|
#3277117 - 04/22/11 04:06 PM
Re: Blog update with some city shots
[Re: Flexman]
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 343
Longbow fanatic
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 343
Santa Fe, NM USA
|
Please Richard for the love of God give the destroyed vehicles a nice plume of wind driven smoke .. I mean Longbow 2 had it, EECH had it, DCS series has it, but strangely enough Apache Air Assault didn't have it , and that was a huge gripe for me... with such a nice graphics engine, and to not have smoke from all of your destruction... just doesn't look right. I know it's cpu intensive and such, but come on, it was done nicely back in '97/ '98 on LB2 and Janes F15...here's hoping it's implemented well, to me it keeps the element of immersion intact, to some it might seem like a small gripe, but to me it adds much more to the experience. And yes I know A:AA was released on consoles as well, and the PC update patches are nothing more than a dream... so I guess all the smoke effects would have killed performance on the consoles??? That's why they removed them from PC version??? Oh well thanks for listening to our inputs, can't wait for the beta!!!
Why do people think flight sims are nerdy???
|
|
|
#3277458 - 04/22/11 09:51 PM
Re: Blog update with some city shots
[Re: Raptor9]
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 357
gatordev
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 357
|
The effect you're referring to is "transient torque". When banking left at high speed and near maximum torque, a slight reduction in collective is required to keep from overtorquing the aircraft. Due to the aerodynamics over the rotor disk, torque will increase depending on amount of left cyclic applied (counter-clockwise rotation), and how aggressively you apply it. The opposite is true for a right bank. To maintain torque, you will need to increase collective slightly while applying right cyclic. The amount of transient torque is affected by airspeed, amount of cyclic application, and rate of cyclic application.
The trick I was always taught was imagine a string attached between the cyclic and collective. "As you apply right cyclic, it pulls the collective up, and as you apply left cyclic, it allows the collective to drop". Of course, this only works with counter-clockwise rotating rotor systems, which pretty much all American helicopters are, I believe.
Yeah, I agree with you Gatordev, pitch-back turns are definitely one of the more exciting maneuvers to perform in a helicopter. You can't fly straight in level ALL the time, lol. Yeah, that's what I'm talking about, transient torque. Maybe I should dust off my old helo aero books. Although transient Tq can occur with any flight control movement. Even more so with the T700 engines, since they constantly talk to one another and share the load. The difference with something like the -60 (and the -64, I would guess) is that it has so much power and over-torquing isn't really an issue in most regimes, so the actual end result is that you climb and descend based on which way you bank. The collective movement isn't meant to correct the Tq, but instead used to maintain altitude. Even more important when doing HET maneuvers. As for the pitch back...one of my favorite maneuvers, in large part for the energy management. Also fun in fixed wing, even when you have the energy to make it a full wing-over.
Last edited by gatordev; 04/22/11 09:55 PM.
|
|
|
#3277521 - 04/22/11 11:17 PM
Re: Blog update with some city shots
[Re: Flexman]
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 217
Raptor9
Rotorhead / GFC
|
Rotorhead / GFC
Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 217
Central US
|
Actually, overtorqing is more likely to occur in the 64 versus the 60 since the 60's transmission is "beefier" than the 64's. However, the T701C and D engines have a better engine controller than the T700's that is designed to prevent large torque increases during combat maneuvers. When above 100% TQ, it limits the torque increase to 12%/sec. I guess it's supposed to give the pilot that extra moment to notice the "box" around the torque indication in his IHADSS before the torque gets too high.
What you said about maintaining altitude is true. However during 3D combat maneuvers, I would contest that managing transient torque is more aimed at maintaining a constant TQ, with the end goal of keeping main rotor RPM's within limits. It's just as easy to overspeed the rotor as it is to droop the RPM's when you start performing acrobatics.
Afterburners are for wussies...hang around the battlefield and dodge tracers like a man.
|
|
|
#3277540 - 04/23/11 12:07 AM
Re: Blog update with some city shots
[Re: Flexman]
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 56
spike_knock
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 56
Germany
|
Nice, a forum talking about the DCU's MTRA. Next'll be NP protection within the ODV. Now disable the FMC due to a PRI HYD failure and lockout the DCU due to an NP overspeed, then we'll get this conversation rolling. But seriously, the aircraft is easy to fly within its normal limits, as the DCU's compensate for most maneuvers. Knowing how the computers will respond to combat maneuvering flight is more complicated, and would be almost impossible to model within a normal FM.
