Has module been abandoned by Devs? - Page 4 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-24-2020, 01:49 AM   #31
keith55
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius View Post
When did this feeling of self-justice become the new 'norm' towards developers? Stuff happens. Developers have lives too, and they can be working behind the scenes towards bigger updates. They're nearing release on their Kiowa and it would make sense for them to be focusing more. Project management is very tricky in this community and I respect those that try to adhere to the public as well as managing everything on the team, from peoples' roles and the modules themselves.
I certainly wish the developers success in their endeavours. I hope the Kiowa is fantastic and the Gazelle is made into the module everyone wants it to be. I have no axe to grind. I came to the Polychop forums a few days ago, interested in the Gazelle, but knowing nothing about any of the modules.

Last edited by keith55; 02-24-2020 at 08:50 AM. Reason: typo
keith55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2020, 02:02 PM   #32
Tiramisu
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 581
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by keith55 View Post
There is also this document.
That is a very interesting read, but for the most part the section about the flight model is mostly describing extreme situations and I doubt that normal reallife pilots can give much feedback about that, because they usually do not fly dangerous maneuvers. I mean we would probably have to ask testpilots or engineers about the flight model in extreme situations. So I would not 100% agree with the following conclusion from the document:

Quote:
PolyChop have repeatedly claimed that their flight model is verified by pilots with thousands of hours of experience and is totally realistic. We find this very difficult to believe, and we’re going to provide evidence.
However, I have to agree with the part in the document, that mentions the weird behavior, when you change the position of your collective and the Gazelle banks in an unnatural way. The transition from one bank angle to another feels very clipped and very sudden in that situation, unless there is some fly-by-wire-mechanics going on that I am not aware of. Still I believe the roll behavior needs some fixes in general. And the fall behavior might also needs some fixes like the document mentions.
Other than that the flight model feels very solid for an Advanced Flight Model (AFM) imo. It is behaving pretty much the way I would expect from a light helicopter. Btw. its relatively small mass might be the reason, why there is almost no VRS for the Gazelle. I am not quite sure about that.

Last edited by Tiramisu; 02-27-2020 at 02:10 PM.
Tiramisu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2020, 04:44 PM   #33
Harlikwin
Veteran
 
Harlikwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Living rent free in your mind
Posts: 5,956
Default

Well they recently fixed many of the various bugs in that document and spent a month or so doing it, so I'd say not abandoned. They also said they will redo the FM based on what they learned with the kiowa.

But the Kiowa is understandably their current priority. And that is what it is.
__________________
New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)
Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Harlikwin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2020, 04:49 PM   #34
CobaltUK
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by keith55 View Post
For me, these posts from a helicopter flight instructor persuaded me that the FM model of the Gazelle is not up to the standard of typical DCS modules. There is also this document.
"these posts" deleted ? That link not working for me.
CobaltUK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2020, 05:45 PM   #35
keith55
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 49
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CobaltUK View Post
"these posts" deleted ? That link not working for me.
Looks like the link has expired. You can see the posts by searching for posts by user '"Damcopter" in these forums.
keith55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2020, 07:32 PM   #36
Ramsay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 2,230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiramisu View Post
That is a very interesting read, but for the most part the section about the flight model is mostly describing extreme situations and I doubt that normal reallife pilots can give much feedback about that, because they usually do not fly dangerous maneuvers.
Although the Gazelle FM improved greatly in Q1 2018 it still has errors in some basic control linkages i.e. between collective input and pitch, roll, yaw, etc.

You don't need to fly to the limits of the flight envelope to find issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damcopter View Post
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.
Debate on the current Gazelle FM is somewhat moot as Polychop have acknowledged the problem and plan to eventually re-code the FM from afresh.


Quote:
It is behaving pretty much the way I would expect from a light helicopter. Btw. its relatively small mass might be the reason, why there is almost no VRS for the Gazelle. I am not quite sure about that.
There seems to be a general agreement among RL helicopter pilots that entering VRS in DCS is too easy in other modules.

The Gazelle does enter VRS (an accelerated descent rate) but it's always possible to "power out" of the vortex with increased collective i.e. there's no need to translate to breakout of the vortex.

AFAIK the ease/risk of entering a VRS is related to aircraft weight and rotor diameter.

The Gazelle does't appear to standout from other helicopters and looks similar to the Huey.



VRS Risk Formula c/o Gunnars Driver: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.p...85#post4180185

Last edited by Ramsay; 02-27-2020 at 09:58 PM.
Ramsay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2020, 10:30 PM   #37
Rogue Trooper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 1,647
Default

It would be shameful to abandon such an European machine!


it will not be abandoned.
__________________

HP pro Reverb user and never going back to 2D flat screen.

Current settings:
Windows VR setting: IPD is 65mm, Best quality (beta) image, 90Hz refresh rate.
Steam: VR SS set to 100%, motionReprojectionMode on and Locked in at 45 Hz display,
DCS: Pixel Density 1.0, Forced IPD at 54, 2X AA.
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.
Rogue Trooper is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 05:14 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.