Notes and Thoughts From a Real Pilot

[An-225 0]

Hi everyone, this is my first post here at the BI Forums.

I have real flight experience, 1 hour 5 minutes flying a Cessna 152. I also have thousands of hours combined while flying FS2004/FSX and Lock On: Modern Air Combat.

I think, the flight model in Armed Assault is an exceptionally good one, especially considering it is a combined arms simulator, but it does have a few weak points.

I have thoroughly tested the flight model, and have compiled a list of things that should be improved upon for ArmA 2.

Here is my list:

First off, not related to the flight model, the control setup (thank you for the multiple controller support in ArmA 2).

Currently, the throttle control is setup in such a manner, that it is either on or off. The throttle should be manual, so that the degree of thrust can be controlled.

Another major problem is, that if the throttle is idle, it automatically deploys the speed brakes for the airplane. The throttle should ONLY control the throttle, and the spoilers should be a different command.

That is all that is truly wrong with the control setup. Here are some things I observed in the flight dynamics.

~ each aircraft class (rotary/fixed wing) feels like it only has one flight model. The Harrier responds to control input, as if it were the Fullback or the Thunderbolt II. The same can be said for the UH-60 being compared to any other helicopter.

The aicraft require different roll and pitch rates, as at the moment, they just have different stall/thrust parameters. Control surface deflection is almost exactly the same for each aircraft.

~ When flying a plane in ArmA, as long as the airplane is pitching upward, it is losing speed. It doesn't matter if it is pitching up one degree (LITERALLY), while flying at a medium altitude, it starts losing speed if you try to climb. In short, ArmA 2 should allow aircraft to climb without immediately losing speed.

~ The glide ratio needs to be decreased in helicopters. If I drop the collective to absolute idle, the helicopter should more or less drop like a stone.

With the above said, the effectiveness of the main rotor blades needs to be increased. It takes several seconds for a helo to climb or descend right now, and this makes flying Nap of the Earth EXTREMELY difficult.

~ Throttle response time needs to be increased for both airplanes and helicopters. That said, it is difficult to tell whether the slow descent/ascent rate mentioned above is a product of this, or the rotor effectiveness and glide ratio, so I would rate the above as more important.

~ Tail rotor effectiveness needs a SERIOUS tweak. Currently, flying at 50km/h imposes moderate yaw dampening. The point at which the helicopter starts to experience yaw dampening, is actually quite close to overspeed, in real life.

In fact, there have been several accidents due to LTE (loss of tail-rotor effectiveness), which have mainly occurred at low speed.

I hope BIS can make some use of these suggestions, and I wish Maruk all the best with Armed Assault 2. Looking forward to flying the Mi-24, V-22 and KC-130.

An-225

[max power 21]

~ When flying a plane in ArmA, as long as the airplane is pitching upward, it is losing speed. It doesn't matter if it is pitching up one degree (LITERALLY), while flying at a medium altitude, it starts losing speed if you try to climb. In real life, only when the plane exceeds 20 degrees, it may start to lose speed. In short, ArmA 2 should allow aircraft to climb without immediately losing speed.

Nothing can generate energy out of nothing. The actual behaviour of the aircraft in a climb is dependent on its engine power and wing design for a given air pressure. This 20 degrees figure is total fantasy. Barring any force a drag, there is a 1 to 1 correlation between the amount of kinetic energy you lose and the amont of potential energy you gain in a climb. Climbing 1 degree would cause a small loss of kinetic energy and a small gain of potential energy over time.

[dm 9]

I have real flight experience, 1 hour 5 minutes flying a Cessna 152.

You might want to get a few more hours on a few more types before claiming to be "a real pilot"

That being said, most of the points - aside for the one already addressed - I agree with...

[sabre4809 0]

Quote[/b] ]~ each aircraft class (rotary/fixed wing) feels like it only has one flight model. The Harrier responds to control input, as if it were the Fullback or the Thunderbolt II. The same can be said for the UH-60 being compared to any other helicopter.

