CORRECTION: @ryanpacheco4047 pointed out and is correct that the DCS OH6 DOES auto rotate correctly on overtorque engine failure -- it was my pilot error that caused the problem. So the performance comparison chart should show that DCS does fully account for auto rotation.
I am not going to speak to DCS, MSFS or X-Plane in depth (you did a nice job there)... I flew the MH-65 Dolphin for the USCG. So I will speak real world flight physics and what you can do with your controls to fly a more realistic experience. I will comment from the point of view as a Helo pilot with 2000 hours. Let me first give you 2 simple things to do with your controls... 1. Remove the spring centering on the joystick. (ya want a floppy joystick) 2. The pedals also need their spring centering removed (pedals do not want to push back to center.) 2 other things to consider, (1) head tracking or VR is a must (2) Make a collecive. I have made my own from PVC, some basic tools, a potentimeter and an arduino micro. Flight physics... Almost all helicopters hover with one wing down by a few degrees and typically a degree or two of nose up attitude. The wing down attitude is on account of having a single rotor and where the lift vector of the rotor disc is pointed. This is very hard to explain with simple text, but the rotor disc is what is flying... the helicopter body is a pendulum hanging below the helicopter. Airfoils are attached to the airframe of the body to fly in a more comfortable position for those inside. As the winds vary and shift, realize that the rotating airfoil over your head is making your lift. As the air flow though the rotor disc changes so does the relative lift vector created. The net result of those lift vectors from the tilts relative to the rotor mast. Now add the torque of the main rotor and the anti-torque of the tail rotor and it further shifts the center of balance for the body of the helicopter as it suspended below the rotor disc. This increases that angle. I am going to set aside the interaction that can take place between the vorticies of the main rotor and how that can influence the efficacy of the tail rotor. Here is bottom line, much of this is about Newton and his physics. The goal is to keep the aerodynamic forces in balance at all times. Even when transitioning into and out of forward flight. This means small control inputs, the most common error is over controling which leads to pilot induce oscilations (PIO). This is ver very common in someone learning to hover. it takes most pilot 8-12 hours to be able to get the basics of hovering and upwards of 100 hours before a pilot becomes proficent. The good news is once you become proficient, this returns quickly within a couple of hours in a helicopter. PIOs are why you want sping centering off of your joystick. I have a completely separate joystick with no spring centering for helicopter. It is also positioned so my arm rests on my forearm and only my wrist (really fingers) move the cyclic. Helicopters do not trim for stable flight like a fixed wing aircraft when in the hover... once above translational lift, the helicopter is very much like a fixed wing aircraft. Fixed wing Fixed wing aircraft are flown with the formula of PAT (Power - Attitude - Trim). Set your power and aircraft attitude. Trim out control pressures. At this you can maneuver the flight controls about that trimmed point and until power or attitude is changed. This is more static with respect to aerodynamic forces on the airfoil as compared to rotary wing. This in turn allows for power, attitude and trim settings that are more reproducible; and therefore can follow something more like a receipe. Rotory wing Helicopters are a different animal... The rotor-disc is tilted to a desired pitch and then constant fine tune adjustments are made to maintain a aircrafts desired direction of flight. The rotor disc is being blanced like a gyroscope with small changes in blade pitch about the rotor disc to change the direction of the lift vector. Modern helicopter have "feel trim," and electromagnet that will hold the cyclic in a set position. Interestingly, a good number of helicopter pilots in the hover are button "mashers" meaing they spend most of their time with the feel trim release depressed (disengaging the trim). Above translational lift... virtually all pilots are using the feel trim as the aerodymic forces closly approximate that of a fixed with aircraft. ( Keep in mind, the rotor disc is flying and the airframe below the disc is along for the ride.) This is why a non-centering joystick makes it so much easier to set the attitude you need for a stable hover without the joystick trying to push the cyclic back to center. This makes flying a helo in the less fatiguing. I have flown DCS, X-plane and MSFS... my position is that MSFS is generally closer to the mark as compared to the other two. I will also add, that hovering in the SIM is exceptionally difficult if you are not able to move your point of view naturally (Track IR or VR). If i were to grade MSFS... they are A- mostly for how far we have come since FSX. DCS and X-plane get a C+/B-... I have done autos in MSFS and they are pretty good and I would argue DCS & X-plane feel (my opinion) more like an arcade game then a true flight sim. Fly safe and maintain your Nr John Hall
Doesn’t the spring simulate (on non fly by wire aircraft) air resistance on the control surfaces? I guess you’re describing helicopters here. My only real life experience is being an avionics tech for the mh60s so I have no idea.
Hey, just to explain some of the physics of which skid hangs low during hover and how the heli reacts to that on take of and landing: First of, there are several factors that play a role in that; like loading, wind and to a big extend the offset of the mainrotor flapping hinges. Classic two bladed semi rigid models tend to freely hang under the rotor while a modern ridgid rotor can produce a torque moment on the fuselage which completely changes the way a helicopter behaves. But the main point is this: What you showed in the MD500 is not a result of engine torque but an effect that is called tail rotor roll. I'll try to explain: Imagine seeing the helicopter directly from behind, you would see that the plane of the main rotor is higher up than the tail rotor. This is where the problem lies, the thrust of the tail rotor pushes in one direction which has to be compensated by tilting the main rotor to the other side to achieve a stable hover. With those two thrust vectors not being aligned you create a rolling moment on the fuselage. With the Huey it's different, the Tail rotor is nearly the same height as the main rotor. This means while you still get two opposing forces, you eliminate the lever that creates the rolling moment. In fact one of the reasons for a raised tail rotor is to reduce this effect. So what is shown in your example clips is roughly correct ... and they still follow the same aerodynamic principles.
OHHHHHHH riiiight. That makes so much sense, explaining what's going on and why the Huey doesn't do it. BRILLIANT. Another thing learned. Awesome. Thanks for the comment!
As always, I really enjoy your analysis. I am subscribed to various forums about helicopters and have basically given up listening to the realism debate, mainly because there are just too many variables - monitor/headtracking/VR/X-box controller/short flightstick/twist grip rudder/decent pedals...etc...etc.... Some want to switch on and 'play' others (like you and I) want the closest to realism possible. In the same thread, someone will often state several good reasons why one heli is better for them, then another person will provide just as solid counter arguments. It is all enough to drive us pureists mad 😄 Your more 'fact-based' approach, attempts to logically reason why things are the way they are and I appreciate that. I have similar reservations about DCS's miltary grounding as you but I love the rotor-wash effect on the ground and VRS and my favourite, the dashboard shake as you transition through ETL. Surely these are easy additions for the other developers??? You have a fairly unique possibility to fly you real-life heli and more interestringly, getting that pilot to fly your sim. Now that is a future video I will look forward to.
Thank you for the comment and thumbs up. The analysis is from my incredibly limited personal experience; a proper pilot might vehemently disagree which is why I think Mr D's feedback would be fascinating, informative, and definitive. He's expressed interest in trying it so we just have to arrange it.
@ImpendingJoker Hm we may not be talking about the same thing. Loss of tail rotor effectiveness is a phenomenon as described -- in normal stable hover operations, a number of conditions can cause the tail rotor to lose sufficient thrust despite having full power available, causing the helicopter to begin rotating uncommanded, and uncontrollably. This can result in a crash.
@@ImpendingJoker Yeah that's a bummer because it's a thing. I mean, obviously it's a thing, but Mr D has told me point blank that it's something you can feel and you have to be conscious of and react to meaning when you feel it, do something to change the situation because if you let it get out of control well... now you're out of control. And gaining recovery is a lot more difficult than just dealing with it before it gets out of control. Point being, it's a serious subtlety that really should be modeled. I know I'm kinda asking a lot in simulations -- helicopters seem to have an enormous bag of subtle issues to contend with in the real world, but you know... if you want to simulate that, you should simulate that. Don't give me a "gamer" version of a simulation. I can go pay 50 cents at the arcade for that.
If you don't like the combat aspect of d. C. S there are multiple multiplayer servers that focus on non combat things. One of my favorite for honing skills is a SAR and Firefighting server. Thats all you do is pickup injured and transport them to a hospital and do water drops on fires. And you can overtorque the Huey. It takes a while but eventually the engine will burn up.
The reason you have to bank to the left is because the anti-torque not only imparts a rotational force, it also imparts a thrust that pushes the heli to the right.
Yes, that's what I was guessing. I wouldn't mind it so much in the air but it surprises me that it skids to the right on the ground -- like I'm taking off from ice. That's a subtlety that should be modeled IMO -- the ground texture should affect your takeoff. Taking off from ice, water (if on pontoons), tarmac, grass, dirt, rocks, etc, should all have an influence. Not trying to make work for the developers but just being real here.
@@CaptainHelisim Older helicopters have this happen a lot because they didn't know about lifting forces generated by the tail boom itself. Along with the axial thrust of the tail rotor pushing a bit to the right, the rotorwash over the left hand side of the tail boom itself also produces lift in that direction. It works the same as an airfoil where the higher speed air on one side creates a pressure differential and causes the tail to move into the direction of lower pressure. Later versions of the Bell 205/210/212/214/412, added a strake down the tail boom that kinda looks like a bilge keel on a ship or a stall strip on a fixed wing airplane, to stop the smooth airflow over the tail boom, and in fact is incorporated into most modern helicopter designs.
Maybe next time it would be good to mention, the dcs OH-6 is a mod and in constend development so things like autorotation in it could come und the future. And as a dcs UH-1 veteran ,…. Yes you can overthought the engine of the UH-1 😂😂 . In the end very nice video 👍
Actually the weird thing is that the DCS OH6 CAN auto rotate, just not as a consequence of overtorque engine failure. So that was a little strange. Also, I did find it strange about the Huey -- I flew it full out over the line and it did not respond to overtorque but I'll take your word for it that it does. I have a vague memory that it used to but for some reason I was unable to make it so.
