Scarecrow84
最新回复 发布由 Scarecrow84
-
-
Thank you for your efforts, Damcopter.
Most of us who can discern the FM problems have given up on trying to even explain them to the fanboys.
Last time I tried, some master of dispassionate reasoned argument referred to me as a "turd", so good luck.
-
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
You dont need specific hard data to get the fundamental cyclic dynamics right. Ridiculous.
-
So you guys finally admit the obvious about the cyclic, but now correcting it isnt 'worth the effort'? What a huge disappointment this whole thing has been.
-
So definitely a general AI thing. No Gazelle bug. A normal 7.62 round would be deadly because even the L is far away from something called gunship.
No, that would depend on where it hits.
So, for the L to be at all playable against the most light of enemies, there would need to be some damage tolerance.
-
It's simply unplayable in combat as the L-version.
A single AK hit and you are done.
Maybe more realistic than before, but its unplayable due to the superhuman ground force AI, if nothing else.
-
Since the latest update, it seems the chopper can't take a single infantry bullet without catastrophic failure.
This has made gunship-type combat pretty much impossible, from what I can tell.
The L-version weapons are awesome, hope this damage sensitivity can get dialed back.
Thanks
-
One of the most noticeable nuances between the Gazelle and other helicopters is the centric nature of the cyclic. It's one of those things that seems odd ...
Also in forward flight there is no offset in the cyclic position once you balance the aircraft it seems to move forward (or what direction you want to fly) with the cyclic bought back to the centre.
.
I hope the original question about the cyclic dynamics from this post doesn't get lost in the discussion...
I raised the same question a long time ago:
-
The devs are probably still waiting for input from the french guys....
This was supposedly going to happen way back in June.
I understand being respectful and diplomatic, but we are looking at a year and a half of waiting for these updates and lo and behold they are yet another disappointment.
The flight model needs a fundamental overhaul or re-do, and that does not appear to be in the works.
-
1
-
-
to 1, this is a helicopter and in general helicopters are flown with a 3 finger grip in reallife. you will have to counteract the forces applied, so a fast roll. needs a counterroll input. to stop. newtons laws to act on the disc.
I hope. i did understand your number 1 correct and could maybe shine a bit. light into this.
nb2 has 2 very simple factors influencing this. mechanical delay and inertia. even a mass in rest has an inertia. hard to believe but it does. forces like. that cause.a felt minimal delay plus even if lift is. built up. on the blades, inertia, gravity and. some other forces have to be overcome. in addition the blades are flexible which mean that even there you will have a slight delay by the forces actiblng to the cabin cause th3y will act on the blades first and bend them which needs a few miliseconds too. all these factor adding up will result in a stack of effecte that. result. in that felt delay.
i hate compare the huey, but there such a delay is way more pronounced and even other factors like the underslung non articulated blades add to this effect.
I hope this might have helped a bit to understand this effect.
Thanks for the in-depth reply.
The Huey (hey you brought it up! lol) does not require this re-centering/counter acting of every cyclic input.
Is this due to fundamental differences in the blade systems?
I posted youtube videos of the gazelle cyclic in action, and it didn't behave the way it does in your sim. When accelerating, the cyclic moves to a new forward position and stays there, or stays to the side when turning. Im sure a degree of counter acting is realistic, but the overall dynamics don't match up with the video evidence...
I understand there would be some delay due to inertia (object at rest stays at rest, blade flex, etc.), it just seems like the degree is off. The heli seems to behave like a much heavier helicopter. I would guess a 500 ms delay between input and reaction.
The original flight model was nice and snappy in this regard.
-
Well, some differences are definitely there.
It feels more solid when holding a steep bank while turning. Pedals are still required for making coordinated turns. I think some IRL pilots on here have claimed that is not usually the case in real life - that pedals aren't really used much in high speed turns. Not sure if that's true, would be interesting to know...
The collective response is different, and is now clearly coupled with roll/pitch behavior (dropping collective makes the chopper drop nose and to the right, if IRC).
I don't notice too much ground effect difference, but the tendency to slide around on the ground seems to have come back - don't know if that's related.
The main gripes I always had with it are still there:
1) centered cyclic that just gets jerked around and quickly returned to center to avoid over-correcting.
2)sluggish response to cyclic inputs. When in hover, attitude changes are delayed by at least a half second from the cyclic input. This seems off for a light helicopter.
I'm glad to see some improvements being made though. I hope they continue, and are not minor.
-
For the people that do not feel any difference, please be aware that the current changes only apply to DCS 2.1 , NOT for DCS 1.5.7 yet.
There is for sure a difference, guarranted
Yes, I was testing it in updated 2.1, and so was the poster on Reddit who couldn't tell a difference either.
-
Honestly, I don't perceive any major differences. I haven't flown it in a long time, so maybe I'm not picking up on something.
Either way, I'd say any improvements are subtle...
edit:
Are we sure the Gaz updates went through with the update on the 11th? Why aren't they listed on the update notes...seems like a major change to miss on the list...?
-
Okay, tested the Gaz again tonight.
