my evaluation

[vaaf_rup]

I spent about two hours in TO:H tonight arsing about. Firstly my experience for the record: flight simming since MSFS1, helo sims since Longbow 2, a lot of time in DCS:Black Shark and helos in FSX. Real Life front seat time on Squirrel, Iroquois, Blackhawk, Kiowa. Kit was X52 in cyclic/collective configuration, trackIR4, CH pedals.

In no particular order:


TrackIR isn't bounded inside the cockpit. If you have X/Y/Z translation on, you end up with your head in the breeze. Need to limit this.
Asymmetry of rotor lift seems to be a bit too aggressive. Noticeable right roll with even slight forward movement. I know that you can offset this with auto trim, but you could dial it down a little without losing realism.
The wee helo seems to run out of left pedal way too easily. It feels like a heavy huey rather than a little sportscar. Could be my pedal axis sensitivity, but it feels like it has an underpowered antitorque rotor (or high density altitude). Are you modelling "hot and high" conditions, requiring hover power checks, etc?
Good to see wind modelled. Doesn't seem very effective though? Didn't seem to make a lot of difference? Would like to see weathercocking and downdrafts over ranges etc, encouraging proper mountain flying and pinnacle approaches. Also we need better wind indications on the ground, e.g. lakes, dust etc.
HUD is good, and I'd say pretty essential given lack of inner-ear feedback.
Regular vibratey burbles don't seem to be linked to any particular flight state. Is this meant to be turbulence or what? Initially thought this was a translational lift burble (though too aggressive), but it happens (too?) regularly, at lots of different speeds and always feels the same.
Translational lift isn't obviously implemented, might just be me though.
Vortex ring doesn't seem to be modelled. Straight down from a few hundred meters, pulled stick, hover.
Much easier to fly with auto trim set - need to be able to bind manual trim/release to keys. Ideally hold button/key for trim release, sets trim on release key/button.
Option for knots/feet on the HUD would be nice.
Autos definitely doable, feel ok. Didn't really respond as expected to a collective "check" after flare, was a bit more Arma-ish. Also it would be nice to be able to hear Rotor RPM as a guide when autorotating.
Cyclic correction to stay level when slide landing doesn't seem to help. Once you start tipping over, you tip. Might just be me though.
There is no Vne modelled (well, I got it up to 1000m and pointed straight down, and pulled out fine at 350+ km/h). It's also fully aerobatic, including hovering cyclic snap rolls. Feels a bit weird.
It's robust as hell (in a bad way). Full deflection cyclic, mashing axes, unusual attitudes etc, nothing breaks it. Couldn't get the main rotor to cut my own tail off no matter how hard I tried :D
Not sure if there's the ability to bind analogue axes to the throttles, but that would be nice. Allows you to model governor failures etc.


$0.02. Thanks for this, I'd definitely be happy if this FM made it into Arma2.

[[DirTyDeeDs]-Ziggy-]

we have a thread for feedback already established. i doubt your opinion is sufficient to require another of the same topic.
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=121033

[vaaf_rup]

Oh, you mean the one that's 10% feedback and the rest noise?

Wow. You're welcome. *headdesk*

[[DirTyDeeDs]-Ziggy-]

You can take your super special suggestions to the community issue tracker for specific problems.
http://dev-heaven.net/projects/toh-cit

[RoyaltyinExile]

Your feedback is certainly welcome, I think the point being made is that it's useful to group feedback into logical threads, so discussions aren't duplicated, i.e. the same points aren't repeated unnecessarily.

However, we're talking ideal world/ free/ people-taking-their-time-out feedback, so, thank you for taking your time, and don't worry about it. :)

I meant to get back to the business of a saturday afternoon a little while ago, but... I will quickly mention one thing:



The wee helo seems to run out of left pedal way too easily. It feels like a heavy huey rather than a little sportscar. Could be my pedal axis sensitivity, but it feels like it has an underpowered antitorque rotor (or high density altitude). Are you modelling "hot and high" conditions, requiring hover power checks, etc?


This is a known issue. It's documented somewhere in the 'read me', and we'll try to update that with other known issues as we go along. In fact, one of our focus testers used almost the exact same terms to describe it, and he was a RL pilot.

Altitude and temps are linked into the FM; however, I cannot confirm if our editor's time of day/ season is linked up with this at this stage. I'll check next week. When I'm not drinking cheap rose wine (don't ask/ judge!). :D


Thanks again to all,
RiE

[CameronMcDonald]

When I'm not drinking cheap rose wine (don't ask/ judge!). :D

Why, RiE? Why? :pet5:

[nightsta1ker]

-Ziggy-;1965831']You can take your super special suggestions to the community issue tracker for specific problems.
http://dev-heaven.net/projects/toh-cit

Perhaps you should keep your super special opinion to yourself and let the man talk. He obviously has some real experience in aircraft and so in my estimation his opinion DOES stand out. There are no rules stating that we cannot start our own forum thread if we wish, and sifting through all the nonsense on the feedback thread trying to find decent feedback IS very tiresome.

