Would be cool to have it all the time as well. Helicopters vibrate. Some more than others.
May 10 2016
That really DOES look like a man on a couch with a beer in his hands. Brilliant description!
There's ofcourse a big difference between civil and military aviation. If a military aircraft is on an important mission, it will most likely choose to continue it's mission. During peacetime it should RTB and inspect for damage. I've had a couple of birdhits in real life and never had much more than blood, guts and feathers on the aircraft. I have to admit, I've never hit a really big bird though. But, like I said, if the mission's important, you continue with the mission. That's what game players will also do. Unless you make it so that birds will always cause severe damage which makes continuing the mission risky or impossible. This, however, would not be realistic.
Most (military) helicopters have filters in front of the engines, so birds aren't likely to cause a flameout on helicopters. Also, it's easier for a helicopter to dodge birds.
Often a birdhit doesn't really damage the helicopter as it does the bird. Engine problems would be very unlikely for a helicopter. Rotor problems unlikely as well. Maybe a broken windshield or a dent, anything worse than that means you must have a REALLY unlucky day.
TheBoat... Yeah, aircraft also have formation lights and navigation/position lights, landing/searchlights... But that all has nothing to do with this thread.
Why does it bother you that it's pitch black Blueteamguy? It's not like there's much to see other than your mates in the back. Ofcourse helicopters have lighting in the back. The Chinook for instance, has cabin lights which you can dim and switch from white to NVG compatible blue/greenish.
Ofcourse instruments have lights. Instrument lighting and flood lighting to be precise. NVG compatible too. But what I was trying to say earlier and in a different thread, pilots don't use their NVG's to look at their instruments. They look past/underneath their NVG's at the instruments. This is because the NVG's are focussed on infinity, not at 1-3 feet away. So if you'd use your NVG's to look at the instruments, it'd be one big light green blur.
PuzzledFreak, that would be IMPOSSIBLE. There's no such thing as a light source that you can only see when you're inside a helicopter. Unless all windows and doors would be closed. But they aren't... Light is light.
Red lights are an awful idea, because red light is VERY visibile through NVG's....
Come on people, don't just talk bullshit here. If you don't know anything about it, mind business you DO know stuff about.
IRL, you would not use cabin lights during flight, because it's not tactical.
The whole point of flying tactically at night is not to be seen by the enemy. That's why you don't turn any cabin lights on.
lol, can you guys believe this PuzzledFreak guy?!
For real, you're full of shit. Ofcourse helicopters have cabin lights, not just 'modern ones' lol. But if you don't want to be seen, you turn them off. It's pretty simple really.
There's no such thing as a light that cannot be seen 'from the outside', unless all doors are closed and windows are blinded lol.
And please, don't believe everything you see in movies.
Yeah NodUnit, that really approaches reality best if you ask me. DCS did a good job.
NodUnit, that mod makes it more unrealistic than it is in the original DCS. Pilots fly with two NVG tubes, not one. And you adjust them on your helmet in such a way that you have enough room to look underneath 'm at your instruments, with eyeball mk1.
Every eye gets it's own NVG tube, they're focused to infinity, NVG's don't have autofocus. All they have is protection against bright light sources and automatic brightness control.
There's no magnification in aviation NVG's, but ofcourse the image is just a little bit distorted compared to the eyeballs mk1. Depending on how far you put the NVG's from your eyes (2cm is recommended), you have around 40 degrees FOV through your NVG's.
The way I always set them up: As close to my eyes as possible, and as high up as possible so that the the goggles cover the area outside of my cockpit, and by just glancing down below the goggles I just barely see the top edge of the cockpit panel. That's what works best. Still sometimes need to tilt my head up to see everything below with eyeball mk1 though.
Dude... I'm an active military CH47 pilot, I fly with NVG's regularly... How many times have you flown with NVG's? Stop being so stubborn.
designed specifically not to interfere DOES NOT EQUAL readable with NVG's. Even a tiny white LED in the cockpit is VERY annoying and disturbing when you're looking outside of the cockpit with your goggles. That's why instruments have NVG compatible lighting. You could probably read it with your goggles if you mess with your focus (but probably only old analogue instruments, but not a single pilot would do that because it would be ridiculous and very dangerous. Also, most modern MFD's with NVG filters are unreadable with NVG's. You simply don't use NVG's for it. And it's also not just a short 1 diopter twist, you have to twist almost 360 degrees, what I reckon. And guess what, that's often not even possible if you're holding the flight controls or using an optical display assembly to project a HUD onto on of your eyes.
