Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
#3330258 - 06/28/11 12:54 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: Flyboy]  
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 352
ufolev Offline
Member
ufolev  Offline
Member

Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 352
Hi friends,

If you are looking for fun you can get it even with Comanche Gold LOL



ufo :-)

Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#3330316 - 06/28/11 01:48 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: Flyboy]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted By: Flyboy


Granted, the full complexity of the flight model is not explored in C3/G, but the real Comanche had several different control and flight model laws. There's really no need in C3/G to be able to do all the fancy aerobatic stuff - which arguably the real Comanche would have never utilized in combat anyhow. But I think that the flight model in C3/G represents very well, what the Comanche was designed for - low-level flight with the ability to weave in and out of trees, canyons, etc. Going by this I'm guessing that any helicopters in ArmA use just generic flight models and although you may be able to do some aerobatics, a Comanche in the game wouldn't have modelled low-level flight dynamics with any detail.

Just to be clear, I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. It's just that there are a lot of common misconceptions as to how the real Comanche would have behaved, and there is a fundamental lack of understanding about its 'flight model', if you will. This is not your fault, and you are just one of many who has probably never cared enough for the Comanche to try and figure out how it would have functioned. But I say again, it IS a common misconception of how it would have worked - and it was unlike any other helicopter out there - still even today.


Don't get me wrong but what is in fact a misconception is what you say about the Comanche that it's like some sort or an "alien spaceship" completly diferent of any helicopter but that's not true! Yes, the Comanche is capable of some impressive manouvers that are very hard to achive with other helicopters but nevertheless the Comanche is a HELICOPTER and even more the Comanche is a CONVENTIONAL helicopter (with main rotor and tail rotor) and therefore the basic rules of helicopter physics and flight model/dynamics are just as valid for the Comanche as it is for any other helicopter! Basically what difers from the Comanche from other helicopters are performance issues but the basic physics laws are the same.

Anyway, there isn't any manouver that you can't do in the Comanche3 sim that can't be done in ArmA but there are (realistic) manouvers that you can do with helicopters in ArmA that can't be done in Comanche3 therefore I still stand with what I inicially said: The ArmA helicopter flight model is superior to the Comanche3 helicopter flight model! Saying that the Comanche3 flight model isn't limited because it's limitations (in terms of manouvers) aren't used or rarelly used in combat is at least a wrong assumption - It's like making a racing sim (Formula 1 for example) where the player can't do a spin with the car on purpose because in the middle of the race the player isn't supposed to make spins, that doesn't make sence to me that's what I say...

#3330385 - 06/28/11 02:54 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,453
Flyboy Offline
Senior Member
Flyboy  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,453
England, UK
Originally Posted By: ricnunes
Don't get me wrong but what is in fact a misconception is what you say about the Comanche that it's like some sort or an "alien spaceship" completly diferent of any helicopter but that's not true! Yes, the Comanche is capable of some impressive manouvers that are very hard to achive with other helicopters but nevertheless the Comanche is a HELICOPTER and even more the Comanche is a CONVENTIONAL helicopter (with main rotor and tail rotor) and therefore the basic rules of helicopter physics and flight model/dynamics are just as valid for the Comanche as it is for any other helicopter! Basically what difers from the Comanche from other helicopters are performance issues but the basic physics laws are the same.


Then simply put, you are one of those people who doesn't understand the Comanche. Whether that's because you don't care for the Comanche enough to find out or through ignorance, you are one of those people.

P.S. ufolev's video showcase is probably not the best representation of what the Comanche is about in C3/G, as he uses a MOUSE to fly! copter

#3330576 - 06/28/11 06:53 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: SHar82]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Even if you use a joystick (and I used one to play Comanche 3) you can't do more than those manouvers in Comanche 3. In Comanche 3 the helicopter can't be put at a angle nose up or nose down highter than something like 45 degrees and the video posted by ufolev clearly shows that.

No definitly I don't understand the Comanche, he never complained or exposed "his" problems to me... rolleyes

Anyway, either my English is plain bad or for some reason I didn't explain well or it's definitly not me the "ignorant" rolleyes

#3331148 - 06/29/11 11:58 AM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,453
Flyboy Offline
Senior Member
Flyboy  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,453
England, UK
Originally Posted By: ricnunes
Even if you use a joystick (and I used one to play Comanche 3) you can't do more than those manouvers in Comanche 3. In Comanche 3 the helicopter can't be put at a angle nose up or nose down highter than something like 45 degrees and the video posted by ufolev clearly shows that.


The fact that you can't put the nose over 45 degrees up or down says nothing about the flight model in C3/G. If you read what I said earlier, about the Comanche having different flight model/control laws you might, just might, have understood where this is coming from. Don't you think the REAL Comanche would have had a limit of 45 degrees up/down nose pitch to make low level flight tactics easier?

