Froogles First Impressions

[sobek]

I've already shown one thing that is wrong, and in return I get hate posts for not doing testers job for them ? The hell ?

 

Yes, there is that, but you speak of a multitude of things that seem to be wrong with the FM, so at least tell us what these things are.

 

This is only one thing from many that are still off with the Huey FM.

 

If you are not interested in informing the testers of the other things that you perceive as wrong, then please do tell, what is the intent of said line?

Edited May 29, 2013 by sobek

[Sundowner.pl]

- Following the ball in turn over 45° in bank result in an uncoordinated turn, even though the ball says differently;

- 2ft hover power setting doesn't correspond to 90kts cruise power setting;

- any by the book power setting doesn't correspond to their right airspeed, or climb/descent performance;

- HIGE and HOGE charts are off, depending on gross weight - from 10% to 50%.

[sobek]

There you go, thank you.

[EvilBivol-1]

When comparing performance, we also need to know what is referenced, i.e. engine model and blades (metal vs. composite) to make sure we are testing apples to apples. This isn't to claim you are wrong. We've already said the FM will continue to be tuned and do in fact plan further work on both the rotor and engine models, but need to be precise with our data (and your data if you're going to post it).

Edited May 29, 2013 by EvilBivol-1

[159th_Falcon]

In that case, could you tell us what exact engine model and type of blades the DCS Huey uses?

 

That way the users also know what they have to compare it with.

[Sundowner.pl]

I'm only using data for CMRBs and dash-13B engine... did you change your mind on the subject of rotor blades ?

Because it would explain a lot:

Edited May 30, 2013 by Sundowner.pl

[WH_Boomer]

I've already shown one thing that is wrong, and in return I get hate posts for not doing testers job for them ? The hell ?

 

No, I'm being reminded over and over again, that I pre-purchased the product, and got its early development stage as a bonus.

 

+1 It's been the same with every release, that's why I don't bother posting on here, some of the "testers" always seem to take it as a personal affront if someone else posts a bug.

 

And then there is the matter of this whole thread. Someone points out an issue and the hounds get unleashed to the point that the video is now removed from public view. Is that really how ED fans want to be seen? As the playground bullies.

[Zentaos]

We all just need to relax and take a deep breath.

Think for a moment, how far flight simulators have come, and be thankful for the time the developers spend on every little detail in our niche market sim world.

We are not spending millions of dollars on state of the art military simulators. We are spending beer money on entertainment software for our overgrown calculators.

 

Of course I want the sim to be as realistic as possible, but I am also realistic in my expectations of what can be achieved. If I had the money, I would not buy a state of the art, top dollar, full motion simulator. I would go buy a real helicopter.

 

I have flown 2 pc products that are very close to my limited experience in real helicopters, DCS:Huey and Dreamfoil Creations R-22 for Xplane 10. Are they perfect? No. Can they be improved? Yes, but they are both light years beyond my first flight sim experiences in the early 90's.

 

So....take a deep breath, and continue to be critical, yet supportive.

[blksolo]

I say put the video back up Froogle,when I buy a product I want to see the positive and negative reviews so I can weigh them. How can I trust any of your future reviews if I know you can be bullied by these guys??

[159th_Viper]

..... ..... .....

 

So, to summarize, you have 5 issues with the Flight Model, yes?

 

 

1 - Following the ball in turn over 45° in bank result in an uncoordinated turn, even though the ball says differently *Turn and Slip indicator behaviour already reported to Developer*

 

2 - 2ft hover power setting doesn't correspond to 100kts cruise power setting

 

3 - Any by the book power setting doesn't correspond to their right airspeed, or climb/descent performance

 

4 - HIGE and HOGE charts are off, depending on gross weight - from 10% to 50%

 

5 - Between 60 and 100 kts, you can maintain 0° pitch, with stable airspeed and stable altitude

 

Any further issues not yet mentioned?

Edited May 30, 2013 by 159th_Viper

[Sundowner.pl]

Like the rotor blades start turning at 20%, and not 15% N1 rpm ?

 

Those are the ones I found out simply by flying the thing, without even looking for errors. I'm beta tester for A2A, not for Belsimtek.

[159th_Viper]

Like the rotor blades start turning at 20%, and not 15% N1 rpm ?

 

 

I'll add that one.

