borchi_2b

Hi guys, I wanted to share this article with you, cause we decided to work closely with some of the known social media guys out there now and then. The following link is just one of a few social media news. More is planed and more exciting for the customers. Stay tuned as it was already mentioned in the article, nice stuff is planned and yes, sometimes I have to pinch myself to remind myself that I am not dreaming. But here we go, the article: https://www.helisimmer.com/previews/quick-preview-polychop-dcs-gazelle-update/

The SA342L never had he option for NVG use IRL neither had the Mystral version such features. Only the 342M recieved night vision options

@AtomMrav: To me it looks as if you pull the stick back. the Gazelle would never, even with SAS on in DCS level the nose back to normal that fast. Sorrry, this can only be achieved with stick inputs that fast as seen in yur video. SAS wil level the nose if you do not reset the nose additude with magnetic, or cooliehat trim.

fictional and not going to happen. Sorry. the weapon loadouts are as they are and only one last add will be happening to the Gazelle in terms of weapons, but non of the listed.

@ all: please stand by and do not expect an answer 24 hours after a question was raised. Thanks. Updates are planned and have to be done but it is more caused by the conversion to 2.5 For me the Gazelle got terminated when I hit something yesterday. Please make sure that your helicopter is not set to immortal, cause your rotor should break at least on impact. Thanks

Well the thread titel indicates speculations about our 3rd helicopter. Our 2nd left the company when we did the split, so our 3rd became the 2nd now. We still have a 3rd, 4th and 5th in the pipeline, which does not indicate thier current status. the status for the helicopters can be anything, from resource research, over licensing or 3d job up to programming. So yes we try to have a plan for longer and some projects are more complex then others.

There is no decision made yet concearning DCS and the revealed behind the curtains project. Do not spread panic among the community, please. Just because you have not seen any news about it for 6 weeks does not mean that nothing is happening in the background.

@all: Please give him the time he needs. I think it will be done in a resonable time and I am sure the campagne will be great again. Oh I sound like politician here :)

:thumbup:

@all: I like to read your posts about the MH6/AH6, but keep in mind, as long as we have no access to any flightmanuals of that bird it is impossible to build it. JSOC and SOCOM are very strict on what happens and they are aware of most of the stuff that happens and the 160th SOAR would know too what we build, and seriously, I do not want to tlak to officials from some of the agencies that would knock my door as I am the CEO. So it is nice to see your thoughts, but currently, I see no possibility to bring this AH6/Mh6 to life in DCS. As it was stated above, we have better helicopters in planning then an oh6 and I prefer to use the resources for them. One fact I learned is, that what ever helicopter we could come up with, there are people that would dislike it or buy it instantly, so there is no real favourite of the community. I had people messege me about ah64 and how much they admire it and how much they do not like the ah1w/z and vise versa. So there is no real route to take customer wise, at least to the general statistics. Some prefer transport over attack and some prefer light scouts over anything else or some even only like civil helicopters. So yes it is nice to read your thoughts on this, but in the end, we as company have to decide by multiple factors that are not always for the wide customer range, why we do or will not do a helicopter. About the MH6 I thought it would be fair to at least name the reason why we ae not touching it, which is resonable for the given facts.

@Fri13 Your assumption is incorrect. And guys, please stay on topic. Nobody has any confirmation of Belsimtek having a license for the Ah1w or any other Bell Textron product. This topic was only about the ah6/mh6 , which is impossible do to SOCOM and JSOC.

The real Gazele does not ahve a pedal trim. There ae other options for it through the magnetic trim, but that depends on the version of the avionics.

please use the bug report area. thx

@Flagrum: I understand the expectations fom a customer base, but if I take that argument into the flight enviroment, the expectations would be the same way true for the backwards compatibilty from a F16c block 52 avionics down to a F16a block 10, which it is not? The F16c was the successor of the F16a too, so theoretically the belgians and dutch would not have to buy new F16c just upgrade the F16a they have ;) 2.5 is technically a new software and all the teams that are in the DCS niche work hard to make 2.5 happen as flawless as possible. 2.5 also is a new 3d mesh of the enviroment, which means not any single mission can be easily convertd from 1.5 to 2.5 I wish it would be that easy.

Hi guys, ths is a rather short message, cause I just stumbled over something in a different topic. As soon DCS 2.5 will hit the market the SA342M Gazelle campaign will not be working. We have talked to the person who made the campaign and who has the script for all the missions. The campaign will be working at some time again, if notthing huge cripples it, but this will take a while. How long, that depends on how long the process of redoing the complete campaign takes in total. 2.5 will be new to our campaign creator like for you guys so he will need some time to see what has changed. Fact is, the campaign was never made for 2.5 and will be exclusiv for 1.5 for a few weeks or even months. We are sorry for that inconvienence but we also appreciate all the comprehension that we are sure our customers will be able to have. For future modules campaigns will be handelled different. Your Polychop Simulation Team

@vracan: nobody said so ? And if, this will take quite some time, till it is accessable again. The campagne for 1.5 was made for 1.5 exclusivly and was never intended to be made for 2.5 2 years ago.