[4 IN 1]

He do make important point, and I agree with the issue he brings up, so leave the man alone.

[Tonci87]

@<hidden> you write that you managed to get Auto Hover working, could you please explain how? It didn´t work for me, no matter what I tried.

[CarlGustaffa]

Altitude and temps are linked into the FM; however, I cannot confirm if our editor's time of day/ season is linked up with this at this stage.

Able to get to 22570 feet (using auto hover). Took me about 3/4 tank to get there. But temperature gauge still reads 16°C. No changes between day and night observed.

Auto hover also ment auto position being able to cope with setWind [30,30,true] (80 KIAS, lol). Some weathervaning observed but I would expect a lot more at these "speeds".

I'm not a helicopter pilot, but I have some experience with real world GA flying and being a helicopter passenger (heavier than this). I don't know about these small helis, but the big ones I've been in is remarkably comfortable in pretty bad weather - turbulence is not felt even remotely as much as in a small plane. I only assume camera shakes is being used to illustrate some turbulence.

[MemphisBelle]

stupid question, I assume that ingame mouse to "touch" knobs and switches will be part of updates, and or at least of the final product, am I right?

EDIT: Damnit, wrong subforum...

[Steakslim]

That and you can already usee ingame mouse to touch the switches, just have to make sure freelook is on.

Edit: Unless you mean the character model physically touch the switches...which I think may be asking a bit much since the actual Take On game will not have a visible human in the seat at all (confirmed in E3 video).

[Dslyecxi]

Looks like really solid and useful feedback; it's a shame the first response he got was from an aggressive asshat who seemed more interested in demeaning the guy than even bothering to read what he wrote. :rolleyes:

[GaGrin]

That and you can already usee ingame mouse to touch the switches, just have to make sure freelook is on.
Can we please get this for A3? Instant clickable interactions rather than scroll lists (but keeping the list for flexibility with multiple options) is a really, really good way to improve some of ArmA's chronic interface issues.

Also: Loving the little rear/under side mirror :) it's a small thing, but when I realised it was actually useful I nearly wet myself.

[vaaf_rup]

However, we're talking ideal world/ free/ people-taking-their-time-out feedback, so, thank you for taking your time, and don't worry about it. :)
...
Altitude and temps are linked into the FM; however, I cannot confirm if our editor's time of day/ season is linked up with this at this stage. I'll check next week. When I'm not drinking cheap rose wine (don't ask/ judge!). :D


I stopped worrying about little forum hitlers waving their epeens around a long time ago :)

Good to see you're including atmospheric conditions into the FM, looking forward to the next update.


@<hidden> you write that you managed to get Auto Hover working, could you please explain how? It didn´t work for me, no matter what I tried.

I didn't actually try the auto hover, only the auto trim?


Looks like really solid and useful feedback; it's a shame the first response he got was from an aggressive asshat who seemed more interested in demeaning the guy than even bothering to read what he wrote. :rolleyes:

Not the first time, won't be the last ;)

[arigram]

I think that real pilots and/or residents of Seattle should either have their own thread to post their detailed and very important analysis or feel free to start their own threads.
Thank you for taking them time to assist in making the simulator a more realistic one.

[ADOGMC]

vaaf_rup Can you bring your experience as a pilot in the community:

1. What procedure must be done to takes off without looking back
2. How to land properly.

Course in another post ^^

Thank you for Avence

[CarlGustaffa]

Maybe vaaf_rup could setup some simple "learn to fly" scenarios, kinda like he remembers from his own first hover struggles? :p

[ryguy]

Edit: Unless you mean the character model physically touch the switches...which I think may be asking a bit much since the actual Take On game will not have a visible human in the seat at all (confirmed in E3 video).

I think there probably will be, maybe at E3 it just wasn't a feature yet. In arma 2, characters never used to move their limbs to control things but they put it in the preview. So I would assume the heli will have a character, even if it wasn't at E3.

[Tonci87]

I would like if the heli has a character. I never understood why fly sims always had to have empty cockpits.

[[DirTyDeeDs]-Ziggy-]

-Ziggy-;1965811']we have a thread for feedback already established. i doubt your opinion is sufficient to require another of the same topic.
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=121033


-Ziggy-;1965831']You can take your super special suggestions to the community issue tracker for specific problems.
http://dev-heaven.net/projects/toh-cit



Looks like really solid and useful feedback; it's a shame the first response he got was from an aggressive asshat who seemed more interested in demeaning the guy than even bothering to read what he wrote. :rolleyes:

My messages weren't "PC" (politically correct), but you can call people names, and somehow that better behavior?

