Helicopter/aircraft improvements.

[buznee 0]

So far I have been really impressed with the handling characteristics of the ARMA helicopters.

There are a couple little things that bother me that are easy fixes.

First off, The collective takes a bit too long to respond, especially from takeoff. Almost all helicopters both turbine and piston are designed to operate at constant main rotor speed. Lift production is controlled by feathering (changing the pitch of the main rotor). Doing this is very fast therefore a change in climb rate should be more responsive than it currently is (even though ofcourse it is dependent upon mass since everything has inertia).

Also I see that no matter what, when on the ground, the dust blows around when the main rotor is turning. In reality in a collective pitch helicopter, this only occurs when the rotor is producing lift. Anotherwords it should kick more dust as the collective is pulled up higher. This would give a very cool experience in arma, you can tell when the pilot is starting lift off when you see the dust begin to kick. If possible you can even make the dust particle size and velocity proportional to the collective setting, just as it is currently dependent upon altitude, since downwash effects "dustkicking" increasingly at lower altitudes and ultimately goes away at higher altitudes.

Also there should be a saturation point in which too much collective is added and the rpm governer cannot hold the rpm therefore the tq goes to redline and the rpm begins to drop. This causes the pilot to input lots of rudder to counteract the torque from the main rotor. I know this is not supposed to be a helicopter sim but just things that would definately give the wow factor. A simple thing such as when you turn the engines on, you have to have the collective at the low setting if not the heli will not reach operating rpm and if you stay in the red line for tq you will overheat the engine and it will fail. This is something that definately can happen in a helicopter, it would be as simple as a tq dial showing green and red arcs, as long as you dont pull the collective to max, keep it in the 80-90% range then your engine will be fine. If you hit red, you'll start to shake, rpms will drop and if you dont bring it back down soon enough your engine will fail and you will have to autorotate.

One last thing in the flying characteristics is rudder becomes almost useless at moderate to high forward speeds. Eventhough a helicopter has a vertical tail it still has significantly more rudder control at forward speeds than what is currently modeled. This would allow fishtailing approaches in which the fuselage can be used as an "airbrake" for much better decelerations and you can use the cyclic in the side to side direction to slow the helicopter down and touch one skid at a time.

Being able to autorotate after tail rotor failure would be very cool too.

Another thing that helicopters have is translational lift. This is the main reason helicopters have wheels. At forwards speeds not too far from hover, the helicopter requires significantly less power to fly than in hover. Therefore allowing it to carry more loads. So if loads can be modeled in ARMA, you can overload your helicopter and still be able to takeoff by doing a rolling takeoff on the ground, and then land either a bit hard or do a rolling landing.

There are many more little things that can be improved but by just improving these items, it would definately make the helicopter experience much more enjoyable.

On a side note, for the harrier, adjustable nozzle control and linear power for any aircraft for that matter would be much better. It feels that currently most aircraft dont have very linear power with throttle control. Seems you add poewr and it goes from 0% to 100% and then it sorta moves around if you try to find a happy medium. It cant be that hard to just make it linear power. Then just change thrust output to downward, maybe helicopter flying characteristics when the nozzles are pointed downward and you can use throttle to control decent rate. This would be much more realistic. You could also keep the autohover for people that perfer that.

If you guys have any other things for improvements in realism post!

[max power 21]

Welcome to the forum. You seem like quite an expert. Many of your suggestions I think go well beyond the scope of the game, but all information like this is welcome. There are already threads on this subject, though, and you should search before starting a new thread. The mods in this forum are quite strict.

[Vernon 0]

I think quite a few of your suggestions are indeed a bit beyond the scope of a combat sim and more appropriate for a flight sim. On the other hand, anything that increases the value of a player who can actually fly peeps around is great.

Of all of your excellent suggestions one is sorely and immediately needed: autorotation.

Please BIS, I don't want a few hits in the engine to be a death sentence for everyone in my chopper. I've tried it dozens of times in the editor, and as other mentioned in other threads, it's near impossible to put a disabled chopper down without exploding on impact.

[FAF_DRAKO 1]

First, they would need to separate the two controls. In this game, both the Collective and Throttle seem to go hand in hand. Hell, I'd be happy if they would make the Rudder a bit more responsive since they have already improved both Pitch and Roll response. (OFP Helicopters were to easy to fly)

Welcome to the forum... and my request as well.

[frederf 0]

More responsive collective: yup

More yaw authority: yup

Linear jet thrust: yup

Transitional lift: yup

The jet thrust is speed-based not thrust-based, which is really weird.

