To answer, no I am not running any mods at all while testing the helos.

Confirmed fixed.

On further checks, blackfoot and mohawk do not have this problem
XH-9 series helos simply do not have enough torque and at OGE hover right turn is very slight.

Confirmed bug with hellcat, orca, ghosthawk helos.

Confirmed fixed. Aircraft performs MUCH more like you would expect it to.

I understand flapping quite well, and since you brought it up, the ghosthawk is not flapping then. If it were, it would be flapping in response to its rigging that would mean a hover would happen with just increase in collective and left pedal.

I agree especially in littlebirds (pretty similar to bells which I have also flown) that the presence of a pilot is going to adjust the lean/pitch of the aircraft. However, a 7+ ton helicopter is not going to see this issue. The Apache for example which I fly every week hangs left low just like the ghosthawk is doing, however unlike the ghost hawk the blades are rigged so that you don't need right cyclic to counter it.

To restate, you should not need exboriant amounts of lateral cyclic in order to hover. Collective and left pedal is the vast majority of what should be needed. Typically any adjust,ent in cyclic comes from dealing with wind, not the helos natural mechanics.

yep hellcat does do that, torque force should definitely be reversed.

Espresso I note that you're talking about light helicopters. For example I would agree with the xh-9 series helos that taking off is correct as it has a very slight forward lean. That does feel natural and is likely close to the light series helos you fly.

A ghost hawk is obviously a recreation of the blackhawk, which is just under twice the base weight of the huey at basic load, and almost 3x a hueys weight at max load. Heavy helicopters do NOT need this.

In relation to the game bug: At a hover, with controls centered, if you release autohover, (with or without pedal compensation) the helo goes into a rolling dive as it rolls left and noses way forward. Since wind does not appear to be affecting the aircraft yet, there is no good reason for this.

Just tested again, the fact the aircraft flies at about a 15-20 degree left-roll with constant motion to the left at forward airpseed (250kph) is indicative something is WRONG with how it's thrust is being directed. Helicopters don't LEAN in forward flight without pilot direction. They fly like planes.

Plus regarding multiple tickets: I'm flying the helos exactly as I would in real life. I take off, do a traffic pattern, and then attempt maneuvers out of my ATM. When things don't do what they should, I report it. Rotorlib is buggy right now. If you want minutia fixed, you report the minutia.

Not going to use caps. Sorry you are partially incorrect. You ARE correct about the left lean, as you want slight left cyclic to compensate for translating tendency from the tail rotor thts not compensated for by default rotor tilt. However helicopter rigging (how the control links go from controls to rotor head) is intended to keep things as simple as possible. Compensating for wind or such yes can give you a slight directional input as well, but you should NOT by any means be able to simply apply collective and BAM you're going. The different models in game are also different, as the ghost hawk for example has such an exaggerated left/forward lean that the aircraft practically flips on you if you center the controls.
Source: 17,500 lb helicopter I fly every week
Edit: I will ammend that, I HAVE experienced aft cyclic needed to hover when I flew a bell 206, and it was because I had an incredibly heavy IP next to me who shifted the CG so far forward it wasn't even funny. But even in a light helo (8000 lbs plus fuel) aft cyclic wasn't overly needed. I certainly havn't seen it in the heavier airframes.

After 07-08-2014
EXE rev. 126616 (game)
EXE rev. 126603 (launcher)
Size: ~172 MB

I would report that I am now able under the above conditions able to land 2 aircraft without destruction on stratis runway: ghost hawk and a/mh9. The blackfoot goes red on all instruments, while the remaining aircraft simply explode. I would note that the H9 series performed the best, but that is due I think to the extra friction of the skids, as another thread deals with the current limit factor of landing at least the ghost hawk and mh9: Aft cyclic yaws the aircraft to the right.

Upon touchdown, colelctive is reduced to roughly 30% to stop lift and pulled to aft position for aerodynamic braking...its how you stop a rolling helo, not with the breaks. Those are used for parking only. Upon aft cyclic, the mh9 is able to BARELY be kept stable until stopping. The ghost hawk almost invariably yaws, trips on its tailwheel, rolls, and blows up. Please note though that all other aircraft still go solid red if not outright detonate upon landing.

I made a ticket on this one I think. The thrust appears to be reversed on the aircraft before collective is applied. Start a helo, release the brakes, and push the cyclic forward....and you'll go backwards. Pull the stick backwards...and you'll go forwards. It's almost like the thrust 0 point is set wrong, and at bottom collective its like its thrusting upwards. That's just a guess though

Reccomend this issue be deleted. After playing around, I've decided the right yaw comes from aircraft yawing to the right (those that do) and simply leaving the ground slightly with aft cyclic applied, allowing them to spin. latest patch modifying the wheels seems to have solved this issue as I have been unable to duplicate to the extent before withoout providing engine power, which will of course cause a right spin.

deduealus: I'm sorry to burst your bubble but you are incorrect. Had you simply stated increasing COLLECTIVE you would not have been wrong. However, first you cannot "increase" cyclic, you simply direct it. And second, at no point in my flying experience (I'm a real world helicopter pilot btw, so I have realworld experience to draw on) have I had the mere input of a cyclic control change my heading. Now, if you were to apply aft cyclic, pick up aft airspeed, you WOULD eventually windsock around since the lever arm on the tail is much larger than the rest of the body, but that happens even at a hover depending on where the wind is coming from. This is a case of the simple act of inputting the command causes a change.

