Cobra Vs. UH60 -- Controls.

[Shashman 0]

Yes, compared with the UH-60's yaw rate, the AH-1's is comparable to that of a pregnant yak's

[Rofflecopter 0]

Well I can Fly all the helo's in ArmA alright, apart from cobra, in that i usually end up barrel rolling into ground, very odd.

[rekrul 7]

Turning 180 with the cobra makes me fly halfway over the map. Now I do a miniversion of the hammerhead where I pull up to drop speed, turn, dives down, then I scream like a schoolgirl when trying to level up and avoid smashing into buildings/the ground. Rinse & Repeat. Quite exciting really with an 80% successrate.

[Radic 0]

There's definitely something wrong about the way tailrotor (technically "anti-torque control") works in at least the ArmA demo - I am at pains here to make it clear I've only played the demo.

Also, with the MI17 they're obviously demonstrating that tailrotor control loses a heap of authority to forward airstream over the tailfin at a certain point - but should it be as sudden as the sim suggests?? - and below that speed I find it hard to believe that even the MI17 would have such crap yaw control - tho not having flown an MI17 IRL perhaps the position of the rotor axis makes the MI17 roll at the same time as yaw IRL (??).

IMO they should offer a "std" control option which works much the same as OFP which IMO is quite real enough for a sim whilst still making it enjoyable to PLAY - as well as a "high fidelity" model for the sticklers - which should include the FULL control authority/interaction required between collective and anti-torque control (if you don't know what I mean by that then you don't know the half of how actually difficult/complicated REAL helicopter flight is!! ) - pilot wannabe's would really know they were alive then ;-)   - the harf arsed option we get IMO is simply frustrating and pointless in the broader concept of the GAME.

sorry for errors - I'm actually suffering another attack of vertigo this last week so just seeing the PC monitor properly is difficult ATM- letalone typing properly.

[whisper 0]

Did you change your settings for your rudder, Radic? I think the default assignement is wrong. It should be changed, bound to "pedals" only if I remember well.

Otherwise, yup the loss of tail rotor authority is a bit too sudden and happens too early. There should be an area where you could keep tail rotor authority more, making the chopper slow down, but it's not present in ArmA.

Not a major issue if you ask me, though

[BHack 0]

I can't vouch for the realism of the flight control, but I personally have no problems piloting the cobra or the blackhawk.

The way the tail rotor loses authority over the helo at speed makes perfect sense to me. In the game, the rotor becomes mostly useless at about 100 kph (whether the speed itself is accurate, I don't know, but I'm sure it does happen in real life at SOME speed). This is the same whether you are flying the cobra or the blackhawk. At any speeds over 100, you should be controlling the chopper's direction almost as if it were a fixed wing aircraft.

I think you guys are haing a difficult time with fast banking in the cobra because it is modeled as having a substantially faster airspeed. This means the force of the airstream on its frame is greater than in the blackhawk. This makes banking, and any other change of direction, more difficult.

You need to SLOW DOWN more with the cobra to get it to move like you want it to. You should only be using full speed when you don't expect to be doing any turning.

[skulljar 0]

Hello,

I've played just about every flight sim ever made. I've seen what the Cobra can do in combat. Not only is ArmA binding the controls wrong, but the flight model on the Cobra is awful. IMO they had it damn good with OFP. Although some of the other flight models in OFP were terrible, the Cobra was outstanding. Those of you wondering if this is a problem, or if it's just you- take my word for it: this is a problem that should be fixed with a patch. ASAP! The Cobra was my favorite part of OFP!

Also, the Blackhawk flight model seems well enough.

[max power 21]

I'd like you to qualify what you mean by 'seen what the cobra can do in combat'.

And I don't think that the flight model in OFP was outstanding. The flightmodel amounted to a car with invisible wheels on springs and some other behaviour. If you drove your 'car' off a cliff, you'd lose control, just like the other cars in ofp, until the wheels hit the ground again.

Because you found it more fliable doesn't make it right. I think you should probably just argue that you found it more enjoyable. That seems to be in essence what you're saying, apart from attempting to solidify your position and credibility with what I think are technically irrelevent reasons.

[skulljar 0]

I'd like you to qualify what you mean by 'seen what the cobra can do in combat'.

And I don't think that the flight model in OFP was outstanding.  The flightmodel amounted to a  car with invisible wheels on springs and some other behaviour.  If you drove your 'car' off a cliff, you'd lose control, just like the other cars in ofp, until the wheels hit the ground again.

Because you found it more fliable doesn't make it right.  I think you should probably just argue that you found it more enjoyable.  That seems to be in essence what you're saying, apart from attempting to solidify your position and credibility with what I think are technically irrelevent reasons.

4 years in the Marines aboard the 29 Palms Combat Center watching live fire combined arms exercises.

