reported Autopilot Channel labeling - English cockpit

[rogorogo]

The mouseover labels for the Autopilot Channels in the ENGLISH cockpit are currently labeled as follows:

• Autopilot H  Channel ON/OFF
• Autopilot K Channel ON/OFF
• Autopilot T Channel ON/OFF
• Autopilot B  Channel ON/OFF

And are also labeled as such in the Control Bindings, clearly derived from НАПРАВЛЕНИЕ, КРЕН, ТАНГАЖ  and высота for Yaw, Roll, Pitch, and Altitude.

 

In-cockpit there are top labels describing the actual function of the channels:

but the bindings line items are - as described above . labeled like the mouse-overlay and look like this.

This will inevitably lead to confusion

Thus in consequence the Mouse overlays AND control line items - should be relabeled as follows:

• Autopilot H  Channel ON/OFF -> Autopilot YAW Channel ON/OFF or AFCS YAW Channel ON/OFF
• Autopilot K Channel ON/OFF -> Autopilot ROLL Channel ON/OFF or AFCS ROLL Channel ON/OFF
• Autopilot T Channel ON/OFF -> Autopilot PITCH Channel ON/OFF or AFCS PITCH Channel ON/OFF
• Autopilot B  Channel ON/OFF -> Autopilot ALT Channel ON/OFF or AFCS ALT Channel ON/OFF

 

Reasoning:
in time many players/user/purchasers will start turning those channels on and off in-flight in various combinations to enjoy the true extent of the flight model and the visceral experience of the Mi-24 that is very impressively translated in the module and also enables more elegant and fludicic, precise maneuvering that is just.. well.. Hind-like (a rotary oiltanker, or freight train), while the dampeners are very much needed in the hover-takeoff and hover-landing phase.

Thus the labels for mouse overlays but especially control line items in the English cockpit and UI-version should be precise, simple, clear and beyond ambiguity.

Addendum: 
Also the term "Autopilot" is ambiguous or even misleading as they are actually "AFCS" (Automated Flight Control System) or "Input-Dampener/Stablilizer-Assist" channels.
Therefore I have added alternate relabel suggestions addressing this issue too.
Again these applies to the mouse-overlays and/but especially the control binding line items.
The actual "Autopilot"(s) are "only  the Hover/Altimeter/Route functions that are the actual autopilots and the only one that should be label as such in the bindings.

 

 

Trackfile showcasing the overlays and cockpit labels attached.

ap_channel_labels.trk

Edited June 22, 2021 by rogorogo
typos and AFCS designation, marked "addendum" and added label suggestions

[rogorogo]

resoning for the addendum of alternate English labeling:

The uneasiness of labeling the entire AFCS suite components with "autopilot" is present in many modules of soviet-era/russian origin.
And while this is absolutely correct in Russian language and in extension in direct translation, it creates a contextual problem.

In the case of the hind - or in russian engineering terms in general - the system suite is referred to as "ВУАП-1 - Вертолетный унифицированный автопилот", which correctly directly translates more or less as "unified helicopter autopilot".
But if we look at the parent umbrelly system component we already get a hint about a linguistic issue. The parent component is the "САУ-В24-1 - "Cистема автоматического управления", the "Automatic control system" that by description includes the (wait for it) "autopilot" (refering in this case to the autopilot and the AFCS in one word) and automatic navigation system.

So again, if we were to just directly translate, all good.
But there is context to be considered. Russian is despite pop-cultural perception a quite poetic, nuanced and contextual language (for the latter weirdly a little bit like the English language) and can be quite efficient by defining meaning in context with a few multiapplication terms.
But when we take the engineering culture into consideration the "autopilot" in English language engineering terminology and culture has a distinctive clearly defined functional meaning, while anything related to automation, input dampening, thresholding, stablization and assist is labelled with anything from "AFCS" to "dampener".
So is the case with western/NATO engineering culture in general, be it in a technocratic and distinctively descriptive language and terminology like German (no naaah....) or anything in-between of rhaeto-roman languages (fe French, Italian.. hmm.. now the spanish and hispanic world will hate me too, but poor me no es bueno en enspanol).

Because of that, a simple direct - while precise - translation fails to purvey the functional character descriptions of Russian source terminolgy for the component. This is also the case for other modules, but those are low-fidelity so imho a little futile to point out (but! - full fidelity Mig "29er", we should all take notice").

We even get a direct statement if the just read the abstract description of the ВУАП-1 - Вертолетный унифицированный автопилот, which reads "Предназначен для улучшения пилотажных характеристик вертолета на всех эксплуатационных режимах полета, а также для автоматической стабилизации угловых поло­жений и демпфирования угловых колебаний но курсу, кре­ну и тангажу".
It literally states that the system is there to "improve piloting characteristics in all flight modes and for automatic stablization" - the very essence, function and description of an AFCS dampener and stablization assist system, not an "autopilot".

So again, imo while автопилот is simply autopilot as an insular word, it "means" something different as soon as the word is combined with contextual terms like унифицированный автопилот or ТАНГАЖ канал in expression.

And as the labels and overlays should be descriptive, unfiied, clear, precise and beyond ambiguity - the true meaning has to be expressed in translation, not a simple (although no less precise) word by word translation without context or topical sensitivity.

P.S. No, I am not fluent in Russian, after thinking about this and doing some research I then asked a Russian engineer (among other things) who is fluent beyond conversational level in English and intellectually capable and sensitive in and for the linguistic aspect of the topic (Also.. smart, beyond average.. and median) about the validity of my suspicions.

Edited June 24, 2021 by rogorogo

[BIGNEWY]

Hi,

 

I have discussed it with the team we will look to improve the labelling of the controls, similar to the Mi-8 most probably. 

 

thanks