Also, in opposite I've found that when you apply left pedal in game the helicopters nose over. That too is not supposed to happen. I've never had to counter a pedal turn with aft cyclic.

Bassicaly what vicx said in the first part: Basic aerodynamics applying, a plane (which is what a helo is a speed) should not be capable of yawing like that (unless it has an absurdly powerful transmission and airframe I suppose) as the aircraft should windsock into the wind. the 48 has those 4 canted stabilators in the back that are intended to stabilize forward flight (or would if it was real). Just like with every other helicopter in the game now, if you put in full left/right pedal, the helo should yaw a certain amount and then bounce back to a neutral point.

And that's not what I'm talking about espresso: The yawing I'm talking about is player inputted yaw...it shouldn't permit a 90 yaw just like the rest of the helos now.

The 100kph thing is about climbing and diving. Go to 200+ kph. Quickly nose over until you point straight down and then back up. I just did it and my airspeed went from 200 to 0 and back to 200 when I leveled back out. That is what I'm talking about, and implies that the helo simply has no "inertia", or no system to make it look like it has inertia.

All of them, though with the latest patch to dev branch via 08-08-2014
EXE rev. 126636 (game)
EXE rev. 126634 (launcher)
Size: ~157 MB

the issue is much better. However the Mi-48 still suffers the issue completely since the change they made effected the tail rotor forces somehow, and the mi-48 has no tail rotor to adjust. In it you can still go 250kph, pull a 90 degree yawing turn and hit 0kph almost instantaneously. It's also heavy enough that it doesnt really flip, so it actually survives the maneuver too.

I would like to correct you: Ground effect IS being simulated, however the difference in power required between IGE and OGE is negligable, very minor differences in collective position. The overall wind effects appear to be marginal, as effective translation lift which is a huge boost in power availiable from forward flight simply isnt happening. I have a ticket on this too.

I'm not understanding the issue...with phsyx enabled..the helo sinks into the water...which helicopters do when submerged...they don't float. When physx is desabled...it doesn't sink in the water....which kinda makes sense since you just turned off physx. What are you looking to see happen when you drop a helo into the water?

Dear BIS manager, having crewed an MH60 blackhawk equipped with m134 miniguns, I can assure you that the video you posted is for the most part staged via abnormal tracer quantity and self-placed explosives. A minigun is frankly a 7.62x51 repeating rifle...very quickly. Could I write my name in the water with a gun? Yes. Could I turn a car into swisscheese and set some fuel on fire? Yes. Could I penetrate a brick or stone wall? No. I hopped in the editor and tested the AH9 against the air tower, and indeed the entire roof was demolished within a few trigger pulls. While yes lots of stuff would be broken with holes in it, the m134's simply don't cause significant structural damage. Please observe the following clip for a real m134 in action. There is no hail of flaming rounds coming from the gun. Just a lot of standard caliber bullets that will punch through soft metal, not harden walls.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWjQnxlvwa0

@the_Demongod Incorrect on aircraft not seeing missile launches. Standard equipment on all modern rotary aircraft (what I'm familiar with, I don't know fixed wing tech) includes missile warning systems that can ID a specific weapon launch by its UV plume from the missile launch. It is even able to ID the specific missile fired based on that specific plume and trigger proper flare dispersion pattern. Current tech has said missile direction locked down to a 3 degree FOV.

Smoke can/will cause backscatter, which is where the laser seeker first in the aircraft, and secondly in the missile seeker will receive either multiple laser returns, disgreeing returns, or such a diluted return that it is unable to locate the center target. Most smokes are intended for pre-launch as attack helo weapon computers will not permit missile launches if backscatter is detected.

As a helicopter pilot, I can tell you that there are two methods of AA systems: Those that target engines, and those that target pilots. If the engines are killed, many helicopters, if they are flying in the correct envelope, are able to either land on one engine, or land without any, it's called autorotation and is where helicopters can "glide" by storing kinetic energy in their rotors. It's dangerous as hell, but works.

The second method where the pilot is killed is preferable, because without pilot input, the aircraft crashes. Total Main Rotor seperation/destruction is actually insanely rare in helicopters, as their is a great deal of metal between the main rotor and A/A paths which protects the blades, while sacrificing power-providing/distributing components.