The flight model was enjoyable, you have a point. I see what you are saying. However, it was a hell of a lot closer to what a Cobra can really do, and it was not all that bad comparing to other sims. OFP was definitely not a flight sim and was an infantry sim. We used VBS-1 to train infantrymen all the time, but never pilots.

Thanks for the opinion on what I should have been saying but I reiterate, "the flight model on the Cobra is awful, IN MY OPINION they had it damn good with OFP. Although some of the other flight models in OFP were terrible, the Cobra was outstanding. Those of you wondering if this is a problem, or if it's just you- take my word for it: this is a problem that should be fixed with a patch."

So I'll take a stab at psycho analyzing your post too... it appears that you would like to see ArmA held up before any other game as the prodigal simulator and would rather not see someone criticizing it's first release- which will be patched anyway; even though patches usually incorporate anything that the gamers feel needing of attention or tweaking; I would agree that the game is the best- but that doesn't make it perfect. That seems to be in essence what you were saying, apart from attempting to pick my post apart and discredit me which were technically irrelevant reasons.

Edit: maybe it was only like a car with invisible springs if you used mouse and keyboard controls? A flight stick was a lot of fun and a little more challenging.

[max power 21]

So I'll take a stab at psycho analyzing your post too... it appears that you would like to see ArmA held up before any other game as the prodigal simulator and would rather not see someone criticizing it's first release- which will be patched anyway; even though patches usually incorporate anything that the gamers feel needing of attention or tweaking; I would agree that the game is the best- but that doesn't make it perfect. That seems to be in essence what you were saying, apart from attempting to pick my post apart and discredit me which were technically irrelevant reasons.

It wasn't a psycho-analysis, I was analysing your argument from a critical thinking standpoint.

I don't think I said anything that could really draw *that* conclusion. I certainly don't think that ArmA is the prodigal simulator! It does a more adequate job of mimmicking the interaction of men and machines on a battlefield compared to other games, or so I surmise.

What I was attempting to convey is that if you're going to take a stab at critiquing ArmA in terms of realism, then you need to quantify and qualify what the problem is. Your premises about playing lots of flightsims are largely irrelevent reasons in that regard. I've played lots of flightsims too, and I've garnered some knowledge about the way flight systems work from those sims, but I don't profess to know in what way the cobra is 'wrong'. I know a few things that are contenders for the way it's unrealistic. ArmA in general seems to have the same control 'problems' as the 1c Maddox flight sims. Its control rates are pretty brutal, making flying more difficult than if the rates were on a curve rather than linear or whatever they are now.

Your anecdotal observations of helicopters doing live fire excercises are a little stronger but I have to wonder how much more skilled those marine pilots are than us lcd potatos. I'm quite sure that someone like me couldn't climb into one and start busting tanks! It's possible that a more skilled pilot could fly the virtual helicopter more like the marine pilots are trained to act in real life. Marine pilots have a lot of training, and, I have observed that even hints and tips provided by other gamers seem to have a profound effect on the flying experiences of others. If we all had intensive training for the ArmA flight model, I'm sure we would be pretty dangerous too! (It would make for a shorter course, though, given that the flight model is much simpler).

Don't take offence to having your post analysed critically. I disagree with some of the things you are saying but it's no reason to start busting the bottoms off of bottles on the bar and circle each other.

[Maximus_G 0]

I just hope BIS will stand their ground and won't be influenced by injustified opinions aka whining.

[rekrul 7]

My main problem with the cobra (apart from turning and screaming like a girl part) is that when I use the tail rotor to turn, it banks. With MH-6 or blackhawk, it turns - with cobra it banks. That doesn't seem right.

[irl-calibre 0]

I agree the cobra no longer turns, it banks - it didn't use to do this in 1.02. I have turn allocated to keys on my keyboard and it banks when I use them the same as it banks when I use it assigned to my mouse..

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

I’ve been talking to a mate and former colleague who is stationed at RAF Benson, he’s a Merlin pilot and he’s just gotten the 505 release of ArmA on Saturday.

Just to give you some background on this guy,  he’s flown Chinook, Squirrel, Huey 412, MD500/520F, Gazelle, Twin Squirrel,  UH60 Blackhawks (RAF/USArmy exchange), Merlins and Pumas.