@@CaptainHelisim it mainly happens wenn you heavily loudest and climb up hills , so you take everything of power that you can get , the limiter screams and a minute or two later the engine burns out , in flying with many guy and once I actually saw how the engine of the Huey infront of me burns through the turbine and a fire plume came out of his nosl and that he took the elevator downwards 😂
@@FlybywireTheGerman Strange -- I just tried it again and was unable to get it to fail. I was overtorqued in the red for at least 5 minutes flying at up to 140 knots. Huey did not complain.
I think of the three main helicopter controls the pedals are the least critical. It's the least sensitive and twitchy of the controls so I don't think the pedals are particularly critical. I have an MFG Crosswind which is also of eastern European origin but I purchased it when I was more of a generalist. It doesn't need to be nearly as elaborate as it is. I don't have a particular recommendation but I think this can be any set of pedals that does the job and holds up over time i.e., a reasonably good quality one but doesn't have to be nearly as critical as the stick.
I have a feeling Mr. D. Will tell you the truth in that none of them feel like being in the real thing. He flies in the real world where you can feel physically feel what your bird is doing and the feeling matches what you see out the window. Flying in a simulator in no way feels like a real plane. The control the aerodynamics of the flight and how accurately the bird reacts to conditions. The only way to get even closer to being in the real thing is VR and a full motion flight seat. Then you get close. But still I think Mr. D. would have fun if he has never flown in any civilian flight simulator. A full fidelity chopper model in DCS I think for absolute accurate flight dynamics is the best here as they have been modeled with the real thing in mind within a battle simulation. While MSFS and X plane have the stunning visuals that DCS is lacking in.
He's eager to try. We just have to arrange it. I think I probably will get a motion seat at some point but not in probably the next year; not sure whether to have him try it before or after that. He did point out (and I personally observed this weekend) that you can feel what the chopper is going to do as it's coming up so you can make your corrections before it even leaves the ground. As the MD500 starts to lift, the skids narrow and you can tell what's going to happen. This of course does not happen in the sim which is a pity but maybe it does with a motion sim. Would be interesting to know if it does. I did hover this weekend and I have a video to talk about that coming soon.
DCs has a problem in that it doesn’t model the friction between the ground and the skid. Also it doesn’t model the aircraft weight in that area. This is why when the weight on the skids gets light it slides.
Hi. I haven't noticed any commentors mentioning this correctly. At around 6 minute mark you are referring to 'Right Translating Tendency'. This occurs in all Counter Clockwise Rotating Helicopters. To compensate for this so it's not as pronounced as it otherwise would be the factories 'Rig' (tilt) the Main Rotors Head a slight bit to the left which results in the 'Left Skid Low' Attitude. I learned this while a Student at Western Helicopters in Rialto, California before their retirement. Note it is the opposite in a Clockwise Rotating Helicopter. Sincerely, Chris 12:34 AM July 2, 2024
Interesting video Captain 👍. I am a helicopter pilot irl and I am struggling to enjoy flying helicopters in commercial sims whereas I am a huge sim fan. Your external views of the MD500 in Xp12 feel amazingly "real": i have to try XP12. Thanks for video
Wow what an honor! Please elaborate if you would why you are struggling to enjoy commercial sims. I was able to experience a full motion commercial sim of the H145 here in Texas and was impressed that I was able to handle it though my lift off was a little uncoordinated haha.
@@CaptainHelisim I find it very rare (in commercial sims) to experience that particular feeling of "constant unstability and sliding". Most of sims and/or modules are "on rails" and almost coded like if it was fixed-wing aircraft but unable to stall. On the other hand they code VRS like if it was occuring 1000times quicker than irl etc... I am exclusively playing DCS (I gave up on MSFS) and I am looking forward to flying the CH47. At the moment I quite enjoy the UH1 and the Mi8 in DCS
@@damcopter Hm thank you for clarifying. I understand MSFS2024 is coming out before the end of the year. Perhaps they'll offer an upgrade in the flight model. I kind of doubt it though, I feel that helicopters are the very esoteric "wing" so to speak of the flight sim community and there may not be enough of us to justify spending the development dollars.
Well done! I am not a heli pilot and have never flown one IRL. I have ridden in only one helicopter. I have a few hours in MSFS. I have purchased the 500F and enjoy flying it. To me, MSFS appears to have a flight characteristic that is strongly affected by winds. I noticed I need to put in a lot of rudder control to overcome wind, especially low speed and hover. Same with light aircraft. Trying to take off with a crosswind it appears that the wind is stronger than the propeller thrust and direction cannot be corrected with the rudder. It is like the vertical stabilizer has more surface area that is pushed by the wind and thus turns the aircraft in to the wind. The only thing that can keep the plane straight is the friction of the tail wheel. Once lifting the tail off the ground, crosswind push the horizontal stabilizer. The P-51s were badly affected by this. It is like Asobo does not know how to implement multiple forces at one time. Good example is the Kodiak. IRL, you need to use a lot of right rudder to keep the plane straight on the runway during initial roll because the thrust/torque of the prop is so strong. With MSFS, the nose wheel friction keeps the Kodiak straight until you lift off the ground, then you really need to kick in the right rudder to keep the yaw centered. As speed increases you need less rudder, as expected.
Thank you for the comment. There is also another phenomenon I've noticed that I need to remember to describe in the upcoming Real V Sim comparison video -- I rarely if ever fly sim planes but in the helicopters, a crosswind or tailwind causes a lot of yaw juddering -- the entire screen is constantly shifting left and right and in the sim it starts to become dizzying and nauseating after a time. That's not how it is in real life. In real life the chopper IS affected by the crosswind and may in fact judder like this but because of the way your head works -- kind of a chicken-head effect -- you don't see the horizon constantly shifting left right. Your eyes, head, and overall body adjust for any such motion and you're able to stay locked on the sight picture in front of you. This is a coding error that really should be addressed because it is a dramatically different sensation and crosswind/tailwind are very common scenarios -- rarely do you fly on a perfectly calm day.
I'm more of a "fixed wing guy" but I still buy all the helicopter modules in DCS. I also have XPLANE 11.5 and don't talk to me about MSFS. 1. I bought the more expensive version and after installation, when I try to restart it, it always freezes at about 80% so I have to uninstall and reinstall. That said, when I did get it to work, I found it to be a "fun game". I quite enjoyed landing with high gusts, etc. MSFS wasn't created as a flight simulator. It was a worldview software but some manager/director at Microsoft said "hey, that would make a great simulator". 2. DCS. I still haven't ventured into PvP and you don't always need to have things shooting at you. That said, you only get the Caucus map and I believe the Marianas islands are free too - so even if you do "free flight", there's not much scenery to explore. 3. XPLANE: In your video, you're flying without scenery. To add realism, may I suggest you buy the ORBX addon. I have GB North, GB Central and GB South since I'm in the UK - and my God! It's like flying in real time (in VR). After a 25 year hiatus, I restarted flying lessons and I find the flight dynamics of XPLANE to be far superior. With XPLANE (as well as MSFS) you can use VATSIM to communicate with realistic ATC who need to pass exams to take on those roles. Many of the VATSIM ATC are training to be ATC so for you (I'm talking to Captain Helisim), since you aspire to become a pilot, it's a perfect opportunity to start training. I also love flying Warbirds so taking off from my home base (Liverpool John Lennon Airport - EGGP) and doing aerobatics over the River Mersey - which is not permitted in real life because it's a corridor with a ceiling limit and proximity to the city.
I did actually buy a Seattle module for X-Plane which allows me to land at the KOMO pad. Frame rate drops dramatically close to the pad for some reason, but still I enjoy it because I spent some time in that area. I didn't realize ORBX had such an extensive array of scenery but three things about x-plane scenery: 1) There doesn't seem to be a thriving amateur mod community (unless I"m mistaken). There's almost a limitless supply of free mods for MSFS. 2) You could spend a LOT of money filling in the missing detail through ORBX 3) X-plane really shouldn't be quite so primal in its base state. I aspire to be a pilot but only like one aspires to be a celebrity. My age and finances make flying for pleasure or business unfeasible, hence helisim. It's a frustrated career path in life I did not take but wish I did.
I'm not sure you answered the question to full. You were talking mainly about the actual flight model which is great, but what about other features of the sim, - terrain etc. Since MSFS was mainly for airline type flying and rotor seems to be an after thought, the terrain down at 500 ft isn't that great, Will msfs 2024 be much better, is x12 btter? etc.
Couple things -- this vid is already 13 minutes long just talking about flight model comparisons so I think it's enough for this. Perhaps another video to talk about terrain and other aspects. As far as MSFS2024, I have no insight into that -- I'm not a selected beta tester so IDK. I'll have to wait and see just like you. From what was promised it sounds great but who knows. What's promised and what's delivered are often different things.
I've seen glimpses of it at times but not really able to invoke it directly. I'm inclined to say the flight model *accidentally* touches the edge of it but not by intentional design. I could be wrong about that and maybe I don't understand the phenomenon well enough myself. As I've heard it described, it's essentially the tail rotor's own VRS.
