Page MenuHomeFeedback Tracker

Better weapon physics on helicopters
Closed, ResolvedPublic


So as some of you know some weapon platforms cause slight vibrations or even require the pilot to mannouver the vehicle in such way to counter the forces genereated by the weapons. Even do these forces are small you should be able to notice them (small shake in camera or cockpit). Also if you look at on of the links in the notes. You see the Hind pilot pushing the stick forward a bit to counter the forces thoese pods create when fired. Even do this is just small it just makes the game a bit more realistic. \


Legacy ID
Game Physics
Steps To Reproduce
A apache pilot and gunner engaging a structure. Look how that ting shakes when he shoots.
I will provide some extra detail about this with more fotage.

NOTE: The fotage i am gona place here might be considerd shocking to some viewers.

Event Timeline

Raoul1234 edited Steps To Reproduce. (Show Details)Jul 9 2013, 8:58 AM
Raoul1234 edited Additional Information. (Show Details)
Raoul1234 set Category to Game Physics.
Raoul1234 set Reproducibility to N/A.
Raoul1234 set Severity to None.
Raoul1234 set Resolution to Open.
Raoul1234 set Legacy ID to 1229802183.May 7 2016, 3:22 PM

While i agree the cannon on the heli should produce shake, i don't believe the rocket prods should produce anywhere as much shake, you can see that in the video as well.
I can't really say how much shake, if any, is produced when firing the cannon. At the same time i think the large amount of shake in the video is due to the strong zoom that is seen.

Hydra's dont really produce such big shake but they deffenetly produce some. Asfor Helfires or AA missiles same counts. Not a big shake but still A shake.

b101uk added a subscriber: b101uk.May 7 2016, 3:22 PM

You should try looking at the footage you posted, Hydra and Hellfire cause NO vibration and definitely NOT in the realms of capitalised “VIOLENTlY” shaking, it’s just the net effect of almost 50kg dropping off a pylon or ~ 10.5kg out of a tube mounted off-centre as the CoG moves, also the comparison of a 7.62mm or .50 BMG to a 30x113mm cannon is a magnitude of difference.

An M789 projectile is in the order of x5.2 times the weight of an average .50 BMG projectile, or ~ 21 times the weight of an average AP 7.62x51mm projectile and all fire at give or take about the same velocity, while the rate of fire of M230 is ~625rpm vs. the GAU-19 @ 2000rpm or the M134 @ >2000 <6000rpm which are all also a magnitude of difference to the A-10’s GAU-8 firing PGU-14 30×173 mm (projectile weight x1.68 and speed x1.258 of the M789) at 4200rpm.

Next take the weight of the platform into consideration, e.g. a AH-64D @ ~ 8000kg to ~ 8500kg, AH-6 @ ~ 1500kg and a MAN at a generous ~ 120kg including the gun, then factor the movement speed thus the kinetic energy the platform has, there are plenty of video of stationery men firing mounted and unmounted 7.62mm and .50 BMG chambered guns.

Then take into account the effects on a giro stabilised sight zoomed-in and the effects of how it will appear to amplify any vibration vs. a 1:1 view as the motors react to vibration as well as any backlash within the system form worn parts.

You will then quickly come to the conclusion there is NO VIOLENT shaking just mild vibration from the mounted gun/s which could only really be replicated with a FFB joystick giving a tactile response.

Anyway try this video, firing to the side whish should maximise any vibration.

We need more people like you. You just corrected me with hard evidence and not some bellend comment like: /downvoted because i think its not true.

THanks for the little lesson m8.

Fri13 added a subscriber: Fri13.May 7 2016, 3:22 PM
Fri13 added a comment.Jul 9 2013, 5:21 PM

Firing few shots or lower rate of fire isn't a problem. And missiles don't cause any shake as they are first released before they rocket motor is ignited.

When looking Mi-24 what is heavy and heavily armed, it does get little wave if firing lots of rockets at once or when firing longer bursts of 30mm dual cannons what are tied to fuselag. But because that the cannons are more accurate on longer range as well as they don't shake as much on lower rate of fire.

Here is a Mi-28 firing its autocannon and seen trough TV.

Mi-24P example with GSh-30K twin-barrel cannon (30x165mm) what fires 300 or 2000-2600RPM 385-405g weighting shells.

You can see on that video both firing rates for autocannon.

If firing in slow rate, rockets and cannon isn't a problem but higher firing rate the helicopter nose should point little down for a firing moment.

With Mi-48 (Mi-28 + Mi-24 + KA-52) the rotating turret would cause the helicopter as well turn sideways on other direction where it is firing.

But currently the Mi-48 doesn't include anykind FCS as firing from move cause gunner to calculate dynamic lead by visually what is so wrong.
As now already FCS causes while firing cannon helicopter do so some adjusting to flight so it stay steady, and because Mi-48 is a twin-rotor helicopter it would not suffer from turning while firing even when on high speed.

Still the video what OP posted is probably from max zoom what is about from 1.5-3km range and that "violent" shaking is really "nothing".

yes, rockets are more or less recoilless!

Recoil but they defenetly knock your Vehicle back. Didn't you see the pilot in the vid before shooting pushed the Stick forward to act like counterforce that the rockets produce? I know people who have actually flown attack helicopters in the USMC and US army. Trust me they said thoes things are non the less recoiless if not handled properly they will push you out of direction NOT drasticaly but yhea they do create some sort of counterforce.

ok. but don't you think that "shake VIOLENTLY" is a bit to drastic?

well, i decided to upvote, because you seem to know more of the issue than i do. but still i think you should change the "violent" part;)

also i assume, that there is a major difference between different kinds of propulsion. afaik there are rockets that fire their main engine in the tube and just accelerate forward. i can't imagine that they would have major recoil.
on the other hand, there are atgm that get shot from the tube with a propulsion charge and fire their main engine later.
i would guess, that these would have more recoil, because of the initial propulsion / impulse.
but that is just an educated guess! correct me, if i'm wrong!

I AM XD wrong pick of words. Its mostly just the tiny vibration and the way you should move the vehicle in such way to coutner effect the forces of the weapons.


but besides realism, that would also add to authenticity: the feeling of firing a realy powerful weapon, even if it only was little vibration.
so it would be a real nice little feature and should not be much work to implement. just apply a little force in physX on the appropriate weapon station, when weapon fires.

True. Only thing now is a gunpowder smell genereator.. xD

Fri13 added a comment.Jul 10 2013, 6:09 PM

Not so much kicking for AH-64 (just firing single rocket, but firing 1-2 bursts with 30mm).

It can look "a lot" in full zoom on targeting system monitors but still those stabilization systems manages to keep kickback low.

Sure the thing would vibrate a very little but not much,

Okey. But in arma full zoom 1 to 2 sec burst.. No vibration at all. Well the only vibrtion you get is from the player thats trying to hold it steady.

As for the helicopter itself it shouldn't be shaking (a lot) when firing any weapon system, however the gunner camera should; especially at higher zoom levels.

This could be fixed by adding a shake effect to the camera feed with the addCamShake function ( or similar.

It's no problem for performance, but does increase realism and fun.

^thanks. But yes would be nice if they implemented it by default.

MadDogX added a subscriber: MadDogX.May 7 2016, 3:22 PM

Mass closing ancient tickets with no activity for > 12 months; assume fixed or too trivial.

If this issue is still relevant in current dev build, please re-post.