Originally Posted By: ricnunes
Anyway, either my English is plain bad or for some reason I didn't explain well or it's definitly not me the "ignorant" rolleyes


In that case your English is bad or you didn't explain well.

#3331249 - 06/29/11 02:20 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: Flyboy]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted By: Flyboy

The fact that you can't put the nose over 45 degrees up or down says nothing about the flight model in C3/G. If you read what I said earlier, about the Comanche having different flight model/control laws you might, just might, have understood where this is coming from.


Ok, now I see that we completly disagree with each other and here's exactly where I disagree with you:
- I disagree that a flight model that isn't capable of putting ANY helicopter in 45 degrees up or down isn't limited or doesn't mean that's limited! Any flight model that models a modern helicopter that isn't capable of making manouvers with more than 45 degree nose up or down (such as the Comanche 3 flight model) is simply a LIMITED flight model. Period!
- I also completly disagree about the part that "the Comanche have different flight model/control laws". This is simply NOT true! Any helicopter no matter how advanced it is, is run by the same basic flight model/control laws as any other helicopter. Don't confuse "perfomance" with "flight model/control laws".

Quote:

Don't you think the REAL Comanche would have had a limit of 45 degrees up/down nose pitch to make low level flight tactics easier?


Not by default! There could have been some sort of function(s) coupled with or belonging to the autopilot that could provide some sort of manouver limitation (just as there are others such as the Auto-Hover). But this would be an autopilot configuration or something similar which BTW should be easily overidden by the pilot in order to allow him to make more aggresive manouvers (more than 45 degrees up and down).
Resuming in a NORMAL flight profile the Comanche would never have that limitation! If you watch some real footage about the Comanche you'll see that the helicopter does execute more and 45 degree up or down manouvers.



Quote:

In that case your English is bad or you didn't explain well.


Like everyone else in the world I also have my own limitations but not being able to explain myself well in English (which BTW, it isn't my first language but I'm 100% sure that I'm much better in your language than you are in mine) is definitly NOT on my limitations list... wink

#3331268 - 06/29/11 02:49 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: SHar82]  
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,453
Flyboy Offline
Senior Member
Flyboy  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,453
England, UK
Obviously normal helicopter limitations apply - to a point. All I'm going to say is this... once you wire an aircraft's flight control system up to a computer - you can dramatically shift what's limited and what's not. The Comanche was the only fly-by-wire helicopter in it's day - and still the only one to that extent - and look at how the flight characteristics of jet fighters have changed when you compare 'traditional' to FBW ones. Even though the Comanche was of a 'traditional' helicopter layout, it could do anything a co-axial helicopter could do - except the bit higher maximum speed.

Of course the Comanche does outside of 45 degree up/down maneuvers in videos you've seen - because that control law applied there is the 'aerobatic' one. A different one could be used when doing the low-level flight as I tried to explain, which would limit these unnecessary movements and abilities to go upside down, etc.

I don't know why you think you're right, and I don't believe that I have ever said I am right. But I'm guessing I have a lot more research under my belt than you, on the Comanche. Why can't you just believe it? Helicopter flight characteristics have changed over the last 50 years you know?

#3331759 - 06/30/11 02:08 AM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: SHar82]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,214
Avimimus Offline
Two-speed Five-Blade Fan
Avimimus  Offline
Two-speed Five-Blade Fan
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,214
Canada
It is real! It is real! ?

It is real ... 8)

#3332368 - 06/30/11 11:46 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: SHar82]  
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
johncage Offline
Member
johncage  Offline
Member

Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
played the demo. wasn't impressed.

only difference from arma 2 appears to be the introduction of trim mechanics.

#3332373 - 06/30/11 11:50 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: Evil Flower]  
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
johncage Offline
Member
johncage  Offline
Member

Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
Originally Posted By: Evil Flower
'Hardcore' simmers seem to think that the harder and more complex anything is, the more realistic it is.


the complexity arises from accurate representation of real world physical forces. arcade games won't model wind, sim games will.

so yes, in a word, more complex means more realistic.

and i laugh at the guy who said the commanche series and gunship! were sims. they are simply arcade helicopter games, nothing more. dcs black shark is a true sim.

#3332629 - 07/01/11 11:45 AM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: johncage]  
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,453
Flyboy Offline
Senior Member
Flyboy  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,453
England, UK
Originally Posted By: johncage
the complexity arises from accurate representation of real world physical forces. arcade games won't model wind, sim games will.

so yes, in a word, more complex means more realistic.