Mmmm…..very interesting subject and one I have wrestled with for years. Some thoughts and comments on the points raised for you: - please remember the MD500 in DCS is a free mod and thus the flight model is not as polished as some of the paid/professional models - there are missions and servers for DCS which focus on civilian flight ops (nobody is shooting at you) - rotor downwash effects are now available in MSFS as a paid addon (Parallel 42 I think?) - you are 100% about controls - whilst expensive, a full size and accurate collective and cyclic setup is an absolute must have (and to be honest increases the enjoyment of flying a sim immensely) - although I’ve never tried it, VR is supposed to be another game changer when it comes to flying helicopters in sims - and finally, the proof of the pudding as the saying goes……I used to fly the Mi-8 in DCS using a set of Puma flight controls regularly. I got quite good (didn’t VRS and crash anymore!) Then one day I got to fly irl in a Cabri G2. Now both the Cabri and Mi-8 main rotors turn in the same direction so right pedal is the power pedal, which probably helped. Point is after one hour of flight time I could hover and safely fly the pattern. The instructor kept asking me “are you sure you haven’t done this before?” 😂 So in conclusion, with the right set up the skills learnt on a home simulator are transferable 👍 Keep up the great content! 😉
Aware of all those points. Yes the DCS MD500 is freeware and is incredibly good considering. I would rate it very close to the Cowansim payware for quality. The phenomenon I'm describing is real though and as you can see in the video comparing its performance to the real thing. Yes I'm aware of the civilian DCS add ons, I have my beefs with them in terms of re-playability and diversity. Which despite that is still better than MSFS's environment where there's little in the way of purpose beyond HPG's efforts in this arena. A good argument here is that in general the whole concept of "purpose" needs to be more "organic" in these sims, I feel. If you fly a medevac, you should be able to toggle on medevac missions natively and have it be organically believable. Same for logging, fire fighting, transport, VIP, etc. Perhaps MSFS2024 will bring us something in that capacity. Was aware of parallel 42's rotor wash offering as well. I haven't sprung for that yet; from the trailer I saw, does it compare with what I showed at the end of this video? Complete with grass and palm trees waving? It seemed a little more contained than that -- dust and water ripples mostly -- which of course is a huge upgrade from static grass but again, an add on rather than native. All the issues I described can be "amended" with add ons but these are hodge podge patches for obvious inadequacies IMO. Re: VR, I have it and it has enabled me to be a decent sim pilot at all. However I have seen evidence that with enough monitors surrounding you and some kind of head tracking, one can create an equivalent "attitude awareness" to be able to pilot well and have a very satisfying experience. And thank you for sharing your experience with the Cabri -- another data point that suggests that yes, there is value to flight sim in terms of preparing one to "understand" the nature of helicopters, but from a practical standpoint to most enthusiasts, that this is not just "gaming" but a worthy approximation of the real thing. My gf was snickering with her mother about my claiming I could fly a real helicopter, until the day I actually DID at which point she had to concede to her mother "I guess he CAN fly a real helicopter". HA!
@@ratherbegliding You totally should. It even comes with functional side guns and a gunner. I was unable to find any missions that utilized it though so was a bit disappointed with that. If I knew how to create them I would definitely do so for this model as it's a hoot.
My god... c'mon! OH6 is a mod, there is NO helicopter mod for DCS thats good, they are all terrible. The UH1H in DCS has gotten worse too since they messed with the power last year, its now so powerful it will do 140+ knots without any issues when VNE in a Huey is 110 and cruise speed about 90 - 95 kts IRL. I have never tried X Plane so cant comment too much but I'm pretty sure they got a more complete helicopter frame work and physics than MSFS 2020 has. The MSFS helicopters flies okey but the sim simply dont have the complete model to do it correctly, thats why I've maintained for 3 years now that the FlyInside Bell 47 and 206 are the only two helicopters I fly in MSFS because their EXTERNAL Flightmodel is pretty awesome and I'd say rival any of the other simulators out there... and I say that as someone who did not get along with the devs, specifically their test pilot, he was... a bit of a character... lets say, he had a massive amount of helicopter time tho as a real world pilot. Unless he lied but I dooubt that. Mi8 is my favorite helicopter out of any to fly, and the Hind, and the new Kiowa in DCS is very good too, its downfall for me is that its very slow and and has very low limits but that is how it would be in real life so I cant fault the module for that, it seems to fly in a very realistic manner and it will only get better, the only thing thats it does in a weird way for now is its AI pilot, it defies all physics, when you ask it to hover the helicopter just sit still in the air as if its on pause, do not move a milimeter, but they will fix that later. Its just a first release. Apache is pretty good, but still a work in progress and very system heavy. KA50 is probably pretty accurate but the most boring thing to fly for me. Gazelle in DCS... Unfinished FM, and following them in the discord has me thinking it will never get done, seem they cant find data that satisfies their needs so the FM will just be crap, oddly enough people now like it since they did the last FM update last year... but its really wonky and its clear the FM is not complete in any way. Makes me sad as hell because it would be the most fun helicopter in the sim world if it was done properly. Its crazy fast, one of the fastest helicopters in the world actually and it can do aerobatics like a BO105... other helicopters can do that too these days, its easy to think only the 105 can do that but thats not true. In military airshows they even loop big helicopters like Super Puma's and what not, its crazy! Just need a strong rotor system that wont kill ya and power and speed! And Airbus took a lot of learnings from the BO105 in that regard, and they own the rights to that helicopter. Also... if you download anything for any game off some random website and its not official, maybe treat it like that.... ^^ like the OH6... without proper access to the dev tools for ED and not basing it off an existing module it seems almost impossible to do a helicopter well in DCS, I have yet to see one. UH60 for example, you can move the cyclic from side to side, go make a coffee and come back and it has barely started moving. In the real world, if you move it full deflection in one direction it would roll over pretty quickly, and thats what I was told from real world Blackhawk drivers... And all one has to do is watch youtube. I watched a Bell 407 pilot fly the other day on youtube, so very close to the Kiowa in design and behavior, rotorsystem and what not, the inputs on the controls from taxi to landing 20 min later was so tiny I could hardly tell that he was moving the cyclic at all the entire flight, infact I could not even catch him trim it and his hand was in view at all times during the flight. THAT is how sensitive helicopters are... people dont get it! Especially a 4 bladed fully articulated 800 hp light utility helicopter like that. And some people might wanna ignore me and think I'm talking crazy... but I have yet to hear real pilots put me down. Even tho I have never in my life experienced a helicopter, not even gotten close to one... xD Heck, one suggested I should teach people in DCS... I've been telling people how to get out of VRS, doing the Vuichard recovery among other things... xD
Never heard of Aerofly before you mentioned it. I'm not sure about it; looked at a couple of their videos and did a search for an MD500; couldn't find any. Is there any kind of third party add on community?
@@CaptainHelisim I’m not sure. I played Aerofly 2 then they went to 4. I didn’t get much into the third party stuff. I was playing that most because I had to use a Mac for a few months. Works on both.
The Robinson R22 in Aerofly 2 was lauded as the most realistic flight dynamics of any sim by a R22 instructor irl. I didnt bother with anything else in the game as realistic helicopter handling and flight dynamics was what I was looking for. So I cant comment on the rest of the sim. Not nearly as easy as FSX (even with HTR add-on active)
The Huey does that in real life and it does it pretty badly in some cases and can result in a dynamic rollover. The DCS Huey is pretty close to the real thing, and I say this as one that used to work on them in the US Army. The left skid always leaves the ground last. DCS with the Huey and the Mi-8 and now the OH-58D very much do simulate descent with power. A lot of people confuse VRS with DWP and therein lies the issue. While similar it is the speed at which each occurs that makes them different. VRS is encountered during translation to or from the hover and slower speeds and flying into your own turbulated air. DWP is a result of too much momentum and not enough power to recover, both can happen in a hover, but DWP usually happens at a higher rate of descent with too much weight or in hot and high conditions where you just don't have enough power to arrest your descent, and this can happen in a strong headwind which keep the turbulated air behind you. So while similar they are not the same and failing to recognize it in time will doom the aircraft and crew. Usually when you see a hotdogging helicopter pilot hit the ground, it is a result of DWP and not VRS, and both are recoverable if caught soon enough and you have enough altitude and an escape route but if you ID DWP as VRS and drop collective and push the nose over, you're not going to make it because you already don't have enough power to recover so you have to keep in the collective you have and push the nose over to gain the extra translational lift, where as with VRS you drop collective and fly out of the turbulated air, this is why knowing the difference and the causes and the recovery methods is cruicial. Remember to check your airbrake fluid, and to engage your Turbo Encabulator for extra power on take-off and landing.
Wait -- elaborate -- you're saying the Huey does or doesn't lift off with that peculiar wobble? I could not get it to do it in either DCS or X-plane -- it came up straight and clean.
I'm right up there with you on all of this. I'm fortunate enough to have built a make shift rig out of a 727 first officer seat and some chip board and i have rudder pedals and collective, and ofcourse VR. I personally find my preference to be 1st DCS, I have all the helicopters in it and I think it does the best at everything, however, auto rotations on some models are a hit or miss. xplane12 seems to have it very very well done however I don't fly on it much to comment msfs2020 definitely feels like water. personally i want full blown simulation starting at No.1 flight dynamics and feel 2.systems simulation model accuracy is a must just like sound.
Hm -- please elaborate on this. I did not find the OH6 unflyable at all, it was a very nice model and my landings were fine, but the loss of ETL was quite sudden and you had to be prepared for it if you were making an aggressive landing. How do you mean blade stall in this case?
@@CaptainHelisim Have a quick look at the rotor RPM gauge. You'll see that the blade rpm has bled well out of the green and yellow caution portions of the arc. That would be likely be irrecoverable. It looks like the overtorque as you mentioned was successful, however you can see that the rotor rpm then bleeds off when the collective isn't lowered. In the above case if you'd dropped the collective by the 8:54 mark and rolled off the throttle you'd have probably been able to enter autorotation. Give it another go! I'm surprised that even this level of fidelity is modeled.🚁
Hm I don't know. I found 3 freeware Hueys, two of which fly (though the cabin interiors are Atari game console quality). I saw a payware model by Nimbus that says X11 compatible, 12 when available but I don't have that one to know one way or the other.
I had X-plane 10 for a while,I contacted them because I found the scenery to be somewhat sparse.The answer I received said that they were producing a flight simulator,not a scenery simulator.With that kind of attitude I'm surprised that they're still going.I moved over to Microsoft........................................
