DCS CH-47F Chinook

Extraído de un post de C47Driver en el foro de DCS, me ha parecido interesante.

Been wanting to cover this for a while to clear some things up. I am 47Driver on YouTube, some of you have been watching my videos on the DCS CH-47F, (I really appreciate that), and everybody wants to know about all these weird acronyms that I mention, along with many others.

First of all I want to point out something in regards to the flight model. I see a ton of complaints about how unrealistic it is, etc. Yes, the FM is very WIP and that is what it is. Tandem Rotor physics are straight up wizardry. This is far and away the most complex flight model that ED has ever tried to replicate, and I can say that confidently as an actual Pilot of this aircraft and someone who understands a fair bit about aerodynamics. Tandem rotor helicopters are very weird, and what I'm seeing in the flight model so far indicates that the devs have done their research on how these helicopters behave when none of the things that are built in to help you fly are working, which is true in the module's current state. Please keep that in mind as you fly this thing.

AFCS: Automated/Advanced Flight Control System. This alone is what makes the Chinook so easy to fly. Put your feet flat on the floor, don't touch the pedals, and fly all day long. Thanks Turn Coordination. She's very smooth, steady, coordinated, and controllable when this system is on. When the AFCS in DCS is fully fleshed out, it's gonna make a huge difference.

DAFCS: Digital Advanced Flight Control System. Super cool autopilot(ish) functionality. Basically allows us to capture current Inertial Altitude or Radar Altitude, maintain low speed over the ground via TRC or Translational Rate Command, or capture current position over the ground via P-Hold. P-Hold + Altitude mode = perfect hands off hovering. We also have a full 4 axis autopilot via Flight Director for cruise/instrument flight.

DASH: Digital Air Speed Hold. As you increase speed, the DASH, (a long tube in the flight controls with an actuator on each end) will increase in length. You'll notice eventually when this is modeled that as you increase speed, you'll actually start moving cyclic backwards towards center and the aircraft will keep the speed. Pretty nice and allows us to fly with a more neutral cyclic position.

LCT: Longitudinal Cyclic Trim (Actuators). As speed increases, the LCTs will extend, this will increase forward tilt in both the fwd and aft heads. Allows a more level fuselage at cruise and reduces stress on rotor system. You'll be flying at 140kts and the fuselage will be completely level with the horizon. No more staring at the ground 10deg nose low anymore. When you land, the LCTs drive to the GND position, allowing easier ground taxi. When you hover, they drive to the RET position to facilitate a level hover attitude.

DCP: Differential Collective Pitch. This is mostly why the Thrust Lever is called the Thrust Lever and not a collective. DCP comes from longitudinal cyclic input. Forward cyclic increases collective pitch on the aft rotor system while decreasing collective pitch on the fwd, and vice versa. So basically, the cyclic is also a collective...

Hope this clears some things up and helps you folks understand why the flight model feels so weird right now. With most of these things not being implemented yet, because I'd imagine they're all very hard to simulate, the Chinook is gonna fly a little weird. I'm still having a great time with the module and I'm very excited for more systems depth to be added, so I can continue to share with you guys.

Thanks!

47Driver

Vamos, que cuando todo esté implementado, volarlo será aburrido de narices.
Me parece que seguiré con el Mi8, Gacelle, y otros...

Vamos, que cuando todo esté implementado, volarlo será aburrido de narices.
Me parece que seguiré con el Mi8, Gacelle, y otros...

Hay que montar algo con el Mi8, el Hind y el Ka50

Vamos, que cuando todo esté implementado, volarlo será aburrido de narices.
Me parece que seguiré con el Mi8, Gacelle, y otros...

Yo ya lo avisé.

Pero al ka50 le quitareis los pilotos automáticos para que sea divertido no XD

Pero al ka50 le quitareis los pilotos automáticos para que sea divertido no XD

Eso fue bueno cando empecé el CBO lo volaba sin los compensadores!!!!!!

Luego cuando se conectaban era mucho más sencillo; pero sí que es cierto que en el CBO se coge mucha mano

Con el Mi8 pasa lo mismo sin los compensadores es más complicado pero se puede volar

¿El Hind usará un sistema similar no?

si, muy parecido o igual al del Mi8 pero no tan intrusivos como el del ka50. De todos los helis el que mas me gusta como vuela es precisamente el Hind

si, muy parecido o igual al del Mi8 pero no tan intrusivos como el del ka50. De todos los helis el que mas me gusta como vuela es precisamente el Hind

A mi me pasó con el Mi8 y el Ka50; de hecho el Akula lo tengo desinstalado pero el Mi8 lo tengo por un “a ver si hay tiempo un día y…”

si, muy parecido o igual al del Mi8 pero no tan intrusivos como el del ka50. De todos los helis el que mas me gusta como vuela es precisamente el Hind

A mi me pasó con el Mi8 y el Ka50; de hecho el Akula lo tengo desinstalado pero el Mi8 lo tengo por un “a ver si hay tiempo un día y…”

Pues cuando quieras montamos unos vuelos de practicas, simplemente pillar manos y hacer tráficos, algo que no lleve mucho tiempo y asi te da menos pereza...a mi el mi8 también me mola mucho.

Hay una misioncita pendiente por ahí...