nightsta1ker

If I may... Previous questions of this nature have gone unanswered by BIS developers. They have kept things pretty tight as to what they are, and are not doing, but I have been assured that, yes, they are watching, and that they have been paying very strong attention to input from the real world pilots. Whether or not any of that input is going to show positively in the game is yet to be seen. In other words, we're just going to have to wait.

I'm sorry if I hijacked your thread RUBIX. I felt strongly that more needed to be said. We can talk about behavioral issues all day long, but if we are not seeing them fixed, then it's kind of pointless, don't you think? In any case, ocramweb has a point. We are not too far from release, and perhaps BIS has a few aces up their sleeves yet. For the record, I did not mention anything like realistic ATC comms, airspace, things of that nature. I do not expect any of that as I am well aware this is not a simulation. However, I do think decent flight dynamics is important. 4 in 1, I find your remark to be typical of the "static" I mentioned in my earlier post about pilots doing our best to "keep it real" on this forum (pun intended). At no point do I feel my expectations or suggestions have been unrealistic within the confines of a fun and playable game, nor have I at any point expected "perfection". I think the vast majority of us know that this game will have it's limitations, but we are all hoping for some basics. Decent flight physics, combined with some missions to use them with. One without the other is OK. We already have several examples of that. BOTH would be phenominal. RUBIX... Once again. Sorry for hijacking your thread. That's enough from me.

Alot of what you mentioned is indeed very trivial, and like I said, I am not expecting a perfect simulation. Just some basic, decent flight modeling. And yes, it IS possible. I spent the last 4 months working with the developer of the Dreamfoil 206 for X-plane on his new R22BII. It is absolutely amazing how close his flight dynamics and systems are to the real thing. Is it perfect? No. X-plane has it's limitations too. But is it good enough to be very convincing? Absolutely. And I think with some focus, BIS could make a convincing flight model too. Does it need to be perfect? No. It just needs to be convincing.

http://rainman.tv/index_files/rainman_helisim.htm These are in the mail. I should have them by the end of next week. Cost me a cool 2 grand :eek:. I plan on using them for training students using X-plane and the Dreamfoil R-22 that I played a role in helping to develop. The combination should be very very realistic, and in this tough economy, I think helping students save money on flight training and maximize their skills in a low cost environment will be a good move. I might be able to lure a couple of students away from the bigger flight schools that are all about keeping rotors turning to generate more $$. They may also make Take On a much nicer experience too! ;)

After re-reading the post above, I wanted to add that my concerns that the game should cater to pilots over the general public are not meant to sound elitist. Every one of the members of this forum who has voiced their thoughts of how this game should be is entitled to their opinion, and their opinion is just as valid as anyone elses, including mine. I am not trying to say that as a pilot, my opinion is more valid than anyone elses. I am only trying to make the point that BIS has stated that they intend to provide a realistic (within the confines of a game) experience in the life of a career civil helicopter pilot, and in order to do that, they would need to place some extra attention and emphasis on real pilot feedback. Judging by the note from PurePassion, perhaps they have been, and maybe the Community Preview does not live up to what the actual game has in store for all of us, but it has been all we have to go by. I just want to make sure that everyone understands where I am coming from. Please put the broken bottles down!

To clarify to some of the others who wanted to know specifically what I meant by my comment: Since this project was first announced, several real world pilots, myself included, have been very active on this forum giving suggestions and advice to help make this game all it can be. There was some static with the gaming community, some of whom thought realism should be sub-par to gameplay (playability and arcade style fun). Helicopters are challenging. They require alot of training, talent, skill, attention to detail, and most of all practice, to master. After reviewing and seeing reviews of the Community Preview releases, and seeing the changes that were implemented based on general feedback from the community, it started to seem to me that more attention was being paid to the general community than to the real pilots that were trying desperately to provide feedback and implement changes that were important to us. Changes that regarded the flight dynamics. After seeing several updates that did very little to improve the dynamics, and in some cases hurt them (alot of this due to complaints and suggestions being made by non pilots), I started to grow weary and stopped monitoring progress. Hovercontrol staff member Cris Gaeth (aka Panther) noted that they would be reviewing the demo soon. So I popped on here to see if any good progress had been made with the flight profile. After reading some of the comments made by other pilots, I started to worry. Thank you for the update PurePassion. I am glad you guys are going to implement all of those things. I just have one question, and it probably won't be answered until I buy the game when it is released and find out for myself: Will it all work the way it is supposed to? Will it feel right? Do your models fly like real helicopters? Your Community Preview was on the right track, but there were some elements that were lacking, and I was starting to get the impression that the flight model was not going anywhere. I just hope for everyones sake that it all feels right. I'm not going to be criticising because a temperature or pressure gauge is not reading exactly how I think it should, or maybe it takes off with 60% torque when it would really probably be 75 or 80%, they are fictional models. But helicopters all fly pretty similarly. Some are more sensitive than others, some sluggish, some fast, some slow, but they all have the same forces acting on them, and so their behavior is pretty predictable regardless of type or size (there are a few exceptions, but only a few). I was just voicing my concern aloud. I have been very anxious to see a game like this come out for a long time. I have even had lengthy daydream discussions about it with other pilot/gamers. When this project was announced it felt like the Holy Grail had been revealed to me. It would be very disappointing to be let down because the flight model was unrealistic.

