Jump to content

An Answer to my Flight Model Question


Scarecrow84

Recommended Posts

How do you know this ? Did a dev tell it to you ? Is it only speculation ?

I really would like to see a source on that.

 

There is no source. It's an observation of how the helicopter behaves in game.

DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule.

 

In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Uhm ...? The conclusion at the end of that video says "No VRS" after the helo landed perfectly fine. Maybe you've linked the wrong alternative facts video? ;.)

 

It's ironic and there is a VRS...

 

The only problem I see is that the VRS is too easy to recover right now, but there is one.

Helljumper - M2000C Guru

 

Helljumper's Youtube

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK3rTjezLUxPbWHvJJ3W2fA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's ironic and there is a VRS...

 

The only problem I see is that the VRS is too easy to recover right now, but there is one.

"Recoverable VRS" is no VRS - it is just a (unreasonable) quick descend. But iirc, this specific point was already discussed elsewhere exhaustively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

too bad we don't hear from the devs anymore, but it is understandable with the bashing and all sad.gif. I hope to here again from them smile.gif.
Very sad about this.

 

All so unnecessary and unproductive.

 

SIGH...................

"Yeah, and though I work in the valley of Death, I will fear no Evil. For where there is one, there is always three. I preparest my aircraft to receive the Iron that will be delivered in the presence of my enemies. Thy ALCM and JDAM they comfort me. Power was given unto the aircrew to make peace upon the world by way of the sword. And when the call went out, Behold the "Sword of Stealth". And his name was Death. And Hell followed him. For the day of wrath has come and no mercy shall be given."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO the original flight model (baring some minor tweaks) was the best and hardest flight model. I spent hours and hours learning to fly this puppy and can say i mastered it. When the flight model was changed (due to people complaining in the forums) i got in the cockpit and it was such a disappointment that all my previous hard work was pointless.

 

if a real (model in question) pilot says that the flight model fly's like the real thing then the developers shouldn't change it.

 

its a challenge to master some airframes and such a sense of achievement to master it.

 

my to peneth.

 

Cheers Specter

Custom built W10 Pro 64Bit, Intel Core i9 9900k, Asus ROG Maximus Code XI Z390, 64GB DDR4 3200 RGB, Samsung 1TB NVme M.2 Drive, Gigabyte AORUS 2080TI, 40" Iiyama Display. Wacom Cintiq Pro 24, HOTAS Virpil T50 Stick / FA-18C TM Stick and Virpil T50 Throttle, MFG Crosswind Graphite Pedals. HP Reverb

 

SPECTER



[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Lead Terrain Developer / Texture Artist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A Huey pilot would wonder if he is drunk while piloting the DCS module...

 

And that's the same for the Gazelle. And for Mi-8. And (I suppose) for Kamov-50.

 

DCS FM are quite accurate, but they don't simulate many, many very important things for helicopters, simply because they can't, too hard to code, too expensive, too long, and by the way too much for a public use. Only real pilots will notice issues (real issues, not those imagined by people who use YT videos to learn how a helicopter behaves...).

 

 

I've heard a retired Army Huey pilot say the Huey module is spot on, actually. And he didn't just drop into a forum to say this and dodge any specific questions posed about the FM.

 

The gazelle flight model is not on the level of the Huey, not even close.

 

One of the Polychop guys talks in the interview about how the original FM (which he claims was something like 80% done, maybe more), could do front flips. He seemed to think this was really cute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO the original flight model (baring some minor tweaks) was the best and hardest flight model. I spent hours and hours learning to fly this puppy and can say i mastered it. When the flight model was changed (due to people complaining in the forums) i got in the cockpit and it was such a disappointment that all my previous hard work was pointless.

 

if a real (model in question) pilot says that the flight model fly's like the real thing then the developers shouldn't change it.

 

its a challenge to master some airframes and such a sense of achievement to master it.

 

my to peneth.