I SAY, he made good points, merge the threads and sticky the topic.
OR continue to have two feedback threads...


I stopped worrying about little forum hitlers waving their epeens around a long time ago :)


It's okay to refer to me as FORUM HITLER...
but I suggest he FOLLOW THE RULES and I get persecuted?

hypocrites.

I don't apologize for my comments. This wasn't the first time I suggested someone use another topic for their thread, and it wont be the last.

I never said I wasn't an asshole. ;)

[LeftSkidLow]

Ah, so this is what it looks like when someone is trying to get a Moderator invite.

[MadDogX]

-Ziggy-;1966697']This wasn't the first time I suggested someone use another topic for their thread, and it wont be the last.
Or alternatively, just use the report button to alert a moderator and refrain from making snarky comments.

[vaaf_rup]

This is the subforum for the Take On Community Preview. Comments are going to consist of two things:

1. useful feedback
2. omgwtf how do I [problem]

Apparently dirtydeeds thinks we should have two massive threadnaughts and nothing else. I disagree. My post was on topic for the subforum. The devs apparently appreciated the feedback. So dirtydeeds, you're entitled to your opinion, but if you're going to wear your own arse as a hat then you don't get to complain when you get called out. K? K.

[[DirTyDeeDs]-Ziggy-]

you are misinformed. I want the feedback in ONE massive thread instead!
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=121033


Or alternatively, just use the report button to alert a moderator and refrain from making snarky comments.

good advice ! ;)

[SUBS17]

Vortex ring doesn't seem to be modelled. Straight down from a few hundred meters, pulled stick, hover.



I've found a Vortex ring state is quite low from hovers at 50m.

[habnor]

Or alternatively, just use the report button to alert a moderator and refrain from making snarky comments.

I agree, nothing worse than wanna be moderators. And I am not a fan of one massive forum thread with a bunch of crap.. Some people don't live on these forums. Some just want their own thread.. I think ts time you (Ziggy, and all the mods who feel the same) to grow up and deal with it.. I see no problem with 50,000 of the same threads.. doesn't bother me one bit.. seems the only ones it bothers are the wanna be moderators that live here and the mods that want to abuse their powers acting like cops. Tough cookies

[[DirTyDeeDs]-Ziggy-]

welcome to the forums! and fuck you! ;)

[habnor]

As if it wasn't obvious you were saying fuck you from the start. Again tough cookies.

[nightsta1ker]

There IS a good valid reason why the mods want to keep the number of threads down. Each one generates its own growth of feedback and takes on an entity of its own. All of these responses and posts are comprised of data that is taking up space on a server somewhere that someone is paying for. Also many people are of the opinion that if everything is on one central thread, and if one READS all of the comments posted on that thread before they make their own comments, they might find that someone else has already discussed what they were going to discuss, thus avoiding double posting.

However, I feel that human nature is to be lazy, and we all want our little piece of spotlight, so we bypass reading everyone else's posts and create our own anyway. Everyone wants a voice, even if we are screaming the same thing as the last guy. So, people can moderate all they want, but it is only going to generate data wasting conflict because our nature goes against the order imposed by the modders.

[habnor]

Space? Are you serious? Has nothing to do about space, it has to do about conformity.
The US realized it couldn't mold humans into soldiers it could only shape them. Guess what, they quit trying to mold, Why don't you?

People do things for a billion different reasons, most of them again are because they don't live here, don't know how, or didn't seem to think they could find the help in a appropriate convenient way. It only seems to irritate those who desire power or already have it.... Doesn't bother 90%. So why must we conform to the few who live here or try to control it? Guess what, it won't mold that way... So again quit trying

[sbsmac]

Hmm - about 4 pages ago this thread was pretty interesting. Anyway, in an attempt to get it somewhere in the vicinity of on-topic, perhaps one of the real-life pilots could explain the following phenomenon....

I've noticed that when flying fast (~100knots) and level with high collective, the anti-torque pedals start off by inducing a small amount of yaw but this very quickly turns into a steep bank in the direction of the pedal. This is so pronounced that it's almost possible to fly along twisting roads using just pedals and a bit of cyclic to increase pitch in the turns. At first I thought I'd inadvertently mapped the pedals to bank or turn but this isn't the case so I'm assuming it's an actual aerodynamic effect. If so, what causes it ?

[habnor]

Hmm - about 4 pages ago this thread was pretty interesting. Anyway, in an attempt to get it somewhere in the vicinity of on-topic, perhaps one of the real-life pilots could explain the following phenomenon....