I passed my checkride on Sunday. I am now a certified helicopter instructor. So... who wants to take lessons? :D

I really hope they get this stuff ironed out. They need to listen to the real pilots. They have championed realism since they announced this project, but I am worried they are catering more to the Arma crowd than the pilot/simulator crowd. I think the game will sell more copies if they listen to us than if they don't.

My experience with shipboard ops taught me that the rotor brake was used primarily to keep time on deck low as each aircraft was limited to only 30 minutes on deck before it either needed to be airborne or placed in the hanger deck. Gotta make room for the next round of inbound or outbound aircraft.

Yes, basically they can only sue for infringement on name and trademarks. As I said, the reason is unknown, but they have addressed the issue and stated that they are not changing the models to be more realistic. Whatever their reason, the decision has been made.

This is one subject that has been thoroughly done to death. Nothing against your remark, you didn't know. Just to recap, For reasons that have been speculated but are unknown to the public BIS has decided to not include accurate visual models of real helicopters. The best and most likely to be true guess is probably that they are afraid of copyright infringement. In any case, we are going to have to wait for the modders to create accurate aircraft after the game releases.

I have determined that realistic autorotations in the preview are not possible. Hopefully this is ironed out before the final release.

My response to that is: Amount of lift with collective input varies with model of helicopter. Flying the H269C/S300C requires much more control movement than an R22, just as one example. So, I would have to say, it's relative. Also, perhaps your control sensitivities are not set properly. Depending on the setup different users may experience different things. ---------- Post added at 11:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:45 PM ---------- Then again, you could be completely right. Not something I noticed as being too unrealistic in my test flying though.

I think what he meant is things like knobs on the altimiter have no effect on the indication etc. The gauges "work" but only to a limited degree. Dragon: Keep in mind that restrictions of ArmA OA are limiting what can be demonstrated in the preview and some of these issues may not be present in the final version of the game.

Yeah thanks... I'm so close, yet so far away, lol!

Considering that BIS's maps for ArmA have been fictional, and at least one of the maps for TOH is going to be fictional, I began to wonder what to expect from the Seattle area map. I live in Olympia and fly out of KBFI (Boeing Field) in Seattle as well as KS50 (Auburn Muni) just south of Seattle and know the area well. I presume the downtown skyline will be accurate, but what about the surronding environs and airports? I am curious, will KBFI, KSEA, KS50, KRNT all be there in full glory? Is there any comment yet on where the fictional base will be located for the game? Will it be at one of these hubs, or will it be stand alone somewhere else? I guess what I am asking is, what amount of liberty is being taken on the Seattle portion of the game? As a local, I will be sensitive to innacuracies of the area. Any comment from the Devs?

I've never flown a NOTAR helicopter, so I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that NOTAR helicopters had WEAK pedal control and required MORE pedal input by the pilot. I know about coandă effect, and thus raising collective means less left pedal required and that this is what you meant, but in foreward flight I have heard that the aircraft is not as manueverable due to less pedal effectiveness. A U.S. Border Patrol pilot I knew told me that he was thoroughly worn out after just an hour of flying the MD600N. He hated it and hoped they would replace them. As of now the entired Border Patrol fleed of 600Ns are in storage. I have however heard that the 520Ns are alot better. Glendale PD in SoCal has been operating them for years with no issues and they love them.

That's what I thought he meant. Peaked my interest. And by the way, Mcdonnell Douglas is no more. Now it's MD Helicopters, which is another entirely different company that bought the rights to the airframe from Boeing who absorbed Mcdonnell Douglas. The company is not doing so hot, aside from the fact that the 500 series and even the 520N are amazing and versatile helicopters, not many are being sold. And the company is losing millions in lawsuits over the 600N which has an abyssimal accident rate. Nearly half of the 600 fleet has either crashed or been grounded since the aircraft's inception.

What do you mean by this?

Good catch Max Power, I couldn't have put it better myself.

Translating tendency DOES provide a rolling moment to the right, but only if the center of the tail rotor is lower than the main rotor hub (thats why some of the larger helicopters have the tail rotor on a vertical stabilizer, the reduction in rolling moment due to translating tendency is worth the extra weight in gearboxes and driveshafts). The relationship between the the rolling moment of the tail rotor and the plane of rotation of the main rotor is called roll/couple. I don't know much more about it than that, but it's worth looking into, I can probably find a better explanation in one of my heavier books. A good example of this is the right roll that occurs in a low G condition in the R22. When the rotor is unloaded in low G, the rolling moment from the tail rotor causes a rapid roll to the right. This is the primary reason why low G is so dangerous for helicopters with a teetering hub: if the pilot corrects for the right roll with left cyclic the unloaded rotor will bump the mast and or strike the tailboom. That little scenario would ruin anyones day.

I personally would love to see more of this implemented. It was addressed at the very beginning. I am not sure if it will be more advanced in the final version, but don't be surprised if what you see is what you get.

