Bell UH-1H rotor mast orientation

[Flagrum]

Check the ground level Nate,

 

The deck (floor) of a uh1 sits at 5.45 degrees while on the ground empty. I personally took this measurement from a calibrated source. This puts the rotor in your 1st picture at .45 degrees after on the skis.

 

When in alpha I spent a few days taking all the early complaints on model errors and checked them with a calibrated source on a UH-1H. I found all of them within .5 degree. I did not report any of the complaints based on that data.

Hrm, I don't really understand what you are saying here, but the rotor shaft is at an 90 degree angle to the cabin floor (or as in the picture marked: to the upper edge of the door - which is parallel to the floor?). The TM on the other hand documents an 5 degree angle forward in respect to the cabin floor.

[Hueyman]

Floor level attitude. This may prove to hurt your case Hueyman. I can't explain right now. I will tonight when I can get off my phone.

 

I don't understand what you are trying to prove ... these 5° are from the floor line and we don't care at all at ground being leveled or not ...

 

That will end I will have to directly give a call to our French Bell importer so they send some material that will show you once for all you are wrong

 

Sorry

[Krebs20]

Long story short. I measured the mast with a calibrated protractor. It was very close to the ingame model. From memory, .35 degrees off aft. I don't have the number with me because its in a book I wrote it in, I lost when I moved this summer. So that number is the one in my head. The floor number is how the floor sits in the real Huey. 5.45 degrees nose up. Now take Nates drawing, put the floor 5.45 degrees up. The mast would be .45 degrees aft based on that information. 0 degrees being straight up. The ingame model sits at about 0 degrees? Straight up. Now, .45 degrees on a 1900x1080 screen will be about 1 pixel? I can't see that worth reporting.

 

Contact French Bell. They may just give you the same information. I'm out of break time now. I'll try to scrounge up my information when I'm home on my pc.

[159th_Falcon]

Nice numbers Krebs. What would have been absolutely perfect would have been the following;

Zero the level on the cabin floor, and then measure the angle of the rotor mast.

 

That way, the aircrafts weight, the surface its parked on etc, dont influence your measurement.

 

Still, i'd say the ingame Huey is pretty much spot on.

[Hueyman]

Don't know what your measurements memories tell you but they are obviously false. Even very highly skilled scientific have to judge their results sometimes and compare the theories to the actual facts.

 

The theory shows there that, with your numbers, you are 100% true

The facts ( images, several diagrams from OFFICIAL manual etc etc ) actually show you are 0% true.

 

Ok, mail sent to the Textron company ... ( I don't know that they will provide better than the TM 55-1520-210-10 manual ... )

 

 

No, I never give up, especially when each time I glance at this great virtual Huey, that thing hurt my eyes.

 

Wait and see guys ;-)

 

It is like a political debate where everyone is persuaded he is absolutely in the right statements ... But guys, when you arrive against the wall of facts, actual facts, how can you continue trying to invent some way of demonstration to demonstrate unreal things ... Starting to become kinda pathetic

 

The Huey cabin floor is canted 5.45° backward RIGHT

The Huey main rotor mast is 5° forward in respect of cabin floor line RIGHT

 

The BST Huey cabin floor is 5.45° backward RIGHT

The BST Huey main rotor mast is 5° forward i.r of cabin floor line WRONG

 

This is where is the problem, the BST Huey rotor mast is perpendicular to the floor line, while it should be +5° offset from it... this is why the -0.45° final mast orientation in respect of the ground gave me the first impressions of it being absolutely straight

 

Isn't this enough for you ?

Edited August 28, 2013 by Hueyman

[Krebs20]

Alright, Being that I have now properly read though the thread and have looked at whats what.

 

My numbers were the following.

 

Protractor was zeroed out on the skis. This cancelled out the fact that the ramp is slanted a few degrees for rain and snow removal.

 

Skis 0°

Cabin Floor @ station 150 is 5.45° Nose high.

Cabin Floor @ station 50 is 5.40° Nose high.

I never thought to measure the cabin ceiling. The thought never came to me.

Mast shaft is 90.35° on the front.

Mast shaft at the rear is 89.65°

 

Now here is where my memory fails me. I remember back before release looking the in game model and seeing this all line up. It all looked good back in November of 2012 when I logged it all. To be honest and in my defense. I don't play Huey much. I don't remember the last time i looked at the external model very closely. I just tend to fly it from the inside.

 

Now looking at Nates drawing. I looks like my numbers fit in very well.

 

The current model is indeed wrong. Looking at it, the easy fix would be to cut and inch out of the front skis. That should bring the mast vertical enough. The only thing to be clear on is that the Mast is Vertical. Not forward or aft.

 

As for the political thing. I just browse the forums on my lunch and breaks at work with my phone. I make mistakes and misread what is wrote. The only political move I tend to make is neutral statements. You would be amazed what people would hang you over around here.

[Flagrum]

I think, I got it now. I assume, krebs20 is correct when he says, the angle between skids and rotor shaft is correct. And hueyman is correct that the angle between cabin and shaft is not 85 degrees as it should.

 

That means therefore, that the whole cabin/airframe is 5° off - it's nose must be 5 degrees higher (while skids and shaft remain in place). Right?

[Hueyman]

Ok Krebs

 

Glad you finally found the real problem, as it seems it was a bit more complicated than what it looked to me to the first sights

 

Thank you very much, hope all will be addressed

[PeterP]

I think it's time for new numbers again - this time in relation to the cabin floor:

 

 

Facts:

Now the Mast is tilted 1.3° forward - according to the document that Nate posted it has to be 5°.