I've seen some actual pilots kind of bristle at Microsoft's "gamey" perspective. They don't like that MSFS is missing some features they consider important while announcing new features they consider gamer-oriented. Could be x-plane attempts to invert that perspective and be more oriented towards pilots rather than "scenery or mission enjoyers". My guess is there's probably an almost equal amount of effort required in both regimes -- flight fidelity and scenery fidelity -- and most companies try to devote resources to one or the other. You do have to respect DCS for this aspect -- their flight sim is pretty good while keeping a combat focus. I also have Arma 3 which I'm told you're able to use to transport fighting troops as a chopper pilot (but have been unable to get to work in a multiplayer setting) and their helicopter fidelity is by far the worst. I mean, you CAN fly something like a helicopter but if you were going to flag really bad flight engines, Arma 3 would be it LOL.
MD500 It has a huge ski and serves precisely to dampen the aircraft, cowansim could not put reactivity in MSFS much less in XP. We can put any aircraft in the MSFS and make it as heavy as possible that the skis will remain rigid and motionless. What I want to say is that MSFS loses a lot because there is no general physics and cowansim ends up contributing by not getting into the details. For me the best simulator in terms of physics we helicopters is DCS and then XP. I hope that in MSFS24 this will be solved, but not by cowansim.
Flight Simulator’s helicopter physics are absolutely a step down from the others, very noticeably from DCS, in fact they simply don’t fly like real helicopters. Real helicopters are unstable, yes, but they are easier to manage that stability, Flight Simulator’s physics just don’t feel like you are hanging off a rotor and just feel unnatural and less controllable, I’ve seen quite a few real helicopter pilots complain about it. DCS gets much closer. As much as I’d prefer it to be the other way around, and I REALLY do, even the best helicopter in Flight Simulator is just off and just being human which means inherently knowing when something doesn’t move right and watching videos of many helicopters from outside and in and how the pilots put inputs into the controls it’s very obvious there’s a long way to go for Flight Simulators rotorcraft physics, and that is disappointing.
Well, as I said in the vid, it's not 100%, it never will be, but it's not so far off IMO that there isn't a commonality between them. If that were not so, taking the controls of a real one would be a completely alien experience for a flight simmer, and it's not. It's like taking the controls of a new sim model where it feels different and you have to adapt yourself to its response. Which is the whole point of my video -- the *basic controls* are correct. The particular feel and responsiveness is unique to each model and one has to adapt to it in the sim. And again, IMO, a real one is just one more "sim model" to adapt to.
@@CaptainHelisim I doubt every helicopter pilot would agree with that sentiment and I’m afraid I can’t either, to me it’s very obvious that there is a noticeable difference in the physics engines of each sim, more noticeably in DCS and of how real helicopters move, and having one skid lower than the other, or the helicopter flying a bit crabbed or tilted doesn’t really say much to that at all. No matter how much I want it to be more realistic, I can’t pretend it is. Not that I’m going to stop flying sim helicopters, and I never said they would ever be perfect, but they could be a lot better, especially in Flight Simulator.
As one that has been in helicopter for 25 years, there is nothing wrong with MSFS flight model. The Cowansim birds are my favorite birds in MSFS I fly the Bell 222 and 222UT the most, and fly the Bell 206L3 quite a bit as well. I fly it with all the realism set to full or modern or hard or whatever you want to call it, and I have no issues putting a helicopter down anywhere I want too. Nothing uncontrollable about any of them in MSFS, in fact if anything the default Bell 407 is TOO stable, so I don't get where you think they are too unstable in MSFS. I have a live stream of my doing just that on my channel flying into and out off Tampa General Hospital helipad right on the water of Hillsborough Bay. Check it out if you don't believe me. haha
@@ImpendingJoker as I said, I’ve seen plenty of real helicopter pilots that would disagree with you, and considering you didn’t even know the difference between external physics engines and default recently I’d never consider your opinion on anything related to that. Nothing wrong with the MSFS flight model? The joker isn’t impending, you are right here, as that’s hilarious.
@@WhiteHawk77 Recently? Where have I ever not know the difference between default and external flight dynamics? A2A has been using external flight dynamics for over a decade. So please show me where you think I am failing in my understanding of this. And just because you know plenty that wouldn't agree with me doesn't mean that there are not many that ~would agree with me and disagree with you, and I didn't come here for you to consider my opinion in the first place, so boo hoo, I don't care if you don't. haha You're a clown.
You are not using the same model of uh to compare, the one from DCS is the H, the one from Xplane is another model, look at the position of the tail rotor You are also comparing professional models like the UH from DCS with a free mod (the oh6 cayuse) and the paid civil MD500 from MSFS
Great video although my experience is different DCS has no idea way a tail rotor is and MSFS has no idea how controls work... Like the joystick is a anlog d-pad without diangles and the power lever is just suggestion to the engine. So it hard for anyone to adjust to flying in MSFS... While in DCS yyou always need yaw input or spin which is not how it works in other sims including a 2000s era Skyhawk US navy sim I flew in boy scouts at NAS Jax... So yeah X-plane may be best it was back in the day years ago but now? I can't check a it only like modern HOTAS bno gamepad and bearly my saitec X52...
I find X-Plane to be far more realistic for helicopters. I fly a lot of VSkyLab helicopters. The Cabri Guimbal G2 is more realistic in XP12 in my view. I don't think the yaw is realistic in MSFS 2020.
Hovering a MD500 isn’t possibly that hard in real life. I have a friend that was a fighter jet pilot. He got a flight in Finnish army MD500. Landed and hovered it with zero experience. Just said it was more stable than the jets. But yeah. MSFS is good enough for stable flight but misses all autorotations and other strange things without plugins. X-plane has these to some level and engine modelling is improving all the time.
Eh IDK about that. The MD500 has the advantage of being very responsive but hovering it is still a muscle memory exercise -- fighting the tendency to drift away, keeping it at hover height, the only thing that might translate are the anti-torque pedals but even here, at hover they're not even. An airbus fly by wire chopper would definitely be easier but even there I question whether a fixed wing pilot could just hover with "zero experience" and I definitely doubt one could do it in an MD500. Dude either had experience or was throwing some braggy claims around.
As a matter of progress and functional practicality it's a sensible innovation but the reason I do helicopters is because "easy = boring". I did fixed wing for a while and enjoyed it till I realized the whole thing is the landing. Putting wheels on numbers smoothly. Which is why I suppose DCS exists -- to give sim flyers something to do before landing. Instead of putting in effort to down enemies, I focused on keeping the aircraft in one piece in the form of helicopters. So switching to a KA52 seems self-defeating, to my frame of mind at least.
Ka-52 is the two-seater and is not featured in DCS, the Ka-50 is the single seater in DCS. The main reasons for it being so easy are basically two-fold: Unlike most other helicopters, the Ka-50/52 models have coaxial counterrotating rotor layouts, which both negates the need for a tail rotor and in general just increases stability massively all on its own. Then you add on top the VERY advanced autopilot systems with a lot of authority in all rotational axis, and which is in fact capable of following routes completely hands off and maintaining a near perfect hover automatically, and it's indeed very easy. And that is indeed by design: The platform, especially in the Ka-50 iteration, was quite interesting in that it was a modern (at the time) attack helicopter concept, BUT intended to be operated by a single pilot instead of the two person crew of pilot + co-pilot/gunner that just about every other attack helicopter or gunship uses. It was specifically designed to alleviate the task of flying as much as possible, the free up the brain capacity of the pilot to focus on finding and engaging targets and avoiding hazards. This makes it less interesting as a flying experience in many ways (though on the other hand being so nimble and easy to control it also allows you to do things you might steer away from in other helicopters), but makes it an effective fighting platform. Kind of like how the F-35 was designed to be dead easy to fly (a Marine Corps pilot said of the F-35B that the first time they _ever_ did a vertical landing in it they were able to take their hand off the controls and wave to their mother, who was watching, something you would not do in a Harrier without immense amounts of experience, if then), so that the pilot can focus on situational awareness and make decisions rapidly. As a flying experience the F-35 is a lot less hands on than a WW2 prop plane, as is the Huey or the MD500 vs. the Ka-50. =)
![[MSFS vs XP12] Thoughts after the six flights I did](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Bd5hnl3WBBs/mqdefault.jpg)
And the OH6 for DCS is only a community mod ^^
CORRECTION:
@ryanpacheco4047 pointed out and is correct that the DCS OH6 DOES auto rotate correctly on overtorque engine failure -- it was my pilot error that caused the problem. So the performance comparison chart should show that DCS does fully account for auto rotation.
I am not going to speak to DCS, MSFS or X-Plane in depth (you did a nice job there)... I flew the MH-65 Dolphin for the USCG. So I will speak real world flight physics and what you can do with your controls to fly a more realistic experience. I will comment from the point of view as a Helo pilot with 2000 hours. Let me first give you 2 simple things to do with your controls...
1. Remove the spring centering on the joystick. (ya want a floppy joystick)
2. The pedals also need their spring centering removed (pedals do not want to push back to center.)
2 other things to consider, (1) head tracking or VR is a must (2) Make a collecive. I have made my own from PVC, some basic tools, a potentimeter and an arduino micro.
Flight physics...
Almost all helicopters hover with one wing down by a few degrees and typically a degree or two of nose up attitude. The wing down attitude is on account of having a single rotor and where the lift vector of the rotor disc is pointed. This is very hard to explain with simple text, but the rotor disc is what is flying... the helicopter body is a pendulum hanging below the helicopter. Airfoils are attached to the airframe of the body to fly in a more comfortable position for those inside. As the winds vary and shift, realize that the rotating airfoil over your head is making your lift. As the air flow though the rotor disc changes so does the relative lift vector created. The net result of those lift vectors from the tilts relative to the rotor mast.