[Lor 0]

Wow, you -do- seem to be very knowledgeable on the subject. This is one of the first posts regarding flight model improvements that I mostly agree with.

Really, I would love to see any of these implemented (except perhaps the rudder control improvements - I really don't see any problem with rotary/fixed wing rudders at the moment =D) - however, as said before, ArmA really isn't a flight sim, and so I won't hold it against BIS if they don't implement highly realistic things such as these.

In any case, good post, and good suggestions!

[LeftSkidLow 1]

I think quite a few of your suggestions are indeed a bit beyond the scope of a combat sim and more appropriate for a flight sim. On the other hand, anything that increases the value of a player who can actually fly peeps around is great.

Of all of your excellent suggestions one is sorely and immediately needed: autorotation.

Please BIS, I don't want a few hits in the engine to be a death sentence for everyone in my chopper. I've tried it dozens of times in the editor, and as other mentioned in other threads, it's near impossible to put a disabled chopper down without exploding on impact.

You can auto if you immediately reduce your airspeed to about 110 kmph and bottem the collective. Just ride it down at that speed all the way to about 10 ft off the ground and go full collective, DO NOT FLARE!!! it does nothing in this game. Just slide it in at 110, I know it feels way wrong but its the only way it works and you will damage the helicopter, so if its already badly damaged you are better off ejecting.

To the original poster, you are right about the collective and rotor wash at flat pitch. And damn it how many people does it take to convince them you have tail rotor authority at higher airspeeds, just tonight I was crossing midfield over an airport and I flicked on the landing then used the pedals to aim the light and find the windsock. The other stuff you mentioned is going a little far though, ETL.... meh maybe, overtorque and overtemp is really going too far though.

[Vernon 0]

Fixed in 1.08!

Air.pbo

* Ah1Z fire geometry fix

* 2D optics models enlarged for 16:9 aspect

* config.cpp

o set damageResistance

o balanced helicopter armor and hitzones, so they survive emergency landing but remain vulnerable to AA gunfire

* Tweeked texture of 2D optics

After testing, I can confirm that crash landing survivability is greatly improved! You'll probably lose the engine but at least the chopper won't explode. Excellent work BIS - Thank you!!!

[apex_predator 0]

I was noticing today after the patch that the reason for the abominable lack of yaw control seems to be that (like the center of gravity placed above the rotor cone that was just fixed) the yaw axis is not the center of gravity of the helo. The yaw axis is at the trail camera some twenty feet or more behind the helo. Moving the axis to the CG may not correct all of the problem but I think it'd certainly be a start.

[max power 21]

I was noticing today after the patch that the reason for the abominable lack of yaw control seems to be that (like the center of gravity placed above the rotor cone that was just fixed) the yaw axis is not the center of gravity of the helo. The yaw axis is at the trail camera some twenty feet or more behind the helo. Moving the axis to the CG may not correct all of the problem but I think it'd certainly be a start.

What are you even talking about? That's not even remotely true.

[apex_predator 0]

Now, I'm not precisely sure what misbegotten idea tumbled out of your malformed head and made you believe that you could talk to me with the same degree of respect that you give your weekly lap dance date; but I'd strongly suggest that you slap a civil friggin' tone in your mouth before you address me again.

[maddogx 13]

Now, I'm not precisely sure what misbegotten idea tumbled out of your malformed head and made you believe that you could talk to me with the same degree of respect that you give your weekly lap dance date; but I'd strongly suggest that you slap a civil friggin' tone in your mouth before you address me again.

I would suggest you do the same.

And plaintiff is right, the yaw axis is not behind the chopper at all.

[apex_predator 0]

I give what I get and don't recall asking for your opinion MadDog, but if you obviously well-bred gentlemen will kindly pull in your (mysteriously) hyperactive attack responses I'll post a video of what I'm talking about.

[maddogx 13]

I give what I get and don't recall asking for your opinion MadDog, but if you obviously well-bred gentlemen will kindly pull in your (mysteriously) hyperactive attack responses I'll post a video of what I'm talking about.

I'll try to overlook the unnecessary parts of your post and stick to the core:

Please be so kind and indulge us with a video.

[apex_predator 0]

It'll be available in a few minutes at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgNrQqGYroo

Note that in near hover the point of rotation seems to be nearer the center of the rotor cone and the camera rotates with the helo. At speed the point of rotation is the camera, as if the body of the helo is attached to the camera by a rod. Regardless if I am right or not about where the point of rotation is or how it is calculated, the helo is clearly not rotating on a central point that runs through the rotor hub.

