Jump to content
aluc4rd

Advanced Helicopter FDM Feedback

Recommended Posts

bigger change with each tap (on regular throttle mapped to keyboard) would probably be better than what is going on now. It is so minuscule right now, that you can tap it over and over and have no change in throttle at all, at times. Other times, only every *other* tap creates a tiny amount of throttle adjustment. It seems you have to hold it down for any noticeable effect (which has a delayed start, and delayed end, and is unpredictable/not reliable as a result)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the old way - having certain keys defined for certain values (0 - 25 - 50 - 75 - 100)? It worked like that in old flight sims and it worked reasonably well - especailly when it could be furter altered by current system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no throttle control on Arma helicopters. Collective input does change pitch of the main rotor blades. Each helicopter has different values for main rotor and is performance depends on many factors (actual weight, speed). There is no other way how digital input (such as keybord) can be used for this. Speed of the collective pitch angle change depends on how long does one keeps the key pressed. I recommend users that use keyboard this way, to use the in-game GUI - vertical speed indicator with bar that represents collective setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no throttle control on Arma helicopters. Collective input does change pitch of the main rotor blades. Each helicopter has different values for main rotor and is performance depends on many factors (actual weight, speed). There is no other way how digital input (such as keybord) can be used for this. Speed of the collective pitch angle change depends on how long does one keeps the key pressed. I recommend users that use keyboard this way, to use the in-game GUI - vertical speed indicator with bar that represents collective setting.

Still, maybe scroll wheel + key would be a nicer way to adjust collective and the speed of adjustment could be controlled by how fast the user scrolls it. I know it's still digital so the same could be done by allowing the user to control the speed of adjustment by tapping a key fast or slow but scroll wheel feels more comfortable and then the keys could be used for smaller adjustments when needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
maybe scroll wheel + key would be a nicer way to adjust collective

Actually we've considered this as one possible use of Ctrl+MWheel (even though currently the coll. increase is too little to make it work even with simple mouse wheel). For now MWheel can't be used with a modifier, it is one of the things we have in our endless lists, but it all depends on the priorities and dedicating some one to actually do it. No matter how simple it may be. Here's a ticket (one of the first) rdy for your voting - http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=96 (contrary to popular belief, we do take the amount of votes into account ;))

Edited by oukej

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually we've considered this as one possible use of Ctrl+MWheel (even though currently the coll. increase is too little to make it work even with simple mouse wheel). For now MWheel can't be used with a modifier, it is one of the things we have in our endless lists, but it all depends on the priorities and dedicating some one to actually do it. No matter how simple it may be. Here's a ticket (one of the first) rdy for your voting - http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=96 (contrary to popular belief, we do take the amount of votes into account ;))

Thanks. Looks like I've already voted for that ticket :)

What do you mean by "even though currently the coll. increase is too little to make it work even with simple mouse wheel"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After doing a bit of testing, I've noticed that the fuel consumption rate for the advanced flight model differs from that of the standard flight model quite substantially (for the NATO choppers, at least). Is there supposed to be such a big difference between the two? If so, why?

Quick picture of what I recorded: http://prntscr.com/58v2jc (There's a typo in the screenshot. SFM = Standard Flight Model, not Advanced Flight Model.)

Edited by Rebel12340

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After doing a bit of testing, I've noticed that the fuel consumption rate for the advanced flight model differs from that of the standard flight model quite substantially (for the NATO choppers, at least). Is there supposed to be such a big difference between the two? If so, why?

Quick picture of what I recorded: http://prntscr.com/58v2jc

Not sure if it matters within the confines of the engine, but was this done sitting on the ground or flying around?

For the ghost hawk (Assuming it performs similarly to a real UH-60) should burn around 120-140 gallons per hour with 360 gallons of fuel (455-530 & 1360 liters respectively) flying at around 100 Kts at sea level. Sitting on the ground its closer to 80 gallons (300 Liters) per hour.

NOTE:

These numbers are approximate and depend on how much power is required for any given mode of flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure if it matters within the confines of the engine, but was this done sitting on the ground or flying around?

For the ghost hawk (Assuming it performs similarly to a real UH-60) should burn around 120-140 gallons per hour with 360 gallons of fuel (455-530 & 1360 liters respectively) flying at around 100 Kts at sea level. Sitting on the ground its closer to 80 gallons (300 Liters) per hour.

NOTE:

These numbers are approximate and depend on how much power is required for any given mode of flight.

I did this by hovering in the air at ~50m, but I flew around in the hummingbird for the full ~40 minutes and there was no difference in how long the fuel lasted. My assumption is that fuel will decrease at a pre-defined rate, hence the "fuelConsumptionRate = x" value in the vehicle configs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear BIS!

As I see you are active in this topic, I dare to ask here:

Are you planning making the collective and other AFM values (rotor / engine RPM) be able to set by script commands? Would be a big help for scripters IMO (for me too).

I'm actually trying to make the Taru pod attach / detach script (without "attachto") and I want to sync every possible value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My assumption is that fuel will decrease at a pre-defined rate, hence the "fuelConsumptionRate = x" value in the vehicle configs.
That is right. AFM does not simulate changes in fuel consumption based on actual turbine performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is right. AFM does not simulate changes in fuel consumption based on actual turbine performance.

Why does the fuel consumption rate differ between the advanced and standard flight models?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why does the fuel consumption rate differ between the advanced and standard flight models?

Because the rotorlib XML has fuel quantity values that probably override the standard FM ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because the rotorlib XML has fuel quantity values that probably override the standard FM ones.

I guess what I meant to ask was, why were the values not configured to match one another?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG, I looked for them in the Arma 3 scripting commands page. Thank you so much!!!

Question: can I add these commands as a "simple user" to the Arma 3 scripting commands page? You know... just to help others :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not fully related to AFM but is definitely centered around helicopters:

What design decisions were used to influence which helicopters have Helmet Mounted Displays and which do not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why does the fuel consumption rate differ between the advanced and standard flight models?

It should be fixed and consistent in the next Dev. branch update (with an .exe update).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet again... I need to ask:

Are you planning to make the rotorlib SUBsettings (roughlanding, autotrim, wind, etc) forcable by the server? (which should be already possible)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yet again... I need to ask:

Are you planning to make the rotorlib SUBsettings (roughlanding, autotrim, wind, etc) forcable by the server? (which should be already possible)

Not planned now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I´ve read somewhere that apparently neither the Huron nor the Taru suffer from strees damage and also auto-trim does not fully disengage when the pertinent setting is disabled (on only this two new helicopters). Has anyone noticed it? Any official word I´ve missed or will it be updated once VRS comes into play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends how you configure the cyclic axes in DCS and FSX. For example, in DCS, you have a choice of digital or analog response to your joystick. It seems many players do not know this, judging by the talking past each other. The next time someone brings up DCS, ask him/her if they set their joystick to keyboard commands or the "Axis Commands" feature. Using keyboard commands is flying digital, using "axis commands" is flying analog. Real helilcopter flight controls are analog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...and also auto-trim does not fully disengage when the pertinent setting is disabled (on only this two new helicopters).

Being dual-rotor (tandem/coaxial), you wouldn't expect either one to need anti-torque trim inputs, if that's what you're referring to. The rotor torques cancel each other out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was referring primarily on cyclic trimming, should´ve stated it better. Here is a stream highlight from Patchwork that shows what I´m referring to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×