I, for one, was talking about the actual cockpit and flight model. Who cares about wind? None of the early sims had wind.

Originally Posted By: johncage
and i laugh at the guy who said the commanche series and gunship! were sims. they are simply arcade helicopter games, nothing more. dcs black shark is a true sim.


If you're referring to me then you come across as a bit of a twonk. Of course the Comanche series and Gunship! are 'sims', even though I never said that GS! was one. It's easy, with hindsight, to say this IS a sim or that ISN'T a sim. With the complexity of sims nowadays one could say that Jane's Longbow 2 isn't even a sim - and it was THE best and most complex combat helicopter sim for well over 10 years. Now if you want to get into an argument over what are 'sims' and what are 'true sims', well that's another matter. In another 10 years time DCS: BS will look like an arcade game, and from what I've heard about it, some might say it is even today. As I stated much to the discontent of DCS: BS lovers when it first came out - that might seem more like a 'sim' to you because it is hard. It is hard, not because it is a complex sim, but because it models a more simplistic helicopter which in turn is harder to operate. If DCS accurately modelled the Comanche, for example, you'd be complaining that it's too easy, therefore it must be arcadey. You 'hardcore' guys kind of slit your own throats with your weak arguments. And don't get me wrong, I used to be up there with all you hardcore simmers - it's just that this is an endless argument and at the end of the day they're all just games for us to waste away our lives with.

#3333339 - 07/02/11 10:43 AM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: Flyboy]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted By: Flyboy
I don't know why you think you're right, and I don't believe that I have ever said I am right. But I'm guessing I have a lot more research under my belt than you, on the Comanche. Why can't you just believe it? Helicopter flight characteristics have changed over the last 50 years you know?


What I'm right about is regarding the flight model of ArmA that while being far from being the "most realistic" for helicopter sims it's better and more realistic than the flight model of Comanche3 and you seem to disagree with this. So I posted reasons why I think that what I say is true, namely when you can't do with a flight model a certainly number of manouvers that the real helicopter do in real life this really proves that (Comanche3) flight model is in fact LIMITED.
Just one last thing, because afer this I won't "beat the dead horse" again regarding this issue:
- I'm 100% sure that if someone wanted to model a realistic Comanche flight model (with all flight functions and abilities), that same person would be much more sucessfull with the ArmA flight model than with Comanche3 one. Again with ArmA flight model you can make all possible manouvers and flight profiles that you have in Comanche3 but the opposite just cannot be done (I think this proves my point).

#3333346 - 07/02/11 10:51 AM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: SHar82]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted By: johncage

and i laugh at the guy who said the commanche series and gunship! were sims. they are simply arcade helicopter games, nothing more. dcs black shark is a true sim.


And I laugh at that comment of yours! I guess that for the first time in this thread I completly agree with Flyboy! I was going to put up an elaborate response to this comment of yours but Flyboy summed up pretty much what I wanted to say.

But I would really like to read your reasons why you say that Comanche3 and/or Gunship! are arcade games? Really, that one really made me laugh really loud rolleyes

#3333356 - 07/02/11 11:13 AM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: Flyboy]  
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 87
LIONPRIDE Offline
Junior Member
LIONPRIDE  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 87
Originally Posted By: Flyboy
If you're referring to me then you come across as a bit of a twonk....


reading - well said -

#3333375 - 07/02/11 12:09 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: SHar82]  
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,453
Flyboy Offline
Senior Member
Flyboy  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,453
England, UK
ricnunes - you've added some good contributions to the Combat-Helo thread where I also sometimes check-in. We hit it off pretty well in there I think so please don't take this argument in this forum personally. I just wanted to try and explain to you (and anyone else with your thoughts but too cowardly or too ill-informed to post) that perhaps NovaLogic made the C3/G flight model 'limited' for a reason. The reason being perhaps they wanted to model the low-level flight characteristics of the Comanche and not the rarely-used high-level aerobatic one. If they didn't intend to model it that way, then it doesn't matter as it is still a valid move on their part as it still matches at least one of the real Comanche's flight profiles and dynamics.

Now just a general observation of how the mindset of 'fans' of the genre has evolved for the worse...
The word 'sim' has kind of become a bit of a dirty word over the recent years. If an infantry/flight/tank game is easy, then it's not a sim. If it's hard, then it must be a sim. As I said above, with hindsight it's easy to come over all high and proper and say 'my sim is better than your sim'. Remember, a lot of the time the sims people are comparing are 10 or more years apart with regards to release date. Newer sims should be more realistic, if they weren't, what a sorry state of affairs! Simulations are simply a genre, like first-person shooters and racing games. A genre of a game says more about the type of game it is and the perspective you play it from. If you play a crap FPS is it still not an FPS? If you play a rubbish racer is it not still a racing game? The fact that you play a game from the view of an aircraft's cockpit, for example, automatically makes it a sim - no matter how 'realistic' it is. The fact that a game even tries to implement certain flight controls and avionics makes it a sim, no matter how in-depth they are. Simple as that. From Tomahawk released in 1985, through Apache: Air Assault (2010 version) to the as-yet-to-be-released Combat-Helo - they are all sims whether you like it or not.