Quote[/b] ]"Having played ArmA for about 6 hours now it would make a great helicopter sim the environments are great but as an infantry game it just sucks.  The environments are great from a distance but they are just too sparse and don’t give you that sense or realism close up.  It just feels awkward to play if you know what I mean. ..Although the flight model is a bit shit so I guess I retract my earlier commentâ€

After a bit of badgering I asked for his informed opinion of the flight model.    He came back with a few general points about the ArmA flight model:

Quote[/b] ]

1) In general the collective control is sloppy and unrealistic

2) As above Yaw rate at speed is far too restricted.  It’s possible to maintain a reasonable yaw rate {in Merlin/Blackhawk size helicopters} and still maintain forward speeds up 90 – 100kts (166-185 kph).  {Obviously Yaw will reduce speed as the fuselage will act as an airbrake}

3) Unrealistic Roll. It seems to centre on a point in the airframe that is neither the logical CofG nor the rotor hub {which is where the airframe pivots from at speed due to aerodynamic loading of the rotor such as high speed turns and flaring}

4) Linked Roll tendency during Yaw is annoying as hell and not realistic.  I’m assuming that’s lazy programming rather than an attempt at simulating full force dynamics {he means put the rudder on and you roll}

In general it’s OK.  Bit more challenging than most games but it’s not at all realistic.  If they were to improve the Collective, Yaw and Roll characteristics then they have the makings of a fairly good flight model.  But right now it’s like flying a Luton Van.

NOTE - Comments in {}  are mine to help explain.

It seems that the people who do actually know how to fly real helicopters don’t like the ArmA flight model any more than those of who don’t fly them.  

As for the issue of Cobra vs Blackhawk.  I’m sure its all about mass distribution in the geo lod again.  I’m sure that the community made addons will sort it all out.

[irl-calibre 0]

It is really easy to test, just manual hover in the cobra and try and turn -  the helo banks it doesn't turn

[Maximus_G 0]

It seems that the people who do actually know how to fly real helicopters don’t like the ArmA flight model any more than those of who don’t fly them.

That was interesting to read, thank you!

There's a slight difference - that's not OFP/Arma FM comparison, that's Arma/RealLife. Would be good if he could compare that to OFP's FM.

I really fear of a possible stepback of Arma's FM towards OFP's simplicity.

At least the pilots surely know what they're talking about, so their opinion is much more specific and constructive.

Arma is not a flight sim and therefore has its constraints, but such a valuable feedback from pilots and aerodynamics guys could make heli behaviour more plausible.

BTW, i've heard some impressions from fixed-wing pilots on heli control. When they try to grab cyclic and collective in the air, they get wet! It's really hard to get used to heli's controls because of complex hand+feet movements. Anybody wants such an FM here?

[max power 21]

I think it was maruk who said that they had a helicopter pilot critiquing their flight model. Maruk said that he was impressed, but that could mean a number of things- such as a general improvement over the ofp in flight handling. As a helicopter simulator it totally sucks, but I like it better than ofp! Rock Ape should get his helicopter pilot pal to fly the bf2 helis and see what he thinks of those!

BTW Rock Ape, good post. It's always nice to hear from the experts!

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

Rock Ape should get his helicopter pilot pal to fly the bf2 helis and see what he thinks of those!

Well we used to play BF2 and 2142 I think it’s a given that their flight model isn’t at all realistic. But they don’t claim to be the "ultimate Combat Simulator" unlike ArmA.

To my mind, Combat simulation means Helos and Planes as well as infantry.

[max power 21]

Rock Ape should get his helicopter pilot pal to fly the bf2 helis and see what he thinks of those!

Well we used to play BF2 and 2142 I think it’s a given that their flight model isn’t at all realistic. But they don’t claim to be the "ultimate Combat Simulator" unlike ArmA.

To my mind, Combat simulation means Helos and Planes as well as infantry.

I've never played any BF game, really, I was just wondering what helicopter pilots think of that thing since it is often maligned on these boards.

[HellToupee 0]

It seems that the people who do actually know how to fly real helicopters don’t like the ArmA flight model any more than those of who don’t fly them.

That was interesting to read, thank you!

There's a slight difference - that's not OFP/Arma FM comparison, that's Arma/RealLife. Would be good if he could compare that to OFP's FM.

I really fear of a possible stepback of Arma's FM towards OFP's simplicity.

At least the pilots surely know what they're talking about, so their opinion is much more specific and constructive.

Arma is not a flight sim and therefore has its constraints, but such a valuable feedback from pilots and aerodynamics guys could make heli behaviour more plausible.

BTW, i've heard some impressions from fixed-wing pilots on heli control. When they try to grab cyclic and collective in the air, they get wet! It's really hard to get used to heli's controls because of complex hand+feet movements. Anybody wants such an FM here?

It dosnt need to be a flight sim to have realistic like control over the helecopter, flight sims busy themselfs more with the systems in the planes, not the controls.

It dosnt even need huge changes,

just buff the collective, allow it to actually yaw a little(hell planes and hokum cant yaw and they have no tail rotor excuse) and move the center of rotation for roll, looks stupid at the moment, havnt been in a helecopter that rotates like that.

[whisper 0]

It seems that the people who do actually know how to fly real helicopters don’t like the ArmA flight model any more than those of who don’t fly them.

That was interesting to read, thank you!

There's a slight difference - that's not OFP/Arma FM comparison, that's Arma/RealLife. Would be good if he could compare that to OFP's FM.

