bradmick

If you pull in just a little bit of pitch, say under 5% (not enough to lift off) you should be fine. It'd be interesting to see an Aircrew Training Manual (or whatever the equivalent is in Russia) to learn how to actually do all the maneuvers correctly. If any of the ED crew actually has an ATM equivalent and its releasable that would be mighty handy! Brad

If you haul it over to the left or right and then pull a lot of aft cyclic (more a result of the aft cyclic though) you're going to induce a lot of rotor coning. It seems that the lower rotor disc cones far more than the upper, and as a result leads to this condition. I was trying to do a pitch back turn/return to target and all was going well until I was pulling a lot of aft cyclic and got a little to aggressive on the roll...needless to say I chopped my own blades off and buried the nose in the dirt. Was impressive to say the least :) Brad

Yup, with a force feedback joystick you'd actually get to feel what the actual aircraft is doing. I have a pretty solid warm and fuzzy that force trim is force trim is force trim. It's a system using magnets to hold the controls at a specific point to decrease pilot work load. If I want the nose to be 10 degrees nose low, then I set the cyclic there, and it stays there. With a regular ol' joystick you can't really simulate what the actual aircraft cyclic is doing unfortunately. That's the biggest problem i'm having right now because I know what force trim is and what it does for me, but my joystick doesn't actually simulate it, which is a bummer. Brad

I'll tell you what, i'd hate to be flying without force trim. In the Longbow its just way to convenient. It doesn't provide total hands off the controls, not that you'd ever really want you're hands off the controls in a helicopter anyway, but it definately decreases the workload for the pilot. It also is really nice in flight too, set the cyclic where you want it, pull in the required cruise torque, and life is peachy. Brad

Hah, sorry about that, I just read the IAS part. Attention to detail ;)

It's really that high? I know that in the 64 my max climb airspeed which is the point on the cruise chart that shows drag is at its lowest on the airframe is usually around 70-ish knots true airspeed. I can't imagine it being much different on the Black Shark. Enviromental factors and the like all play into it, sure, but its still around abouts the same airspeed for me. Brad

Eh, its good...but its not THAT good. The 30mm has some pretty solid traverse limits, but not quite what you're thinking. The radar missiles are pretty awesome too, but...well, they're not perfect (nothing is). I personally prefer the Laser hellfires over the RF ones. Sure I have the fire and forget capability, but there are other dangers and trade offs associated with that missile that make the SAL a little more comforting. Also, ballistics starts to play a big factor in any kind of off axis shot with the 30mm. You can hit, sure, but it's going to take a damn good gunner who really knows his systems and the ballistics playing into the shot to ensure you actually hit. Crew coordination between the pilot and gunner is critical as well. You can be the best gunner in the world, but if you're pilot can't keep you oriented so you can keep that gun trained on the enemy, then you're just a 18000 lb insurgent scarecrow. I'd also say it's definately a lot different just in that the 64 is a 2 pilot aircraft. The task saturation in the 64 is just a shade over rediculous, and thats with the two operators. The KA50 puts everything on one guy, gunner, pilot, etc. If it's modeled properly, with the gunners seat being filled by an AI pilot or gunner (whichever seat you're not occupying) then it'll be a lot different type of simulation, and allow a little more variety, or at least i think so anyway. Brad

The easiest way to explain how torque is measured on my aircrafts engines, there's a tube that goes through the drive shaft and as a load is put on the engine, it twists. The twist is exactly equal to the amount of torque being put on the system and is read on the Np (power turbine) section of the engine. Not very heavy, or complicated. Brad

I'll have to see what I can do. :) Brad

Wow, that's just wickedly over complicated for no good reason by my thinking, but interesting. Any reasoning behind why Torque isn't used? By my thinking it simplifies things by giving me a single number and point of reference to keep in my head. It's also really cool to see how a non western country (from what i've seen and read torque seems to be a pretty standard measurement for western countries aircraft) goes about doing things. It'll definately take a little bit of getting used to in flying the sim, a challenge I welcome :) Brad

So, I did some fam flying in the Black Shark yesterday and this morning, definately going to take a little getting used to, as she flies a little differently then i'm used to. My biggest question is this, as a US aviator, i'm used to looking at Torque. Torque tells me everything, I pull in this much torque and i'm going to go this fast. I pull this much torque and i'm going to hover at 5 feet, or 80 feet. But I always know that number and am able to reference it. In the Black Shark i've got Rotor Pitch, Engine RPM, and EGT. Which of those three is going to give me a correlation to a set Cruise Speed, or Hover Power? As with my example, at a set gross weight i'll have to pull say....54% torque to maintain 110 KTAS. Appreciate it! Brad

