Will there ever be a SA342sim?

I too have the feeling the control input should be more 1:1, somehow the cyclic in the cockpit is a little weird. FFB is already unchecked.

This thread is actually quite depressing to me, because as a real life (for fun) heli pilot, with just under 200 hours in trainer and single turbine ships (S300/R22/R44/MD500/Bell 406) -- I have had loads of fun in the Gazelle. It feels more realistic than anything I've flown in FSX or XPlane (and I have a lot of hours in the FSX 206, as annoying as it is flight model-wise). I haven't flown a single combat mission with the Gazelle; I just like messing around and landing on the nearest parking lot as I cruise around.

So now I learn that it's not realistic. <Sigh> I have the UH-1 and the Mi-8 and I don't enjoy flying them that much. The Gazelle just feels right to me. Maybe I'm not as discerning as I should be, and I don't spend any time exploring the corners of the flight envelope, but -- it's FUN to fly and scratches my flying itch (I don't fly much IRL due to various reasons, the biggest one being $).

So, I'll just wait for that new, more realistic FM that PolyChop promises... That will be interesting.

(Edit: I meant to mention that I'm using a Virpil MongoosT-50CM2 base along with a TM Warthog grip and 100mm extension, with the centerless cam and very light pre-loading set. I think that makes a lot of difference in the way flying "feels".)

Well based on my own experiences with RL vs Simulated flight cross training... the controls you use definitely do make a drastic difference in 'feel'. A lifetime of using short sticks and poor quality controls resulted in a... ummm... ''interesting experience punctuated with creative profanity'' when I first took to the skies and discovered the differences in control. My current setup is a full length, low mounted VKB stick that feels a LOT like the stick in the aircraft I fly. One is good for training, the other caused a ''Coming to Jesus'' moment.

Based on my RL vs Simulated experience, I sort of disagree with you. While it is true that your type of joystick makes a big difference in how you can control the aircraft, you can definitely still notice if a flight model has been done right or not.

This thread is actually quite depressing to me, because as a real life (for fun) heli pilot, with just under 200 hours in trainer and single turbine ships (S300/R22/R44/MD500/Bell 406) -- I have had loads of fun in the Gazelle. It feels more realistic than anything I've flown in FSX or XPlane (and I have a lot of hours in the FSX 206, as annoying as it is flight model-wise). I haven't flown a single combat mission with the Gazelle; I just like messing around and landing on the nearest parking lot as I cruise around.

 

 

So now I learn that it's not realistic. <Sigh> I have the UH-1 and the Mi-8 and I don't enjoy flying them that much. The Gazelle just feels right to me. Maybe I'm not as discerning as I should be, and I don't spend any time exploring the corners of the flight envelope, but -- it's FUN to fly and scratches my flying itch (I don't fly much IRL due to various reasons, the biggest one being $).

 

 

So, I'll just wait for that new, more realistic FM that PolyChop promises... That will be interesting.

 

 

(Edit: I meant to mention that I'm using a Virpil MongoosT-50CM2 base along with a TM Warthog grip and 100mm extension, with the centerless cam and very light pre-loading set. I think that makes a lot of difference in the way flying "feels".)

I find it quite depressing that a "real life" heli pilot isn't aware of DCS's excellent implementation of realistic force trim feature for the helicopter modules. With a spring centering stick (which should be a very annoying input method for a real life heli pilot) you have to use those workaround methods (stick to center after trim), which isn't the most natural way of flying a heli. Someone who has no clue about the realistic trim feature might it find difficult to fly the Mi-8, UH-1 and Ka-50. However, there are springless joystick mods out there and FFB joysticks which work absolutely fabulous with the realistic trim feature. It makes flying the helicopters in DCS the most realistic experience for a game on PC. The Gazelle module doesn't even feature any of those trim methods and in addition, their magnetic brake implementation is a joke. This, the weird input sensitivity overdrive after startup and the incomplete FM make the Gazelle a low quality module in comparison to the other helicopters in DCS. It's like Arcade Mode always enabled, like flying a helo in Arma and other games with 'normal' joysticks.

Examples for a simple joystick mod with 'hold stick in place' feature: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=50522

Another one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR3I0WS9vWI

Ok, so for the record, do we have any real reason to believe Polychop still intends to re-work the flight model?

