Interesting read

[Hiob]

23 minutes ago, fapador said:

 

Not only I read the review, but also the comments, I urge you to go look for yourself. 

Oh, in the comments! Then of course it must be the one and only truth…. 

[fapador]

Just now, Hiob said:

Oh, in the comments! Then of course it must be the one and only truth…. 

Dont know about you mate, but there is a whole thread with a salty title on reddit including a response from Bignewy over there

 

[Krupi]

From the review:

"Changing the CYCLIC TRIMMER MODE selection to Joystick without springs and FFB made a big difference, the same with the Pedal trimmer mode. But it still wasn’t quite right.

I tinkered with the curves some more and ended up with the collective curve at 20%, and pedals at 15%. The cyclic is still a challenge because with the trimmer mode now set, I was able to bring the curves back to zero and the model is flyable. Even though it feels much better at a hover but is still not quite right. It’s just fine at cruise or maneuvering flight but at a hover my normal cyclic inputs that I would make in a real aircraft results in lots of over-controlling. So far, I haven’t been able to find a setting that gives me both realistic hover handing and maneuvering flight characteristics."

It sounds like he has realistic helicopter controls, not everybody has these... in fact I would say he is in a tiny minority. 

Also from the comments... 

PHMAC

Hey Joe, thanks for sharing you impressions on this DCS module. It was a very interesting read indeed. I think your conclusion on which helicopter module developers are using to test a model could be spot on. I never thought of that.

I’m curious to read ED’s response to your review and if the things that are not completely correct or lacking in the early access model planned to be fixed or updated in future updates.

 

Thanks again for sharing your insights.

 

UPDATE

 

A link to this article was posted on r/Hoggit where ED Community Manager u/bignewy commented as follows:

 

"Its an interesting article, and some of the feedback is good, it was an opinion piece and not data driven, but we will take the feedback on board for early access as it progresses. I do feel the author was having some control issues, transitioning from real controls to a home sim can be difficult.

The comparisons to newer versions of the AH-64 probably did not help, the avionics are different in various ways from the version we are modelling in DCS and we still have more work to do here during early access.

Flight model tweaks are still to come, roll at high speeds, having to use to much torque pedal, VRS ect. so that will be addressed in future patches.

Always good to get the feedback from real pilots and the team have all taken a look, including our own AH-64 pilots.

Thanks - Bignewy"

It is in Early Access as Joe himself states, you sensationalised it compared to reality. All those quotes are from before he set it up correctly for his hardware after that still not perfect but it will never be. 

Edited September 22, 2022 by Krupi

[fapador]

3 minutes ago, Krupi said:

I tinkered with the curves some more and ended up with the collective curve at 20%, and pedals at 15%. The cyclic is still a challenge because with the trimmer mode now set, I was able to bring the curves back to zero and the model is flyable. Even though it feels much better at a hover but is still not quite right. It’s just fine at cruise or maneuvering flight but at a hover my normal cyclic inputs that I would make in a real aircraft results in lots of over-controlling. So far, I haven’t been able to find a setting that gives me both realistic hover handing and maneuvering flight characteristics."

 

[Krupi]

Not quite right

6 hours ago, fapador said:

Its worrying that the FM according to him seems mile's off....

I have no more to say, goodbye. 

Edited September 22, 2022 by Krupi

[Harlikwin]

9 hours ago, InteR said:

Hello, I write to you the link from helisimmer where a real AH-64D pilot made a review from ED DCS: AH-64D.

I think it is very interesting for users and ED developers.

Enjoy it.

IDK, on the whole FM debate I took his comments more as control comments. I.e. it was difficult for him to replicate the control inputs he expected with his setup in DCS. Which is something entirely different than FM IMO. What he is saying IMO is I move my controls to positions A,B,C and expect result Y. And I get Result Z. If it move controls to positions D,E,F and I can get result Y, but my controls are off from the real thing which he flew a few hours ago. And he does detail that he spent a ton of time tweaking the controls to get it as good as he could, but perhaps not good enough. And that the apache seemed to have been developed with standard "HOTAS" controls i.e. a throttle vs a collective which has perhaps led to the results he was seeing. 

