Helicopter Simulator

The biggest problem with many helicopters in current versions of
X-Plane is simple - they were made for older versions & not updated
(including all that ship with it - I know, I built them). The
helicopter flight modeling has changed pretty dramatically during the
7.x run - for the better, but it neccesitates changes in the aircraft.

Of course, it's not perfect - but it's better than anything I've seen
in MSFS (any version).

Try a couple of the recent ones I've posted at x-plane.org, you may be
suprised...

wrote in message
news
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:47:10 GMT, "Ezra Bavly" wrote:
My biggest beef is (as noted by another poster) the poor modeling of
required pedal input, but in most other aspects it feels more or less
correct, at least given that I'm looking at a 17.5" monitor with no
peripheral cues.

Is this pedal issue a model problem, or a control sensitivity one?

I find if I use the virtual cockpit and expand the view to 0.5 zoom I get a
much wider view that increases the peripheral awareness.

2. I bought MegaScenery Northern California recently (at the Avsim
conference in Denver). It looks good "at altitude" (say, 5000 feet) but
it falls apart at helicopter altitudes. I am not aware of any add-on
that improves the visuals adequately for the helicopter pilot.

I bought FS Terrain by JustFlight. The terrain mesh is improved a great deal
over the standard stuff. It really brings it to life, and scenery I know
well suddenly looks like it should. It doesn't do anything for the
placement of landmarks or auto-gen buildings, but I think it's a vast
improvement. It covers virtually all of Europe and the USA.

Si

"Ezra Bavly" wrote in message
news:hMSdd.791780$M95.84283@pd7tw1no...
Hi Andrew,
Can you offer a good group discussion site for the Flightsim 2004?
I am using that MicroSoft FlightSim 2004software to simulate a Bell
JetRanger 206 helicopter and it is working quite beautifuly.

It depends on what you mean by works beautifully. The thing just doesn't
handle like a helicopter. For instance, if you go shooting across the
airfield at low level and pull back for a wingover, you'd expect the thing
to go shooting up into the air. It doesn't. Also I'd challenge you to auto
the thing. Also, if you slow down beyond ETL, the thing starts oscillating
in yaw from a point way behind the tail.

X-Plane is way better, but still fails to model
- etl
- vrs
- rotor overspeeds
- rotor disc coning at low RPM
- in fact most effects of low RPM

You will find though that the flight model is much much better than MSFS,
although the eye candy doesn't touch that of MSFS. Whilst neither of them
will fly like a chopper, you can use MSFS for navigation exercises and to a
limited extent, VFR flight planning (I sometimes practice a flight using
MSFS before going out and doing it for real as navigation is not my strong
point).

I am not fammiliar with the X plane program it might be better, but after
setting everything up with flight sim
I will carry on and try to enhance the program.

You can run both. X-Plane is a free download for a fully-functioning sim
which only differs from the real thing by offering limited scenery and
taking control away from you after about 5 minutes of operation.

Regards
Andrew

Andrew Crane wrote:
"Ezra Bavly" wrote in message
news:hMSdd.791780$M95.84283@pd7tw1no...

Hi Andrew,
Can you offer a good group discussion site for the Flightsim 2004?
I am using that MicroSoft FlightSim 2004software to simulate a Bell
JetRanger 206 helicopter and it is working quite beautifuly.

It depends on what you mean by works beautifully. The thing just doesn't
handle like a helicopter. For instance, if you go shooting across the
airfield at low level and pull back for a wingover, you'd expect the thing
to go shooting up into the air. It doesn't. Also I'd challenge you to auto
the thing. Also, if you slow down beyond ETL, the thing starts oscillating
in yaw from a point way behind the tail.

Another gripe about MS flight sim is the collective pulls exactly to
100%, no more, and the response-droop feel is all wrong. Maybe the
sit-down sim I tried was incorrectly rigged, but in real lift, you
can pull WAAAY more than 100% torque in a 206, especially in transient.

If you think of it as procedures trainer or an expensive video game,
it doesn't seem so bad.

Actually, it models everything you've listed in current versions
(7.61/62) - some better than others though:
ETL isn't as abrupt in onset as it should be, but it's definitely
there.
VRS is there but is a hack & not truly calculated, it's a very generic
effect - it looks for vertical descents over a certain rate & then
kicks it in. You get a nasty rate of descent & some wobbling around,
recovery takes some airspeed.
It'll most definitely overspeed the rotor, and the disk does cone more
at low rpm. You can also droop the rpm by pulling pitch too fast, or
pull too much & bleed it off - which slows the tail rotor as it
should, you'll run out of yaw control pretty quick.

Most of this has been there for quite a while, although ETL was broken
in a few versions along the way...

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:07:47 +0100, "Andrew Crane"
wrote:


X-Plane is way better, but still fails to model
- etl
- vrs
- rotor overspeeds
- rotor disc coning at low RPM
- in fact most effects of low RPM