Sephyrius

To be fair, the fact that a helicopter FM has the cyclic behaviour of a fixed wing aircraft (13:00 and 24:30) is a pretty huge deal. If a fixed wing module was released with the cyclic behaviour of a chopper, there'd be an outrage, but the fixed wing playerbase is larger so there'd be more familiarity with the issue. I have zero clue how this even got past the QA process. The other FM issues are footnotes in comparison and the saturation issue is easily fixed by the user. But all I know is that while it works fine to fly the Gazelle, it teaches me terrible habits because the basics are wrong, and if I wanted simplistic arcade solutions I'd stick to arcade games.

Sure thing, but it's not exactly cluttered when it's a forum section about an unreleased module, with zero news for an entire year, on a forum abandoned by the developers and with the last topic being 3 months old.

Just to add two cents of my own, the Gazelle is fun to fly, mostly works well, and there's a whole slew of flight behaviors that I would gladly ignore because they only kick in for particular circumstances, the SCAS system working its magic, or are just ridiculous aerobatic maneuvers... But I simply can't stand...how the cyclic input and subsequent behavior is so far off from normal flight behavior, as well as that surely being knowingly developed, as well as passing ED's QA, as well as seemingly being tailored towards somehow making things easier for self-centering sticks, and apparently is so integrated into the flight model that god knows when it will ever be adressed. I don't want to fly a helicopter where every move of the cyclic teaches you bad habits because no actual helicopter flies anything like it. Some timestamped clips showcasing it : https://youtu.be/FS3LvVVMrnw?t=790 https://youtu.be/AU3sntZXRbU?t=698 https://youtu.be/E96fhzKmCHI?t=505

Going from a end of 2020 release date into complete radio silence even a year later sounds more like an unexpected implosion than actual plan. But it doesn't really matter, the Apache looks like a far better choice in terms of complexity and fidelity, and I'd rather not buy another PC scout heli when the first one remains so painfully mediocre. Fool me once.

Sums it up nicely. The Gazelle sure is an absolutely excellent helicopter if you've never flown one before and don't like how helicopters behave.

Gonna toss in my two cents on the matter. I've been flying with both an FFB stick (with centering removed entirely via a 3rd party application since the PC FFB is still completely broken, what's up with that anyways?) and switched to a regular centering stick as of late because it has better precision for flying real low. Even a regular centering stick it feels really wonky because just because it self-centers doesn't mean that you can't hold it in a particular position (until you trim it), which works great in any heli module except the Gazelle where you are forced to either return to center or pitch/roll until you flip over. That's why it's not about rivet counting at all, but about diverging entirely from heli flight behaviour. We're talking about the equivalent of a racing sim where there is zero wheel centering support, and then you'll get used to the wrong behaviour and gotta re-adjust yet again when in a sim that actually has it. Sure, I've adapted to its quirky behaviour in order to fly it. It flies perfectly fine. The systems work alright (still hate the arbitrary Viviane "locking" behaviour). But that is a terrible criteria to go for, because then I'd might as well have saved myself the hundreds of dollars spent on modules and just play the Arma 3 helis, or War Thunder, or pretty much whatever else, because there the helis also fly fine and systems work. It's a matter of fidelity and paying for it. Agreed. The extreme maneuver examples of a "bad FM" never deserved as much attention as they got, and it's silly to expect the developers to do backflips in their codes just to account for all these instances. The Bell QA process does give hope. Personally I'm gonna hold out on the Kiowa until either it is truly verified as being stellar, or the Gaz gets fixed. Fool me once. But I'm not a fan of how the Gaz was supposed to be developed in tandem with the Kiowa, whereas now it looks like they've backtracked and aren't touching it until afterwards anyways.

Some pictures of #25 that it is supposedly replicating. The MWS is visible but still can't find any pictures of it at all with a third pylon or Iglas.

Enabling FFB still completely breaks the controls making it unusable, right? Because I'm still waiting on this since March 2018, but maybe that was just yet another empty promise.

Wow, okay, didn't know that we couldn't wonder why the development approach is entirely inconsistent from one module to another. So since that means that we can't assume that there's an actual holistic approach (which many, including myself, had done up until now), but rather that it's done on a case-by-case basis, it would be great if you guys could explain specifically for BS3 where you have drawn the line between fact and fiction. That we have to figure it out after the fact with bits and bobs from different language sections of the forum isn't exactly a great look.

Yeah, I guess to clarify I meant by "completely made up" that there is no actual reference helicopter in existence, but rather that it's just a bunch of bits and pieces from later airframes cobbled together into something that never was a thing. I mean, if the KA-50 was very modular and effectively allowed for adding and removing these things from any airframe with ease, then okay, but that seems like a far more modern approach (e.g. Gripen E) and doesn't seem likely when entire stub wings are changed.

