Vortex

No idea about the KA50. I know it's been done in real life in an Apache AH Mk1, same pilot also air lifted a wounded soldier with two crew strapped to the outside of the AH Mk1 during a fire fight :helpsmilie: Read "Apache" by Ed Macy :thumbup:

Point taken about the chord, it sure seemed to me that that old wooden bird was at a negative angle of attack, the damn stick had alot of back pressure and I wondered if the tug was attempting to hit it's vne while still rolling :lol: As I said we could go on and on about this, but if you do have some real proof from a recognised source to post then I'd like to see it. I spent a week last year pouring over the latest submissions and it's still a debating point. Though it doesn't matter really as long we know that you need to have some laminar flow over the wing, and too much angle of attack decreases lift.

Ah yes the great debate Bernoulli's theorem VS Newtons Laws of Motion. Everyone can debate the theory all ythey want, but neither is proven incorrect. All I have to say about that debate is my practical experience in flying a semi symmetrical airfoiled sailplane. On take off, after the sailpane has lifted off you need to increase the nose down attitude until the tug takes off. With a large negative attack angle (chord pointing below the horizon) required when taking off, the wing still creates large amounts of lift.

Can your video card support that resolution?

I'd buy a touchscreen :D

Thanks for the response. I hope it's an easy fix so you guys can get on with other things.

aledmb You are failing to realize the complications in programming for multiple CPU's. It's not just a case of changing a setting to divide the code up between 4 cores. Each core needs to be given a specific task.

It's an industry wide problem, very few games take advantage of multicore cpu's yet given the relatively new technology. It's taking a while for software developers to catch up. But more importantly mainstream users are only just catching up, and programming is usually done to the lowest common denominator.

Patches for what??? Despite them both being number crunchers, Video cards are and CPU's are very different.

Okay. When I look that mast I always feel for the engineers, two times everything to maintain.

That's when you use the pedals to keep in "balance". But by the very nature of a helicopter you will not always need to apply pedal when initiating a turn. It's not at all like with fixed wing where you always apply pedal while applying aileron. It took me a long time to stop automatically putting pedal in when initiating turns, and until that time my turn-in was sloppy and unbalanced. Once I started leaving the pedal alone until it was required for balance, turn-ins became crisp. As my instructor always said when referring to pedal movement during any training excerise "I cannot tell you how much pedal, or even which direction" "You just put in whatever is necessary, as it's always different". Regarding the KA50, it's interesting that it's very similar to fixed wing. Also I wonder how much that enormous mast and centrifugal forces effects things.

Yep that's part of the more advanced description. Your nose will not drop during the turn simply because you have banked. It will drop when you increase collective, so only a little cyclic is needed to counter this effect and keep the nose at the same attitude.

^^^^^ Raising the collective simply unduces a greater VRS and you will lose altitude faster, negating any height you think you gain by "catching it" early. If you want to catch it early learn the signs of entering VRS and you will also learn the signs of leaving VRS. Once you establish you have left VRS you can then establish a positive climb away. You still have cyclic authority in VRS, it's just very "mushy" response wise. In my training using the cyclic to exit VRS, I never needed to lower the collective. If I raised the collective I was still able to escape, but I lost ALOT more altitude and falling like a rock during VRS, literally.

Just don't buy the game thinkr. At the moment you seem to be finding every excuse you can to belittle BS, despite never actually having played it. I just don't think you want to accept it's a better game, anyone who is a helicopter sim nut would crawl over broken glass to get this game.