@BIGNEWY: potato of the day? ever heard of it from Burk ? About the fps, we did optimise our module to fit an average computer 2 years ago. We defenately can not optimise for low end comupters, cause we do see an evolving technology ourselfs and want to also produce modules that are evolving with the technology available, which is what every developer will look for. We feel sorr if some customers face fps issues now and then, but as it was already mentioned, lower the graphic settings of your sim and check if your framrates will increase. turning water down will help. turning down shadows will help. unfortunately our bird has a bigger field of view available then others and yes, the outside rendering will be the stuff that needs power. anything that moves will use gpu power, even when the outside world is still, as soon it rotates it needs to be renderred, therefore, the more you see of the outside world, the more power is needed.

Hi Daniel, i flew our product this week numerous times online with friends on the f99th server. on the nevada map dcs 2.2 and i had no issues like that. same goes for dcs 1.5.8 Same goes for Patrick. we need a detailed description of your system, which mods are. installed, when was your last dcs update and which version number are you using and as much detail about your grafic settings and your pc as possible. also are your drives running on the latest versions and so on. please provide us such detailed data so we can handle your issue, cause currently nobody else seems to have this issue. I personally doupt that it has to do with the uv mapping, and yes I know what uv mapping is and how distortions of that would look like. another important question is, does that occure with other modules too? and no, a fix by demand on a specific date and hammering it down to that date is impossible for any software provider in this world unless they have unlimited ammountmof finacial resources, which none in the flightsim community, world wide, has, at least in terms of civil bussiness

@cichlidfan: :D good, enjoy :joystick::pilotfly:

considering other platforms goes hand in hand with increasing the size of the dev team. So this should not affect the DCS development of any kind. No I personally have the core feeling this would be more benefitial for the DCS platform, cause we have to work closer with the manufacturers on some civil platforms then we have to do in DCS, which is good in the long term for possible module options that many customers do not forsee yet :joystick::pilotfly::D roar roar roar (MGM Lion)

Here you can find a cockpit picture and a super little interview. http://https://www.helisimmer.com/news/polychop-talks-future-shows-oh-58/ in know this was posted before but I guess it was not pointed out that you can see the inside of it. @Scarecrow84: Currently we have no data availabe of the ammount of forward pitch in terms of angles, cause nobody in the world in the 80ties ever thought this might be important for a flightgame, that is what the military sees in DCS and other sims, at least the people we talked to. I hope we ca gather the data somehow next year being at the actual aircraft. But no promises. Still we will talk about this in our team and 2018 has not even begun ;) but we already have some plan for this as backup

