Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kiowa practice, use Huey or Balck Shark?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #81
    Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
    Topic is, what helicopter choose to upcoming helicopter training...

    That includes very much, majority of it a helicopters flight physics.
    And that as well includes the suggested helicopters flight modeling that what matches best to that upcoming module....

    Or how are you going to advice what to use for flying without talking at all about flight modeling?
    Is the helicopter just the displays with other avionics and weapons for you?

    If you want to learn to drive a car, it is not enough that you know the rules on road or car specifications like how many kilometers per liter, you must as well understand control devices like pedals, wheels, gears and all...
    Even if you discuss FM getting into such deeps matter as SAS dampening AP etc won't help him decide. And gaz was not even in the options the guy has.
    Chinook lover - Rober -

    Comment


      #82
      Originally posted by Alec Delorean View Post
      Still there is enough real life data and videos that show that the controls + SAS + FM of the Gazelle module are extremely far from everything real.
      Most of it from "established members of the flight sim community" (aka arm chair pilots).
      Then there is input from real helo pilots and that's more or less the opposite (see link).
      So should I trust a long time simulation nerd and his research, assumptions and interpretation of "how it should be" or real world helicopter pilots comments on "feels pretty realistic", " yes, close to what I would expect" and so on?
      I personally tend to trust the professional pilots more, than the professional simmer.
      So I still stand by my original answer, to learn flying a helicopter hands on, no fancy SAS pick the Huey, then transition to any other model, after you feel comfortable with maneuvering, hovering, transition from hover to flight and back to hover with just manual input and muscle memory.
      The Gazelle uses similar tactics as a Kiowa (both being scouts) so if you want to familiarize yourself with approach to positions, unmasking sights etc. the Gazelle can be good training... If you want to do FM testing in conditiony you would never dare to enforce in real life, I would not recommend the Gazelle, or any simulation for that matter... try (and survive) the real thing.
      Link to a nice "review":
      https://youtu.be/AU3sntZXRbU
      Shagrat

      - Flying Sims since 1984 -
      Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 32GB | GeForce RTX 2080S - Acer XB280HK 28" 4k | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | TM Cougar MFDs | a hand made UFC | AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

      Comment


        #83
        Originally posted by swatstar98 View Post
        Even if you discuss FM getting into such deeps matter as SAS dampening AP etc won't help him decide. And gaz was not even in the options the guy has.
        Gazelle should be closest to the Kiowa Warrior from the all, but there are reasons is isn't.
        Kiowa Warrior has features and capabilities that Gazelle has, so it is important to OP understand that what are the differences.
        i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
        i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

        Comment


          #84
          Originally posted by shagrat View Post
          I personally tend to trust the professional pilots more, than the professional simmer.
          And that is where you make an mistake, as you trust the authority without any evidences or logic.
          It is not like real world pilots has not been wrong before...
          i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
          i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

          Comment


            #85
            Is this argument still pumping on.
            This discussion is so yesterday.
            Move on and lets see how the dice fall shall we!

            Man alive!

            HP pro Reverb.

            Current settings:
            Windows VR setting: IPD is 64.5mm, High image quality, 90Hz refresh rate.
            Steam: VR SS set to 100%, motionReprojectionMode set to "motionreproduction" and Locked in at 45 Hz display,
            DCS: Pixel Density 1.0, Forced IPD at 55 (perceived world size), 2 X MSAA, 0 X SSAA.
            My real IPD is 64.5mm. Prescription VROptition lenses installed.
            VR Driver system:
            I9-9900KS 5Ghz CPU. XI Hero motherboard and 2080ti graphics card, 32 gigs Ram 3200 Hz. No OC at the mo.

            Comment


              #86
              Originally posted by Rogue Trooper View Post
              Is this argument still pumping on.
              This discussion is so yesterday.
              Move on and lets see how the dice fall shall we!

              Man alive!



              How do I upvote you?

              Comment


                #87
                Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
                And that is where you make an mistake, as you trust the authority without any evidences or logic.
                It is not like real world pilots has not been wrong before...
                Not saying they can't be wrong, just doubting anybody who has never actually flown the real thing has more than assumptions based on paper and interpretation of data to offer...

