RESEARCH - Non BIS made Helicopter Flight models, What do you want?

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

This is a general research question. It isn't a debate about the BIS flightmodels. Its an addon maker asking the community how they want their helicopters to handle.

There are several caveats to this discussion:

1. No BIS bashing, its pointless and i'm sick of it.
   
2. We can only change the sensitivity of the flight model - not totally rework it. Don't ask for or expect miracles.
   
3. The relative weight and size of the aircraft will be factored in. IE a Chinook wont be as agile as a Lynx.
   
4. No "Google experts" need reply. A lot of aircrew have already provided input into the addons and have vetted the information i'm using so please don't post BS.
   

So given those conditions here is the situation:

We have several helicopter projects nearing completion and i've had some interesting if conflicting feedback from several groups that have been beta testing various models.

• 
  Group A - are REAL pilots and aircrew that have or are serving in the RAF, British AAC and US Army.
  
• Group B - are gamers with a few private pilots thrown in.
  

Now most of Group A are happy with a balanced flight model that give the helicopter a nice stable flight model appropriate to the size and role of the aircraft. Normally this means its fairly easy to use and control but at the same time it needs to feel "right". (Its subjective I know but its hard to quantify a feeling)

To clarify and elaborate. Group A's professional opinion was that ArmA2's physics were insufficient to properly simulate realistic helicopter operations. IE the different performance due to altitude, cargo and fuel states, weapons loadouts and weather. And given the nature of most arma games, it would be safer to go with the middle ground that simulates a relatively heavy aircraft that usually exhibits a more robust and less agile flight model. However, as any pilot will tell you this often requires far more skill and technique to fly, which brings us back to realism vs game engine.

Now most people accept this argument but at the same time most gamers (i asked) seem to want a balls out sim. And that usually means a harder to fly flight model with exciting handling and high performance of an unloaded aircraft.

And before people chip in about how much nonsense and how unrealistic that is, take a look at the RAF Chinook Flight demo. They use an unloaded Chinook HC2 and it flies a display that would challenge 95% of the worlds helos. Yet stick 20 tonnes of cargo in it and it handles like a Number 12 Bus in Dulwich High St.

Group B seem to want all out simulation. They want the helicopters to be hard to fly. They should be twitchy and sensitive; Or at least how they imagine they should be.

Now I have 2 hours in a Robinson R22. I'm no helicopter pilot. But I do know helicopters are very sensitive creatures but I am quite happy to go with Group A's expert opinion. But I do see the excitement and fun in having something that you have to learn to fly properly and you can push your skills to the limit in game. so the question is:

What do you want?

Edited October 26, 2009 by RKSL-Rock

[Simon C 0]

I think the flight model should be as realistic as possible. It wouldn't do the realistic models and textures justice if the flight model was simplified, imho.

[andersson 285]

Agree, I prefer the feeling of flying a helicopter and to have different feel to them depending on model. For me its more than bringing me from A to B.

[Snake Man 401]

I voted hard to fly because I read that as "realistic". I have no problem with BIS flight model, it feels fine.

I would not want to fly anything simplified from the default ArmA controls.

What I want, is feel of the flight, feeling how the helicopter responds to my control movements. I don't want to have freight train on tracks flying through the air without much input from me.

Dunno if that feedback helps ;)

[muttly 10]

Is one of these helicopter projects that is near completion the apache ?:D

[ProfTournesol 956]

I like the current simple flight model (for helos, not planes) that BI provides. Apart from the irritating "into trees crashing" by AI.

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

I voted hard to fly because I read that as "realistic". I have no problem with BIS flight model, it feels fine.

I would not want to fly anything simplified from the default ArmA controls.

What I want, is feel of the flight, feeling how the helicopter responds to my control movements. I don't want to have freight train on tracks flying through the air without much input from me.

Dunno if that feedback helps ;)

When i say "hard". I mean harder than the BIS flight models. Most of the sim crowd ive talked to think they are too simple.

The hard option involves some very twitchy handling that requires some practice, patience and usually a good joystick (or a decent gaming mouse).

Is one of these helicopter projects that is near completion the apache ?:D

Might be.

[Supah 0]

I'd rather have fairly realistic but still flyable in a fun manner then total realisme that is no fun and almost unusable.

[PuFu 4591]

good initiative mate...

would go for a more difficult (than BIS) flight model...to the point it would require a learning curve, and some training/experience to master.