Disagree with this bit(or misunderstand), the LB and UH60 handle extremely differently to each other and the others.

[An-225 0]

My apologies, plaintiff. My wording was sparse, and criptic, and you are completely right.

I intended that line, to be an example, of when such power loss occurs, rather than saying "power loss occurs at a hard figure of 20 degrees pitch up." Power loss is highly dependent on AoA, and other variables, such as the type of engines used and altitude of the plane.

My mistake on the context of the line, in all my time simming, I've never encountered such behaviour, and it was difficult for me to place it into (appropriate) words.

Sabre tooth, it might just be my control set up then. I could feel minute differences between each type, but not much else.

DM; I just figured, 'ah, what the hell, I have some experience.'

[Inkompetent 0]

It's easy math for losing energy when climbing. If you increase your AOA with 1 degree you will lose energy and subsequently fly slower and slower, unless you add a proportionate amount of energy to accelerate - i.e. adding more thrust. This is where the problem in ArmA is, since we can't really fine-tune the thrust to compensate for fine changes in AOA.

I do agree on the other points though.

[LJF 0]

~ Tail rotor effectiveness needs a SERIOUS tweak. Currently, flying at 50km/h imposes moderate yaw dampening. The point at which the helicopter starts to experience yaw dampening, is actually quite close to overspeed, in real life.

Very true, you can still fly a chopper in ArmA when the tail rotor is completely disabled, which is a little weak. I hope this is fixed so we can have some "blackhawk down" moments in ArmA2

[sk3pt 0]

you can still fly a chopper in ArmA when the tail rotor is completely disabled, which is a little weak.

Actually, you can fly a helicopter in real life without the tail rotor, but you have to fly fast.

[An-225 0]

Thank you to all who support my suggestions.

I have noticed something very odd; while flying the A-10, I was able to gain speed while climbing. I went back and checked the Su-34, and it could also gain speed.

However, this was not the case the first time around, where two afterburning AL-34 engines could not support my Su-34s climb at one degree pitch up.

As such, my comment on this subject in my opening post should be disregarded.

However, power loss is exponential, while flying the Su-34 with max throttle, I abruptly pitched the nose down - and it LOST speed, before regaining it. This is DEFINITELY not right.

The above begins another point on which the flight dynamics could be improved, power loss and glide ratio need to be adjusted.

EDIT:

I have now noticed in the Russian video, the helicopters seem to have increased agility, with the MI-17s bobbing up and down at will. This is a step in the right direction (even if Mi-17s do handle like "flying dumptrucks" ).

[[aps]gnat 28]

I abruptly pitched the nose down - and it LOST speed, before regaining it. This is DEFINITELY not right.

No, that is not right.

If you'd done a nice slow over-the-top, then sure, speed should increase on the horizontal and down pitch.

But with any aircraft, it you throw it into a turn, a hard turn, be it pitch up or down, or yaw left or right, the airframe is no longer in the optimal profile vs direction of travel and hence the extra drag blows off your speed .... until the airframe lines up properly again with direction of travel.

Roll action can be a little different. If you neutralise a change of heading when doing an sharp aileron roll (part or full) by using the elevator (usually down) you generally don't loose much if any speed. Its only when you use a part roll to execute a sharp turn / change of heading would you loose speed.

Yep, I've flown many hours in cessnas and gliders, and a few hours in small choppers.

[An-225 0]

I understand that energy is lost due to high alpha maneuvers, and my maneuver was not all that different from a Pugachev's Cobra, only going down.

Where the plane got the elevator authority to pitch down that hard, I do not know.

The plane's entire fuselage in this instance acted like a spoiler, and the plane slowed down by 50km/h, in an extremely short amount of time (less than 2 seconds) which does not seem all that natural.

Rather than "DEFINITELY not right" (I often exaggerate. ), I think this behaviour encountered in ArmA is (also) an exaggerated form of the real thing.

P.S: lucky buggar, I'm stuck with TPG, while you have iinet.