I'd say that the tactics are largely going to be dictated by the enviroment and situation you find yourself in. Understanding the capabilities of the aircraft, to include all the ASE (aircraft survival equipment), optimal weapons engagement ranges, target weapon pairing (do I really need to waste a valuable ATGM (anti-tank guided missile) on an IFV? If i'm engaging with the cannon, whats its penetration power and whats the effective range? Does it put me within the enemies optimal engagement range with their weapon system? If i'm looking for a firing position from which to launch missiles, am I silhouting myself against the sky or am I below the horizon. In the real world, i'd also be concerned with audio signature, so distance figures into it. If i'm operating in an urban enviroment, knowing that the enemy may be posting folks with cellular phones on roof tops with long lines of sight may cause issues, so i'll probably want to keep myself outside of potential threat engagement ranges, or if forced to operate inside of those ranges be very, very aware of the fact that the enemy is going to have a much easier time engaging me simply because the distance doesn't really allow any of my maneuvers to be effective as i'm this little dot on the horizon barely moving. Anyway, i've rambled on too long. To many things to think about as I said, and all of them are situation dependent. Brad

Funny story about the hind, there was a guy in Korea flying around one day and encountered a Hind on the other side of the border. The Hind started doing all manner of different maneuvers which the pilot was able to keep up with without a problem in the Longbow. As it was winding down, the Longbow settled into an OGE hover and did a left pedal turn, matching suit the Hind did the same, only instead of staying in the air it descened into the trees and crashed. The thing was so over grossed it didn't have the power to perform the pedal turn. The Longbow flew off, both pilots laughing pretty hysterically. One of my IP's told the story. Brad

AH-64D Longbow. Its avionics coupled with the night sensors (particularly MTADS which i'll get to use once I get out of TRADOC) armament and the insane capabilities of the FCR for meeting a large armor threat just make it a rediculously deadly aircraft. It's also highly maneuverable and durable. And actually, even with the legacy FLIR I feel very confident flying at night, even with a crappy FLIR picture. She's a solid piece of Helicopter and an absolute joy to fly. Brad

the external model is simply stunning and 100% true to the actual helicopter, the cockpit....not so much. Brad

i'm pretty sure i just hit pay dirt! http://home.cfl.rr.com/pwales/ka50.html this is from that german kit, gives me a pretty solid idea of what it looks like inside. Brad

Sweet! Yup, as Grey said, the majority of them have two motors connected to independent gears. The one with the mini turbine engine is awesome, but i'm sure the same result can be achieved by using an electric motor. Brad

Awesome, that would be great! I ask because I want to try and build one for an RC model and not have to use two motors. The trick is finding a place that sells mini gears. Brad

So, here's a question. I've been thinking alot about how in the world the Ka 50 transfers its power to two counter rotating rotor heads from one gearbox. Anyone know of any pictures of the gearing setup? Or do you eagle dynamics folks by chance have some pictures of the gearbox gearing to post? My guess is there are the two central driver gears in the gear box which connect to the intermediate gearboxes, they are geared a certain way so that a top mounted rotational gear rotates clockwise, and a bottom mounted rotational gear rotates counter clockwise. The thing I can't get my head around, is what the gears would look like, and the tooth setup of the rotor rotational plates. Anyway, thoughts? Ideas? Pictures? Brad

I remember hearing the biggest issue the Osprey had was in its original control setup. It was equipped with a Flight Yoke as opposed to a Cyclic control which made hovering the bird impossible. It is surprising though that it can't autorotate. I suppose the wings don't allow enough upward inflow to spin the blades, which I suppose makes sense as a fairly large wedge of the rotors thrust is interupted by the wings and so thats a huge no wind or little wind area as well. Though, i'd be interested to see some illustrations of the forces as it goes through an Auto (or doesn't). Brad

God I would love to fly one of those! Brad

That's why everyone who wants to fly should go the Army and push for Apaches, we're so shorthanded you shouldn't have any problems :D Brad

Gimme the Harrier, as that would be truly awesome to hover a jet. :) Brad

Nah, it's not a big deal. I know lots of folks with glasses that fly the Apache. They have a special set of IHADSS glasses that they are issued by the friendly eye folks. My last eye exam gave me the option of wearing glasses or not, my right eye has an astigmatism, it's not real bad, but i'll probably have to have glasses after my next eye exam. You can get a waiver for it as well. You can also get laser corrective surgery, but you have to be wary because the Army has only approved two types, and I'm sorry to say I can't remember which ones. A flight surgeon should be able to answer that. But, if you're wearing contacts that should be fine too. The biggest problem with contacts is that in the event of a flash fire, they'll melt to your cornea. That's why the Army isn't to hot on them. But, yeah, a good buddy of mine who's going through the course right now (who started flight school with glasses) got here, so you shouldn't have a single problem either. Brad

Suppose a Jet dwarfs a helicopters workload, well, yeah, it does. But as far as Helos go, I don't think a hawk or hook comes close. A 58 does. Brad