Now add the torque of the main rotor and the anti-torque of the tail rotor and it further shifts the center of balance for the body of the helicopter as it suspended below the rotor disc. This increases that angle. I am going to set aside the interaction that can take place between the vorticies of the main rotor and how that can influence the efficacy of the tail rotor.
Here is bottom line, much of this is about Newton and his physics. The goal is to keep the aerodynamic forces in balance at all times. Even when transitioning into and out of forward flight. This means small control inputs, the most common error is over controling which leads to pilot induce oscilations (PIO). This is ver very common in someone learning to hover. it takes most pilot 8-12 hours to be able to get the basics of hovering and upwards of 100 hours before a pilot becomes proficent. The good news is once you become proficient, this returns quickly within a couple of hours in a helicopter.
PIOs are why you want sping centering off of your joystick. I have a completely separate joystick with no spring centering for helicopter. It is also positioned so my arm rests on my forearm and only my wrist (really fingers) move the cyclic. Helicopters do not trim for stable flight like a fixed wing aircraft when in the hover... once above translational lift, the helicopter is very much like a fixed wing aircraft.
Fixed wing
Fixed wing aircraft are flown with the formula of PAT (Power - Attitude - Trim). Set your power and aircraft attitude. Trim out control pressures. At this you can maneuver the flight controls about that trimmed point and until power or attitude is changed. This is more static with respect to aerodynamic forces on the airfoil as compared to rotary wing. This in turn allows for power, attitude and trim settings that are more reproducible; and therefore can follow something more like a receipe.
Rotory wing
Helicopters are a different animal... The rotor-disc is tilted to a desired pitch and then constant fine tune adjustments are made to maintain a aircrafts desired direction of flight. The rotor disc is being blanced like a gyroscope with small changes in blade pitch about the rotor disc to change the direction of the lift vector. Modern helicopter have "feel trim," and electromagnet that will hold the cyclic in a set position. Interestingly, a good number of helicopter pilots in the hover are button "mashers" meaing they spend most of their time with the feel trim release depressed (disengaging the trim). Above translational lift... virtually all pilots are using the feel trim as the aerodymic forces closly approximate that of a fixed with aircraft. ( Keep in mind, the rotor disc is flying and the airframe below the disc is along for the ride.) This is why a non-centering joystick makes it so much easier to set the attitude you need for a stable hover without the joystick trying to push the cyclic back to center. This makes flying a helo in the less fatiguing.
I have flown DCS, X-plane and MSFS... my position is that MSFS is generally closer to the mark as compared to the other two. I will also add, that hovering in the SIM is exceptionally difficult if you are not able to move your point of view naturally (Track IR or VR). If i were to grade MSFS... they are A- mostly for how far we have come since FSX. DCS and X-plane get a C+/B-... I have done autos in MSFS and they are pretty good and I would argue DCS & X-plane feel (my opinion) more like an arcade game then a true flight sim.
Fly safe and maintain your Nr
John Hall
Doesn’t the spring simulate (on non fly by wire aircraft) air resistance on the control surfaces? I guess you’re describing helicopters here. My only real life experience is being an avionics tech for the mh60s so I have no idea.
The DCS OH58 is very accurate. The right skid lifts off befor the left.
That ending 🤣 Great video, thanks for sharing!
Hey, just to explain some of the physics of which skid hangs low during hover and how the heli reacts to that on take of and landing:
First of, there are several factors that play a role in that; like loading, wind and to a big extend the offset of the mainrotor flapping hinges. Classic two bladed semi rigid models tend to freely hang under the rotor while a modern ridgid rotor can produce a torque moment on the fuselage which completely changes the way a helicopter behaves.
But the main point is this:
What you showed in the MD500 is not a result of engine torque but an effect that is called tail rotor roll. I'll try to explain: Imagine seeing the helicopter directly from behind, you would see that the plane of the main rotor is higher up than the tail rotor. This is where the problem lies, the thrust of the tail rotor pushes in one direction which has to be compensated by tilting the main rotor to the other side to achieve a stable hover. With those two thrust vectors not being aligned you create a rolling moment on the fuselage.
With the Huey it's different, the Tail rotor is nearly the same height as the main rotor. This means while you still get two opposing forces, you eliminate the lever that creates the rolling moment. In fact one of the reasons for a raised tail rotor is to reduce this effect.
So what is shown in your example clips is roughly correct ... and they still follow the same aerodynamic principles.
OHHHHHHH riiiight. That makes so much sense, explaining what's going on and why the Huey doesn't do it. BRILLIANT. Another thing learned. Awesome. Thanks for the comment!
Welcome back, CHS. I missed you!
As always, I really enjoy your analysis.
I am subscribed to various forums about helicopters and have basically given up listening to the realism debate, mainly because there are just too many variables - monitor/headtracking/VR/X-box controller/short flightstick/twist grip rudder/decent pedals...etc...etc....
Some want to switch on and 'play' others (like you and I) want the closest to realism possible.
In the same thread, someone will often state several good reasons why one heli is better for them, then another person will provide just as solid counter arguments.
It is all enough to drive us pureists mad 😄
Your more 'fact-based' approach, attempts to logically reason why things are the way they are and I appreciate that.
I have similar reservations about DCS's miltary grounding as you but I love the rotor-wash effect on the ground and VRS and my favourite, the dashboard shake as you transition through ETL. Surely these are easy additions for the other developers???
You have a fairly unique possibility to fly you real-life heli and more interestringly, getting that pilot to fly your sim. Now that is a future video I will look forward to.
Thank you for the comment and thumbs up. The analysis is from my incredibly limited personal experience; a proper pilot might vehemently disagree which is why I think Mr D's feedback would be fascinating, informative, and definitive. He's expressed interest in trying it so we just have to arrange it.
Loss of tail rotor effectivness you can feel for instance in DCS Mi-24P
Oh that's nice. I guess for $70 they go the extra mile LOL!
@@CaptainHelisim You can feel it in the Huey as well. After you get over 50kias you don't even need your feet on the pedals while you cruise.
@ImpendingJoker Hm we may not be talking about the same thing. Loss of tail rotor effectiveness is a phenomenon as described -- in normal stable hover operations, a number of conditions can cause the tail rotor to lose sufficient thrust despite having full power available, causing the helicopter to begin rotating uncommanded, and uncontrollably. This can result in a crash.
@@CaptainHelisim Oh oh oh, yes that is not what I was thinking about. You're right I don't think any of the helicopters in DCS model that.
@@ImpendingJoker Yeah that's a bummer because it's a thing. I mean, obviously it's a thing, but Mr D has told me point blank that it's something you can feel and you have to be conscious of and react to meaning when you feel it, do something to change the situation because if you let it get out of control well... now you're out of control. And gaining recovery is a lot more difficult than just dealing with it before it gets out of control.
Point being, it's a serious subtlety that really should be modeled. I know I'm kinda asking a lot in simulations -- helicopters seem to have an enormous bag of subtle issues to contend with in the real world, but you know... if you want to simulate that, you should simulate that. Don't give me a "gamer" version of a simulation. I can go pay 50 cents at the arcade for that.
If you don't like the combat aspect of d. C. S there are multiple multiplayer servers that focus on non combat things. One of my favorite for honing skills is a SAR and Firefighting server. Thats all you do is pickup injured and transport them to a hospital and do water drops on fires.
And you can overtorque the Huey. It takes a while but eventually the engine will burn up.
I bought the CowanSim 500E for MSFS because of your review. I really like it.
So did I
For me the best flight model is the ec130 on XPlane12
The reason you have to bank to the left is because the anti-torque not only imparts a rotational force, it also imparts a thrust that pushes the heli to the right.
Yes, that's what I was guessing. I wouldn't mind it so much in the air but it surprises me that it skids to the right on the ground -- like I'm taking off from ice.
That's a subtlety that should be modeled IMO -- the ground texture should affect your takeoff. Taking off from ice, water (if on pontoons), tarmac, grass, dirt, rocks, etc, should all have an influence. Not trying to make work for the developers but just being real here.
@@CaptainHelisim Older helicopters have this happen a lot because they didn't know about lifting forces generated by the tail boom itself. Along with the axial thrust of the tail rotor pushing a bit to the right, the rotorwash over the left hand side of the tail boom itself also produces lift in that direction. It works the same as an airfoil where the higher speed air on one side creates a pressure differential and causes the tail to move into the direction of lower pressure. Later versions of the Bell 205/210/212/214/412, added a strake down the tail boom that kinda looks like a bilge keel on a ship or a stall strip on a fixed wing airplane, to stop the smooth airflow over the tail boom, and in fact is incorporated into most modern helicopter designs.
Maybe next time it would be good to mention, the dcs OH-6 is a mod and in constend development so things like autorotation in it could come und the future. And as a dcs UH-1 veteran ,…. Yes you can overthought the engine of the UH-1 😂😂 . In the end very nice video 👍
Actually the weird thing is that the DCS OH6 CAN auto rotate, just not as a consequence of overtorque engine failure. So that was a little strange. Also, I did find it strange about the Huey -- I flew it full out over the line and it did not respond to overtorque but I'll take your word for it that it does. I have a vague memory that it used to but for some reason I was unable to make it so.
@@CaptainHelisim it mainly happens wenn you heavily loudest and climb up hills , so you take everything of power that you can get , the limiter screams and a minute or two later the engine burns out , in flying with many guy and once I actually saw how the engine of the Huey infront of me burns through the turbine and a fire plume came out of his nosl and that he took the elevator downwards 😂
@@FlybywireTheGerman Strange -- I just tried it again and was unable to get it to fail. I was overtorqued in the red for at least 5 minutes flying at up to 140 knots. Huey did not complain.
What rudder pedals do you use? Which do you recommend?