another statement is still wanted? christmas news are online :D

Valued Customers and Polychop Simulations fans, Christmas is about to happen, and we decided to talk a bit about the past year 2017 and the future year 2018. First of all, we want to thank all our customers for the support, which is important for any company to exist. We’re still here and making great products for simulators so you guys must like something we’re doing and that makes our team very happy; thank you from the Polychop family to yours. Briefly, I’ll dive into some issues Polychop faced in 2017. As all of you have witnessed, we have gone through internal issues, that already developed in 2016. As many companies face the same issues in the beginning, there are possible routes to take and not every member agrees on the same course. As was the case for us. We wanted to keep Polychop as a cohesive team, that way we could devote every ounce of our energy into building great products rather than internal strife. Therefore, with best wishes, we wished our former CEO Oliver Michel goodbye and agreed on giving him the BO105 project, which is now run under Miltech-5. We still wished to release more products because we are confident, as a team that we can provide some of the best simulation software available so in 2016, we started a new project in secret to avoid the pressure of rushing out an un-prepared product and could focus energy on improving the Gazelle. Although many things that were stated during the past 9 month are not correct and painted a wrong picture I never felt the need to make a direct statement to any interviews, trailers, or anything that showed codework of Polychop Simulation nor had Patrick any intent to brag about it. This is still the case and so I can only state that for the remaining Polychop Simulation Staff, we are glad this split was finalized before the end of 2018 and that we do not have to deal with the BO105 and the development anymore. Sadly, due to contractual disagreements, we were not able to accept the conditions discussed between Polychop and Miltech-5 to continue work on the BO-105 jointly. We utilized most of 2017 to really hone the Gazelle and our other projects. The Gazelle itself really saw a lot of attention and re-coding to help mature several key improvements. Flight model, textures, and much proprietary framework was poured over until we reached a point where not only the simulation pilots felt happy, but also a beta team comprised of actual helicopter pilots said they were satisfied with the product. There are a few details that are still being evaluated and we are still collecting data in these areas. Some is easier, some is not. For example, we did look into the cyclic behavior again, but currently there is no data available regarding how many degrees the cyclic is pushed forward proportionall to forward airspeed. Many factors collate into this problem including control rigging and wind. Given how our testing staff has very limited time to devote to testing (dare I say, actual Gazelle pilots?) we determined that some of these issues were not worth the effort put into fixing them. Not because it wasn’t important to us, but because it wasn’t cost effective or prudent to do so. We also planned to have a new device implemented into the SA342M Viviane Gazelle. The new device was a periscope that is available in the real machine, but do to framerate break-downs using the periscope and the tv, which would both be active at the same time, we decided to not implement this feature. Framerate management is as important to a developer as smooth textures or appealing visuals. If we can’t implement some feature due to framerates, it hinders the experience for the end-user. I can only provide an example: On an average system, the simulation see’s 30 FPS with an activated TV. With the TV and periscope activated, the best we could benchmark was 15 FPS. Because of this, we couldn’t agree to implementing it. We didn’t want to throw a new feature in that was not usable and improve the customers experience. A picture of the periscope was shown on our facebook page earlier. To clear the air about it: no, it is not a periscope of a EC665 Tigre HAD. Sadly, we finally also decided to scratch the sniper version for now and probably for good, because in DCS there is no real use of a sniper and would only be able to hit soft targets at a max range of 300m. Instead, we decided to change the sniper version to a minigun version that, if it works out well, would be accessible as multicrew. This is what we plan as an update for the Gazelle in 2018, but we have no timeframe yet when this will exactly happen, because it also depends on the core coding. This and multi-crew both require more information from Eagle Dynamics before we can really improve those features. We will continue to work closely with Eagle Dynamics to help make the Gazelle a smooth and effective product. Looking to the future and into 2018, as already mentioned, we gave away the BO105 project so we can’t guarantee a release for 2018. The split ate a lot of resources and time unfortunately, but for 2018 we already have a strong game plan. replace all of that with this: We are a small team, but many of our core testers are actual pilots, some with military obligations and can only provide energy and time as available. Thankfully, our testers and core employees who have some insight into the exciting projects in the future and want to see these projects to completion as badly as many of you. We want to extend a grateful and humbled thanks to all the talented people who applied for the programmer’s slots. Our first actions for 2018 will be interviews with the individuals that applied. We really want to grow our programmer department to produce faster code to devote more time and resources for the detail tuning. About the programming, I had to learn that the fine-tuning is about 30% of the coding, which Patrick already knew. We’re working with Eagle Dynamics and, in 2018, an aircraft manufacture to fine-tune our code process and produce a product with a higher degree of fidelity. The team at Polychop loves anything that flies and particularly, anything that spins. Therefore, we want to branch into the interesting realm of civilian aviation and hopefully see some of our loyal customers on other platforms. We just haven’t decided which yet and want to make a smart choice. Our team is so small that any time we devote into a project is going to be about quality, not quantity and the choice of a non-military simulator must provide the company with the resources to continue improving with technology. About fixed wing products, we cannot say much because our team is still too small to work on fixed wing in addition. This might change through the course of 2018. And finally, we hope to open a Polychop discord channel so you, our loyal customers, are able to interface and receive direct input with the developers, testers and people who desire you’re raw input. So maybe now and then we will have a friendly chat. At the end I also want to send out a personal note of acknowledgment to the people that supported the current development in the background. Without these friends, this would have not gotten as far as it already has and the community of this bird is amazing. My girlfriend might have to buy me a Stetson one day when we visit friends overseas. That said, I put up a rendering of the 3d model in a state that it has been earlier this year without textures. Currently, we are not sure yet into which simulation this 3d model will be implemented in the end, but it will happen. So, thank you for reading and your continued support. In the end, our goal here at Polychop is to provide you with the most realistic and immersive product that we can. We wish all of you and your families a delightful Christmas season 2017 and a good jump into the year 2018! Your Polychop Simulation Team

We could also communicate zero. Customers would not like that either. About deadlines, well, we never say any specific date for good reason, plus a christmas news sometimes takes abit

what do you mean by the following? I can say that mine was doing much the same with the slowing down when it should be speeding up etc. It surely can't be intended and I know it worked correctly a few weeks ago (and for many months prior to that). i have to ask cause being all over and having all topics on brin memory is impossible so have to ask what you are explaining there in detail