Fixed Wing Flight Model (dev branch)

[SabotAndHeat 10]

The one thing I've noticed is that some add on planes (imported from Arma 2) don't have any slip while banking. You can essentially tilt the plane 45 degrees to the left or right while in straight flight and it will not change the planes heading via slip. Not necessarily an Arma 3 flight model issue, but a physics issue perhaps?

[dragon01 902]

Remember though, that realism=/=fun and vice versa.

It's the case more often than you'd think with games like ArmA. "Partial realism" is often the most annoying kind, since some things are simulated, and make the game harder, but others, that would make it easier, are not. Flying a plane, even as advanced as A-10, is pretty easy, all things considered. As such, flight physics should act realistically. A-10 isn't prone to any weird behavior, deep stalls (like the F-16 is) and it's, from what I've heard, rather "tame" and handles very well compared to many other planes. I've found flying an F-16 in FreeFalcon much easier than in ArmAII (well, that was a mod, but still), for example.

The real challenge in flying modern warplanes comes from their complicated weapon systems, radar and radios, which are en entire science and take a long time to master. This "switchology" doesn't have to be simulated. Though realistic store management or radar could greatly appeal to flightsimmers (and would probably bring the planes' capabilities more inline with RL), they could also be simplified without compromising real pilots' ability to fly the plane. :) I wouldn't mind ArmA easing off on switches and knobs, but the physics of flight should be modeled as realistic as possible. Also, it should have realistic displays, even if their operation is simplified. Somehow, real ones are always better-looking, more readable and logical than whatever game/movie designers can come up with. :)

[the_demongod 31]

Is it just me or can the Wipeout jet turn like it has rocket boosters on its wings? The Neophron or Buzzard seem to have a more limited turn speed (making them harder to stall) but the A-164 seems like it can turn harder than its speed should allow it to. Anybody else seeing this?

EDIT: Please take a look at a thread I just posted regarding Air to Air missiles and how a few simple changes could totally overhaul the way they are used in combat.

I know this isn't exactly related to flight model per-se, but I'm sure some of you other flight enthusiasts will find it of interest.

Air to Air Missiles and Why They Need to Change

Edited July 22, 2014 by the_Demongod

[carlostex 38]

Is it just me or can the Wipeout jet turn like it has rocket boosters on its wings? The Neophron or Buzzard seem to have a more limited turn speed (making them harder to stall) but the A-164 seems like it can turn harder than its speed should allow it to. Anybody else seeing this?

EDIT: Please take a look at a thread I just posted regarding Air to Air missiles and how a few simple changes could totally overhaul the way they are used in combat.

I know this isn't exactly related to flight model per-se, but I'm sure some of you other flight enthusiasts will find it of interest.

Air to Air Missiles and Why They Need to Change

The A-164 has big non-swept wings that give it optimal lift at slow speeds, there might be an exageration in game, but in reality what we need is a decent flight model for all the fixed wing really.

It would be awesome to see ARMA be able to do realistic flight simming as well.

[Vibrant_Viper 0]

While speeds have to match the size of the maps, I feel something like this should be considered:

(Maybe not the music ;))

In my opinion it would really help improving the "feel" of speed. The way the pilots head moves when banking and pulling G's. I hope it could be considered. It could also apply in a similar manner to rotary wing crafts in tight banks through rotor turbulence.

What do you think?

[Brisse 78]

I don't feel that realistic speed is a problem on Altis as long as you have a good computer able to achieve good view distance setting.

[griffz 1]

Yeah I agree.

One of the biggest problems with arma vs other games (The flight model) is how in arma your nose always wants to go down.

When you play something like DCS, it actually makes sense because you have to keep your nose down (If I remember correctly), and it feels much more natural.

no. in DCS , standard cockpit view has a negative vertical angle ,related to horizon . that 's why you always feels the plane climbing. t'was the same since lockon 1.0 . i never understood why they choose to do it this way. to keep MFD/gauge in sight ?

track ir player doesnt suffer from that , but if you play without , the best thing to do to get the feeling of flight , is to level this angle to 0° . horizon must be in the middle of your screen.

