Gazelle Flight Dynamics... Again.

[Scarecrow84]

Is it so difficult to make a correct flight model for a helicopter?

 

 

 

Yes, it is.

 

 

Helicopter aerodynamics are insanely complicated. For one thing, the machine isn't grounded or "on rails" in any way like you could (sort of, minus wind, etc.) say about a fixed wing craft moving at high speed.

 

 

I've even heard that due to some gyroscopic effect I don't understand, the rotor head wants to fly something like 45degrees off heading, so this effect has to be compensated for in the hub design.

 

 

It's amazing to me that they can model autorotation...just look up a flight training manual on that subject.

 

 

Until we can have flight models based on fluid dynamics (i.e. just model the aircraft body surfaces and mass distribution as in real life, and let it fly based on calculated interactions with modeled air particles, gravity constants, inertia calcs, etc.), the Huey flight model is as good as we can expect in my opinion. I think its fun as hell myself.

 

 

Don't forget to look up Dunning Krueger...It explains a great deal of the modern world.

[CHPL]

My experience in the real gazelle is limited to less than a thousand hours so I'm no expert and that was a lot of years ago!

 

:megalol::pilotfly:

[cromhunt]

If i used comparaison with cars backward on the thread it's not for nothing.The gazelle had have a lot of modifications before become an attack helicopter,around 175.

Between the sa 341 and the sa 342 there are same differences that between the cars mentionned on my previous post.Main rotor is not the same and engine is more powerful.Without speaking about the cellule with lot of renforcements.

Thus the weight is different.

if you think that is not sufficient to make the flight different you are wrong.I did piloting the two and she doesn't fly the same.The module in the game is pretty good and in fact ,as "Oldahpilot"said ,she fly like a real aircraft.

 

Now we have to wonder what model of gazelle is in discussion.The module of game is SA342 M

https://www.defense.gouv.fr/terre/equipements/materiels-specifiques/alat/combat/gazelle-viviane-sa-342-m1

Take an attentive look of the differences between models.

https://www.defense.gouv.fr/terre/equipements/materiels-specifiques/alat/combat

Edited December 4, 2019 by cromhunt

[Fri13]

I've even heard that due to some gyroscopic effect I don't understand, the rotor head wants to fly something like 45degrees off heading, so this effect has to be compensated for in the hub design.

 

Justin has a good basics about helicopters physics:

 

 

There are lots of good videos about the helicopters to start learning the basics:

 

 

I have somewhere as well a nice 120+ hours series of the basic helicopter rotor hub and blade design lecture, where the basics are gone through thoroughly.

 

It is not an easy topic, at all. But the pilots are not going ever learn the stuff that the aerospace engineers will learn in universities when they are studying helicopter building...

 

Over the years pilots will learn many of the things, but they are just gasping the surface of the engineering for helicopters. The long term test pilots will start to learn these things as they will spend lot of time among the engineers talking to those pilots the small details and changes they are doing.

 

Basically saying, if you change anything in the helicopter, be it a blade design, length, weight, counter-rotating rotor parts etc, or the fuselage, you are required to recheck and redesign everything in the helicopter. They go from the cockpit sizes, weights, positions etc.

 

So if you want to do just small change, you might be looking months if not years work to redo lots of things.

[Harlikwin]

Understanding physics involved is not the same as being able to develop an verifiable, accurate, professional flight model and then evaluate it.

 

@Harlekwin - I never knew about this Dunning Kruger principle; how enlightening this is. :thumbup:

 

Yeah, it tends to be a bit overstated though. And honestly a related principle is that some smart people in one area tend to overestimate their abilities in other non-related areas. Which is why smart people don't think they are being dumb when they actually are. I.e. engineers commenting on social policy etc (or better yet vice versa).

[The Falcon]

So ultimately the guy who started this thread is right or wrong?

[Scarecrow84]

So ultimately the guy who started this thread is right or wrong?

Polychop has admitted that the FM needs a major overhaul. Appeals to experts are fraught with all kinds of biases and ingroup/outgroup signaling, politics, etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No one who claims the FM is good will address the basic issues with the cyclic dynamics, on-rails tracking, etc.

 

 

If it wasn't for the fanboys and people with really low standards being so vocal, we might have a decent one by now, who knows.

[ben1101]

If it wasn't for the fanboys and people with really low standards being so vocal, we might have a decent one by now, who knows.

 

Dayum!

 

IMO the FM is terrible and needs an overhaul. The module is useless to me as is.

 

/sigh

[nessuno0505]

Is it so difficult to make a correct flight model for a helicopter?