#3333442 - 07/02/11 02:21 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: SHar82]  
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 577
Evil Flower Offline
Member
Evil Flower  Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 577
Eslv, Sverige
In all fairness the Comanche 3 flight modelling is pretty similar in being limited to Gunship 2000, LHX and pretty much every helicopter sim prior to Longbow. Tomahawk of course was an exception but IIRC it was the only heli sim to feature full aerobatic FM for at least 10 years.

So I guess that means Gunship, Gunship 2000, Thunderhawk, LHX, Apache Air Assault, Apache Longbow Assault, etc etc etc are just arcade games?

LOL

#3333477 - 07/02/11 03:34 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: Evil Flower]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Originally Posted By: Evil Flower
In all fairness the Comanche 3 flight modelling is pretty similar in being limited to Gunship 2000, LHX and pretty much every helicopter sim prior to Longbow. Tomahawk of course was an exception but IIRC it was the only heli sim to feature full aerobatic FM for at least 10 years.

So I guess that means Gunship, Gunship 2000, Thunderhawk, LHX, Apache Air Assault, Apache Longbow Assault, etc etc etc are just arcade games?

LOL



Mr "Bad Flower", I not sure if that question is regarding my posts but I believe it is, so here's my answer:

- No, it's doesn't mean that those games are arcade! Nothing like that and I NEVER SAID THAT, it just means precisely that those sims (at least most of them) have a limited flight model (compared to reality), period.

All those games that you posted (perhaps with the exception of Apache Air Assault and Apache Longbow Assault) are clearly sims and I guess that even Apache Air Assault and Apache Longbow Assault could somehow be considered simulations (I never played Apache Longbow Assault so I can't comment on this game).

For me a combat flight simulation (fixed wing or helicopter) is a game where the player must play with realistic tactics in order to win and the aircraft and it's weapon system try to model in a realitic level their real counterparts.
For me an arcade flight game (fixed wing or helicopter) is a game where the player must kill ALL the HORDES or enemies (air, land and sea) present in the mission and in order to achive this the player usually have much more ammo and weapons than it would have in real life would have and usually the player's aircraft is like a flying SUPER-tank that can take up several hits even from missile and still fly as almost nothing as happened (usually there's a "health bar" present).

This is what is to me (trying to use as less words as possible) the diference between simulation and arcade...

#3333576 - 07/02/11 07:00 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: ricnunes]  
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 577
Evil Flower Offline
Member
Evil Flower  Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 577
Eslv, Sverige
Originally Posted By: ricnunes

Mr "Bad Flower", I not sure if that question is regarding my posts but I believe it is

Actually it was directed at Johncage, who apparently believes a game is arcade if it doesn't require a degree in switchology like DCS.

#3333588 - 07/02/11 07:28 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: SHar82]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
ricnunes Offline
Senior Member
ricnunes  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,840
Portugal
Roger that.
Anyway, my latest reply serves to oppose what Johncage said.

#3333672 - 07/02/11 10:29 PM Re: TAKE ON Helicopters: WOW!!! [Re: johncage]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,214
Avimimus Offline
Two-speed Five-Blade Fan
Avimimus  Offline
Two-speed Five-Blade Fan
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,214
Canada
Originally Posted By: johncage
played the demo. wasn't impressed.

only difference from arma 2 appears to be the introduction of trim mechanics.


It is a dedicated helo game! If it wasn't for Combat Helo the genre would be dead.

I'm happy to have a second darling - even if it is on the 'lite' side.

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Hey hey
by Stormtrooper. 12/02/23 12:54 AM
Weapons thread
by Stormtrooper. 12/02/23 12:06 AM
Low pass.
by RedToo. 12/01/23 08:44 PM
Sandra Day O'Connor was 93
by F4UDash4. 12/01/23 05:13 PM
Collings Foundation Grounds WWII Aircraft
by F4UDash4. 12/01/23 01:06 PM
Victor Belenko was 76
by F4UDash4. 11/30/23 05:08 PM
Henry Kissinger was 100
by F4UDash4. 11/30/23 02:01 AM
Rebuilt Tempest flies
by oldgrognard. 11/28/23 06:19 PM
So what did you get in the Steam sale?
by DBond. 11/28/23 04:07 PM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0