                Evidence: pilots do it for real
                Logic: pilot does know his shit vs. assuming and interpolating from paperwork
                Shagrat

                - Flying Sims since 1984 -
                Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 32GB | GeForce RTX 2080S - Acer XB280HK 28" 4k | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | TM Cougar MFDs | a hand made UFC | AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

                Comment


                  #88
                  Just two examples what a real Gazelle pilot said, but you need to be able to use translate.google.com:

                  http://www.checksix-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=465&t=200331&start=50#p1678174

                  http://www.checksix-forums.com/viewt...rt=50#p1679855
                  i9 10920X @4.8GHz, 3090 OC, 64 GB RAM @3600, Valve Index, HOTAS & Rudder: all Virpil with FFB base mod (G940)

                  Comment


                    #89
                    Once again. Your personal vendetta against PC has nothing to do with OP's original question.

                    Comment


                      #90
                      Maybe, once you start being objective, you will understand my point.
                      i9 10920X @4.8GHz, 3090 OC, 64 GB RAM @3600, Valve Index, HOTAS & Rudder: all Virpil with FFB base mod (G940)

                      Comment


                        #91
                        We understand your point completely.

                        The Gazelle isn't how you expect it should be. This is fine, you're allowed to have concerns.

                        However it is not fine that you insist on derailing every thread in PC's section of the forum. Stop posting your personal issues with the module on everyone elses threads. You are destroying meaningful conversation when you do.

                        Comment


                          #92
                          Thank you for being so generous.
                          i9 10920X @4.8GHz, 3090 OC, 64 GB RAM @3600, Valve Index, HOTAS & Rudder: all Virpil with FFB base mod (G940)

                          Comment


                            #93
                            Originally posted by shagrat View Post
                            Not saying they can't be wrong, just doubting anybody who has never actually flown the real thing has more than assumptions based on paper and interpretation of data to offer...

                            Evidence: pilots do it for real
                            Logic: pilot does know his shit vs. assuming and interpolating from paperwork


                            The paperwork that was quoted is from real flight tests from U.S Army Air Mobility Research and Development Laboratory in 1975. The real hard evidence that overrides anything that any person has to say, as long you get the parameters as much close to the same as in the real tests was done.

                            There are always some small details that are not found in any documentation, as they can be added only on some notes, footnotes, individual test reports and so on even just discussed verbally and never written to any documentation. That is when the personnel information becomes valuable when it is the only source for anything, and even then it needs to be compared against everything else above it.

                            If someone thinks that helicopters fly straight and level by having a cyclic in the center, you can fly it around performing high G maneuvers between 60-180 km/h by never touching at all to pedals or collective only mainly flying by moving cyclic slightly, and calling it "correct as is", then that is against laws of physics and all engineering already and doesn't even come near anywhere to question the personnel opinions.

                            When one can fly same way no matter is there a SAS active, is the TRIM active, is the collective at 25% or 75% (RPM 45-90%) without using collective or pedals and just using cyclic in 5% of its whole movement range while doing acrobatics, formation flying, gun/rocket attacks, firing missiles etc... Basically everything except take-off, landing and hovering.... It doesn't require hundreds/thousands hours on that specific helicopter (or even a helicopter pilot license) to know that all is not correct.

                            This is the common problem here in DCS topics, a real pilot pop-up and say something and it is for many like a word from a god, and problems starts when there is other hard evidence that points elsewhere.

                            Everything can be evidence, question is just to find out what has more weight on them against other evidence and what they can tell if even combined.

                            If someone gets irrefutable evidence for something, it can not be "that person said so".
                            i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
                            i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

                            Comment


                              #94
                              @Fri13, feel free to join the Low Level Hell Discord and bring up that topic and what you wrote under your nice little graphic. I assure you, you will recieve a lot of answers from real helicopter pilots on your false assumptions how a helicopter should fly, turn and so ever. I can only recommend you join there. The guys are generally nice and talk to anyone, as long you are not behaving out of the line.
                              http://www.polychop-sims.com

                              Comment


                                #95
                                Originally posted by Fri13 View Post




                                The paperwork that was quoted is from real flight tests from U.S Army Air Mobility Research and Development Laboratory in 1975. The real hard evidence that overrides anything that any person has to say, as long you get the parameters as much close to the same as in the real tests was done.