 

Anything else, keeping in mind that YOU were the one mentioning the shortcomings first. I am just attempting to ascertain the ENTIRE range of perceived shortcomings so that I can have the Devs take a look at them and confirm and rectify, alternatively deny and substantiate why. That way we are all happy.

Edited May 30, 2013 by 159th_Viper

[Rykane]

Really ? Let's do a quick reality check here. We, the customers:

- don't have the current development build;

- don't know what errors were already found by the testers team;

- don't know what errors were already addressed;

- don't know what's on the "to do" list.

 

From what we know, anything we post there could be already found out, researched, and done.

 

No, its a beta which they are allowing customers to play. They could have kept it internal and not let us play early, but playing earlier also means more bugs for us consumers to experience. It being a beta also implies that if a customer finds a bug they CAN submit a bug report and let the developers become aware of the said bug.

 

It is not obligatory but if you can help make the product better in quality and stability why the hell wouldn't you do it, it takes probably roughly about 5 minutes to 10 minutes to write up a bug report within a forum. Also you shouldn't really review a product when it's in beta form, that's like reviewing a hotel/restaurant when its still getting built or near completion.

Edited May 30, 2013 by Rykane

[Farrow]

I never got a chance to see the original video, but from reading this thread it seems like you (Froogle) posted your first impressions without having prepared yourself beforehand for the learning curve and practice that the Huey requires.

 

I'd suggest that you pay a visit to a multiplayer server like the Virtual Aerobatics one and see how some people can fly the Huey after some practice - it's really quite impressive when you see 3 Hueys and a Black Shark swarming like flies around a taxiing Su-27 like I did last night :D

[Sundowner.pl]

It is not obligatory but if you can help make the product better in quality and stability why the hell wouldn't you do it, it takes probably roughly about 5 minutes to 10 minutes to write up a bug report within a forum.

This is not how I roll. If something feels wrong to me I research it, then test it multiple times, to rule out any external causes, or "game engine hickups" - THEN I write about it. That's few hours of work.

 

Changing the topic a bit, I don't work today, so I took the Huey for a test ride, to check the VRS behavior as the Wolle was asking about before ED testers started demanding to do their job for them. After about 30 descents from hover, with various mid-level loads I find out that the VRS threshold is around -1200fpm in the version we have. Any vertical descent slower than that can be easily arrested by pulling collective (provided we have the power, if we don't then we deal with settling with power). But once we go near or cross the -1200fpm, the helicopter fall through, and pulling the collective won't change the situation... although I didn't notice for it to aggravate it either.

 

Now the question is: does the -1200fpm right or not? When we look at what Nick Lappos wrote about the VRS, as the vertical speed of descent being equal to rotor downwash, and therefore dependent on the disc load, we can deduct, that ~25kg/m^2 rotor of Huey will have that speed 1.8 times greater than that of 14kg/m^2 rotor of Robinson R22. Now, thanks to the magic of internet we know that R22 enters VRS at about 700-800fpm at gross weight. So taking the averages we get around -1230fpm with Huey at 8500lb load... so I'll say we're pretty darn close.

Edited May 30, 2013 by Sundowner.pl

[tranquillity]

:thumbup:;)

 

I talked to a real life ex huey pilot from the German Airforce last week on the virtual aerobatics teamspeak, he flew the the german version UH1D(which a look on wikipedia brought up is using the same turbine as the UH1H),

and he said it felt pretty damn close to the real flight thing, just obviously missing the seat on one's pants feeling and details like

" 5 - Between 60 and 100 kts, you can maintain 0° pitch, with stable airspeed and stable altitude" -

he was really annoyed by that when we flew formation together...because he always was too slow, must have maintained pitch like he was used to from the real thing...

 

and he was really confused when i talked about vortex ring state when I crashed once, and said he saw me crash and it was just my mistake, settling with power being the issue..

 

 

keep it up sundowner, and everyone relax a bit...belsimtek are doing their best, and so are the testers...:music_whistling:

 

have a good day everyone:)

[159th_Viper]

This is not how I roll...

 

Then it would be appreciated if you would kindly refrain from posting unsubstantiated allegations, saving us all a lot of time attempting to get you to explain yourself. If you are not willing to help then don't - just don't come in, stir the pot and then leave again without an attempt at explaining yourself. In a final attempt, have you any more bugs to add to your perceived bug list?

