Is it realy done?

[Aries]

Wait... WAIT!

 

Where's my cockpit glass crazing in the A-10C? :D

 

That first and then go for the ehm... correct blade thickness in the root of the rotor shaft...

 

:megalol:

[MemphisBelle]

there´s nothings about hairsplitters in those Communities...hehehe.

The Huey is good as she is and totally worth the 50 bugs, I don't know why moaning just for a few millimeter of space between some parts I don't care

[Sn8ke]

I love the aircraft, best representation of the Huey available on any simulation in my opinion. Granted it is in beta, I believe all that is needed is some fine adjustments in the flight dynamics modelling. I did not even notice the model inaccuracies detailed by the author of the originating post, so it wouldn't even matter to me.

[cichlidfan]

From my perspective, the model is perfect. I land, it blows up, and the charred remains look exactly like I would expect. ;)

[Adi]

From my perspective, the model is perfect. I land, it blows up, and the charred remains look exactly like I would expect. ;)

 

Too true! :D

[Mt5_Roie]

The simple answer to the thread "is it done?" is - no, it's in beta!

 

I personally spend more of my time in the cockpit so wouldn't really notice the spacing between the rotors is a little off.

[Hueyman]

@Tailstrike :

 

I'm fully with you, but ...

 

I'm a developer myself, making with a mate a plane for another simulator. I know things can get frustrating when " badly " said from customers, it can even hurts when you have spent hundreds of hour trying to get it perfect.

 

BUT, I'm also a perfectionist, and fully agree with all what you said about rotorhead details etc...

 

The fact is that this Huey is not a CAD model but a really spot on 3D model to fit in a flight simulator...

 

There are big things they should improve like the rotor being canted forward ( and also reducing the max pitch as it's visually way too much ... ) but overall it seems really really as real as it gets.

 

Of course there are areas to improve, but they have more important things to work on right now I believe.

 

The thing I appreciate the least is ( even if I'm in love also with that chopper ) they start a Mi-8 while the Huey is not perfect. But that is a matter of opinion, whatever and at any rate they will release helis, I'll buy them all and support them as much as I can.

 

But yeah...without that " forward canted rotor/ backward canted fuselage " attitude, it's not THE Huey icon we have idea of when our brain thinks about that heli :pilotfly:

 

Really nice work Belsimtek, may god save you !

Hueyman

[Tailstrike]

Oh boy! lot of views and reply's. Thanks gentlemen for that.

I don't have english as native language, forgive me for mistakes.

It is not my intension to hurt somebodys feelings with my statements or hairsplitting nitpicking talk.

I have high expectations DCS has to offer.

Did not know they don't draw in cad 3d. I supposed they did, sorry for that, it is explained to me.

When i saw the huey startup video i had the "bug", realy guys you got me.

Great job! liked it and still do.

But as i looked more closer, i was very surprized.

If i come to this point i would not bring it out to public in this stage.

 

I do realize it is lots of hard work and don't let be disapointed by some guy like me knocking at your door.

I let BST make there own decision about this baby and only hope they take comments positive, good or bad.

They are great and talented people together that can blow this sim to a great succes. (bigger you can imagine)

I am not a coder or programmer but with today's technology i think it is possible

 

 

@ AlphOneSix

About semi-rigid or rigid rotorhead systems

I related that only to the KA-50 rotorhead, (i don't have information of this Kaman helicopter)

Obvious the huey is a teetering rotor.

 

" It means it can not transmit torque to the main shaft!" ; Is wrong explained by me. When i say;

Transfering momentum to the mainshaft by the rotor when it flap (obvious this can't because it is a teetering rotor).

Please pay attention 06:07. It is "December 1939" in this movie. Where "Bell Helicopter" was born!

 

 

Hope this movie explain better then i do. :smartass:

 

@ Hueyman

To me, it is a icon! ;)

 

Everybuddy thanks for the comments and reply's, :D

 

-Tailstrike-

Edited May 13, 2013 by Tailstrike

[TimeKilla]

Okay, everyone i know would say you totaly overdo it. To be honest. I find this awesome lol! Now i would not hit on Belsimtek for that but i love the attention to detail some people in this community have!