 

 

Nate

 

 

 

This opens another question:

Lets assume the mast gets "fixed" and will be tilted 3.7° degrees more forward - so it will be 85° from the floor-level .

This will mean that the mast will be tilted 2.3° forward in relation to the ground/skids .

(2.7°+85°)-90° = 2.3°

Is the angel of the skids right?

 

 

EDIT:

I found a image that seems to show the same skid model as it is used in-game.

(keep in mind that this Huey seems to be fully loaded . The picture also gives no hint if the rotors are running and on load- so this measurement can be only a estimate.)

And also notice that the mast is tilted forward in relation to the cabin-floor.

Image source >>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UH-1H_taking_off_at_Hohenfels_Training_Area_2010.jpg

Edited August 29, 2013 by PeterP

[Hueyman]

Wow you are looking very far dude ;-) I like it !

 

If you search somewhere in my old posts, you will see I already told that these skids were too high AND not the same orientation as the real ones. I got an answer back that this 80's era model was like that ... still unsure

 

From what I know about 205, there are 3 landing skids model, the 70's Vietnam era ones ( lowest ), the high ones currently equipping some of the 205-A1, and the very high ones for firefighting operations.

 

These higher ones are more an inaccuracy than a " 80's era " version.

Also, I don't really understand this version with composite blades etc ... that tail rotor version really shows it should belong to Vietnam era Hueys, with heavy metal blades, normal ( for msot ) straight exhaust and lower skids, as well as a bunch of other things I didn't noticed for sure ...

 

I think the actual skids are a bit high but not to bad angled, the Huey really have that backward fuselage pitch attitude on ground, regardless of loading ( you can see the CG limits are really close to the main mast )

 

But the mast definitely has to be moved forward a bit

[Sharpe_95]

Look on the bright side Hueyman - if your inside it and flying it you don't have to look at the mast. Every cloud and all...:thumbup:

-Sharpe

[Hueyman]

Yes, but that is not the point of this thread sorry ...

[Sharpe_95]

I know mate. Just trying to cheer you up. I sympathise with what your going through on a topic like this.

-Sharpe

[Hueyman]

Okay

 

This was hard to demonstrate finally ... I admit it is always hard to change our own original opinion, mine too ...

 

When we think we are right, only few things can change it !

 

In that case, no one, me too, was actually 100% true ... Hope they will take the truth out there and correct what need to be corrected, no more nor less ..

[Rammit]

Can someone actually sum up what is inaccurate? You lost me (I have been up a while and am still fairly intoxicated)

[PeterP]

Can someone actually sum up what is inaccurate? You lost me (I have been up a while and am still fairly intoxicated)

 

post #34 sums it all up.

[TimeKilla]

Now if we could just get Belsimtek to talk! :thumbup:

 

Next challenge

Edited August 29, 2013 by TimeKilla

[159th_Falcon]

Okay

 

This was hard to demonstrate finally ... I admit it is always hard to change our own original opinion, mine too ...

 

When we think we are right, only few things can change it !

 

In that case, no one, me too, was actually 100% true ... Hope they will take the truth out there and correct what need to be corrected, no more nor less ..

:thumbup: Job well done by sticking to it Hueyman, and thank's to PeterP ofcourse.

 

I wonder now though what exactly is wrong whit ingame huey?

Is it just how the cabin sits on the skids,

Is it how the Gearbox sits on the upper deck. (area its bolted on to)

Is the upper deck itself angled wrong.

Plenty options and combination's there off, though i'm pretty confident it will get fixed somewhere down the line.

[TimeKilla]

For example:

the parking angle of the Mi-8 is 4 .. 6 degrees up regarding the horizontal.

A tilt main rotor axis is 4 degrees 30minutes regarding the fuselage waterline. So, it may be a situation in which the axis of the rotor is tilted backward, not forward to the regarding absolute vertical line, and it will not be wrong.

 

PS

If angle mast our Huey is wrong - we'll fix this inaccuracy:)

 

Never mind they have already spoken!

[Hueyman]

Yes yes ...

 

And Krebs, Nate, PilotMi8 etc ... you are part of BST or ED ? You should know a little more than us about the next upgrade isn't it ?

[Nate--IRL--]

Yes yes ...

 

And Krebs, Nate, PilotMi8 etc ... you are part of BST or ED ? You should know a little more than us about the next upgrade isn't it ?

 

I'm only a tester, and as such covered by an NDA. Can't say much about the next update. Sorry.

 

Nate

[Hueyman]

Okay totally understand

[iFoxRomeo]

Maybe this visualizes the problem. The perspective is not 100% identical.

I wanted the background of the real Huey to be transparent, but the program I used to make this gif is not able to do this.

 

Fox

[Hueyman]

Very very nice IFR !!

 

This shows both cabin floor lines are almost the same ( except the virtual Huey is maybe not as backward as it should BUT that may also be the fault of the pict perspective etc ... ) and it is clear now the +5° applied to the mast in respect of cabin floor is definitely there in the Huey, while it is definitely absent in its virtual counterpart

[Hueyman]

Hello People ... you know, I never expected such an answer ... FROM BELL TEXTRON THEMSELVES !!!!

 

They finally answered my request of searching good proof for Huey rotor mast orientation ... they provided this, the latest word in this affair ...

Their answer :

 

"

Hello Valentin,

 

Thank-you very much for your question and please see the attached information from the 205A-1 MM. Page 4 of the pdf shows the 5 degree forward tilt of the mast for the 205A-1.

 

Regards,

 

Jim Dawson

Bell Helicopter

Customer Support and Services

Technical Publications "

 

And the joined file :

205A1-MM-CH06 (1).pdf