[Mehmehmeh 0]

I am afraid that your link does not lead, at least me, to an ArmA heli movie clip?

[max power 21]

Now, I'm not precisely sure what misbegotten idea tumbled out of your malformed head and made you believe that you could talk to me with the same degree of respect that you give your weekly lap dance date; but I'd strongly suggest that you slap a civil friggin' tone in your mouth before you address me again.

Flamebaiting is wrong, Apex. Very wrong. And you're also wrong about the axis of rotation. Ie. It's not even remotely true. I'm not exactly sure how I could broach the subject of you being wrong to suit your apparently delicate sensibilities but perhaps next time just read the words on the screen and put in nothing else.

[whisper 0]

I give what I get and don't recall asking for your opinion MadDog, but if you obviously well-bred gentlemen will kindly pull in your (mysteriously) hyperactive attack responses I'll post a video of what I'm talking about.

Wow, you overreact this way anytime someone dare not agree with you? Toughy toughy!

[kestrel7e7 0]

your weekly lap dance date

To me, that's a complement!

If the helicopter's yaw axis was behind the airframe at speed then it would lead to extremely strange sideways slipping behaviour... but I've never seen this. Nice try though.

[max power 21]

To be perfectly honest, I think that they had it correct before they changed the roll axis. I was just watching some videos... which is the way that Maruk or Suma was convinced... and now I'm convinced too. It seems like most helicopters do rotate from some point near to the rotor mast- on the kamov especially!

[maddogx 13]

To be perfectly honest, I think that they had it correct before they changed the roll axis. I was just watching some videos... which is the way that Maruk or Suma was convinced... and now I'm convinced too. It seems like most helicopters do rotate from some point near to the rotor mast- on the kamov especially!

I think an intermediate point between what we have now and what it used to be would be perfect, but I'm ok with the current flight model.

As for what apex was talking about (his video is still not available), a helicopters yaw axis is not equal to the rotor axis, unless the helicopter is hovering completely still - and even then, not in all cases.

If the helicopter is moving at high speed, it will fly very much like a plane, due to aerodynamics - especially regarding the tail fin. At increasing speeds, the tail rotor is less able to turn the helicopter against the aerodynamic pressure, so the pilot must either slow down or turn using bank and pitch control, much like it is implemented in the game.

[max power 21]

Right, I agree, but it still pivots at the rotor hub. To be clear about all that axis talk up there, picture a helicopter drawn from the top. When you apply tail rotor collective, it will pivot around an axis that is at the main rotor hub- the same axis that the rotors turn around. Apex is saying that he thinks that the helicopter actually rotates around an axis located at the camera. This would give an effect as if the helicopter was being swung like a bat. Clearly, this is not the case and never has been.

[.COMmunist 0]

Sounds like a bunch or helicopter experts here. Can I ask you guys a question? How much similarity do you see between the real combat guided AT missiles attack and the way it is done in Arma? I seem to struggle with hitting moving targets with AT missiles from a chopper in Arma. What's the trick there?

[max power 21]

Sounds like a bunch or helicopter experts here. Can I ask you guys a question? How much similarity do you see between the real combat guided AT missiles attack and the way it is done in Arma? I seem to struggle with hitting moving targets with AT missiles from a chopper in Arma. What's the trick there?

The trick is to aim the missiles at the target. If you have too much angle off, they tend to fishtail all over and miss. With the kamov and the vikhr, they tend to like to spiral (like in real life) but they always miss when they do that (not like real life). If you aim the pipper directly at the target (ie. aim the helicopter above the target), they won't wiggle around and will fly directly to the target without any of the spiral nonsense.

The missiles in ArmA work nothing like missiles in real life. The missiles in ArmA have a much shorter range, apparently, and the way they target is complete fantasy. In reality, the hellfire must have a laser illuminating or a radar illuminating their target (either from the helicopter or someone else) and then take a really high path and drop on the target from above. The TOW missiles simply try to stay at the centre of the reticle, so you must constantly aim at what you're trying to hit until the missile gets there. The vikhr is a laser beam riding missile that looks backwards at the helicopter to see where it is in relation to the laser beam... You also must constantly aim at the target with those ones too.

[frederf 0]

Has anyone played with the missile maneuverability to see if a more "sluggish"-turning missile hits more often? The missiles in ArmA by default can turn 180 degrees on a dime, might explain all the fishtailing they do.