[gibonez 18]

The A-164 has big non-swept wings that give it optimal lift at slow speeds, there might be an exageration in game, but in reality what we need is a decent flight model for all the fixed wing really.

It would be awesome to see ARMA be able to do realistic flight simming as well.

Yup realistic simming in all aspects would be awesome in Arma.

Infantry, vehicles already feel really realistic and heavy, helicopters and fixed wings even artillery could use a dose of realism.

[x3kj 1247]

vehicles already feel really realistic and heavy

really realistic, like so?

heavy vehicle are a pita to drive because of numerous and severe issues. And that is even before you put an AI into it.

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=20078

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=19164

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=19183

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=19182

Edited August 26, 2014 by Fennek

[the_demongod 31]

I'm bringing this thread back up because I have a question related to our upcoming helicopters DLC.

How difficult would it be to port some of our new features from the new flight model to fixed wing aircraft?

Some must be relatively simple. For instance, the instruments that show up could be added to aircraft as well, telling waypoint information, airspeed, rate of climb, and most of all the throttle indication. These would add the same kind of quantitative information about the aircraft's current motion and position.

A few may be a bit harder, for example: the effect of fuel and weapon weight would be a great addition to the flight model, because it would make control of the plane more difficult when fully loaded. Additionally, a pilot may have to make the decision to jettison all his ordinance before engaging in an air to air battle, or risk being outmaneuvered and killed.

Similarly, having wind effect on the jets would make a difference primarily on takeoff and landing, where rudder input may be required to keep the jet on proper glidepath.

Just a few thoughts. I really have no idea how these features are implemented; does anybody know how much of an ordeal it would be for BI to do this?

Cheers

[x3kj 1247]

First they should fix that rolling to the side a bit does not make your aircraft turn. Atm the only way to turn is either to use rudder, or roll alot and then use the elevator to turn. It feels like it flies on rails, and there is extensive sidewards drift after a turn, noticeable when shooting your cannon. Very poor simulation.

[campingmcgeehy 13]

The flight physics feel unrealistic. When I bank right, The plane doesn't want to bank right, Instead it just stays there. Like if it is gliding...Its very unrealistic..

---------- Post added at 01:25 ---------- Previous post was at 01:10 ----------

Is there a way to enable auto rudder? Its come to my attention that Bohemia disabled Auto Rudder. I feel that with out Auto Rudder, It makes the flight experience a bit unrealistic.

[dezkit 28]

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=16833

Ticket has been open for a while with no response from BI

[Gutsnav 13]

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=16833

Ticket has been open for a while with no response from BI

So has this...

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=17881

[the_demongod 31]

So has this...

http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=17881

Really nice work on that one, physics explanations as well. It's really too bad that BI doesn't pay much attention to these kinds of tickets.

[dr. hladik 231]

So, hot it works

(Simplified version, do not crucify if i missed some parameter. Also I'm a programmer and I don't do configs)

All the forces are computed in model space (so they do rotate with airplane)

Lift

- force size is affected by flaps

- force size is affected by altitude

- force size is affected by groundEff

- force size is affected by envelope array (speed dependent)

- force size is affected angleOfIndicence

Thrust

- force size is affected by thrustCoef array (speed dependent)

- force size is affected by altitude

- force size is affected by rpm/thrust

- direction is forward (forward or up for vtol)

Ailerons

- torque size is affected by aileronSensitivity parameter

- torque size is affected by aileronCoef array (speed dependent)

- adds torque (roll)

Elevator

- torque size is affected by elevatorSensitivity parameter

- torque size is affected by elevatorCoef array (speed dependent)

- adds torque (pitch)

Rudder

- torque size is affected by elevatorSensitivity parameter

- torque size is affected by rudderCoef array (speed dependent)

- adds torque (yaw)

Draconic forces (there are forces keeping plane aligned with its speed direction)

- force size is affected by speed

- force size is affected by airplane speed and direction deviation

- force size is affected by draconicForceXCoef, draconicForceYCoef, draconicForceZCoef parameters

- adds forces keeping plane aligned with its speed direction

Draconic torque

- torque size is affected by speed

- torque size is affected by airplane speed and direction deviation

- torque size is affected by draconicForceYCoef, draconicTorqueYCoef parameters

- adds torque that will align plane so that it flies forward

Friction & Gravity

- also there (gravity in world space)

Why tilted airplane does not turn?