I think of the three main helicopter controls the pedals are the least critical. It's the least sensitive and twitchy of the controls so I don't think the pedals are particularly critical. I have an MFG Crosswind which is also of eastern European origin but I purchased it when I was more of a generalist. It doesn't need to be nearly as elaborate as it is. I don't have a particular recommendation but I think this can be any set of pedals that does the job and holds up over time i.e., a reasonably good quality one but doesn't have to be nearly as critical as the stick.
@@CaptainHelisim Thanks ...I have some cheap Logitech ...I will upgrade only because the rest of my rig is much better.
I have a feeling Mr. D. Will tell you the truth in that none of them feel like being in the real thing. He flies in the real world where you can feel physically feel what your bird is doing and the feeling matches what you see out the window. Flying in a simulator in no way feels like a real plane. The control the aerodynamics of the flight and how accurately the bird reacts to conditions. The only way to get even closer to being in the real thing is VR and a full motion flight seat. Then you get close. But still I think Mr. D. would have fun if he has never flown in any civilian flight simulator. A full fidelity chopper model in DCS I think for absolute accurate flight dynamics is the best here as they have been modeled with the real thing in mind within a battle simulation. While MSFS and X plane have the stunning visuals that DCS is lacking in.
He's eager to try. We just have to arrange it. I think I probably will get a motion seat at some point but not in probably the next year; not sure whether to have him try it before or after that. He did point out (and I personally observed this weekend) that you can feel what the chopper is going to do as it's coming up so you can make your corrections before it even leaves the ground. As the MD500 starts to lift, the skids narrow and you can tell what's going to happen. This of course does not happen in the sim which is a pity but maybe it does with a motion sim. Would be interesting to know if it does. I did hover this weekend and I have a video to talk about that coming soon.
DCs has a problem in that it doesn’t model the friction between the ground and the skid. Also it doesn’t model the aircraft weight in that area. This is why when the weight on the skids gets light it slides.
Sounds right. That's what it seems like.
Well to be fair it DOES model the friction, it just does it quite poorly.
Hi. I haven't noticed any commentors mentioning this correctly. At around 6 minute mark you are referring to 'Right Translating Tendency'. This occurs in all Counter Clockwise Rotating Helicopters. To compensate for this so it's not as pronounced as it otherwise would be the factories 'Rig' (tilt) the Main Rotors Head a slight bit to the left which results in the 'Left Skid Low' Attitude. I learned this while a Student at Western Helicopters in Rialto, California before their retirement. Note it is the opposite in a Clockwise Rotating Helicopter. Sincerely, Chris 12:34 AM July 2, 2024
Interesting video Captain 👍. I am a helicopter pilot irl and I am struggling to enjoy flying helicopters in commercial sims whereas I am a huge sim fan. Your external views of the MD500 in Xp12 feel amazingly "real": i have to try XP12.
Thanks for video
Wow what an honor! Please elaborate if you would why you are struggling to enjoy commercial sims. I was able to experience a full motion commercial sim of the H145 here in Texas and was impressed that I was able to handle it though my lift off was a little uncoordinated haha.
@@CaptainHelisim I find it very rare (in commercial sims) to experience that particular feeling of "constant unstability and sliding". Most of sims and/or modules are "on rails" and almost coded like if it was fixed-wing aircraft but unable to stall. On the other hand they code VRS like if it was occuring 1000times quicker than irl etc...
I am exclusively playing DCS (I gave up on MSFS) and I am looking forward to flying the CH47. At the moment I quite enjoy the UH1 and the Mi8 in DCS
@@damcopter Hm thank you for clarifying. I understand MSFS2024 is coming out before the end of the year. Perhaps they'll offer an upgrade in the flight model. I kind of doubt it though, I feel that helicopters are the very esoteric "wing" so to speak of the flight sim community and there may not be enough of us to justify spending the development dollars.
Well done! I am not a heli pilot and have never flown one IRL. I have ridden in only one helicopter. I have a few hours in MSFS. I have purchased the 500F and enjoy flying it.
To me, MSFS appears to have a flight characteristic that is strongly affected by winds. I noticed I need to put in a lot of rudder control to overcome wind, especially low speed and hover. Same with light aircraft. Trying to take off with a crosswind it appears that the wind is stronger than the propeller thrust and direction cannot be corrected with the rudder. It is like the vertical stabilizer has more surface area that is pushed by the wind and thus turns the aircraft in to the wind. The only thing that can keep the plane straight is the friction of the tail wheel. Once lifting the tail off the ground, crosswind push the horizontal stabilizer. The P-51s were badly affected by this. It is like Asobo does not know how to implement multiple forces at one time. Good example is the Kodiak. IRL, you need to use a lot of right rudder to keep the plane straight on the runway during initial roll because the thrust/torque of the prop is so strong. With MSFS, the nose wheel friction keeps the Kodiak straight until you lift off the ground, then you really need to kick in the right rudder to keep the yaw centered. As speed increases you need less rudder, as expected.
Thank you for the comment. There is also another phenomenon I've noticed that I need to remember to describe in the upcoming Real V Sim comparison video -- I rarely if ever fly sim planes but in the helicopters, a crosswind or tailwind causes a lot of yaw juddering -- the entire screen is constantly shifting left and right and in the sim it starts to become dizzying and nauseating after a time. That's not how it is in real life. In real life the chopper IS affected by the crosswind and may in fact judder like this but because of the way your head works -- kind of a chicken-head effect -- you don't see the horizon constantly shifting left right. Your eyes, head, and overall body adjust for any such motion and you're able to stay locked on the sight picture in front of you. This is a coding error that really should be addressed because it is a dramatically different sensation and crosswind/tailwind are very common scenarios -- rarely do you fly on a perfectly calm day.
Dcs is by far the best
I'm more of a "fixed wing guy" but I still buy all the helicopter modules in DCS. I also have XPLANE 11.5 and don't talk to me about MSFS.
1. I bought the more expensive version and after installation, when I try to restart it, it always freezes at about 80% so I have to uninstall and reinstall. That said, when I did get it to work, I found it to be a "fun game". I quite enjoyed landing with high gusts, etc. MSFS wasn't created as a flight simulator. It was a worldview software but some manager/director at Microsoft said "hey, that would make a great simulator".
2. DCS. I still haven't ventured into PvP and you don't always need to have things shooting at you. That said, you only get the Caucus map and I believe the Marianas islands are free too - so even if you do "free flight", there's not much scenery to explore.
3. XPLANE: In your video, you're flying without scenery. To add realism, may I suggest you buy the ORBX addon. I have GB North, GB Central and GB South since I'm in the UK - and my God! It's like flying in real time (in VR). After a 25 year hiatus, I restarted flying lessons and I find the flight dynamics of XPLANE to be far superior. With XPLANE (as well as MSFS) you can use VATSIM to communicate with realistic ATC who need to pass exams to take on those roles. Many of the VATSIM ATC are training to be ATC so for you (I'm talking to Captain Helisim), since you aspire to become a pilot, it's a perfect opportunity to start training.
I also love flying Warbirds so taking off from my home base (Liverpool John Lennon Airport - EGGP) and doing aerobatics over the River Mersey - which is not permitted in real life because it's a corridor with a ceiling limit and proximity to the city.
I did actually buy a Seattle module for X-Plane which allows me to land at the KOMO pad. Frame rate drops dramatically close to the pad for some reason, but still I enjoy it because I spent some time in that area. I didn't realize ORBX had such an extensive array of scenery but three things about x-plane scenery:
1) There doesn't seem to be a thriving amateur mod community (unless I"m mistaken). There's almost a limitless supply of free mods for MSFS.
2) You could spend a LOT of money filling in the missing detail through ORBX
3) X-plane really shouldn't be quite so primal in its base state.
I aspire to be a pilot but only like one aspires to be a celebrity. My age and finances make flying for pleasure or business unfeasible, hence helisim. It's a frustrated career path in life I did not take but wish I did.
I'm not sure you answered the question to full. You were talking mainly about the actual flight model which is great, but what about other features of the sim, - terrain etc. Since MSFS was mainly for airline type flying and rotor seems to be an after thought, the terrain down at 500 ft isn't that great, Will msfs 2024 be much better, is x12 btter? etc.
Couple things -- this vid is already 13 minutes long just talking about flight model comparisons so I think it's enough for this. Perhaps another video to talk about terrain and other aspects. As far as MSFS2024, I have no insight into that -- I'm not a selected beta tester so IDK. I'll have to wait and see just like you. From what was promised it sounds great but who knows. What's promised and what's delivered are often different things.
Wait, no LTE on all three? I learned it (the hard way) all the way back to FS2004 with DODOSIM RS206, and still treat it as a thing in XP12 now.....
I've seen glimpses of it at times but not really able to invoke it directly. I'm inclined to say the flight model *accidentally* touches the edge of it but not by intentional design. I could be wrong about that and maybe I don't understand the phenomenon well enough myself. As I've heard it described, it's essentially the tail rotor's own VRS.
Mmmm…..very interesting subject and one I have wrestled with for years.
Some thoughts and comments on the points raised for you:
- please remember the MD500 in DCS is a free mod and thus the flight model is not as polished as some of the paid/professional models
- there are missions and servers for DCS which focus on civilian flight ops (nobody is shooting at you)
- rotor downwash effects are now available in MSFS as a paid addon (Parallel 42 I think?)
- you are 100% about controls - whilst expensive, a full size and accurate collective and cyclic setup is an absolute must have (and to be honest increases the enjoyment of flying a sim immensely)
- although I’ve never tried it, VR is supposed to be another game changer when it comes to flying helicopters in sims
- and finally, the proof of the pudding as the saying goes……I used to fly the Mi-8 in DCS using a set of Puma flight controls regularly. I got quite good (didn’t VRS and crash anymore!) Then one day I got to fly irl in a Cabri G2. Now both the Cabri and Mi-8 main rotors turn in the same direction so right pedal is the power pedal, which probably helped. Point is after one hour of flight time I could hover and safely fly the pattern. The instructor kept asking me “are you sure you haven’t done this before?” 😂
So in conclusion, with the right set up the skills learnt on a home simulator are transferable 👍
Keep up the great content! 😉
Aware of all those points.