 

Yup great finds buddy not sure they can change the model that much tho as might affect the flight model not sure tho.

 

Good eyes tho still love this bird

[Hueyman]

We'll see what is improved when final is out

[wess24m]

Related news: I read a post by EB that we won't be made to wait for 1.2.5 to get a tuned FM. They plan to push it out in a auto update. I'm pretty impressed on how great the Huey is, especially considering this is still in beta. Also the Huey team seems to be quick to offer help when somebody asks on the forum's without completely dismissing the posters questions/assumptions as a waste of their time and with contempt.

 

The support from Belsimtek is a drastic change then what i've witnessed from the ED team starting back in the BS1 beta days.

[Cedaway]

And have you noticed the attention bring for mission and campain design? Have you notived the great leap forward concerning the multi position you can take in the heli (pilot, copilot, gunner). Concerning the FM, I guess the aeronautic engineer they hired would be amused reading this... So yes, it's beta and there is room for improvement. But don't you really find it's an amazing piece of art for personal computer game/ oooops, sim?

Anyway, I admire the attention you give to the product. Please, don't say you don't take pleasure flying this Huey.;)

[Pikey]

I'm sure the items mentioned by the OP are performance simplifications as hinted already by mentioning the CAD differences.

 

I found this a positive post actually, can you imagine crafting a sim and these items were called out for being inaccurate? I didn't even understand a word of what anyone said :)

[Sundowner.pl]

The fact is that this Huey is not a CAD model but a really spot on 3D model to fit in a flight simulator...

Actually it's about damn time that someone would take a 3D scanner to the hangar, and utilize technology we (engineers) are playing with for years, instead of using over, and over the same inaccurate 3-way views and drawings made in the 1960s. No, it won't make the model for the artist, but will give him much more accurate reference points. BTW doing a CAD model, and low-polygon 3D model for a game isn't really that different.

[Hueyman]

Yeah that's what I said. A 3D model CAN BE perfect if the manufacturer ( Bell ) gives their actual 205A airframe CAD charts etc, but why ? it's still spot on.

 

But don't you really find it's an amazing piece of art for personal computer game/ oooops, sim?

Anyway, I admire the attention you give to the product. Please, don't say you don't take pleasure flying this Huey.;)

 

Of course, that's also what I said in all my previous posts.

 

The thing Tailstrike and me are trying to say, is that it's so great for a beta, and those little areas that can be improved aren't deep things, just tiny minor things here and there... You won't tell me put the main mast some more degrees forward is a " major " change, but it will also add to realism.

 

You know, anyone find it's immersion where he wants to, some in avionics, some in sounds, others in skins... I think Tailstrike and me are in mechanical parts, the Huey is such a mechanical piece of marvels ! The main and tail rotor system are already really detailed and spot on, it only miss a tiny thing for them to be perfect, at least perfect for such a flight sim use.

[Cedaway]

You're right, Hueyman. That's why I told there is still room for improvement.

[Cowboy10uk]

FM Update is now out. So at least we know, Belsimtek are keen to improve it. :)

 

Cowboy10uk

[Krebs20]

Hello Tailstrike!

 

Thank you for the submission of information to make DCS UH-1H better!

 

I would like to go over the points you made and details with them. My experience with the UH-1 is that I am a mechanic working on one. Today I was in the process of rebuilding the tail rotor.

 

Point 1

 

"* There are spaces between bladeholders and blades . Blades are to thin at the root.

(two horizontal arrows)"

Agreed.

"*There should be space between bladeroot and end of the hubaxis in the bladeholder.

(left vertical arrow)"

Agreed.

 

"*Also there are spacers/gaps between the hub and the two blade holders on the axe.

(vertical arrows at the center)"

I have to check. I don't think you pointing to the right spot. No gap will be on the inside of the blade grip.

Point 2

"Tail gearbox and main gearbox are not detailed. However tailhub is good!"