The last message I saw from them walked back from admitting it even needed work.

What happened to the French pilot who came on here and was going to work with them?

I've had fun with the Gaz recently, but all this still stands...

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=181563

@Scarecrow84

You will know as soon as a big update comes out, where all of those who tinkered the axis saturation down to hell can safely set everything back to 100% to get 1:1 deflection for the cyclic:

- ingame cyclic 1:1 deflection on joystick input and before startup deflection equal to after startup deflection

- in special settings you will find the same trim options like in the other helicopter modules

- the magnetic brake will actually work (press and hold - disengage, release - engage, full FFB support...).

- no more weird continuous roll on cyclic input

- tbc

Everything just a dream for years now. But all this is needed to make it a full-quality DCS module.

I have 154hours of real flight in the Gazelle and 3000h + in other helicopters.

I am helicopter instructor since 15 years on French helicopters.

 

The DCS Gazelle has big problems considering FM.

 

First of all:

A steady cyclic displacement on the right or the left side doesn't correspond to a roll angle of X degrees like it is IRL. In DCS the Gazelle never stop rolling until fly on the back... IRL if you displace the cyclic x cm on the right, you will have a x degrees roll angle (it's a little bit simplified but too hard to explain in English for me)

Just compare the MI8 and the Gazelle in DCS. Fly both at 120km/h (or the speed you want) and displace your stick 3cm on the right or left and maintain it. Just look at the behavior of your helicopter ������. The MI8 is realistic, the Gazelle is....

 

I agree with comments on the VRS in DCS. If it was like that in real life I wouldn't be able to write a comment on Ed's forum: I would be dead.

 

Sorry for my English.

There are some other weird things on the FM of the DCS Gazelle. I explained all of them to Polychop guys. They are working on it.... Or they are working on the next chopper and maybe... Maybe one day they will work again on the Gazelle.

 

I am angry because Polychop never made a statement on the problem of their FM. They know all the mistakes they've done thanks to real pilots feedbacks but they don't speak about it and still earn money based on a lie.

 

Some guys tell that ALAT pilots were happy with the FM when testing the Gazelle on DCS.

It's normal because when you test a Sim for the first time when you are also a real pilot, you miss the real sensation of flight that you are used to. And you pilot the Sim in response to the instant behavior of the module. I made the same mistake during the first 2 hours of flight with the Gazelle. I was like a child when I saw the cockpit for the first time, it was like 15 years ago when I learnt to fly in ALAT school at Dax. But passing the first 2 hours trying to apply curves on axes to have a realistic feeling, I never succeeded to reach a realistic FM. Then I searched for the mistakes and I have discovered some.

After that I performed a test flight with Polychop guys and now we are waiting for the new FM. Perhaps one day. Fingers crossed.

Finally, someone who can speak about the problems I wrote a long time ago. I only flew AS365 and AS350 in real life (plus training in R22, R44 and some Ka-32), can't speak about the Gaz, but sure doesn't feel like a helicopter.

Mi-8 and Huey feel more like a helicopter. Although as you said... VRS like that and we would all be dead. Huey also feels... mmm... how can I say it... elastic in the FM. For me, the best FM to describe a helicopter in DCS would be Mi-8, and Ka-50, because I flew a Ka-32 and feels a lot like it.

But Gaz, definitely does not fly as a helicopter. I flown the AS350 B2 and B3, they are a bit heavier than the Gaz and doesn't have all the SAS/aids that the military Gaz have, but... helicopter physics are helicopter physics. Extremely complex at the macro level but understandable if you break it down.

As Jester986 said... a PC sim is what it is... even in the multi-million sims that we train, it is not the same thing.

But... I reinforce, the Gaz have big flaws. I've always defended that.

Good to know, that they are assuming that there is a problem, and they are going to work to fix it. Finally!

You don't have to be snarky about it. I have very little turbine time, and most of my time is in piston ships that don't have force trim (vs. just "trim").

That said, I'm here to say that I'm modifying my position about the SA-342. I've spent more time in the Gazelle and in the UH-1 (and to a lesser degree, in the Mi-8) since I first posted here, and I am starting to "get" why some folks are less than impressed with the Gazelle flight model. I now realize that it flies the way I *want* it to, not necessarily the way it really does :). I am now more anxiously awaiting an improved flight model, and will wring out the Huey some more.