 

....before ED testers started demanding to do their job for them...

 

Quit the melodramatics - it's unbecoming. All we ask is that if members are willing to attend to bug reports in an attempt to help us all deliver a better product at release, they do so in the manner prescribed. Shouting 'problems' without so much as a reason/explanation why helps nobody. As said, our olfactory senses are not that well developed.

 

If people are not willing to help then that's OK too - nobody is forcing anyone to participate in the open-beta. It should however be blatantly obvious that if one doesn't want to participate in the open-beta then it would be well advised to wait for the final release before shooting one's mouth off.

Edited May 30, 2013 by 159th_Viper

[ericoh]

I have the feeling that there is hurt feelings involved here..

[159th_Viper]

I have the feeling that there is hurt feelings involved here..

 

:megalol:

 

Try frustration.

 

It's about identifying specific issues that need addressing. We are all in agreement that the Flight Model is a W.I.P. It is after all a Beta.

 

Now if I were to go to the Real-Life Huey Pilots we have on the test-team and the Devs (which we are currently doing with the issues so far identified so we can investigate and provide feedback to you the members) and tell them that there are reports on the flight model being incorrect and need attending to, what are they going to ask me?

 

Any guesses?

 

Yes, you are correct. They are going to ask me what is wrong! What do I tell them? I cannot just say that it's something with the flight model - they need specific details.

 

Why is it so difficult to understand that Bug reports need to be as detailed as possible?

 

A specific flight model behaviour irregularity can contain a myriad of bugs - generalizations cannot be tolerated when one reports issues, which is why we as testers are profoundly grateful for all the open-beta bug reports that are provided by the community, provided that they are done in such a way so as to ensure that we as testers are in a position to properly forward the bug reports to the relevant pilots/devs so that they can be sorted out for final release.

Edited May 30, 2013 by 159th_Viper

[ericoh]

:megalol:

 

Try frustration.

 

It's about identifying specific issues that need addressing. We are all in agreement that the Flight Model is a W.I.P. It is after all a Beta.

 

Now if I were to go to the Real-Life Huey Pilots we have on the test-team and the Devs (which we are currently doing with the issues so far identified so we can investigate and provide feedback to you the members) and tell them that there are reports on the flight model being incorrect and need attending to, what are they going to ask me?

 

Any guesses?

 

Yes, you are correct. They are going to ask me what is wrong! What do I tell them? I cannot just say that it's something with the flight model - they need specific details.

 

Why is it so difficult to understand that Bug reports need to be as detailed as possible?

 

A specific flight model behaviour irregularity can contain a myriad of bugs - generalizations cannot be tolerated when one reports issues, which is why we as testers are profoundly grateful for all the open-beta bug reports that are provided by the community, provided that they are done in such a way so as to ensure that we as testers are in a position to properly forward the bug reports to the relevant pilots/devs so that they can be sorted out for final release.

 

 

I would agree to that. I do not expect any of you to find and narrow down every bug, afterall we are all humans.

[Sundowner.pl]

2 - 2ft hover power setting doesn't correspond to 90kts cruise power setting

Actually it's a 100kts, because it's a roof mounted pitot tube, it's 90 for nose mounted. Still off though, as all the power settings above 60kts, probably because of what I wrote about the attitude for cruise flight being off. If you want specific data for power setting in HOGE, here's an example:

 

 

9000lb, 2000ft OGE hover, with 20°C FAT should be 38 PSI torque. For +20°C FAT that difference is smallest I've seen, and -2 PSI across the board - both for altitude and gross weight.

 

This isn't something we should point out, this is in maintenance flight checklist - document which each flight tester should receive from developer, because it's best possible way of testing if this thing fly by the numbers. And those errors would be noticed less than an hour from releasing new dev build. Apparently this is not the case.

[159th_Viper]

Actually it's a 100kts, because it's a roof mounted pitot tube, it's 90 for nose mounted..

 

Ta - edited.

 

Any other Flight model reports to add to the six presently?

[Sundowner.pl]

Not at this time.. I'm flying Cessna.

[HuggyBear]

Several of these engine / hover power related bugs were submitted as far back as April, including reference to the appropriate charts.

 

These are still being worked on by the devs .

 

Maybe coding is tricky stuff...

 

- Bear

[Zentaos]

No man...coding is easy. Everybody's doing it!