Really, do you REALLY think pilots would adjust their focus while flying? Really? Let go of the controls to turn on their focus rings until they can read their instrument, then turn on the focus ring again to look outside again? Seriously, you have no idea how big the bullshit is you're spreading.
If you want to see a pretty good simulation of NVG's, play DCS world, but please, stop spreading lies.
Ofcourse it's nice to see developers reading and replying here, but then they should be reading and doing the RIGHT thing...
I say again: In reality, when you're in the cockpit and you have your NVG's on, you CAN NOT, _CAN NOT_ read your instruments. The lighting of the instruments will often be too bright for the goggles, but more importantly, the goggles are focused for infinity, so the instruments would be severely out of focus.
In reality, the pilot looks down below of his or her goggles to look at the instruments with eyeball mk1.
Sniper, that is great you have a pvs. Good for you. It's totally irrelevant to this issue though. Aviators use anvis goggles. What I say is correct, what you say is not. I guess our goal here is to give the developers tips on how to make arma as authentic as it gets so I'm glad you won't post on this issue anymore because you don't know what you are talking about.
I agree with dustoff. A HUD would work and is realistic.
I guess I should just explain here, because people are full of shit and they think they know anything about how it works in real life.......
NVG's don't have autofocus. Pilots focus their goggles to infinity, so they can look outside and see sharply.
This means the instrument panel is UNREADABLE. It's too unsharp to distinguish numbers and markings.
This is why pilots look underneath their goggles to read their instruments.
So this report is not legit. Downvote please.
Yeah, but pilots don't read instrument panels using NVG's. They look past their NVG's.
Your picture is misleading. In real life you can't read your cockpit instruments either wearing your NVG's. You look past your NVG's to read your instruments, not through your NVG's.
I have to admit the instrument lighting should be more dimmed at night.
lol... Sometimes it's better to first check google than to ask dumb questions.
True, main and tail rotors are connected, they can not spin independantly, unless the tailboomshaft disintegrated or something.
RPG's aren't guided, therefor they can NOT lock on, and flares have NO effect on them.
SGTice, ofcourse, everything can be jammed. Jamming is VERY simple. But eavesdropping/decoding/translating? No... If encryption (+Frequency hopping) is used it will not be decoded. Maybe years and years later, but I guess that's useless huh?
Unsecure transmissions can be intercepted ofcourse. You could even do some spoofing as an enemy. It's just that I don't think armies will work with unsecure comms.
I don't understand what you're trying to say with your point of bases and FOBs with their radio towers... But like I said earlier, it's Hollywood bullshit to put a jammer on one of those towers lol.
Also, all of this will be useless in-game, when people use 3rd party software to communicate, like TeamSpeak.
SGTice, I am not wrong. I said regular armies, self-respecting ones lol, use encrypted radio transmissions in times of war. Especially if important intell is shared.
I don't recall the Taliban being a regular army lol. They use cell phones and walkie talkies to communicate, and yes, those can be recorded and translated.
Placing a jammer on a radio tower is Hollywood bullshit and has nothing to do with reality.
Like I said earlier, radio jamming is possible. To jam radio you need a big power source and then you just block out a certain frequency range by transmitting your own jamming signal over it. This means YOU cant use these frequencies either. If you want to jam a broader frequency range, you need more power. If you want more range, you need more power.
Yeah... But it's not realistic is you have 2 regular armies fighting eachother. You can't hack radios, you can't intercept and translate encrypted radio waves. What you CAN do is jam a frequency range so it cannot be used. But it's not equipment a single soldier can carry with him, so to say :)
Yeah lol@Ender, that's totally ridiculous BF3 style.
I vote against this. I dont think its realistic that a platoon, or squads do jamming. Im pro EW in aircraft, but on the ground... nah, wont work, not implementable in a realistic manner.