So IDK, its a point of criticism, but IDK if its really fatal as for most DCS users we won't have the "correct" controls, nor will the they be setup "correctly" to provide the correct inputs. 

 

[admiki]

2 hours ago, fapador said:

Funny how they didn't notice all the quirks, Joe Hudson did... 

Really?

Words: "If they say, yeah, it's WIP, it's close, but still needs to be tuned" somehow to you mean they have not noticed all the quirks? I would love to hear your definition of the phrase "still needs to be tuned".

Edited September 22, 2022 by admiki

[Raptor9]

2 hours ago, fapador said:

Funny how they didn't notice all the quirks, Joe Hudson did... 

Like wrongly implemented Boresight Unit not working realistically with even wrong ring  colors...

Your conclusions are based on false assumptions. As I mentioned in another thread, the SME's involved with the DCS: AH-64D have noticed (including me). Further, we've also openly described a lot of these "quirks" on these very same forums ever since release, and have identified them in our own reports to the devs months ago.

The BRU was identified for improvement as well (you can even find old posts from myself explaining how it should eventually appear later in development), but it needs to be weighed against other priorities within the project. Coincidentally, yesterday's patch got the BRU reticle closer to how it should be, but the accuracy is still not quite there in how the pattern is projected within the BRU itself. This has been reported internally, but again, it's all about priorities. Can someone use it to boresight their IHADSS? Yes. The appearance of it can be corrected later.

The color of the BRU reticle itself isn't necessarily wrong, but it was a game design decision (recommended by the SME team themselves). When the naked eye looks at the BRU reticle, it will appear as it appears in game: yellow-ish in color. When viewed through the lens of the HDU, the BRU reticle will appear pink. The HDU's combiner lens has a color filter on its surface that allows it to reflect certain colors of light (namely the green symbology/FLIR underlay being projected onto it) while allowing the pilot to see through it. This filter is normally not perceived by the pilots as they are using both eyes, but if you are boresighting the IHADSS, the BRU reticle will appear very distinctively pink through the lens. However, since the computer monitor must simulate both eyes within the cockpit, the recommendation was made to not have everything seen by the player appear with the tint color. The same design decision was made when blending both visible lights and FLIR imagery at night, since both eyes are simulated on the computer monitor.

So to reiterate, there are a lot of things that the SME team has and continues to comment on, flight model related or otherwise. But just as is the case with other DCS modules, everything cannot be refined or improved at once. Prioritization must be made. But if the assumption is that the members of the SME team are not as knowledgeable or have the same attention to detail as the author of that article, that assumption is wrong.

I'm not throwing mud or shade at the author or anyone else; but due to confirmation bias, people will tend to believe the opinions of AH-64 pilots that agree with their own beliefs and observations, and discount any counterpoints to such assessments.

[Raptor9]

One further thing I want to be clear on. The author of the article, who I have met, is a good person and a solid professional. My critiques of his review are because I disagree with some of his assessments of the DCS: AH-64D and the context that they were presented, not because I don't respect him or his experience.

[javelina1]

14 hours ago, Tom Kazansky said:

Thanks for sharing this review.

It seems I never felt closer to a real AH-64 driver than as I read this:

"When I first tried this model, I found it almost impossible to fly.

It rolled over almost immediately shredding the rotor blades."

me too, until I adjusted my HOTAS settings (specs in my sig)

[fapador]

18 hours ago, admiki said:

Really?

Words: "If they say, yeah, it's WIP, it's close, but still needs to be tuned" somehow to you mean they have not noticed all the quirks? I would love to hear your definition of the phrase "still needs to be tuned".

Well somehow these issues Joe mentions got past them. Its not Day 1 Apache released, its has been released at least 6months ago, by  now... 

 

I might also add that I consider  a bad tactic for ED to release Apache so soon in development, because for example things like this wouldn't have happened if they didn't urge it so fast.