By default our airplanes don't clim up - our lift force is not very strong by default.

If you tilt your airplane, lift force is also tilted also so you should start turning, descending and in some cases, your nose should go up/down.

However, if draconic forces are strong enough, they will do the exact opposite and stabilize your airplane.

I'm not and aircraft engineer, so if we are missing some force or some speed based curve, please tell me, I will add it.

If you find better configuration for airplanes, please tell me.

Edited September 25, 2014 by Dr. Hladik

[RuecanOnRails 10]

Seeing as RTDynamics, the company behind RotorLib also has a product called FixedWingLib is there any chance of seeing a possible future DLC or expansion making use of this?

[dr. hladik 231]

Seeing as RTDynamics, the company behind RotorLib also has a product called FixedWingLib is there any chance of seeing a possible future DLC or expansion making use of this?

Slim.

It takes a loooooot of time to combine our simulation and RTD and to create configuration for each RTD airplane.

[blackpixxel 53]

It takes a loooooot of time to combine our simulation and RTD and to create configuration for each RTD airplane.

But I think it is worth the time. And even if you would only include the FixedWingLib into the game without making the configs for each of the (four) vanilla planes, then the plane modders could benefit from it.

I am happy about every single feature that makes the make more realistic / authentic.

I am still dreaming of jet, tank and ship-DLC's that do the same as the Helicopter-DLC: Bringing new engine features for free as well as new content.

[RuecanOnRails 10]

I am still dreaming of jet, tank and ship-DLC's that do the same as the Helicopter-DLC: Bringing new engine features for free as well as new content.

Forget free, I'd be more than happy to pay a premium for that extra content. Adding more authentic and simulator based content costs time and money which needs to be recouped with additional sales and support. Content like that is something I would pre-order in a sort of crowd funding campaign. Given the option I'm sure others in the community would be eager to show support as well.

I'd think the likely success the Helicopter DLC sales and community support will be weighed in on future decisions to add other simulator like content.

Even if the chances are slim, I can always hope. I am patient when it comes to these things, I'll ask this again in January 2016 to see where we're at :)

[blackpixxel 53]

I did not mean that content should be free, just the features like in the current DLC's. Of course I will pay for extra tanks/jets/ships/submarines.

I think that the RotorLib integration was not that much work compared to the FixedWingLib integration, because it was already done for the Arma 2/TKOH Engine. But BI said that this game will have a long time until the next Arma comes. So I really hope that we will see those increased simulation aspects, even if we have to wait a year.

[campingmcgeehy 13]

Please add auto rudder again. It felt more realistic with auto rudder.

[dr. hladik 231]

Unfortunately, we do not plan to do any major re-examination of our airplanes (I mean now, cannot speak abou future).

All I can help you with now is configuration of your airplanes, extend some paramaters or to extend forces diag_mode (if it is even enabled now).

Speculation about new DLC or RTDynamics for airplanes will not help anything.

[dezkit 28]

Unfortunately, we do not plan to do any major re-examination of our airplanes (I mean now, cannot speak abou future).

All I can help you with now is configuration of your airplanes, extend some paramaters or to extend forces diag_mode (if it is even enabled now).

Speculation about new DLC or RTDynamics for airplanes will not help anything.

All that we ask now, is to make auto-rudder, AT LEAST, an option, to the way it was during beta/alpha.

Other than that, pack it up boys, thread's over.

[dr. hladik 231]

All that we ask now, is to make auto-rudder, AT LEAST, an option, to the way it was during beta/alpha.

Other than that, pack it up boys, thread's over.

Rudder - not everyone agrees.

> thread's over

Why? Nobody wants to help to improve airplanes?