 

Cheers Specter

 

I agree, the original FM was better. It at least wasn't laggy and over-stable at the same time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard a retired Army Huey pilot say the Huey module is spot on, actually. And he didn't just drop into a forum to say this and dodge any specific questions posed about the FM.

 

The gazelle flight model is not on the level of the Huey, not even close.

 

One of the Polychop guys talks in the interview about how the original FM (which he claims was something like 80% done, maybe more), could do front flips. He seemed to think this was really cute.

 

How can you compare the huey to the gazelle totally different choppers lol :thumbup: And may i add flight models, Thats like saying oh i flew the F-15 and its not on par with the SU-27 :)

 

Let the 3rd parties work there magic, So Polychop thank you for the Gazelle, Not everyone will be happy you cant please them all keep up the good work.


Edited by Coxy_99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My argument is not that the Gazelle doesn't fly like a Gazelle.

 

My argument is that the current FM is "script it from the ground up until it flies like a Gazelle," when it should be, "simulate the basic physics of a helicopter rotor, then tweak it until it flies like a Gazelle"

 

The current approach will lead to a reasonably believable FM with time, but I still believe that time would be better spent developing a physics based FM.

DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule.

 

In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My argument is not that the Gazelle doesn't fly like a Gazelle.

 

My argument is that the current FM is "script it from the ground up until it flies like a Gazelle," when it should be, "simulate the basic physics of a helicopter rotor, then tweak it until it flies like a Gazelle"

 

The current approach will lead to a reasonably believable FM with time, but I still believe that time would be better spent developing a physics based FM.

 

I really would like to know where you got this info.

Helljumper - M2000C Guru

 

Helljumper's Youtube

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK3rTjezLUxPbWHvJJ3W2fA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you compare the huey to the gazelle totally different choppers lol :thumbup:

 

They're both still helicopters though. All helicopters are controlled by the same physical and aerodynamic phenomena.

DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule.

 

In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you compare the huey to the gazelle totally different choppers lol :thumbup: And may i add flight models, Thats like saying oh i flew the F-15 and its not on par with the SU-27 :)

 

Of course they have different FMs but they operate on the same basic principles.

 

They shouldn't be as different as a helicopter from a moon lander.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really would like to know where you got this info.

 

Again, it's an observation of how the helicopter behaves in game.

 

If a developer decides to intervene and prove me wrong I will happily redact all of my previous statements.

DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule.

 

In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if it flys like a Gazelle who care how it got there!

 

 

This debate is pointless IMHO, if it barks like a dog, smells like a dog, looks like a dog then its a dog.

 

My final words.

Custom built W10 Pro 64Bit, Intel Core i9 9900k, Asus ROG Maximus Code XI Z390, 64GB DDR4 3200 RGB, Samsung 1TB NVme M.2 Drive, Gigabyte AORUS 2080TI, 40" Iiyama Display. Wacom Cintiq Pro 24, HOTAS Virpil T50 Stick / FA-18C TM Stick and Virpil T50 Throttle, MFG Crosswind Graphite Pedals. HP Reverb

 

SPECTER



[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Lead Terrain Developer / Texture Artist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, it's an observation of how the helicopter behaves in game.

 

If a developer decides to intervene and prove me wrong I will happily redact all of my previous statements.

 

Why would a dev waste his time answering such insulting question ?

 

Even if he proved you that you're wrong, you wouldn't believe him, so why ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All one has to do is watch the online cockpit videos of the IRL Gazelle flying to see it does not fly like the real thing (or any other real helicopter). I explained this fact based evidence in painstaking detail, but most will just accept half hearted appeals to "authority" instead.

 

Was the gazelle squadron that is supposedly using the DCS module given this module by Polychop? Are we to expect them to bad-mouth a free piece of software?

 

Are they really using it for stick and rudder training purposes?

 

Do they refer to it as a non physics-based "toy" like the gaz pilot who chimed in before?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...