Yes the DCS MD500 is freeware and is incredibly good considering. I would rate it very close to the Cowansim payware for quality. The phenomenon I'm describing is real though and as you can see in the video comparing its performance to the real thing.
Yes I'm aware of the civilian DCS add ons, I have my beefs with them in terms of re-playability and diversity. Which despite that is still better than MSFS's environment where there's little in the way of purpose beyond HPG's efforts in this arena. A good argument here is that in general the whole concept of "purpose" needs to be more "organic" in these sims, I feel. If you fly a medevac, you should be able to toggle on medevac missions natively and have it be organically believable. Same for logging, fire fighting, transport, VIP, etc. Perhaps MSFS2024 will bring us something in that capacity.
Was aware of parallel 42's rotor wash offering as well. I haven't sprung for that yet; from the trailer I saw, does it compare with what I showed at the end of this video? Complete with grass and palm trees waving? It seemed a little more contained than that -- dust and water ripples mostly -- which of course is a huge upgrade from static grass but again, an add on rather than native.
All the issues I described can be "amended" with add ons but these are hodge podge patches for obvious inadequacies IMO.
Re: VR, I have it and it has enabled me to be a decent sim pilot at all. However I have seen evidence that with enough monitors surrounding you and some kind of head tracking, one can create an equivalent "attitude awareness" to be able to pilot well and have a very satisfying experience.
And thank you for sharing your experience with the Cabri -- another data point that suggests that yes, there is value to flight sim in terms of preparing one to "understand" the nature of helicopters, but from a practical standpoint to most enthusiasts, that this is not just "gaming" but a worthy approximation of the real thing.
My gf was snickering with her mother about my claiming I could fly a real helicopter, until the day I actually DID at which point she had to concede to her mother "I guess he CAN fly a real helicopter". HA!
@@CaptainHelisim Classic “I told you so” moment eh? 😂
I think I need to go download that MD500 for DCS now….. 😁
@@ratherbegliding You totally should. It even comes with functional side guns and a gunner. I was unable to find any missions that utilized it though so was a bit disappointed with that. If I knew how to create them I would definitely do so for this model as it's a hoot.
My god... c'mon!
OH6 is a mod, there is NO helicopter mod for DCS thats good, they are all terrible.
The UH1H in DCS has gotten worse too since they messed with the power last year, its now so powerful it will do 140+ knots without any issues when VNE in a Huey is 110 and cruise speed about 90 - 95 kts IRL.
I have never tried X Plane so cant comment too much but I'm pretty sure they got a more complete helicopter frame work and physics than MSFS 2020 has.
The MSFS helicopters flies okey but the sim simply dont have the complete model to do it correctly, thats why I've maintained for 3 years now that the FlyInside Bell 47 and 206 are the only two helicopters I fly in MSFS because their EXTERNAL Flightmodel is pretty awesome and I'd say rival any of the other simulators out there... and I say that as someone who did not get along with the devs, specifically their test pilot, he was... a bit of a character... lets say, he had a massive amount of helicopter time tho as a real world pilot. Unless he lied but I dooubt that.
Mi8 is my favorite helicopter out of any to fly, and the Hind, and the new Kiowa in DCS is very good too, its downfall for me is that its very slow and and has very low limits but that is how it would be in real life so I cant fault the module for that, it seems to fly in a very realistic manner and it will only get better, the only thing thats it does in a weird way for now is its AI pilot, it defies all physics, when you ask it to hover the helicopter just sit still in the air as if its on pause, do not move a milimeter, but they will fix that later. Its just a first release.
Apache is pretty good, but still a work in progress and very system heavy.
KA50 is probably pretty accurate but the most boring thing to fly for me.
Gazelle in DCS...
Unfinished FM, and following them in the discord has me thinking it will never get done, seem they cant find data that satisfies their needs so the FM will just be crap, oddly enough people now like it since they did the last FM update last year... but its really wonky and its clear the FM is not complete in any way. Makes me sad as hell because it would be the most fun helicopter in the sim world if it was done properly. Its crazy fast, one of the fastest helicopters in the world actually and it can do aerobatics like a BO105... other helicopters can do that too these days, its easy to think only the 105 can do that but thats not true. In military airshows they even loop big helicopters like Super Puma's and what not, its crazy! Just need a strong rotor system that wont kill ya and power and speed! And Airbus took a lot of learnings from the BO105 in that regard, and they own the rights to that helicopter.
Also... if you download anything for any game off some random website and its not official, maybe treat it like that.... ^^ like the OH6... without proper access to the dev tools for ED and not basing it off an existing module it seems almost impossible to do a helicopter well in DCS, I have yet to see one.
UH60 for example, you can move the cyclic from side to side, go make a coffee and come back and it has barely started moving. In the real world, if you move it full deflection in one direction it would roll over pretty quickly, and thats what I was told from real world Blackhawk drivers...
And all one has to do is watch youtube.
I watched a Bell 407 pilot fly the other day on youtube, so very close to the Kiowa in design and behavior, rotorsystem and what not, the inputs on the controls from taxi to landing 20 min later was so tiny I could hardly tell that he was moving the cyclic at all the entire flight, infact I could not even catch him trim it and his hand was in view at all times during the flight.
THAT is how sensitive helicopters are... people dont get it! Especially a 4 bladed fully articulated 800 hp light utility helicopter like that.
And some people might wanna ignore me and think I'm talking crazy... but I have yet to hear real pilots put me down. Even tho I have never in my life experienced a helicopter, not even gotten close to one... xD Heck, one suggested I should teach people in DCS... I've been telling people how to get out of VRS, doing the Vuichard recovery among other things... xD
DCS heli you where using is a unofficial free mod, imagine if it was an official one
What about Aerofly FS 4?
Never heard of Aerofly before you mentioned it. I'm not sure about it; looked at a couple of their videos and did a search for an MD500; couldn't find any. Is there any kind of third party add on community?
@@CaptainHelisim I’m not sure. I played Aerofly 2 then they went to 4. I didn’t get much into the third party stuff. I was playing that most because I had to use a Mac for a few months. Works on both.
The Robinson R22 in Aerofly 2 was lauded as the most realistic flight dynamics of any sim by a R22 instructor irl. I didnt bother with anything else in the game as realistic helicopter handling and flight dynamics was what I was looking for. So I cant comment on the rest of the sim. Not nearly as easy as FSX (even with HTR add-on active)
@@ilikegliding Very interesting. I might have to look into it at some point.
The loading stall is being fixed or has been fixed now.
Yes but as it has come and gone over time, I decided when it was broken to just buy x-plane and have it as an end around MS's recurring issues.
The Huey does that in real life and it does it pretty badly in some cases and can result in a dynamic rollover. The DCS Huey is pretty close to the real thing, and I say this as one that used to work on them in the US Army. The left skid always leaves the ground last. DCS with the Huey and the Mi-8 and now the OH-58D very much do simulate descent with power. A lot of people confuse VRS with DWP and therein lies the issue. While similar it is the speed at which each occurs that makes them different. VRS is encountered during translation to or from the hover and slower speeds and flying into your own turbulated air. DWP is a result of too much momentum and not enough power to recover, both can happen in a hover, but DWP usually happens at a higher rate of descent with too much weight or in hot and high conditions where you just don't have enough power to arrest your descent, and this can happen in a strong headwind which keep the turbulated air behind you. So while similar they are not the same and failing to recognize it in time will doom the aircraft and crew. Usually when you see a hotdogging helicopter pilot hit the ground, it is a result of DWP and not VRS, and both are recoverable if caught soon enough and you have enough altitude and an escape route but if you ID DWP as VRS and drop collective and push the nose over, you're not going to make it because you already don't have enough power to recover so you have to keep in the collective you have and push the nose over to gain the extra translational lift, where as with VRS you drop collective and fly out of the turbulated air, this is why knowing the difference and the causes and the recovery methods is cruicial. Remember to check your airbrake fluid, and to engage your Turbo Encabulator for extra power on take-off and landing.
Wait -- elaborate -- you're saying the Huey does or doesn't lift off with that peculiar wobble? I could not get it to do it in either DCS or X-plane -- it came up straight and clean.
I'm right up there with you on all of this. I'm fortunate enough to have built a make shift rig out of a 727 first officer seat and some chip board and i have rudder pedals and collective, and ofcourse VR.
I personally find my preference to be
1st DCS, I have all the helicopters in it and I think it does the best at everything, however, auto rotations on some models are a hit or miss.
xplane12 seems to have it very very well done however I don't fly on it much to comment
msfs2020 definitely feels like water. personally i want full blown simulation starting at No.1 flight dynamics and feel 2.systems simulation model accuracy is a must just like sound.
as for me, i like IL 2 as a flysim, but there is no hellicopters(( but P-47D is so cool!!!
The Oh-6 around the 9 minute mark has blade stall. Any more attempts with it?
Hm -- please elaborate on this. I did not find the OH6 unflyable at all, it was a very nice model and my landings were fine, but the loss of ETL was quite sudden and you had to be prepared for it if you were making an aggressive landing. How do you mean blade stall in this case?
@@CaptainHelisim Have a quick look at the rotor RPM gauge. You'll see that the blade rpm has bled well out of the green and yellow caution portions of the arc. That would be likely be irrecoverable. It looks like the overtorque as you mentioned was successful, however you can see that the rotor rpm then bleeds off when the collective isn't lowered. In the above case if you'd dropped the collective by the 8:54 mark and rolled off the throttle you'd have probably been able to enter autorotation. Give it another go! I'm surprised that even this level of fidelity is modeled.🚁
@@ryanpacheco4047 Indeed you are correct! Pilot error. I will credit you with a pinned comment in a bit. Thank you for pointing that out.