How to react to incoming 30mm:
Jump up 20 feet and spread yourself out over a wide area
|
|
|
#3277650 - 04/23/11 03:13 AM
Re: Blog update with some city shots
[Re: Flexman]
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 217
Raptor9
Rotorhead / GFC
|
Rotorhead / GFC
Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 217
Central US
|
Whoa, whoa, we were simply discussing the difference between simulating the "feel" of a helicopter versus the "realism" of a simulated helo. I admit Gatordev and I were getting off on a tangent, but I was in no way implying Flexman should get THAT in depth into a flight model.
BTW, throwing a whole bunch of acronyms out there isn't gonna impress anybody.
Afterburners are for wussies...hang around the battlefield and dodge tracers like a man.
|
|
|
#3277753 - 04/23/11 07:17 AM
Re: Blog update with some city shots
[Re: Flexman]
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 56
spike_knock
Junior Member
|
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 56
Germany
|
Ouch. All in good fun, just couldn't resist pointing out how silly the topic was getting on a sim forum.
How to react to incoming 30mm:
Jump up 20 feet and spread yourself out over a wide area
|
|
|
#3277905 - 04/23/11 02:25 PM
Re: Blog update with some city shots
[Re: Raptor9]
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 357
gatordev
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 357
|
Ouch. All in good fun, just couldn't resist pointing out how silly the topic was getting on a sim forum. True, but I also enjoy talking flying. I've only flown one Series of -60 in my career (soon to change, but for now...) and I'm pretty bored with it. To be able to talk to other guys and learn about other models/series is interesting to me. I can throttle back if Flex would like. Sorry for the off-topics. Actually, overtorqing is more likely to occur in the 64 versus the 60 since the 60's transmission is "beefier" than the 64's. However, the T701C and D engines have a better engine controller than the T700's that is designed to prevent large torque increases during combat maneuvers. When above 100% TQ, it limits the torque increase to 12%/sec. I guess it's supposed to give the pilot that extra moment to notice the "box" around the torque indication in his IHADSS before the torque gets too high.
What you said about maintaining altitude is true. However during 3D combat maneuvers, I would contest that managing transient torque is more aimed at maintaining a constant TQ, with the end goal of keeping main rotor RPM's within limits. It's just as easy to overspeed the rotor as it is to droop the RPM's when you start performing acrobatics. It may just be a difference in platforms. We have -401C's with Enhanced ECUs (I'm guessing that's what spike is referring to when he says "DCU"). For the legacy -60 Seahawks, there really isn't a Tq limit. Yes, there's a number in the book, but it's pretty forgiving in real life. The Romeo has all the same parts and they just upped the limits so it could fly. With that said, again for legacy Seahawks, maintaining Nr (like you mentioned) and not smacking the ground/water are the two prime concerns. Of course our angle of bank and pitch limits are much less than a -64, so that helps.
|
|
|
#3277961 - 04/23/11 03:34 PM
Re: Blog update with some city shots
[Re: Flexman]
|
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 217
Raptor9
Rotorhead / GFC
|
Rotorhead / GFC
Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 217
Central US
|
Speaking of numbers in books, it's funny to read about the pitch and bank limits of the Apache. Out of the book, they're quite conservative. 60 deg roll, 30 deg pitch, unless you're in a combat situation in which case "they can be doubled". In reality, I believe the Army just wants to keep its pilots from performing crazy maneuvers and killing themselves, cuz you look at videos of Boeing test pilots doing those rolls, loops, etc, and it seems clear the aircraft is not just capable, but designed to handle the stresses on the rotor system (ie static mast). I admit though, those test pilots probably have an absurd number of flight hours and years experience in helicopters, so I understand why the limits are there.
Do you know the difference between -401C's and -701C's? Are they better protected against salt water and corrosion or something?
Afterburners are for wussies...hang around the battlefield and dodge tracers like a man.
|
|
|
|
|
Exodus
by RedOneAlpha. 04/18/24 05:46 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