Edited September 23, 2022 by fapador

[Floyd1212]

As you probably already anticipate this, the response there would be Early Access is not mandatory, and is there for those that want to get in early, with the expectation there will be issues along the way.

[javelina1]

1 hour ago, Floyd1212 said:

As you probably already anticipate this, the response there would be Early Access is not mandatory, and is there for those that want to get in early, with the expectation there will be issues along the way.

exactly, EA is probably not suited for some folks...   for me, I've been enjoying the "heck" out of the Apache.  I know it's a WIP, and I'm fine with that....  like a fine wine, it'll all come together with a little time.

[admiki]

2 hours ago, fapador said:

Well somehow these issues Joe mentions got past them. Its not Day 1 Apache released, its has been released at least 6months ago, by  now... 

 

I might also add that I consider  a bad tactic for ED to release Apache so soon in development, because for example things like this wouldn't have happened if they didn't urge it so fast.

 

You didn't really follow all the whining here and on their Discord of "when we will have Apache"?

You don't like it, I get it. Your choice. to which you are completely entitled.

Our choice is to have fun in the state it is, dealing with all the bugs as we come upon them and actually helping ED finding them and fixing them, so people like you can enjoy it too.

[Mr_Blastman]

1 hour ago, javelina1 said:

exactly, EA is probably not suited for some folks...   for me, I've been enjoying the "heck" out of the Apache.  I know it's a WIP, and I'm fine with that....  like a fine wine, it'll all come together with a little time.

And what would be these HOTAS settings?  I see no settings in your signature.

 

After the update this week the Apache is unflyable.  It does barrel rolls without commanding such maneuvers.

[javelina1]

25 minutes ago, Mr_Blastman said:

And what would be these HOTAS settings?  I see no settings in your signature.

 

After the update this week the Apache is unflyable.  It does barrel rolls without commanding such maneuvers.

my bad for not stating this more clear, I was alluding to my actual hotas hardware.  I'm using a K-51 collective, rather than my TM WH throttle.  It feels/fly's more "chopperish" to me.  Plus, I set some hotas curves, (keeping them linear just isn't realistic with the length and throw of our desktop hotas equipment.  you have to compensate).  Lastly from the first or second day of having the Apache, I did make the change in the "Special" tab settings for the Cyclic and such.

[Mr_Blastman]

29 minutes ago, javelina1 said:

my bad for not stating this more clear, I was alluding to my actual hotas hardware.  I'm using a K-51 collective, rather than my TM WH throttle.  It feels/fly's more "chopperish" to me.  Plus, I set some hotas curves, (keeping them linear just isn't realistic with the length and throw of our desktop hotas equipment.  you have to compensate).  Lastly from the first or second day of having the Apache, I did make the change in the "Special" tab settings for the Cyclic and such.

Ah.  I don't have a bottom tier setup myself, with a Uber II NXT and hall sensor modded HOTAS Cougar + modded pro pedals, but this gear works best with fix wing aircraft.  I fly the Hind fine, though, and have no issues.  The Apache, however, has this weird rocking and twitching behavior that actively tries to kill me when I barely touch the controls ever since the update this week.

 

[RodBorza]

On 9/21/2022 at 2:10 PM, skypickle said:

Todays update significantly improved the handling

Yep, I found it easier to control and no more 'SAS Sturated' thing. The only thing that I found to be more twitchy were the pedals. For the rest it works fine (even George improved in SP).

[Picure]

Real or not, I adjust my flying habits to whatever FM is implemented right now. I dont want my money to go to waste , which means no left sideways flight for now.

[Dallas88B]

On 9/24/2022 at 4:12 AM, Mr_Blastman said:

has this weird rocking and twitching behavior that actively tries to kill me when I barely touch the controls

I thought it was me. Despite so many folk saying its Early Access (get over it), just "practice and git gud", its the best helicopter to fly that ED has ever produced, the FM is .... blah blah blah... I have decided its not. Its just not.

And it turns out DCS has 11 out of 39 aircraft in early access... dating as far back as 2017.  So the "its early access what did you expect" put down doesn't resonate.

Edited September 29, 2022 by Dallas88B
added comment