Coordinated turns vs. FM

[Pikey]

Night and day with the FM for me. We have posited that since Blinky has been removed form the helicopter, the thing flies much better, presumably as the chopper is much lighter...

[Yurgon]

Did a quick check ride (mostly to figure out how to fire rockets and guns in the L variant :D) and the FM definitely feels different. It'll take some getting used to, but I think it feels more real, less like "flying on rails".

 

The Fenestron authority definitely seems a lot better now, the Gazelle doesn't turn at 720 degress per second with full rudder deflection any more. ;)

 

I didn't compare ground effect to 1.5.3 directly, but the ground effect when hovering out of and into it feels pretty good now.

 

All in all, with the improved FM and the new 342L, this looks like a great update, thanks a lot Polychop! :thumbup:

[Fri13]

I have the exact same setup than you have, she flies just fine. Just add a little curves and saturation, whilst we wait for the corrected flight model to arrive. (Oh I just heared it's about to be out today)

It's all about practice. You'll soon find yourself able to do manoeuvres that you won't think possible with any other helicopter available in DCS.

 

 

 

Ok guys. So you know, the flight model has been corrected following the comments of Cpt E. , French Army Light Aviation, 1200hrs on Gazelle.

Besides, I flew her on military full cabin simulator, and all things compared, I can tell that the new model is very convincing compared to what I experienced.

 

I travel to a french Gazelle Regiment next week to get it tested by the same captain, and see if there is anything left to correct. But it should be all right by now.

 

As you know, it is nearly impossible to recreate the same flight model than the real thing, even with the same set of controls. So if he says that it's good enought, I think we'll call it good enough.

Is there a change to know are tests done with applied saturation levels or even with curves for control I/O?

 

As my believe is that default un-adjusted I/O should make it easily be flyable, and if something then require some to add sensitivity for smaller movements instead other way around by lowering sensitivity.

[gospadin]

tail authority during forward flight is WAY better

turn behavior with stability enabled is WAY better

 

there's still some wierdness in how the magnetic brake works. i can't get it to consistently trim where i want it to.

 

also, i was able to get the gazelle to slide backwards on the ground with forward cyclic applied and collective at zero... something seems wierd there, need to investigate more

[fjacobsen]

Now I can fly the Gazelle with precision even without curves and reduced saturation.

 

FinnJ

[Poly_Phil]

Isn't it possible to get all FM data directly from that military simulator? :D :D

 

I wish...

 

 

Did a quick check ride (mostly to figure out how to fire rockets and guns in the L variant :D) and the FM definitely feels different. It'll take some getting used to, but I think it feels more real, less like "flying on rails".

 

The Fenestron authority definitely seems a lot better now, the Gazelle doesn't turn at 720 degress per second with full rudder deflection any more. ;)

 

I didn't compare ground effect to 1.5.3 directly, but the ground effect when hovering out of and into it feels pretty good now.

 

All in all, with the improved FM and the new 342L, this looks like a great update, thanks a lot Polychop! :thumbup:

 

This is normal. The 342L and the 342M doesn't have the same stability assistance system.

 

In reality, the improve FM is actually on the 342M. These annoying corrections the SAS does on the VIVIANE Version, are actually supposed to be improvements.

[Chelco]

I flew a custom mission in the 342L and the Gazelle flew great. For the first time I feel like I'm commanding the helicopter and not the other way around.

 

Flying in the mountains, hovering to scout a village ahead and finally shooting my cannon and rockets ... It was fantastic.

 

Full debrief (lots of screenshots) at my blog:

 

http://kriegsimulation.blogspot.com/2016/06/dcs-sa342-gazelle-what-if-they-gave-war.html

Cheers,

[0xDEADBEEF]

As you know, it is nearly impossible to recreate the same flight model than the real thing, even with the same set of controls. So if he says that it's good enought, I think we'll call it good enough.

 

Earm. I am confused. Did you just say you guys will settle with a flight model that is good enough? Nobody is expecting you create perfection. But I am indeed expecting you to make it is a good as possible, I would be hugely disappointed if you guys would settle for good enough. :huh:

 

No offense. But an honest reaction.

[borchi_2b]

ok, for all and also for understanding the posting of Phil.

At some point after nearly 4 years of development and I would say, hunderts of hours of real pilots testing the product, we have to make a cut at some time and talk to the real pilots and ask them what they feel abouit the fm now after we corrected it in terms of thier intial report we received. It is not of use to keep pounding the gazelle endless because some source, forumposter says he feels it might be or is off in his opinion, but has nothing then just an impression that is not backed up for us by facts like for example 1300 hours in the real helicopter. If anyone can prove he has better knowledge about the fm how it should feel like, then a pilot who flys that helicopter as dayjob in real for over 10 years now and can state that this is not correct what the real pilots gave us as feedback, then this is something we might concider after we have validated the background of the information.