I've noticed that when flying fast (~100knots) and level with high collective, the anti-torque pedals start off by inducing a small amount of yaw but this very quickly turns into a steep bank in the direction of the pedal. This is so pronounced that it's almost possible to fly along twisting roads using just pedals and a bit of cyclic to increase pitch in the turns. At first I thought I'd inadvertently mapped the pedals to bank or turn but this isn't the case so I'm assuming it's an actual aerodynamic effect. If so, what causes it ?

Well from the little that I do know... over 60 knots the rotor is basically uneffective no?

[nightsta1ker]

Space? Are you serious? Has nothing to do about space, it has to do about conformity.
The US realized it couldn't mold humans into soldiers it could only shape them. Guess what, they quit trying to mold, Why don't you?

People do things for a billion different reasons, most of them again are because they don't live here, don't know how, or didn't seem to think they could find the help in a appropriate convenient way. It only seems to irritate those who desire power or already have it.... Doesn't bother 90%. So why must we conform to the few who live here or try to control it? Guess what, it won't mold that way... So again quit trying

I sure hope you are not yelling at me. I am not exactly for the whole structured forum thing myself. Also, I was a U.S. Soldier, so I get your point there, but my post was in no terms trying to "mold" anyone into doing anything. I was simply trying to weigh some pros and cons. So pardon me. I'm SOOO sorry I offended your sensibilities somehow.

---------- Post added at 05:43 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:35 AM ----------


Hmm - about 4 pages ago this thread was pretty interesting. Anyway, in an attempt to get it somewhere in the vicinity of on-topic, perhaps one of the real-life pilots could explain the following phenomenon....

I've noticed that when flying fast (~100knots) and level with high collective, the anti-torque pedals start off by inducing a small amount of yaw but this very quickly turns into a steep bank in the direction of the pedal. This is so pronounced that it's almost possible to fly along twisting roads using just pedals and a bit of cyclic to increase pitch in the turns. At first I thought I'd inadvertently mapped the pedals to bank or turn but this isn't the case so I'm assuming it's an actual aerodynamic effect. If so, what causes it ?

This is not an aerodynamic effect you would see in real life for a helicopter, though you do get this effect in an airplane. The tail rotor's only purpose on a helicopter is to counter torque from the rotor system. The pilot does not need to change pedal input more than a smidge for trim in turns (quite unlike an airplane). As the helicopter gains forward airspeed, the vertical stabilizer on the tail, which is basically a wing turned 90 degrees, starts producing lift with a horizontal vector which also counters the torque induced by the rotor system and alleviates the pilot's need to apply as much left pedal to keep the nose straight. The faster the helicopter goes, the more effective the vertical stabilizer becomes and the less left pedal is required. In forward flight the pilot steers primarily with the cyclic, banking the helicopter, it should stay in trim with minimal (if any) pedal required for trim.

I hope this answers your question, and I also hope this winds up being correctly modeled in the final version of the game.

[sbsmac]

I hope this answers your question, and I also hope this winds up being correctly modeled in the final version of the game.

Great explanation, thanks :) Now I just have to break my habit of using pedal in the turns....

[Sundowner]

Maybe vaaf_rup could setup some simple "learn to fly" scenarios, kinda like he remembers from his own first hover struggles? :pThis would require an in-game mechanics controlling certain inputs, limiting player to control only a certain number of axis. Student pilot would begin his familiarization with the rudder only, then try the collective only, then the cyclic, then combine rudder and collective, to finely take full control. Who flown the Jane's Longbow, or the introductory helicopter missions in FSX, know how this works.

After that - learn to hover, transition to forward flight, and back to hover, flying patterns, navigation, emergencies, including many scenarios requiring autorotations (engine out, stuck pedal, in forward flight, in hover, 180° autos, etc. )...

I'm not sure a typical ARMA player would like to take on that kind of "tutorial", we're talking hours of game time to complete, and master it, and we're still not talking mission specific skills, like:
- IFR flying
- mountain flying
- oversea flying
- winching operations
- longlining
- firefighting with a bucket
- firefighting with underbelly tank
- confined space operations
- ENG patterns flying
- ship deck operations
- aerial gunnery
- NOE flights
- NVG night flying
etc.

Now, how far the devs want to go with this? Because with the right approach to simulation (with more "arcade" style of flying also available), I could think out at least 30 training missions to cover all of this, and that's a lot to go through.

[Alex72]

I agree, nothing worse than wanna be moderators. And I am not a fan of one massive forum thread with a bunch of crap.. Some people don't live on these forums. Some just want their own thread.. I think ts time you (Ziggy, and all the mods who feel the same) to grow up and deal with it.. I see no problem with 50,000 of the same threads.. doesn't bother me one bit.. seems the only ones it bothers are the wanna be moderators that live here and the mods that want to abuse their powers acting like cops. Tough cookies
Maybe you dont see the problem but we who do this work free on our own free time see a problem with it because it takes more time to manage. And the rules are in place to keep some order and ease of using the forum - for everyone. ;-)