Feature Suggestions » English Setup and Physics Discussion

E: I'm starting this thread after an online session with some guys from Holland (I think). Inverted autorotations feel wrong right now, you can't come in inverted and flip into upright at the end. It works well upright though. I shall be posting model setups where this works better as soon as I get them.

D: Ich starte diesen Thread nach eine Online-Sesison mit Leuten aus Holland (glaub ich). Autorotationen auf dem Kopf fühlen sich im Moment irgendwie falsch an, man kann nicht invertiert rein kommen und am Ende mit einem Flip die Drehzahl wieder aufladen. Anders rum (normal und dann mit Flip auf den Kopf) geht's. If werde die Modell-Setups, wo das besser geht, posten sobald ich sie bekomme.

E: Raising the "Flare" parameter from 0.0019 to 0.0050 helps a lot, lowering the Consumption of Elevator/Aileron (to e.g. 0.020/0.010) helps too. This is for all the 700 size helis.

D: Den Parameter "Flare" von 0.0019 auf 0.0050 anheben hilft, den Verbrauch auf Nick/Roll reduzieren (auf beispielsweise 0.020/0.010) hilft auch. Dies gilt für die 700er Heils.

Auto rotation simulation still needs works but it's getting there

I was also in this discussion I think. After lot of tries and testing I think I still feel autorotation is not completely simulated correctly. The problem is that when you flare, normaly the heli first has to translate speed to height (altitude). So the rotor speed stays constant and the speed decreases, so you have to gain altitude (Law of Energy conversion). In CGM Next I miss the lift there. So it looks like only the falling speed is converted to blade speed.
When you do an inverted autorotation this is more noticable. Because you will need the first flare to flip/roll. Now it falls down and does not gain height.

Maybe Klaus can help here with correct settings, but from what I see I miss the translational lift from forward speed calculation. I will be happy to test things out. Realflight 6.5 does it more correct.

Another thing is blade stop. As the blades stops the heli has to start tumbling because there is no way to correctly steer it. But in Next and in Phoenix the heli drops straight. In RF it tumbles which is correct.
The instability factor needs to be very much higher with the decrease of the rotor speed.
Here I also would like to contribute with testing if desired. I like CGM Next a lot!

Great!

Good to see that you are working on it.. I see there is an option that headspeed is gained due to forward flight now. This works.
Where can we find the true meaning of all those parameters? This can help us tweak the settings and also tell whether there are settings maybe missing that can be of use.
Still the forward speed drops little too fast and altitude is not gained much, but it feels already a lot better.
If you fly the heli away quickly (say to the left) and then put it in a high stall, it should have enough energy that when you throttle hold on top you can fly (auto) all the way backward and land it sliding easily in front of your feet. At least that works really well on my 700 DFC align heli in real life.
email:tjarde01@hotmail.com incase needed.

Thanks for the great efforts!

Further to autorotations, I notice that when the heli is on the ground, the head spead barely decreases with any collective between 0 and -11 (max) degrees, but decreases rapidly with high positive collectives. I'm not experienced with these things, but it seems to me that the head speed should also decrease rapidly with negative collective on the ground (and, more generally, whenever the collective is such that the downward motion of a falling helicopter is accelerated)?

the simu is very good , i really like the way its done and after testing a month i still don t miss realflight at all
please keep working on sounds effects this is very cool and if you can add a good overspeed gestion it would be awsome . "directional sound" , new sounds effects, could be nice too
perhaps autorotation needs to be tuned by default
last summer i tried the demo and don t liked the "too easy" feeling, retryed on december and liked the ameliorations.
lot of friends switched to next but some others say its too easy compared to realflight .
for me the "difficulty" of a sim can be artificial and no realistic like in phoenix so i don t care , and i think the Feasibility in next is kind of realistic. perhaps the hovering could be more "alive"
all in all i think the physic is pretty solid and fun, and we waiting more :p
multiplayer mode could be fun too , like when sometimes we fly 2mn each one like a contest, or each one make one move and others have to recreate , etc
graphics are cool , even if models are less detailled the result is good. but graphics still have a huge amelioration potential . even n64 can implement 3d objects in a spherical bitmap ;p;p
smoke engine could be badass
3d grass could moving when smacking lol


the video is very nice i m gonna try it ^^