I beleive that right roll in the hover is an attempt at modeling translating tendency, however, it is way too extreme and does not seem to dissipate with forward airspeed as it should. On Dissymmetry of lift. As I have mentioned in another thread, dissymmetry of lift is caused by the forward airspeed of the aircraft adding airspeed to the advancing side of the rotor disc and subtracting airspeed from the retreating side of the disc. If nothing were done mechanically to solve this issue then helicopters would be limited to stationary hovering. Lucky for us Juan de la Cierva found the solution: Flapping hinges. Allowing the additional lift from additional airspeed on the advancing side to flap the blade up, and then down on the retreating side. This changes the Angle of Attack of the blade so that the rising advancing blade is creating LESS lift, and the retreating blade is creating MORE lift, despite the significant difference in airspeed. The end result is the lift vector is balanced on both sides of the disc. Ergo: No rolling moment in forward flight. At least, until you get the helicopter up to an airspeed where the flapping hinge can no longer compensate for the difference in airspeed, at which point, you would experience a vibration and oscillations followed by simultaneous roll to the left (on counterclockwise turning rotor systems) and a pitch up of the nose. This is called retreating blade stall, when the retreating blade side has lost so much airspeed due to the forward motion of the helicopter that it can no longer produce lift, and is the limiting factor in helicopter airspeed. Questions are welcome. Comments will be tolerated as long as they are intelligent in nature. :D More to come as I have time. ---------- Post added at 02:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:44 AM ---------- OK, so I tested out the latest update. Here are my thoughts. On the plus side, the obliteration of the null zone did a world of good. Now I can much more easily feel and see the flight characteristics for what they are rather than constantly over correcting my inputs and chasing the stupid thing all over the place. Now that I can accurately feel the flight dynamics, lets address some issues. Pedal control is WAAAAAY too light. Small inputs should yield rapid turns. Though the helicopter will pitch very quickly with input, the actual ground movement is slow to respond. A real helicopter will slide left, right, foreward and back with almost imperceptible pitch changes. The helicopter should be moving over the ground alot more than it is pitching around its axis. Please decrease the volume and increase the rate of the vibration occuring at ETL. It's a nice touch, but it does not achieve the intent if it doesnt look and feel right. I have said it before, the vibration experienced at ETL is more HEARD than felt, you would be better simulating the PANEL vibrating along with a rattling noise than having the whole helicopter shaking. It just doesn't look or feel right at all. What on earth is that right rolling tendency in forward flight? As the helicopter moves into ETL an odd thing happens called Transverse Flow Effect, the front part of the rotor is moving into clean air and the the flow into the rotor system is more horizontal than vertical, however, the induced flow at the back of the rotor is increased and the flow is more vertical than horizontal, the result is a difference in angle of attack (and thus, lift) between the front and back of the disk, not entirely unlike what is occurring during dissymmetry of lift in forward flight, though for completely different reasons. Basically, the front part of the disk is in ETL and the back part is not. The effect of this is the vibration I mentioned earlier, as well as a pitch up and slight right roll of the helicopter. The pilot must push through this in order to gain airspeed. Once the ENTIRE rotor system is through ETL this effect goes away, and rather quickly. There should be no right or left rolling tendency in foreward flight unless VNE is exceeded. Rate of turn in forward flight vs amount of bank angle is way off. A smaller bank should yield a higher turn rate than what is simulated. No pedal input should be necessary to aid in turns in forward flight. It IS definitely starting to feel like a helicopter, just with some unusual behavior. Good job gentleman and please keep improving! Listen to what the pilots are all saying, I keep reading about the same issues over and over again. Please watch my youtube videos. I have real helicopter footage as well as some very good helicopter simulator footage, the most recent being the DreamFoil R22 in alpha testing for X-Plane. This thing flies like a real R22. Watch carefully how it behaves compared to the TOH model.

OK. I see your point. As smart as I would like to think I am, I can be dense sometimes. I get what you are saying. I was skimming the thread and my mind was filling in the blanks. After reading some of the posts a little more carefully I realized that you were not complaining about it being too difficult to control with a keyboard, but merely wanting a more fluid rudder control function FOR a keyboard. I apologize.

I did no such thing. Now you are putting words in my mouth. What I am saying is that my opinion is that you shouldn't be begging a "realistic" flying helicopter when you don't even have a joystick. Like I said in my first post: Helicopters are not flown with a keyboard and mouse, so trying to fly one with a keyboard and mouse is not very realistic. I did not complain about their tank controls for ArmA being "unrealistic" as I do not have real tank controls. I have actually driven a tank and I don't think they are modeled correctly in the game, however, I did not say BOO about it until now and only to make a point. Point being, if you are not going to bother with proper controls, don't ask for realism. You are cutting yourself short on the realism part by refusing to get a joystick. Now, do I feel BI should implement some sort of anti-torque function to make it easier for keyboard users? Sure! I have no problems with that. Just keep in mind, whatever they come up with will not be "realistic". Realism to me is having pedals, a cyclic and a collective in my hands. Even a joystick falls somewhat short in that category. It's all relative, but the farther away from real controls you get, the less realistic. Does that make ANY sense to you?