 

I think the gearbox is fairly detailed. I was working on it today IRL. Whats is missing?

 

Part 3

"The fuselage nose should rise little bit more and the main rotorshaft should come more forward until it is right-angled on the skids/ground and not on the door slides (yellow lines)."

Depends on Fuel and cargo load on how the Huey will sit on the ground. Also the picture your using as a reference has the wheels installed. I cannot tell if there is weight on them. When the wheels are used to lift the UH-1 it will lower the tail a foot or so.

"Also the skids are cast in concrete! O, and please let us choose to a straight exhaust-pipe?"

The skids are in the sunk in concrete because when you land on grass the skids sink into the grass. I cant talk for the developers, I would assume this is a halfway solution for the time being.

 

"Probably used pictures from the media like this! Which are not always done right.

 

The model was created from blueprints and maintenance manuals. Also from the tester's private photos taken for BST by request. I have over 5 GB of information I uploaded for them. Trust me when I tell you, BST and ED have better information sources than the internet can provide.

 

Point 4

"Also the huey hangs at the hub not dangle somewhere in between.

This (Huey) goes everywhere.

The rotor-system is not a semi-rigid or a rigid rotor system like the KA-50.

It has a seesaw rotor. It means it can not transmit torque to the main sha

ft!"

 

The 1st half of this is information I cannot say. I fix them, I do not fly them.

The 2nd half? Yes, it seesaws? It definitely can transmit torque to the main shaft.

 

But here is a Huey hanging or dangling from its Hub.

[Sundowner.pl]

Yeah that's what I said. A 3D model CAN BE perfect if the manufacturer ( Bell ) gives their actual 205A airframe CAD charts etc, but why ? it's still spot on.

It is rarely the case where manufacturer have CAD models available for 50+ year old design. In case of Bell, they should, but not all of it, because a lot of the air-frame is similar to the Bell 412 some can be extracted from its files etc. But using CAD parts and assembly files is the least efficient way one can do a game model. More efficient way is simply scan the parts and whole machine with 3D scanner that a dev studio can buy or rent. Then you have a 3D representation you can import directly to the 3D modeling program of your choice, and use the scan model as template to build low poly model around it. This is how Elizabeth was modeled for Bioshock Infinite.

 

For helicopters like Sikorsky S-61 or S-58 there is really only that way, or building a mesh on any available 3-way drawings, and then push the vertices one-by-one in accordance with A LOT of detailed, scaled pictures, like this one I made for a modeler some time ago:

 

[Tailstrike]

Well thanks Krebs20 for your reply on the subject. I appriciate your reaction very much also your explaination.

I am aware that you and the others of "the team" have enough information about an aircraft to model by you.

First again it is not my intension to hurt someone's feelings about there skills in what they do for hobby, education or for a living.

 

I was in hypothesis that this chopper was modeled in CAD by a program like autodesk inventor or dassault Systèmes and later

rendered by some kind of program 3D Smax, cinnema 4D or something like that. I do not know what kind of requirements was

associated to create the Huey for simulation. I think it had to be very special. Something unic, never done before, never the less obviously.

 

As a reaction i provide you more detailed information to your reply:

 

1.) obvious clear, however:

Quote:

"*Also there are spacers/gaps between the hub and the two blade holders on the axe.(vertical arrows at the center)"

 

A: So not: ------Blade/Grip/ (spacer) /Hub/ (spacer) /Grip/Blade----

but ---------Blade/Grip/(PitchBallanceAssembly/Hub/(PitchBallanceAssembl/Grip/Blade----------

more together so that the 2 grips and hub become more or less one peace.

PitchBallanceAssemblyplate bolted on the Grip opposite of the Blade fixation.

(.....obvious make a thicker spacer....has olso a render problem because it has different colors due to the liveries.)

 

 

2.) Quote:

"I think the Gearbox is fairly detailed. I was working on it today IRL. Whats is missing?"

 

A: For you i serious hope not any part, please do check it again! :helpsmilie:

For the BST-huey i think more detailed castings and washers and bolts, not that monochronic dark green. The Tailrotor itself is OK!