Dcs if you like how and what the aircraft was designed to do. MSFS if you like scenery.
honestly in VR DCS looks way better then MSFS specially the Gauges
Taking Copeium are we?
Does the huey for xplane12 properly work in the beta? I want to get the heli but it says xplane12 version soon, but that has been a year now.
Hm I don't know.
I found 3 freeware Hueys, two of which fly (though the cabin interiors are Atari game console quality). I saw a payware model by Nimbus that says X11 compatible, 12 when available but I don't have that one to know one way or the other.
I had X-plane 10 for a while,I contacted them because I found the scenery to be somewhat sparse.The answer I received said that they were producing a flight simulator,not a scenery simulator.With that kind of attitude I'm surprised that they're still going.I moved over to Microsoft........................................
I've seen some actual pilots kind of bristle at Microsoft's "gamey" perspective. They don't like that MSFS is missing some features they consider important while announcing new features they consider gamer-oriented. Could be x-plane attempts to invert that perspective and be more oriented towards pilots rather than "scenery or mission enjoyers". My guess is there's probably an almost equal amount of effort required in both regimes -- flight fidelity and scenery fidelity -- and most companies try to devote resources to one or the other.
You do have to respect DCS for this aspect -- their flight sim is pretty good while keeping a combat focus. I also have Arma 3 which I'm told you're able to use to transport fighting troops as a chopper pilot (but have been unable to get to work in a multiplayer setting) and their helicopter fidelity is by far the worst. I mean, you CAN fly something like a helicopter but if you were going to flag really bad flight engines, Arma 3 would be it LOL.
MD500 It has a huge ski and serves precisely to dampen the aircraft, cowansim could not put reactivity in MSFS much less in XP. We can put any aircraft in the MSFS and make it as heavy as possible that the skis will remain rigid and motionless. What I want to say is that MSFS loses a lot because there is no general physics and cowansim ends up contributing by not getting into the details. For me the best simulator in terms of physics we helicopters is DCS and then XP. I hope that in MSFS24 this will be solved, but not by cowansim.
Flight Simulator’s helicopter physics are absolutely a step down from the others, very noticeably from DCS, in fact they simply don’t fly like real helicopters. Real helicopters are unstable, yes, but they are easier to manage that stability, Flight Simulator’s physics just don’t feel like you are hanging off a rotor and just feel unnatural and less controllable, I’ve seen quite a few real helicopter pilots complain about it. DCS gets much closer.
As much as I’d prefer it to be the other way around, and I REALLY do, even the best helicopter in Flight Simulator is just off and just being human which means inherently knowing when something doesn’t move right and watching videos of many helicopters from outside and in and how the pilots put inputs into the controls it’s very obvious there’s a long way to go for Flight Simulators rotorcraft physics, and that is disappointing.
Well, as I said in the vid, it's not 100%, it never will be, but it's not so far off IMO that there isn't a commonality between them. If that were not so, taking the controls of a real one would be a completely alien experience for a flight simmer, and it's not. It's like taking the controls of a new sim model where it feels different and you have to adapt yourself to its response.
Which is the whole point of my video -- the *basic controls* are correct. The particular feel and responsiveness is unique to each model and one has to adapt to it in the sim. And again, IMO, a real one is just one more "sim model" to adapt to.
@@CaptainHelisim I doubt every helicopter pilot would agree with that sentiment and I’m afraid I can’t either, to me it’s very obvious that there is a noticeable difference in the physics engines of each sim, more noticeably in DCS and of how real helicopters move, and having one skid lower than the other, or the helicopter flying a bit crabbed or tilted doesn’t really say much to that at all. No matter how much I want it to be more realistic, I can’t pretend it is. Not that I’m going to stop flying sim helicopters, and I never said they would ever be perfect, but they could be a lot better, especially in Flight Simulator.
As one that has been in helicopter for 25 years, there is nothing wrong with MSFS flight model. The Cowansim birds are my favorite birds in MSFS I fly the Bell 222 and 222UT the most, and fly the Bell 206L3 quite a bit as well. I fly it with all the realism set to full or modern or hard or whatever you want to call it, and I have no issues putting a helicopter down anywhere I want too. Nothing uncontrollable about any of them in MSFS, in fact if anything the default Bell 407 is TOO stable, so I don't get where you think they are too unstable in MSFS. I have a live stream of my doing just that on my channel flying into and out off Tampa General Hospital helipad right on the water of Hillsborough Bay. Check it out if you don't believe me. haha
@@ImpendingJoker as I said, I’ve seen plenty of real helicopter pilots that would disagree with you, and considering you didn’t even know the difference between external physics engines and default recently I’d never consider your opinion on anything related to that.
Nothing wrong with the MSFS flight model? The joker isn’t impending, you are right here, as that’s hilarious.
@@WhiteHawk77 Recently? Where have I ever not know the difference between default and external flight dynamics? A2A has been using external flight dynamics for over a decade. So please show me where you think I am failing in my understanding of this. And just because you know plenty that wouldn't agree with me doesn't mean that there are not many that ~would agree with me and disagree with you, and I didn't come here for you to consider my opinion in the first place, so boo hoo, I don't care if you don't. haha You're a clown.
You are not using the same model of uh to compare, the one from DCS is the H, the one from Xplane is another model, look at the position of the tail rotor
You are also comparing professional models like the UH from DCS with a free mod (the oh6 cayuse) and the paid civil MD500 from MSFS
Prepar 3d:
Bms falcon:
I refuse to watch the video because I know the answer... DCS and you cant convince me otherwise...
It's still an interesting watch IMO.
Great video although my experience is different DCS has no idea way a tail rotor is and MSFS has no idea how controls work... Like the joystick is a anlog d-pad without diangles and the power lever is just suggestion to the engine. So it hard for anyone to adjust to flying in MSFS... While in DCS yyou always need yaw input or spin which is not how it works in other sims including a 2000s era Skyhawk US navy sim I flew in boy scouts at NAS Jax... So yeah X-plane may be best it was back in the day years ago but now? I can't check a it only like modern HOTAS bno gamepad and bearly my saitec X52...
I find X-Plane to be far more realistic for helicopters. I fly a lot of VSkyLab helicopters. The Cabri Guimbal G2 is more realistic in XP12 in my view. I don't think the yaw is realistic in MSFS 2020.
Hovering a MD500 isn’t possibly that hard in real life. I have a friend that was a fighter jet pilot. He got a flight in Finnish army MD500. Landed and hovered it with zero experience. Just said it was more stable than the jets.
But yeah. MSFS is good enough for stable flight but misses all autorotations and other strange things without plugins. X-plane has these to some level and engine modelling is improving all the time.
Eh IDK about that. The MD500 has the advantage of being very responsive but hovering it is still a muscle memory exercise -- fighting the tendency to drift away, keeping it at hover height, the only thing that might translate are the anti-torque pedals but even here, at hover they're not even. An airbus fly by wire chopper would definitely be easier but even there I question whether a fixed wing pilot could just hover with "zero experience" and I definitely doubt one could do it in an MD500. Dude either had experience or was throwing some braggy claims around.
I tried briefly the KA-52 in the Dcs and it's so easy to take-off it almost looks like cheating
As a matter of progress and functional practicality it's a sensible innovation but the reason I do helicopters is because "easy = boring". I did fixed wing for a while and enjoyed it till I realized the whole thing is the landing. Putting wheels on numbers smoothly. Which is why I suppose DCS exists -- to give sim flyers something to do before landing. Instead of putting in effort to down enemies, I focused on keeping the aircraft in one piece in the form of helicopters. So switching to a KA52 seems self-defeating, to my frame of mind at least.
@@CaptainHelisim I feel the same. I was just curious to try it.
Ka-52 is the two-seater and is not featured in DCS, the Ka-50 is the single seater in DCS.
The main reasons for it being so easy are basically two-fold: Unlike most other helicopters, the Ka-50/52 models have coaxial counterrotating rotor layouts, which both negates the need for a tail rotor and in general just increases stability massively all on its own. Then you add on top the VERY advanced autopilot systems with a lot of authority in all rotational axis, and which is in fact capable of following routes completely hands off and maintaining a near perfect hover automatically, and it's indeed very easy.
And that is indeed by design: The platform, especially in the Ka-50 iteration, was quite interesting in that it was a modern (at the time) attack helicopter concept, BUT intended to be operated by a single pilot instead of the two person crew of pilot + co-pilot/gunner that just about every other attack helicopter or gunship uses. It was specifically designed to alleviate the task of flying as much as possible, the free up the brain capacity of the pilot to focus on finding and engaging targets and avoiding hazards.
This makes it less interesting as a flying experience in many ways (though on the other hand being so nimble and easy to control it also allows you to do things you might steer away from in other helicopters), but makes it an effective fighting platform. Kind of like how the F-35 was designed to be dead easy to fly (a Marine Corps pilot said of the F-35B that the first time they _ever_ did a vertical landing in it they were able to take their hand off the controls and wave to their mother, who was watching, something you would not do in a Harrier without immense amounts of experience, if then), so that the pilot can focus on situational awareness and make decisions rapidly. As a flying experience the F-35 is a lot less hands on than a WW2 prop plane, as is the Huey or the MD500 vs. the Ka-50. =)
Wanna play VR? Vtol Vr. Awesome.
Well for me, Xplane and MSFS can’t do combat like DCS so… they lose.
I refuse to get a xbox account for msfs! And screw steam
Yeah. I am quite disappointed since the day 0 there is no Stand-alone version of MSFS2020