So if the pilots we work with say, this is exactly what this helicopter feels like and how it flys, then that is the best resource besides numbers of windtunnel data we have from NASA.

If they tell us little details need to be changed here or there again, we will probably do, but for now we had no review yet, which Phil will try to get for us if possible soon.

 

Plus, we can simulated the rotorhead 1 on 1 for you guys, no problem, but then you run nothing else on your pc at the same time then the realtime calculation of the rotorhead, which will not happen. So at some point, everybody has to acknowledge that this is only a sim/game, not the real helicopter and that this software is capabale of awesome things, but always with sacrafices on the other hand, so we still try to give you the best solution that is possible, but when we feel it is finsished, then it is finished.

 

This post might even sound rude, to some people, but please see it as constructive as it is and maybe it is clear what I want to say, although english is not my first language.

[Poly_Phil]

I said, my good sir, that if REAL GAZ PILOTS (in this case 1200hrs experienced captain) says it's good enough, we'll stick with that.

 

Why?

 

Because as we mentioned a few times, it is IMPOSSIBLE to re-create the exact flight model, (mainly because the flight controls are unlikely to be reproduced in the sim) and what we aim for is re-creating the correct FEELING.

 

Definition of good enough for us: An experienced Gaz pilot says that the flight model is convincing to his opinion compared to the relevant model (L or M)

 

One more thing, actual Gaz pilots are kinda busy folks. It's not easy to get a hand on one, and even more difficult to get him to try it out, with the full set of HOTAS and pedals, as these things are not easy to transport and set up for them. (First thing the pilot I had to try it said: can I put the stick between my legs? So I had to arrange the set-up to match his needs.)

 

To summarize, if the pilot judges it to be accurate, that's our good enough.

[decipher]

i wonder how much time the real pilots really spend on testing the FM though. i mean you said it yourself, they are busy people and they probably don't have the time to sit down and just fly around for an hour to really test all the different flight situations etc.

 

also it is to be expected that they will "just" fly by the book. when they fly the real thing, they will not start to think "hey i wonder how this helicopter behaves if i turn off SAS and press the rudder full left in a 5 meter high hover!". they will fly within the regulations, so even if they say the poly-gazelle "feels like the real thing", this might only be for the actual "normal" operations, not extreme situations and weird control inputs, that are not to be expected within the regulations.

 

the thing is, even 10 year old FSX airplanes and helicopters had real pilots "test" them and say "hey this feels like the real thing, you can fly it by the flight manual and numbers"... but they were just using the basic fsx FM with just some tuning to fit the model.

 

i don't know how much math and physics the coder has to actually know to implement a helicopter FM within DCS and how much of the physics and "world integration" (wind, gravity, aerodynamics etc) are set variables and routines from the DCS code, but it should also be considered, that the coder might just have some physics of helicopter flight just wrong, that only come to light in extreme situations (that a real pilot would avoid at all costs in the first place and probably never test without being specifically asked)

[Len62]

i mean you said it yourself, they are busy people and they probably don't have the time to sit down and just fly around for an hour to really test all the different flight situations etc.

 

 

Probably more free time than you think, based on the pilots I knew in the service.

 

also it is to be expected that they will "just" fly by the book. when they fly the real thing, they will not start to think "hey i wonder how this helicopter behaves if i turn off SAS and press the rudder full left in a 5 meter high hover!". they will fly within the regulations, so even if they say the poly-gazelle "feels like the real thing", this might only be for the actual "normal" operations, not extreme situations and weird control inputs, that are not to be expected within the regulations.

They would probably try things they would not dream of doing in the real thing. Isn't the hallmark of simulations the ability to go crazy just for the heck of it?

[Deezle]

They would probably try things they would not dream of doing in the real thing. Isn't the hallmark of simulations the ability to go crazy just for the heck of it?

I had a friend over who's a helo pilot and he told me the the problem with putting real pilots in a simulator is they just wanna screw around :music_whistling:

[Chelco]

ok, for all and also for understanding the posting of Phil.

So at some point, everybody has to acknowledge that this is only a sim/game, not the real helicopter and that this software is capabale of awesome things, but always with sacrafices on the other hand, so we still try to give you the best solution that is possible, but when we feel it is finsished, then it is finished.

 

Well said!

[Enduro14]

I said, my good sir, that if REAL GAZ PILOTS (in this case 1200hrs experienced captain) says it's good enough, we'll stick with that.