I don't fly with mouse and keyboard (i know it is possible, even though i can't), i prefer not to fly at all if i forget to plug in my joystick...

note that all i have flown so far was FS series, as well as glider iRL.

[tcp 10]

Will ground effect will added?

Will the tail rotor become more effective?

[due-_- 10]

personally i voted for difficult one... but its just me... what about the people who r new to this game but wanna use some mods/addons or such? maybe they cant even handle the bis one helis ;D (lol?) maybe both would be the best choice.. so u can learn with the easy handling and then go up to expert ones. Would be nice for servers too... maybe the fun one CTI servers would more likely use the easy ones and the "realistic" servers the difficult ones i dont know.

*edit* so is it u always flying over my house with that r22? -_- damn yellow "alarm clock" ;<

Edited October 26, 2009 by Due-_-

[lee_h._oswald 0]

That's not easy to answer, because we can't compare what exactly the differences are.

Generally I would say, make it as realistic as possible, it will be fun to learn the "new flight model".

Better would be a "demonstrator" addon, based on a bis helicopter(e.g.: AH-1)to get a feeling for what your plans are.

MfG Lee :)

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

Will ground effect will added?

Will the tail rotor become more effective?

Both of those issues are outside of the scope of this topic. They would require proper scripted solutions that right now i'm not even going to consider looking at. I'm trying to get a feel for what people want from the helicopters. I'm looking for more general answers and im not talking about adding anything to the current flight modelling. Just tweaking it to be a bit harder.

Although one aspect of a more sensitive/twitchy flight model would mean faster yaw (tail rotor) response. But the Game engine has a hard coded limit on the rudder authority so it wont affect it much.

Better would be a "demonstrator" addon, based on a bis helicopter(e.g.: AH-1)to get a feeling for what your plans are.

One of the reasons for posting a poll like this is to see if its worth investing my time on making a demonstrator and following the idea further.

... what about the people who r new to this game but wanna use some mods/addons or such? maybe they cant even handle the bis one helis ;D (lol?) maybe both would be the best choice.. so u can learn with the easy handling and then go up to expert ones.

Well part of the reason i get asked to make the helos harder to fly seems to be to discourage the idiots that don't know how to fly in the first place.

There is a huge backstory to all this Flightmodel saga that i wont bore you with but there is a theory that the harder a helo is to fly the less likely you are to have an unskilled pilot.

And I have considered the idea of trainers and "switchable flight models" (its possible just very very complicated to do in practice). But my theory is that if you can learn to fly the stock BIS aircraft then you can also take the time to learn the more "advanced" aircraft types too? So BIS Helos = the Trainers?

*edit* so is it u always flying over my house with that r22? -_- damn yellow "alarm clock" ;<

Sorry mate the one i used was Blue and Gold. Must be my mate Slippey, hes just bought a canary yellow one.

Edited October 26, 2009 by RKSL-Rock

[Daniel 0]

As someone that falls into Group B, i'd say go with what Group A say!

I'm not so much interested in it being difficult to fly, i'm more interested in helicopters behaving how they're supposed to, almost from an outside obsever's point of view if you get me.

I consider myself a good heli pilot in game despite using Mouse and Keyboard. :p

Tbh, havn't got too many issues with the choppers, more interested in your Harrier flight model...

Edited October 26, 2009 by Daniel

[Scrub 0]

I voted complex, Please and thank you! I Truly appreciate your efforts in this.

Your vote options however, need one more: "Complex flight model, wimpering in the pilot seat."

[Defunkt 431]

Group A! Aside from representing a well-informed opinion (pilots & aircrew), I (as a gamer) would ask, what is the point of introducing new assets that are not consistent with (and therefore do not stand alongside) those already in-game? That is unless you intend to modify the flight model for all of the defaults as well.

[suhsjake 1]

Would their be a way to create a simplified flight system for the AI to use while the actual players use the realistic model?

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

Group A! Aside from representing a well-informed opinion (pilots & aircrew), I (as a gamer) would ask, what is the point of introducing new assets that are not consistent with (and therefore do not stand alongside) those already in-game? That is unless you intend to modify the flight model for all of the defaults as well.

I have no intention of altering the default BIS aircraft.

And I don't see why new "assets" should be consistent with the stock BIS addons. I fail to see why helicopters with different flight models would not stand along side the existing aircraft? Nor how they could be inconsistent with the possible exception that most of them will be British. Which I suppose is totally inconsistent with the whole game if you want to be pedantic.