As someone who was looking forward to the Shark upgrade, it's distressing to see that not only are there a thing here or there that might be off, but all of it is completely made up? Because if so, that's an absolutely insane business decision, fidelity and ED's prior commitment to it is the bread and butter of why we're all here and are paying for multiple $80 modules. What's next, a Su-25 II with R-77T missiles?

As I mentioned, this post was from September 2019, so it's not really anything new that should've directlyly affected the current Kiowa delay. As for controls, I think the twitchiness of the Gazelle (and that FFB is and always will break the controls entirely) got confused with the actual FM concerns, which is unfortunate. Personally I use a Sidewinder FFB2 with an extension, 70% saturation (except for the last 30% of stick deflection being increased to still allow maximum deflection) and simply disabled the self-centering for the Gazelle. It works great but would be much better if the cyclic behaviour wasn't messed up. Just gotten used to flying it unrealistically, but that shouldn't be an expectation in a sim.

"Your message is clear though and it made us reconsider our priorities. As stated before, our intentions were to learn from the flaws in the Gazelle and build the new module from scratch, then implement and adapt the new code for the Gazelle module. Now we will focus on finding ways to develop both the Gazelle and the new module in parallel." And that was back in September 2019, so I kinda have my doubts...

Imagine if the same issue was in place for any fixed wing module, though in opposite. You'd have an aircraft that would continuously start self-stabilizing despite you applying continuous pitch and/or roll input. People would go absolutely mental and it would never have passed any form of QA simply because of how commonly understood fixed wing behaviour is. And since the guy in the video mentioned that he was hoping for a fix after the Kiowa is released, let's not forget that PC already stated that they would work on fixing the Gazelle *in tandem* with developing the Kiowa instead of waiting until afterwards. Still nothing as of yet.

FYI to all those who, like me, were interested in the Kiowa because it looked like it might fly similarly to its civilian counterparts - got to try the 206 myself.

ED with 3 chopper modules that all have more or less perfect FM's. PC with 1 chopper module that is questionable. I know which one of those will get my money. And that doesn't just count for the FM, the Gazelle has neither complex weapons nor complex systems to make up for its price tag, and for the few things it does have it's still mediocre - I for one can't stand the arbitrary "lock-on" solution used for the Viviane that makes targeting while on the move very clunky, and multi-crew was just an empty promise that we're still waiting to ever see.

Delays are fine, but isn't the external model kinda the least important thing there is for a genuine early access program? Couple that with having pre-orders for early access - something that frankly I don't think I've ever seen before, all titles tend to be either early access or pre-orders to a full release, never both - and it just leaves a hint of early access being treated the same exact way as a full release would be even when it's far from it.

Fair point, the LCH might also be a stretch since there L and H hints are the loosest, and it's a fair bit newer than say the JF-17. But that still leaves us with the stronger hints of HAL being the developer, and the older chopper that the LCH was derived from - the HAL Dhruv. And the plot twist that it was part of the Ecuadorian airforce, where Razbam primarily is from. Granted, it doesn't seem to have been much of a success there

Well at least we already know it's gonna be a rotorcraft/heli.

Two weeks later, after facing community backlash, they said they would develop both in parallel instead of just leaving the Gazelle on the shelf. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4045817&postcount=33 Considering how the Gazelle isn't being updated, the Kiowa isn't out yet and wont be anytime soon because of the Mi-24 entering EA (staggered releases) I dont think the Gazelle will be updated in a long, long, long time. So, as usual, expect very little from polychop and keep that in mind when considering the Kiowa.

What I think the secret module is : "In darkest days, in blackest nights" = Green lantern oath. The name of the main character in Green Lantern = Hal Jordan. Hal = Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) The capitalized letter from the first teaser was H in Horizon. The capitalized letter from the second teaser was L in Little. HAL produces a combat helicopter called the HAL LCH (Light Combat Helicopter). So expect the next teaser to capitalize C. Coincidence? I think not.

"Now we will focus on finding ways to develop both the Gazelle and the new module in parallel." https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4045817&postcount=33 Since Sven already mentioned that pilots all have varying opinions, then why should we care about "two pilots say it's good" or "our pilot testers disagree with the forum ones" at all then? It cuts both ways.

I enjoy the Huey and Mi-8 more because they feel like real flying real helis with character while the Gazelle is so easy and ignores so many behaviours that it's borderline arcade, which isn't fun.

The "locking" functionality doesn't play by the same rules as the player input, so it's even stronger than what is even possible for you to add. That's why, even at max deflection, the camera will still slew too slowly to fight the yaw rate. There's not even any way to evaluate whether it behaves realistically or not since there's no way to deactivate the locking functionality, and the control of the Viviane seems centered around heavily relying on it rather than based on the real thing. Hopefully the Kiowa will be based on the real behaviour and then any shortcuts will work within those constraints - rather than independent of them, which leads to these messy results. Not really what I would consider a high quality product.

RIP Tunnan/Draken/Gripen dreams :(