 

Yes, it is. Nevertheless, ka-50, uh-1h and mi-8 exist.

 

Also the reason why there are so few (serious) choppers developments in flight sim

 

And unfortunately polychop is not among them

 

French airforce Pilots feedback has been recieved regularly, since the module came out, all stating it's exactly like the real thing.

 

That's polychop saying so, but that's simply not true. They also stated a lot of other things were true and the facts proved they are not.

 

Fortunately, I'm not bound to buy all available dcs modules and I'd like to keep a quality standard inside my virtual hangar. Polychop is not on par and it does not meet my expectations. If it meets yours, it's your business and you're free to buy whatever you want.

Edited December 5, 2019 by nessuno0505

[The Falcon]

Yes, it is. Nevertheless, ka-50, uh-1h and mi-8 exist.

 

And unfortunately polychop is not among them

 

That's polychop saying so, but that's simply not true. They also stated a lot of other things were true and the facts proved they are not.

 

Fortunately, I'm not bound to buy all available dcs modules and I'd like to keep a quality standard inside my virtual hangar. Polychop is not on par and it does not meet my expectations. If it meets yours, it's your business and you're free to buy whatever you want.

 

 

And these are exactly the point of the question. When there insufficient charts only pilots (or whoever understands these things even without being a pilot if the "bug" is big) can tell us if the FM is credible or not, then the problem is not whether it is difficult or not to create an FM for a helicopter but the fact that for modules like helicopters or WW2 aircraft the judgment of those who flew them is important.

[sc_neo]

PC has officially stated that they are working on a new flight model for the Gazelle. So patience is king i reckon.

[Sephyrius]

PC has officially stated that they are working on a new flight model for the Gazelle. So patience is king i reckon.

 

Well, nothing's happened even after they announced that it would be developed in tandem with the OH-58D, so for all we know it was just a bargaining chip in contract negotiations á la "Let us do this or we wont update or maintain the Gazelle".

 

Talk is cheap, but I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[The Falcon]

PC has officially stated that they are working on a new flight model for the Gazelle. So patience is king i reckon.

Nice:)

[The Falcon]

Well, nothing's happened even after they announced that it would be developed in tandem with the OH-58D, so for all we know it was just a bargaining chip in contract negotiations á la "Let us do this or we wont update or maintain the Gazelle".

 

Talk is cheap, but I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Bad:(

[Polychop Simulations]

About the flight model update of the Gazelle, it's simply impossible to show progress. It is not about updating some parts and values of the code with an immediate result to show but a complete rewrite of all the code that makes up the flight model. It is the most complex code of a module and has to be done right. We've been clear about this in the past but I will post this again. I'm affraid this is a process that will take its time with very little to show until it is fully implemented. The old and new, way more advanced code are simply incompatible. In the mean time we will be fixing other issues pointed out by the community and release the needed patches.

Edited December 7, 2019 by Polychop Simulations

[ghost84]

I'm affraid this is a process that will take its time with very little to show until it is fully implemented.

When do you aim to release the new gazelle FM? Before or after the kiowa?

[Polychop Simulations]

When do you aim to release the new gazelle FM? Before or after the kiowa?

 

As both modules are developed in parallel it's hard to say. It depends on which one reaches the finish line first.

[Beltza]

As both modules are developed in parallel it's hard to say. It depends on which one reaches the finish line first.

 

Are you a politician? :lol::lol::lol:

[The Falcon]

As both modules are developed in parallel it's hard to say. It depends on which one reaches the finish line first.

Thank you for letting us know, in any case we will have both :thumbup:

[nessuno0505]

When do you aim to release the new gazelle FM? Before or after the kiowa?

 

I believe a very few people will buy the kiowa with confidence without the proof of the gazelle new flight model, and this is something the developers have to take into account.

[ghost84]

I believe a very few people will buy the kiowa with confidence without the proof of the gazelle new flight model, and this is something the developers have to take into account.

Exactly! And this is why I have asked this question.

[zaelu]

I believe a very few people will buy the kiowa with confidence without the proof of the gazelle new flight model, and this is something the developers have to take into account.

 

Yes, they should prioritise Gazelle first. Putting out Kiowa first would be suicide. I don't expect that FM to be 100% accurate but put on Gazelle people might see improvements and that things go in the right direction. Although... for me is a bit too late. So many years of denial of problems with FM made that the acceptance in the end that the FM is indeed FUBAR and they will fix it "at some point" mean very little. I sincerely say to you PC, if other developer would appear now and say... "we are making another take on Gazelle with everything an super FM" will present more interest than you fixing this one.