In my defense, I spent many many hours in FSX's helicopter model over several years, wishing it didn't suck, and even the Gazelle feels 10x better than that sorry thing, so maybe that's why I was so enamoured with the Gazelle for a while.

I find it quite depressing that a "real life" heli pilot isn't aware of DCS's excellent implementation of realistic force trim feature for the helicopter modules. With a spring centering stick (which should be a very annoying input method for a real life heli pilot) you have to use those workaround methods (stick to center after trim), which isn't the most natural way of flying a heli. Someone who has no clue about the realistic trim feature might it find difficult to fly the Mi-8, UH-1 and Ka-50. However, there are springless joystick mods out there and FFB joysticks which work absolutely fabulous with the realistic trim feature. It makes flying the helicopters in DCS the most realistic experience for a game on PC. The Gazelle module doesn't even feature any of those trim methods and in addition, their magnetic brake implementation is a joke. This, the weird input sensitivity overdrive after startup and the incomplete FM make the Gazelle a low quality module in comparison to the other helicopters in DCS. It's like Arcade Mode always enabled, like flying a helo in Arma and other games with 'normal' joysticks.

 

 

Examples for a simple joystick mod with 'hold stick in place' feature: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=50522

Another one:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR3I0WS9vWI

When people are less impressed with the FM, they also mean the input and how differently it works compared to helicopters in DCS. It maybe better to separate them, because both are the biggest issues in the module. How the input system fails might be a bigger problem for most people than how accurate the simulated flight model is. Right now steering the gazelle works better with keyboard or the d-pad on a gamepad than with a HOTAS, which is my biggest complain since release. It's implementation is extremely bad and far below the standard of controls in DCS's other aircraft.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4063636&postcount=1

"Learning from the past and including subject matter expert input and testing right from the start, countless hours have been spent at coding a new and true to life flight model to a point where we can honestly say we’re proud of the result. We don’t take that statement lightly as we know the flight model of our previous module did not live up to expectations. That said, the SA-342 Gazelle module will be updated in time with the new technology developed for the Kiowa."

If that means a complete overhaul of controls (best: start from scratch) to get rid of this horrible unrealistic fly-by-wire abomination, i would be very happy. After years.

If that means a complete overhaul of controls (best: start from scratch) to get rid of this horrible unrealistic fly-by-wire abomination, i would be very happy. After years.

Are you a real life helicopter pilot? Ever flown a real Gazelle? If not, you have no right to comment in such a manner.

Furthermore, no need to be so harsh in any circumstance. These guys have put their heart and soul into this project so show some respect please. Provide constructive and civil criticism only.

I personally like the Gazelle very much and I'm enjoying it immensely. Big thank you to the guys at Polychop for making this one and I'm looking forward to the Kiowa.

PS. I have a PPL(H) in real life - never flown a Gazelle though.

Are you a real life helicopter pilot? Ever flown a real Gazelle? If not, you have no right to comment in such a manner.[…]

To be honest, an actual Gazelle pilot and instructor from the ALAT (Aviation Légère de l'Armée de Terre | French Army Light Aviation) expressed the same concerns several months ago but after several tries to convince the team he just quit these forums. He's still active on a french website though.

The good news is that Polychop will revamp the flight model in the future. From what I read lately the ALAT is nevertheless ramping up its deployment of the Polychop's Gazelle to train their pilots thanks to this same instructor.

Jup, if you talk about Damcopter, well, he bailed out after I told him that we will have the information backed up by some other helicopter pilots. Plus 150 hours on a Gazelle in pilot training 12 years ago is not a reference that we take into question, but knowing that it has been such a limited time and been a long time ago, we had all rights to backup the information by other pilots that activly fly in 3 different french squadrons.

So to speak, there was a quote of a 64d instructor about flightsims and helicopters I read lately.

"Ask 10 pilots about the feel of a helicopter and you will end up with 10 different answers!"

This means we have to work with the people and talk to them what we need, what they will agree on feels right as a team and our production is not a 1 man show of one pilot anymore for a long time already.

Anyways, we are still waiting for numbers and data we kindly asked to be collected for us from the actual aircraft. This still takes some time and Patrick and I have talked about the progress, cause this goes through his department, I am unfortunately not able to speak french.