The point of this is to provide a more "realistic" and more enjoyable(?) experience for the "Sim" side of the community. To provide aircraft that are more challenging and entertaining to fly then the stock units. judging from the results so far most people seem to want this "inconsistency"

Would their be a way to create a simplified flight system for the AI to use while the actual players use the realistic model?

There would be no point. The AI seem to cope very well with the protoypes.

[lennard 447]

I love how the arma1 lynx flies.

Think that is pretty realistic isn't it?

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

I love how the arma1 lynx flies.

Think that is pretty realistic isn't it?

It was compromise to be honest. The original FM that I went with (and was 'approved' by an actual Lynx pilot) was dumbed down for keyboard players. Its something I regret if you

you can see the difference. It was very hard to fly properly but with practice it was a lot of fun and more interesting to use. But several of non RKSL/VCB beta testers complained long and hard about it. So much so that they convinced me that the average player wouldn't be able to fly it.

Ever since release I've had people emailing and PMing me about how unrealistic it was and how much more agile it should be. To offset that I did have 2 emails from AAC crew saying it was consistent with a fully loaded Lynx (roughly the right rate of turn without causing damage etc). But the collective and roll rates were too heavy. So I've been working with a few experts to find a balance. Interestingly the Lynx is the only helicopter that both of the latest test groups agreed on. They wanted it to be far more agile.

[due-_- 10]

So now that i read what is ur position of it..

I think u should make them more complicated than the stock BIS ones.... so anyone who needs more practise can use the BIS choppers and u will give us the difficult one. So the community first has to learn how to fly ur choppers to use them ;D a little challenge would be nice

And plz tell your friend Slippey dont fly over my house before 08:00 ;s

[raptor 6 actual 13]

I voted for more realistic. Though there are players in our community that make flying BIS helos ingame look like an art, right now, anyone can just jump in and take off.

Alot of squads I've seen, are trying to base their teams on realism, and would probably love to have a dedicated Flight section that is "trained" to operate the more realistic aircraft.

I always wanted to do a more complex idea of the OH-58D Kiowa, whereas you can operate the different switches and utilize the capabilities of that helicopter.

Good initiative mate, keep up the hard work.

[echo1 0]

Your poll is missing a "Do whatever the pilots said was right" option. I don't believe in having one that is unnecessarily difficult because some people perceive that difficulty = realism. Neither do I want one that is too dumbed down. I'd just like one that is as close to the real thing as is feasible. Thats my 2c.

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

Your poll is missing a "Do whatever the pilots said was right" option. I don't believe in having one that is unnecessarily difficult because some people perceive that difficulty = realism. Neither do I want one that is too dumbed down. I'd just like one that is as close to the real thing as is feasible. Thats my 2c.

I'm discussing this with some guys in Skype atm. I've probably done Group A, a disservice. I didn't really explain their position properly (which Chris(RN) and Jaime (US Army) ) are - im sure you will be happy to hear - now slagging me off for. I apologise, my intent was to simplify the argument and not overly complicate the poll with a in depth explanation of details of people arguments.

To clarify and elaborate. Group A's professional opinion was that ArmA2's physics were insufficient to properly simulate realistic helicopter operations. IE the different performance due to altitude, cargo and fuel states, weapons loadouts and weather. And given the nature of most arma games, it would be safer to go with the middle ground that simulates a relatively heavy aircraft that usually exhibits a more robust and less agile flight model. However, as any pilot will tell you this often requires far more skill and technique to fly, which brings us back to realism vs game engine.

Now most people accept this argument but at the same time most gamers (i asked) seem to want a balls out sim. And that usually means a harder to fly flight model with exciting handling and high performance of an unloaded aircraft.

And before people chip in about how much nonsense and how unrealistic that is, take a look at the RAF Chinook Flight demo. They use an unloaded Chinook HC2 and it flies a display that would challenge 95% of the worlds helos. Yet stick 20 tonnes of cargo in it and it handles like a Number 12 Bus in Dulwich High St.

Edited October 26, 2009 by RKSL-Rock

[andersson 285]

Ok, now I understand better the Group A and B. Didnt really make sense before.

I think the flightmodel should reflect some load. Imo that is a "balls out sim" more than flying unloaded aircrafts. A middle ground is what I would like to see.