I've tried rolling bank with a joystick (X52) and using the keyboard. The rolling rate is just too slow. When you need to break, or dodge trees for instance, in real life you'd make a quick input on the cyclic and helicopters generally react very 'snappy'. Now it takes a second or 2 to go from level to 60 degrees angle of bank.
This ofcourse concerns the current flight model, and if that'll change in next versions, this report could be disregarded.
Flying with a mouse just doesn't cut it for me.. way too unrealistic.
Didn't know TOH flight model was coming to Arma3.
Yes, I'm a real pilot.
I tried flying with keyboard and joystick. Haven't changed any sensitivity settings. The roll rates are just way too slow. A real helicopter reacts more direct and rolls faster.
You can also just ask me. I've flown TH67, UH1, Allouette-3 and CH47.
Tailrotor still has effect at higher speeds, you need it to fly coordinated. Pushing harder on the pedals at high speeds isn't something you'd normally do, but it most certainly can be neccesary and it is possible.
Hmmm... This is simply not true. I haven't ever flown such a tiny helicopter like a R44, maybe that R44 doesn't have the power to use the tailrotor at speeds, but bigger helicopters can most certainly give yaw inputs. You'll break stuff if you overdo it, but a heading change like 10-20 degress at higher speeds is not much of a problem, at all.
I have about 100 hours on tailrotor helicopters, yaw IRL has more effect than it has in Arma3.
Actually the tail rotor still has effect on helicopter attitude, even at higher speeds. Just not good for the aircraft, will put a lot of stress on the tailboom.
May 9 2016
I also reported this, ID# 0003322
I think it would be great to have a key that would make the pilot lean forward and look over the nose.
The MH9's responsiveness is good. The Ka-60 should be more responsive.
Fly a real helicopter before you make claims like this.
Dagonath, I'm new here, willing to help out with helicopter physics.
Can you please explain to me what the TOH flight model is? Are you saying that in a next update with the TOH model, things will improve?
That's just total bullshit, but very funny nonetheless.
actually, decreasing the collective far enough, will in some helicopter types result in negative pitch in the rotor blades, so that the rotor system disengages from the drivetrain and this will make the helicopter autorotate.
So yes, it is possible to autorotate just by lowing the pitch far enough.
Why would you want Vortex Ring State implemented??? I know, it's realistic because it could happen, but it'd be WAY too complicated for this game, also you would need a full motion simulator to actually notice what's going on, otherwise it'll just be confusing.
That R22 quickstop is just gay. A gust of wind would make that tiny thing quickstop. But that MH53 quickstop is very impressive. Great aircraft!
Wanna see another GREAT quickstop? Check this following video out at 3:15
How's that for using yaw at higher speeds, Stiffwood? :)
There's too little response from pedals in Arma3, believe me.
I totally disagree with your comment about the pedals. They're not too powerful at all at high speeds. I think they're about right or maybe even a bit too weak.
I'm a real life CH47 pilot.
This report is accurate. The way helicopters behave right now in Arma3 prevents tactical flying. It takes way too long to drop altitude/speed. WAY too long.
Just getting started with Arma3, will post more reports on helicopter physics soon I guess.
Female soldiers? No, don't implement.
Ofcourse there are females in the armed forces, but you'll hardly see any females at the front lines, if any. They usually have non-combat functions, like medics (non-combat), logistics, administration etc.
You won't see many females fighting the war together with men, absolutely not. Not now, not in 2035.
To be clear, I'm not saying there are absolutely NO women in combat-functions, they are very rare, and there's no reason to be implementing them in the game.
I'm a real life CH47 Chinook pilot.
In a helicopter, Rotor RPM remains constant in normal cases. It CAN decrease a LITTLE bit when pulling power/collective. What happens is the angle of attack of the blades increase, they'll have more air to 'push down', this requires more power, the 'governor' will react by increasing fuel flow, but there can be a little bit of lag so the RPM drops just a little bit, but will quickly return to 100%.
Same goes for decreasing collective, if you decrease rapidly the rotor system may disengage from the driving train and rotor RPM may increase.
Poor screenshot, had to see the attitude on the left attitude indicator.
Also occurs with 'O' for the watch.
Every helicopter taxies, helicopters with skids also. There are different kinds of taxiing. Groundtaxi, hovertaxi and airtaxi.