 

3.) No not about the wheels, besides this chopper is on his skids, but that's is not important. Of course you are right about fuel, weight etc.

In this picture you can see i draw a horizontal line, parralel on the driveshaft of the tailboom.

The mainshaft is right angled on it only to indicate it is right-angled.

I can prove with more pictures on the ground and in the air as in drawings but you can discover that for yourself.

besides in your DCS uh-1h Flightmanual page 22 you have a beautiful picture drawn cut trough in length explain drivetrain

(rotor, mainshaft, engine and taildrive explaination in seven numbers)

This picture shows that the main rotorshaft is richt-angled on to the horizontal tailrotor driveshaft on the tailboom. :D

 

 

Quote:

"The model was created from blueprints and maintenance manuals. Also from the tester's private photos taken for BST by request.

I have over 5 GB of information I uploaded for them. Trust me when I tell you, BST and ED have better information sources than the internet can provide."

 

A: Well all i can tell is perhaps it was to much information all of this and forgot and where totaly hypnotized of the 5GB's! :doh:

 

 

4.) A: Made my statement on 13-5-2013, post #33 page 4, I shall explain this more;

Please read my comment and watch "How Bell Helicopter was born" part 1!

Brilliant Mr. Arthur Young discovered on his model the stabilizer bar and the effect on his modelaircraft and build later on the 'Big one's' Ship one and two.

What i wanted to make evident is this effect of this stabilisation transmitted to the mainrotor.

As you peek how this aircraft behave and how stable it hover and when he tries to disrupt its hover you can see later on in this

movie in part 4 he does the same with the big one obvious at this point it is to much stable for forward flight and make changes

and adjustments to make it right.

When you observe real close you see the steadyness of the rotor in space of the models and is also to much stable by the imput of

the flyingwheel and stabilizer on the big one. The fuzelage is also quiet in behavior.

 

 

In this clip you can see pretty much cyclic input on the ground, the fuselage will stay in position, rotor is flaping around

i am not discussing mastbumping here but only teetering of the rotor by input of the cyclic. Obvious

 

04:15 > 05:05 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nm8iV_uiBsI :pilotfly:

 

 

Take advice: a hinge can not transmit a moment/torque, every door would come off into your hands.

 

 

To simulate all of this that is the Trick of the design of the programm where you can imput perhaps real flightdata of aircraft or/ and

RL pilots can adjust there findings and conclusions to compare all of this with data from real aircraft.

They already have that experience, they can be very helpful about this.

I have noticed there was already an update to the Flightmodel so that is an step forward. :thumbup:

 

I hope i was clear enough, Thanks for your attention.:book:

 

 

@sundower , Thanks for good comments in this thread and on this forum. I hope the devteam take it in consideration.

About 3D scanning, it is posible. Someone wo also read this idea can move a step forward and help developers out.

However i think it is possible to draw in Solidworks, Catia or Inventor with real dimensions and translate it perhaps and

then import in 3DS Max to do animations and who knows what and do rendering maybe also with assistance of Cinnema 4d to create

nice models.

Krebs20 has access to all dimensions.

 

Sorry to mention here on this forum but as an example, CeraSim has awesome Bell Models 212, 412, 222's created for FSX

beautifully nice rendered to.

 

Everybuddy thanks for the replies, ;)

 

 

-Tailstrike-

[Sundowner.pl]

Yes you can do CAD model then export it into a 3D Studio... but you can model in 3D studio using exact dimensions to begin with, and Solidworks or Inventor for commercial work cost a lot (had to stop using Solidworks after 10 years because my student licence run out and that thing is bloody expensive even for non-commercial work).