I think i found out what bothers me about the FM.
In the real world (asuming no wind, no gusts, standard day) when i initiate a turn the following basically happens:
Pushing my cyclic to the left/right for a certain amount results in a certain amount of bank angle. E.g. pushing cyclic to the left by 2cm results in a 15° bank angle if i hold the cyclic steady at this position (i know this is very simplified but basically what happens when you break the physics down).
Now i tried the same thing in the Gaz. The Gaz starts turning at a certain amount of cyclic input but doesn't stop rolling at a certain amount of bank angle. It just keeps on rolling. I activly have to counter it with applying cyclic to the opposite direction resulting in a back and forth (or left and right) with my cyclic. So it's not possible to maintain a steady 15° bank angle.
In order to make sure it's not me overcompensating my controls i put my saturation back to 10% in pitch and roll axis. I was pretty stunned by what happend.
I applied left cylclic and a long time nothing happend. Still level flight. Then i just applied a tiny bit more cyclic and held it there when the gazelle startet to turn. This beast almost flipped over!
I made a little video in order to demonstrate what i just encountered. Watch the red diamond in the red cross at the bottom left side closely.
For me, this really doesn't feel like a real one. It's like if there is an internal deadzone programmed in it. If you overcome the deadzone, you will turn no matter how little or big the rest of the input is. It's totally digital...0 or 1.
Thank you!
The weird cyclic behavior seems like the main problem to me, but when I bring up the issue it gets lost in arguments over details of the FM...
https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=181563
No IRL pilot has ever come on here to confirm that the real Gaz flies level at full speed with a centered cyclic.
In before "but different French rotor system, so it shouldn't fly like a helicopter"...
-
Shadows have disappeared for me...anyone else?
-
Yes, but download fresh and start from the beginning of the install.
Hi Hawkeye,
I need to download the mod files again? Do you have a link to the latest version I should download?
Thanks
-
Does this mod work in 2.1? I had to delete it to install Normandy, but would like to fly it in that map if possible...
-
Turning OFF V-sync in my Nvidia settings, and ON in my DCS settings seems to really help smooth things out.
Performance still struggles in the most dense areas, but now the sim is flyable and Ive been having a great time with it. I'm guessing an update from my 970 graphics card is in order sometime soon.
Thought I'd share, in case any one hasn't tried this.
-
I lost interest because of the stuttering issues. I used to fly Nevada, but it crashes now in MP when I try to open the Nevada Virtual Aerobatics server.
I'm hoping they can improve performance, but I'm not sure if that is even a realistic hope, or if we are looking at an object count limit type of thing...
I was most looking forward to the revamped Caucuses map, but now I don't know how that is going to work out considering these performance issues.
-
Scarecrow,
If your DCS tab is on your desktop, you can right click on it and it will show you a "run with graphic processor" line. click on it and you will see all your options. In my case, I get the high performance NVDIA or the integrated graphic card.
This method is good if you want to just change the graphic card selection for DCS. If you want something more permanent (like NEVER use the integrated graphic), you cal also do it in your PC graphic settings.
What do you mean by "DCS tab"? I right click on the desktop icon and get no such option...or the bottom bar icon when DCS is running and tabbed out.
Edit: windows 7 here
Edit2: Ok, so this lack of "run with graphic processor" option is apparently a problem others have had with Nvidia. I went into the "program settings" tab (i think that's what it's called) in the Nvidia interface, and noticed DCS wasn't in the drop down list of programs using Nvidia. Everything else was in there (Xplane, dvd player, etc.). So, I added DCS, which was listed as "DCS: Blackshark" for some reason.
I then ran DCS 2.1 again and didnt notice any changes.
I checked that my monitor is plugged in to the video card (a 970).
Someone let me know if it still sounds like my DCS might be running off the Intel graphics. NTTR always ran great...
Thanks
-
Make sure you're not running off the IntelHD Graphics.
How do I check this?
-
I have almost the same configuration than you... did you try to disable the V-sync ?
try this :
- Click to the "LOW" preset button
- Disable V-Sync
- Turn Deferred Shading off
This will be ugly, but that should run correctly... once you have that, try to increase some prameters, test again, etc...
I have tried disabling V-sync, and have deferred shading off. Neither seems to help.
Thanks though.
-
No, but it was in a demanding part of the terrain - Caen. All the traffic was turned down, and no AI.
-
This was tested in single player. I would assume multiplayer would always be worse...
Thanks
-
I tried lowering textures, and it didn't seem to help at all. I kept MSAA off, deferred shading off, low density sliders, etc.
I'm still getting the stutters. Pretty much ruins the experience.
System specs:
Nvidia GTX 970
total avail graphics memory: 12023 MB
Dedicated video memory: 4096 MB GDDR 5
Intel Core i7-2600 @3.4GHZ
16GB RAM
How to build a gaming cmputer/purchase one
在 PC Hardware and Related Software
发布于
I was hoping to put together a system to run 2.5 smoothly (non VR, at least for now) for under $1500.
Is this realistic?
Thanks