                                There are always some small details that are not found in any documentation, as they can be added only on some notes, footnotes, individual test reports and so on even just discussed verbally and never written to any documentation. That is when the personnel information becomes valuable when it is the only source for anything, and even then it needs to be compared against everything else above it.



                                If someone thinks that helicopters fly straight and level by having a cyclic in the center, you can fly it around performing high G maneuvers between 60-180 km/h by never touching at all to pedals or collective only mainly flying by moving cyclic slightly, and calling it "correct as is", then that is against laws of physics and all engineering already and doesn't even come near anywhere to question the personnel opinions.



                                When one can fly same way no matter is there a SAS active, is the TRIM active, is the collective at 25% or 75% (RPM 45-90%) without using collective or pedals and just using cyclic in 5% of its whole movement range while doing acrobatics, formation flying, gun/rocket attacks, firing missiles etc... Basically everything except take-off, landing and hovering.... It doesn't require hundreds/thousands hours on that specific helicopter (or even a helicopter pilot license) to know that all is not correct.



                                This is the common problem here in DCS topics, a real pilot pop-up and say something and it is for many like a word from a god, and problems starts when there is other hard evidence that points elsewhere.



                                Everything can be evidence, question is just to find out what has more weight on them against other evidence and what they can tell if even combined.



                                If someone gets irrefutable evidence for something, it can not be "that person said so".
                                Sounds like you fly either in "Arcade Mode" or with "Easier Controls" (much less forgiving).
                                If I center the cyclic it immediately tries to fly of course and pitches. Even with SAS and trimmed to level flight it requires corrections, unless you activate AP.
                                But I would support what Borchi said, talk to the guys in the know and discuss it with someone who actually flew these types of helicopters.
                                I think the FM isn't "perfect", but no Simulation will ever be. If guys with real life experience tell me it feels pretty real, if you don't try stupid stunts no sane pilot would try, as they likely would kill him, or at least ground him, I am ok with that.
                                Especially as Polychop already said they could improve with the new FM for the Kiowa and will transfer these improvements to the Gazelle. What more can we ask?
                                Shagrat

                                - Flying Sims since 1984 -
                                Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 32GB | GeForce RTX 2080S - Acer XB280HK 28" 4k | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | TM Cougar MFDs | a hand made UFC | AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

                                Comment


                                  #96
                                  There is no extra arcade mode for the Gazelle (other modules support this mode while having separate control sets for it in the control options were you choose for instance "Ka-50" or "Ka-50 real"). The current FM is very arcade mode, yes. What doesn't make sense to me is how "Easier Controls" are much less forgiving. I'm sure you meant the opposite?
                                  i9 10920X @4.8GHz, 3090 OC, 64 GB RAM @3600, Valve Index, HOTAS & Rudder: all Virpil with FFB base mod (G940)

                                  Comment


                                    #97
                                    Give it a rest Alec.
                                    There is no medal for regurgitating old arguments and saying what has been already said.
                                    Your observations of the OH-58D videos are worthless unless you have actually manhandled the actual module and this you have not done.
                                    Relax, let us see where we go.and what we have on release, a fella can look real stupid without the patience to wait for what unfolds..

                                    HP pro Reverb.

                                    Current settings:
                                    Windows VR setting: IPD is 64.5mm, High image quality, 90Hz refresh rate.
                                    Steam: VR SS set to 100%, motionReprojectionMode set to "motionreproduction" and Locked in at 45 Hz display,
                                    DCS: Pixel Density 1.0, Forced IPD at 55 (perceived world size), 2 X MSAA, 0 X SSAA.
                                    My real IPD is 64.5mm. Prescription VROptition lenses installed.
                                    VR Driver system:
                                    I9-9900KS 5Ghz CPU. XI Hero motherboard and 2080ti graphics card, 32 gigs Ram 3200 Hz. No OC at the mo.

                                    Comment

                                    Working...
                                    X