I really fear of a possible stepback of Arma's FM towards OFP's simplicity.

At least the pilots surely know what they're talking about, so their opinion is much more specific and constructive.

Arma is not a flight sim and therefore has its constraints, but such a valuable feedback from pilots and aerodynamics guys could make heli behaviour more plausible.

BTW, i've heard some impressions from fixed-wing pilots on heli control. When they try to grab cyclic and collective in the air, they get wet! It's really hard to get used to heli's controls because of complex hand+feet movements. Anybody wants such an FM here?

It dosnt need to be a flight sim to have realistic like control over the helecopter, flight sims busy themselfs more with the systems in the planes, not the controls.

It dosnt even need huge changes,

just buff the collective, allow it to actually yaw a little(hell planes and hokum cant yaw and they have no tail rotor excuse) and move the center of rotation for roll, looks stupid at the moment, havnt been in a helecopter that rotates like that.

Exactly my PoV, even if I enjoy current FM more than OFP one. I don't know about the collective, though, I find it responsive enough to be effective on my stick.

But the center of rotation and tail rotor loss of authority points are spot on.

[BLSmith2112 0]

I like the new controls for the UH60. However, the Cobra just (to me anyway) seems worlds apart.. shouldn't helocopters have a more unilateral approach to how they are controlled? It's like, instead of having controls that specify: Air, Land, and Sea. It's like every vehicle has its own set of controls that need to be mastered. With the 1000s of addons coming out (hopefully), the controls will have to be mastered for all of those as well then. It's going to be so much more difficult than it needs to be. Sure change the sensitivity etc, but the flight control model should be similar.

[Scrub 0]

IMHO, I like the fact that there will be different cadres of expert pilots in the uh-60's, mh-6, COBRAS, Hips, 50's (ad nauseum) Makes the game an individual's game.

[Radic 0]

Did you change your settings for your rudder,  Radic? I think the default assignement is wrong. It should be changed, bound to "pedals" only if I remember well.

Otherwise, yup the loss of tail rotor authority is a bit too sudden and happens too early. There should be an area where you could keep tail rotor authority more, making the chopper slow down, but it's not present in ArmA.

Not a major issue if you ask me, though

RockofSL,s post I think pretty much wraps it up for me - that pilot friend of his pretty much nails it all exactly in line with my feelings on the matter - the yaw control is NOT right - there should be more authority at virtually any speed - the changeover shouldn't be like a switch being thrown tho there should definitely be an effect due to forward speed increasing - and rolling caused by yaw input as happens with the MI17 should simply not be happening (I do have the controls bound correctly).

The collective I wasn't going to get into but yes I too feel that it's far too "mushy" - and also it seems that the collective is setup almost as a height lever rather than an actual collective control - ie. to be close to the ground my collective ends up at a lower setting and to be higher it's set higher - in reality (altho ground effect does play a part) you should need a certain amount of collective to maintain height - ANY height - which will be defined by forward speed and aircraft allup weight rather than the height itself - heavy ship plus low forward speed will require a heap of collective regardless of whether you're at 2000 feet or 6 feet. Mind you, this I think is the same in OFP - probably the biggest pork in that flight model overall too. I think part of what's happening is that IRL you have cyclic, pedals and collective PLUS POWER CONTROL (usually a twist grip) - in OFP and ArmA the power setting is just linearly indexed to collective position which simply isn't right - tho even that doesn't explain it entirely.

The one thing they may have about right is the cyclic "swimming" - that does indeed take developed feel or "skill" to master (like skating I'm told by real pilots - tho they reckon you get rustier on flying than skating when you haven't done it for a while) and this is reflected quite well I think in ARMA (more an approximation taste rather than particularly precise tho?) - but the rest they should simply replace with the old OFP model - I still stand by saying that in fact the OFP helo models are much more like the real thing in general terms - harder does not by default mean more realistic!!! If they fixed the collective in OFP it'd be spot on IMO.

RockofSL could you possibly get your friend to try out OFP and comment??

I'm a little frustrated overall as the two things that I think they had really nicely in OFP were ground vehicle controls and Helicopter models - and yet in ArmA they've spoiled both IMO!!! (in OFP I could run a rally race with the mouse and a fast car - but in ArmA even driving a bloody humvee down the road is a pain!

[max power 21]

Currently, at least in 1.03, you centre the collective in order to maintain alt, lower it to go lower and raise it to climb. The collective and engine power seems to get less effective over a few hundred feet and it starts to climb slower but I think 50% still maintains alt. I haven't actually tested it tho. Usually when I'm flying over a couple of hundred meters I'm in full forward flight.

I personally don't have any problem with the control of the jeeps, trucks, tanks and other things. I'm not sure what you mean by spoiled their control. They really feel very similar to me. If anything, ArmA feels more like driving in real life.