To be honest, an actual Gazelle pilot and instructor from the ALAT (Aviation Légère de l'Armée de Terre | French Army Light Aviation) expressed the same concerns several months ago but after several tries to convince the team he just quit these forums. He's still active on a french website though.

 

The good news is that Polychop will revamp the flight model in the future. From what I read lately the ALAT is nevertheless ramping up its deployment of the Polychop's Gazelle to train their pilots thanks to this same instructor.

Can't be easy to get the flight model 100% right and another factor with the "10 different pilots - 10 different answers" problem is what hardware they flew the sim on. PC specs and flight controls used can make a big difference to the experience so no real fixed reference to go by.

Main thing is, you guys are still working on it and trying your best to get it right. Nobody can ask any more of you. Keep at it and we'll get there.

Respect.

[…]

I was indeed talking about Damcopter.

I won't say a thing about your process as it is in my opinion the best way to go, asking to various pilots who flew the machine to give their opinion. In the end, the most important thing is that your team accepted to revisit the flight model and update it in the future. Everybody wins !

@Hunter_5E

The major problems of the Gazelle are two:

1. the flight model allows you to fly upside-down and hold this attitude by simply pushing the collective down to the floor. this "negative thrust" creates enough uplift to maintain an upside-down flight, which is simply ridiculous...

2. the more severe problem is the control system. DCS has one of the absolut best features for truly dedicated helisimmers: FFB. This feature is present since the very beginning with DCS: Black Shark 1.0 and enables realistic trimming in every helicopter module except Polychop's Gazelle - because they just didn't know about it. They produced the gazelle module just with standard HOTAS controls and missed one of the most important, game changing features. If you are not that into helicopters, it's more likely to not know about realistic trimming, because you are used to simplified helicopter controls for spring centered joysticks like in ARMA 3 for instance.

Over the years they tried to ignore it, promise a solution, get away with excuses and so on. But in the end it's not acceptable to sell a module which lacks high standard features like that. Now PC has a lot of attention and goodwill from the community, because they announced the Kiowa. But showing a nice 3D model isn't enough to convince me. They have to deliver this time, pretty much on the same standard like the other Heli modules and keep their promise to fix the Gazelle.

It's not enough to let real helicopter pilots test their module with a spring based joystick, this way those guys can't verify the full capability of the sim and compare the fidelity against the other heli modules. No wonder those real pilots accepted the gazelle the way it is today.

@Alec Delorean

The OH-58D Kiowa flight model looks very promising and is planned to be ported to the Gazelle.

Sven talks Re:Flight Modelling @08:36:00 in the ThePaverHawker's 2nd Dec 2019 Twitch Stream

**Remove dead video link**

Unfortunately it's not clear if FFB support will be a thing but whatever happens, it's likely to be an improvement over what we have.

After 4 years waiting time - it better should be an "improvement" or let's hope for rebuilt from scratch and in the right way this time...

Ignoring FFB functionality will be a big mistake, than both choppers are only something like "FC3 fidelity".

Would be nice if the manufacturer would give current information about the further development of the Gazelle. You haven't heard anything since last October. Please polychop, give us a corresponding update on the Gazelle.

surprised people don't like the gazelle. it flies like a dream in my opinion.

To be more precise, it flies more like a plane - that's the problem. The magnetic brake is not functional and it's SAS, FD and Autopilot are just a wild guess and workaround for spring based joysticks by Polychop. All the other helicopter modules adress this with special settings for trimming options. I pretty much like the Gazelle module, it's a beautiful machine, modelled and textured nicely, superb cockpit functionality... But how it flies and it's controls, a disgrace.

just compare these maneuvers, especially the roll and hard turn with the gazelle in DCS, in reality it rolls around it's center of mass shortly below the main rotor. Makes sense, because the main rotor lifts all the weight and fights against gravity. In DCS the point of mass is centered and fixed in the middle of the whole 3D model, it rolls like a plane around the center of the hull between "invisible wings". For realistic simulation, the center of mass should also be dynamic not fixed, depending on payload, engine power and attitude. All the other helicopter modules manage that as a standard feature.

and finally: https://sendvid.com/2fx0z4oc