummingbird the other day at max collective because I assumed since I hadn't yet encountered stress based damage it wasn't added or modeled correctly or whatever, and the rotors just suddenly stopped and it took me a few moments of plummeting to my doom to figure out what happened. It seems odd that it happens so suddenly but if it's going to be that way it would be nice to see the MROT go red or give some other indication of what happened. Could someone who knows a little more weigh in on whether this should be so sudden without warning, or are their signs that the rotor system is about to fail?

While the virtual gauges are great I would like to see an option to remove the little crosshair thing in layout options that you get when they're enabled. It's nice to have the virtual instruments enabled because no trackIR, low screen resolution, etc. etc., but When flying low at high speeds I find myself having a hard time seeing and distinguishing thin objects such as light posts and telephone polls when the crosshair is right on top of them or they are just inside of it which usually ends badly. The Orca has one already, and it just adds more elements to my screen I don't really need.

All that being said would it be possible to get all the actual gauges in the cockpits to work in at least some of the helicopters to a similar fashion as we had in TKoH? It would be nice if you could fly just by those if you chose to for the added immersion or challenge. Right now the hummingbird/pawnee is about the closest to this but flying with no torque indicators seems silly when it can cause your helicopter to catastrophically crash.

[Brisse 78]

While the virtual gauges are great I would like to see an option to remove the little crosshair thing in layout options that you get when they're enabled. It's nice to have the virtual instruments enabled because no trackIR, low screen resolution, etc. etc.

They would have to fix the HUD's and HMD's first. The crosshair and flight path vector on those are not alinged properly, at least not when moving around in the cockpit with TrackIR.

[blackpixxel 53]

Fixed: [RTD] Collective no longer starts the engine

This works great, autorotations are survivable now! In addition to that it makes a lot of fun.

I just recommend you to land with some horizontal speed, about 30-40 km/h. This will make it much easier. Landing without horizontal speed needs too much RPM and so you are often still too fast during the impact and it will damage your helicopter.

Good work helo dev's, this is a nice update!

I hope to see the joystick smoothing / input delay removed in the next days, because it is not really enjoyable to fly without having the full controll about the aircraft!

EDIT:

This is what I am talking about. I recorded joystick and monitor with a 120 FPS camera

and looked how many frames it needs from joystick movement to helicopter movement.

It was exactly half a second:

This is really destroying my helicopter experience. I would say that the input delay

is even worse than the current damage system, because the delay is often the only

reason why I crash. The delay really needs to be addressed as soon as possible!

Edited August 14, 2014 by BlackPixxel

[Brisse 78]

This delay is not present in TOH, is it? It's only Arma3?

[blackpixxel 53]

This delay is not present in TOH, is it? It's only Arma3?

I just tried TKOH again, and it is also there. The interresting thing is that the joysticks and pedals in the helicopter move 1:1 with the real stick without any delay, just the vehicle movement flollow much later.

[Brisse 78]

Alright. I was trying to compare TOH and Arma3 yesterday and I thought they felt quite different. Maybe it was just becouse the framerate was much higher in TOH though.

[blackpixxel 53]

Well, TOH really feels a bit smoother, there might be less delay. At least the TOH littlebird is much easier to fly than the A3 one. You just have to trimm the tailrotor, then it will hover steady, while you have to trimm nick and roll axis in A3 too.

[Grumpy Old Man 3545]

Well, TOH really feels a bit smoother, there might be less delay. At least the TOH littlebird is much easier to fly than the A3 one. You just have to trimm the tailrotor, then it will hover steady, while you have to trimm nick and roll axis in A3 too.

Weird input delay you got there, is it still present when checking the customize controller window?

I checked it with a ps3 sixaxis controller and there's no noticeable input delay.

Maybe some other joystick owners can chime in on this one, do you experience this in other games too?

[CaptainObvious 95]

Weird input delay you got there, is it still present when checking the customize controller window?

I checked it with a ps3 sixaxis controller and there's no noticeable input delay.

Maybe some other joystick owners can chime in on this one, do you experience this in other games too?

Quite a while ago I tried to fly with F.L.Y5 but didn't like it at all, it was really sluggish just like in BlackBixxel's video, I've used mouse and keyboard ever since, but now with the AFM, I'd really like to use a stick and pedals.

[Henry Rollins 10]

It's definitely there with Thrustmaster warthog hotas. It has to go, I don't understand why it was there in the 1st place.