Okay obviously this has confused a lot people, so I have written up a simple (but long) explanation about turning in a conventional heli. Now for those wondering about the KA50, I have never flown a co-axial nor do I know the theory, that's why I stated my interest at the beginning of the thread. Lets get back to why we think we need to use pedals to turn in. In a plane using the ailerons to initiate a bank creates a yawing moment, this is because the drag created from the aileron trying to lift a wing is greater than the one trying to lower the wing. In this scenario the nose of the plane will yaw left. To compensate for this yawing motion, right rudder pedal is applied. Now this is where people get things wrong. The rudder pedal is not used to "tip" the plane into a turn, but simply provide an equal and opposite yawing moment to the ailerons. More aileron = more rudder input needed, it's directly proportional. In theory the nose should stay where it is and balanced flight occurs. Now lets look at the conventional helicopter side of thing (important, governor imployed to keep things from getting confusing). When initiating a bank you apply cyclic, this does not create a yawing moment (very minimal and effectively nothing). Easy, we don't need to go compensating for it with anything! Hence no torque pedal is required for turn in. BUT now we now have a problem! Lets look at the vector diagram from a link already posted by JHepburn As the disk is tilted it is creating less "vertical" lift, to maintain height we need to increase the component of lift. To do this we raise the collective. PROBLEM, we have now creating a yawing moment, thus we NOW need to use the pedals, specifically the antitorque pedal. This is the left pedal for a conventional heli. Now lets turn left. We put a left input into the cyclic, start raising the collective to compensate for the loss of "Vertical" lift and input left pedal to correct the yawing moment created from increasing engine torque. Seems simple enough and almost just like a plane. So lets turn right then. Input right cyclic, raise the collective and input left pedal. YES I meant left pedal, this is where fixed wing pilots struggle at first. If you input right pedal here you invoke an out of balance turn and things go pear shaped. Right, I hope everyone understood that. Let's move onto why you do not pull back on the cyclic in a turn if you want to exit it at the same height and speed. Getting back to the Vector diagram above you can see that to maintain height you need to raise total lift somehow. Starting already in a turn, lets pull back on the cyclic then. Up goes the nose and so does our lift, great problem solved! But wait, our speeds going down. And if you look at our tracking our turn is not O shaped but infact has a radius that is ever decreasing. We are in effect flaring, just at a banked angle. Lets try that again, but lets raise the collective instead. Up goes our lift, and providing we maintain the same attitude, our speed remains the same. Our track remains a perfect circle and we can maintain this height, angle of bank and speed as long as we want. For those wondering why If you maintain balance then the nose will lead into the turn. If you don't you will be skidding (like a car skidding straight ahead in a turn). This is what confuse people again, as obviously you need to input into turn pedal right? Wrong see above about the right turn, that's why when talking about pedals in a conventional helicopter (conventional in the sense of a single disk, not main rotor turn direction), they are used simply to keep balance, you make whatever input is needed to maintain it. Now obviously I have simplified things, but I hope it helps some people understand what I am talking about.

Actually I am impressed by the fact I've gotten response's from you guys, let alone over the holiday's. Great game, and great support from you guys :thumbup: I'm happy to wait and if you guy's go missing for the next few days it won't bother me. I just thought I'd draw attention to something I thought was odd, so if it is an issue, it can be identified and allocated some time to fix for the new engine upgrade.

Nope you don't. While training I always got in trouble as I instinctively added a little pedal from my fixed wing flying (I never knew I did it until flying heli's). Once past 30 knots the pedals are used only to maintain balance. Remember the reason you use some rudder input on turn in for a plane, is because of the aerodynamic drag the ailerons cause. No such problem occurs in a helicopter.

Thanks! I just edited it for when my friend comes over to have a fly :D

My other favourite sim is Silent hunter 4, if adding a naval aspect I reckon ED would do well to talk to the developers behind that sim. Just make sure you keep away from UBISoft for gods sake.

Well I have the FFB steering wheel and pedals, so I'm ready for when they do :thumbup:

What speeds specifically are we talking about?

Oh I see what you mean now :doh:

When I eject, it would be cool to use my sidearm until I got rescued, or hitch a lift and drive a car or truck back to base :lol:

Ahh ok, I was wondering how you manage the throttles in a KA50 without taking you hand of the collective in real life.

I don't know, I was hoping you could tell me. Take a look at my thread, I posted a track and no one has come back with an answer yet. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=36020