 

Why?

 

Because as we mentioned a few times, it is IMPOSSIBLE to re-create the exact flight model, (mainly because the flight controls are unlikely to be reproduced in the sim) and what we aim for is re-creating the correct FEELING.

 

Definition of good enough for us: An experienced Gaz pilot says that the flight model is convincing to his opinion compared to the relevant model (L or M)

 

One more thing, actual Gaz pilots are kinda busy folks. It's not easy to get a hand on one, and even more difficult to get him to try it out, with the full set of HOTAS and pedals, as these things are not easy to transport and set up for them. (First thing the pilot I had to try it said: can I put the stick between my legs? So I had to arrange the set-up to match his needs.)

 

To summarize, if the pilot judges it to be accurate, that's our good enough.

 

Very well said and happy you guys communicate like you do. This bird is amazing and I'm glad their is haters out their on how it flys because these things like many airframes in real life have quirks. Keep doing what your doing and using real SME's is the best professional approach. I'd take their word over it than google masters anyday.

[Poly_Phil]

They would probably try things they would not dream of doing in the real thing. Isn't the hallmark of simulations the ability to go crazy just for the heck of it?

 

They absolutely do. :thumbup:

 

 

As for the time they have to try it, in general we try to arrange an entire afternoon and cover as many flying scenarios (no wind, wind, high pressure, low pressure, IMC, PTU's etc...) as possible.

[The Legman]

Sorry for bumping an old thread but i think it's to make justice. I am loving the Gazelle on its current state (1.5.5). It is a sensitive bird but it certainly feels a ton better than when i first tried it so thanks a lot for making it a real joy to fly, while challenging and fun.

 

 

I have bought it. I am having a really hard time to fly it around. I have the warthog and thrustmaster pedals. I know it's sensitive but I've had to place y saturation in 50% and add curves and I still find myself losing the control so easily and I can handle the Huey rather well.

 

I want to enjoy this airframe but I'm not a pilot and my experience with helicopters is very little. I can't seem to perform easy things as coordinated turns or so without ending losing all the control and the helo spinning around.

 

Probably it's just me, but i am not a brain surgeon having to control the stick moving one millimeter to have a huge output seems excessive. It is realistic? Probably with the Gazelle collective and cyclic that question makes sense but we are using retail controls, I think it should be doable with a regular stick without having to be a real pilot.

 

Probably a lot of issues arise from the lack of experience in helos but I don't see myself spending 1000€ on helicopter controls to be able to play.

 

I love it and want to fly it but it's super frustrating. I will keep practicing though.

[kreisch]

I laugh everytime when someone says he need this and that hardware to control the bird.... And there I am, flying with my x52, saitek Cessna pedals and I love this chopper :)

[The Legman]

The FM has evolved quite a bit. However, yeah, probably when you are a pro you don't need any practice.

[BronzeYardNo11]

The FM has evolved quite a bit. However, yeah, probably when you are a pro you don't need any practice.

 

I wouldn't fly Polychop's gazelle until they get the FM right, when ever that will be. You'll be learning some really nasty habits.

[Hook47]

I wouldn't fly Polychop's gazelle until they get the FM right, when ever that will be. You'll be learning some really nasty habits.

 

Oh come on now, really?

[The Legman]

I wouldn't fly Polychop's gazelle until they get the FM right, when ever that will be. You'll be learning some really nasty habits.

 

I have seen the "rails" debate, i believe some of it has been fixed and they are still working on it. Compared with how it behaved when it was first released i think it's going into the right direction.

[0xDEADBEEF]

Sorry for bumping an old thread but i think it's to make justice. I am loving the Gazelle on its current state (1.5.5). It is a sensitive bird but it certainly feels a ton better than when i first tried it so thanks a lot for making it a real joy to fly, while challenging and fun.

 

Glad for you that you got practice done and it flies now fine for you. Please bear in mind this does not make the current FM more realistic ;) Polychop is working on it though, I'm positive they'll listen to the feedback and come up with something better in due time.

 

I wouldn't fly Polychop's gazelle until they get the FM right, when ever that will be. You'll be learning some really nasty habits.

 

+1

[The Legman]

I know the flightmodel has issues and it is not the final flightmodel. However, it is still much better than the day it was released.

 

Nasty habits? I doubt it.

[Fredo_69]

Glad for you that you got practice done and it flies now fine for you. Please bear in mind this does not make the current FM more realistic ;) Polychop is working on it though, I'm positive they'll listen to the feedback and come up with something better in due time.

 

 

 

+1

+2