Flight Model Again V2 - Page 12 - ED Forums


Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-09-2018, 12:40 AM   #111
3rd Party Developer
borchi_2b's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 961

Originally Posted by NixNB View Post
"The AP has it's own gyro and is always running"

This does not explain why the Gazelle lacks blowback, dissymmetry of lift and left skid high, right skid low takeoff/landing

Doesn't explain why yawing doesn't roll the aircraft (and vice versa)

Doesn't explain it's overly sensitive controls (can completely loop/roll the aircraft with only less than 10% stick input)

I'd also imagine the the AP SAS system would move the pilot's controls, showing what it's doing, like other SAS systems (unless the gazelle doesn't do that IRL, I would have a hard time believing that, if the SAS is linked to the control servos, thus the pilots controls)
sorry to sound rude or annoyed, but all. your points have been coverred already a few times. I am not going to explain it over and over again. Thanks for your comprehension
borchi_2b is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 03:15 AM   #112
NixNB's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Arizona
Posts: 115

Make a sticky post explaining these then, posting important info buried in 20+ page threads is not a very effective form of communication.

The only answers i've seen explain these almost always blames the SAS, and I can't imagine that's all you guys can say.
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Give OH-6 ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
NixNB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 09:08 AM   #113
Focha's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Portugal
Posts: 640

Just to add some experience I had...

We once add a failure in the rail gyroscope in our 365. Not much happened.

We just had the AFCS compensating wrongly the servos and we end up having oscillations.

I don't know the gyroscopes that Gazelle has. That is a fact. What I know it that the gyroscopes are there to help AFCS/SAS know the displacements, then the AFCS/SAS makes corrections to the servos connected to control rods.

Can you explain the SAS system and its gyroscopes? Or at least, do you have any references to learn more about it?

Thank you.

Also, can you point me out to the quotes explaining why the Gazelle does not have effects that I expect in every helicopter I type rated?

Thank you very much.

To reply to does who say that if you didn't fly you can't compare... then why the developers compared a Bell 206 cyclic displacement to argue for the Gazelle?

There are simply some factual errors here that I don't understand.

It's like there are diferente criteria here.

Again, obviously you can compare helicopters. They may not have the same performance, the same feeling in the controls... but I am yet to experience different experience like in the Gazelle modelled here. Maybe when Bell 525 with its FBW comes out, then I should expect something different.

I've flown the R-22 which is a helicopter with direct linkage mechanic to the rotor and for example a more complex machine like the AS365 and although they are different I feel the same feedback from rotor, and 365 is free of feedback, since it is hydraulic connected to rotors servos.

I am not saying what is wrong. I'm saying that your Gazelle flies so different that for me it is like a different class of aircraft instead of helicopter.

I would really like to fly a military Gazelle, but that is really far from happening and the civil one I can fly, it's not the same, right? So not comparable by some standards.

I have to agree with a fellow pilot that wrote here... it's all about expectations... and I cannot expect more, I guess, from a desktop helicopter sim.

And also, RL pilots perspective of a desktop sim is utterly subjective. But again, if I saw effects modelled in our modules in this simulator, than I would expect Gazelle to have those too.

Dissemetry of lift, roll-yaw couple (even if light one), blowback... etc.

Thank you.
ASUS N552VX | i7-6700HQ @ 2.59GHz | 16 GB DDR3 | NVIDIA GF GTX 950M 4 Gb | 250 Gb SSD | 1 Tb HD SATA II Backup | TIR4 | Microsoft S. FF 2+X52 Throttle+Saitek Pedals | Win 10 64 bits
Focha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2018, 12:56 PM   #114
Schmidtfire's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 801

I have had a blast in the Gazelle as an overall experience, but I have come to terms with that the fidelity will be different depending on what module and who is making it. Obviously the FM has some issues or there would not be this many threads or upset users. I think a lot of this stems from expectations that Gazelle 342M should hold the exact same level of quality as the Huey, Mi8 or K-50. That is next to impossible for a new 3rd party to achieve for their first project (no offense PC). Those modules are considered to have the best flight models of any sim out there today. With help from Kamov, access to the Mi8 and boatloads of info on the Huey...

Not here to kill the discussion, but it does not really move along to something productive. In the end: Better FM = better reputation = higher sales and happier users. So how can we help with FM development to get it were it needs to be to compete with ED/BST modules? Any programmers? RL Gazelle pilots? Engineers? I am sure some will offer a helping hand if asked. It will build a really good relationship with the DCS Gazelle community aswell
Schmidtfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2018, 09:32 AM   #115
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 180

Very simple example of a fault in the FM. Just start up the helicopter. Apply power to just under hover. And you'll see you can move the airframe with the cyclic but not the rudder.
YorZor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2018, 11:34 AM   #116
ED Translator
EagleEye's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,019

Hmmm, isnt what you have wrote on post #13 of this thread different from what you have wrote in post #103?

Originally Posted by borchi_2b View Post
About bank angles of the Gazelle a very important fact has to be known. As soon the AP and the gyro are activated, another system is running in the background to enhance flightsafety and an easier controlability of the helicopter for combat use. This system is callaed "SAS", as far I remember the correct name is Stability Augumentation System, but I would have to check that again, which is not im portant for the function it provides.
This system is designed to support the pilots and counter tendencies of the airframe that you try to neglect if possible to increase safety of flight during combat. According to the french pilots the system has 2 sides, a good and a bad one. Good one is that it enables you to fly semi automatic in cross country flights. Bad part is, if you fly more aggresiv you have to fight the systems tendencies, which is the reason why some of the pilots switch of the AP or the gyro for example.
I also switch of the trim when I fly her in DCS, then she feels even more natural to me, but that is just me and everybody has to find thier preferred way of flying her.
This SAS has no real activation button by design in the SA342M cause it is directly linked to the gyro and the autopilot.
As soon you switch off certain functions the SAS is also deactivated.

Originally Posted by borchi_2b View Post
Hi at all. I talked to Patrick about it again and in the end I asked him if we. ever mentioned that the gyro and the AP are linked to the SAS in the 342m but are there for the purpose of autohover and automated flight and no matter if or if not engaged, that. the SAS is running in the background of the helicopter all the time as soon the batteries provide enough power at the end. We came to the conclusion that some how it must have been lost in the hundereds of forum entries. So for not keeping. track if we mentioned and highlighted it I have to apologies.

So i state it here again. even if you dislink the gyro and the ap from the SAS by switching them off, the SAS is still running in the background, which makes the helicopter more stable then others. We recieved the information why this was done and unique to the 342m from the pilots with similar words: "this was done to increase the stability and to give. us the freedom to work more efficient as a fireteam and reduce workload, cause on a battlefield flying is just a tiny bit of the whole action in the cockpit, so the french army had a request to make. the flight more safe"...

Just read through the pages and saw the difference.
That info from #103 should be in the manual, if its not there, right?
Deutsche DCS-Flughandbücher
(Zuletzt hinzugefügt: Kurzeinweisung DCS: AV-8B Harrier)


SYSSpecs: i7-4790K @4GHz|GA-Z97X-SLI|16GB RAM|PALIT GTX970|Win10 64bit|TrackIR5|TM Warthog/Saitek Pro Pedals
EagleEye is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:58 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.