 

Plus exporting from CAD files into 3dsm files create a lot of trash, that has to be dealt with manually. Both CAD modeling and low-poly 3dsm modeling need a certain "flow" of the model to render correctly and not be over-complicated, but from my experience, unless we're dealing with a cube, it will not translate between the two types of models, and I did a lot of trial and error years ago with Solidworks 2003 - where complex shapes were hard to achieve, and importing 3D Studio Max models, were next to useless. The only advantage CAD programs can give a game developer is automatic creation of damage models. But on the other hand for one software licence you can buy a good freehand 3D scanner, so... :music_whistling:

[Hueyman]

This is obvious that some areas are so tricky to be done perfectly it's not worthing the time spent into it...

 

But, things like that huge positive blade pitch in normal forward flight is just so unrealistic, that would stall the blade and put an overtorque on the RGB, probably leading to a shaft failure... This can't be corrected, at least in a visual way ( if the visual are really " sticked " to physics ? )

[rabid_monkey]

My comments on the Belsimtek Huey!

 

1.) The main rotor head is not right detailed in my opinion.

From left to right i'll give comments based on the 2 pictures:

 

* There are spaces between bladeholders and blades . Blades are to thin at the root.

(two horizontal arrows)

*There should be space between bladeroot and end of the hubaxis in the bladeholder.

(left vertical arrow)

*Also there are spacers/gaps between the hub and the two blade holders on the axe.

(vertical arrows at the center)

*The corner of the root of the trailingedge of the blade is also not right done,

again spacing between edge and holder, blade should be thicker at the edge to fit the clamp of the rod. By the way, one is comming loose of the blade! (red circle)

[ATTACH]81478[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH]81479[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH]81480[/ATTACH]

 

2.) Tail gearbox and main gearbox are not detailed. However tailhub is good!

 

[ATTACH]81481[/ATTACH]

 

3.) The main rotorshaft is tilted backwards:

The fuselage nose should rise litle bit more and the main rotorshaft should come more forward until it is right-angled on the skids/ground and not on the doorsliderrails (yellow lines).

 

[ATTACH]81482[/ATTACH]

 

Also the skids are cast in concrete! O, and please let us choose to a straight exaust-pipe?

[ATTACH]81483[/ATTACH]



Probably used pictures from the media like this! Wich are not always done right.

 

[ATTACH]81484[/ATTACH]



4.)Also the huey hangs at the hub not dangle somewhere in between.

This (Huey) goes everywhere.

The rotor-system is not a semi-rigid or a rigid rotor system like the KA-50.

It has a seesaw rotor. It means it can not transmit torque to the main shaft!





So, is it worth $ 50,- bucks, i leave that on to you. :smartass:

If you ask me i say my 2 cents on this is enough for now. Come on!

I'll think for paying 50 bucks ED/ DCS can do it much better.

Couple hours on internet gives enough information to design a model realistic.

There are plenty reallife Huey pilots that can improve the flightmodel realistic

and not say ohh. this is good, this is awesome wow, yeh...... ok!

I have not the feeling that this is a licenced Bell Textron 205 UH :D

But it is BETA we shall see what comes.

Till now well done BELSIMTEK :thumbup:

 

-Tailstrike-

 

 

 

 

Yeah dude, I also noticed there weren't the right number of rivets on the panels on the side doors. I mean. Ridiculous. I guess I'll have to go buy me a real Huey.....

[Weta43]

So, is it worth $ 50,- bucks, i leave that on to you.

 

I think if the intent were to use DCS.modlues for the creation of screenshots, or movies, 'do cosmetic errors in the extenal model impact on value' would be a more relevant question. Given that what I really spend my time looking at is the inside of the cockpit, and perhaps LOD_2 of a wingman, I'd say these are second order problems.

 

I think it's good you've done a good check, and the feedback is useful, but I don't see that the fact that ' "There should be space between bladeroot and end of the hubaxis in the bladeholder" but if you get really close to the external modelthere isn't ' has a significant impact on the value of the module as a combat flight simulation.

[Sundowner.pl]

Weta43 then you did noticed, how the pedestal looks did you ? :smilewink:

 

There are no flat, empty spaces on the real one, if a space is not used, there is a blank panel mounted in that place, otherwise there would be a hole and the side drilled mounting rails visible.

 

Edited May 17, 2013 by Sundowner.pl