I've tried most of them and I don't get past 5 minutes before I become disgusted.

 

Wow... does that include Take On Helicopters? Welcome to the forum by the way and thanks for the post - thanks to all who replied. My expectations might have been a bit off, but they were based on a lenghty article I once read, not just armchair logic.

Each time I tried to fly a helo in FSX I always found myself going slightly inclined 30° to the left or right but I was used to do that with style. ^_^

 

Back to Flight, it really needs at least 2 helos with cockpit to enlarge the experience.

Wow! I would have dumped that nasty fellow in a heartbeat... "Follow my GD orders Larkin!" Ugh! What freaking orders exactally?

 

The Hind is one fugly machine... :LMAO:

The Hind is one fugly machine.

 

"Helicopters can't actually fly. They are so ugly the earth repells them."

 

It may be ugly, but it's a cool machine. :)

 

Hook

Here is a vid I made from a hoop course in the demo. It took me many takes since I tried to get tricky with my stunt flying and kept flying into buildings.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D33EnVu5aY8

The Hind is one of the beautifulliest helis !!

 

I think the Mil-24 Hind is one of a very few aircraft where its appearance symbolises its purpose very well, it looks absolutely deadly dangerous, and not every warplane can claim that. For example, nobody would deny that the Spitfire is a beautiful aeroplane, but it doesn't look like a killer, whereas the Ju-87 'Stuka' looked mean as hell. The Mil-24 has that same kind of 'badass' ambience.

 

The canopies on the Hind look a bit like the compound eyes of some kind of nasty stinging insect, but I suspect it is the downturned stub wings that give it that mean feel; you can see that employed in Star Trek, where the Klingon Bird of Prey also uses that downturned wing to effect like a swooping killer bird. I think that kind of lights up a bit of a primeval feeling of danger in us when we see that geometry. The F4-U Corsair was another that gained that ambience from having the same cranked wing as the Stuka. In both cases it was simply to elevate the propeller's ground clearance, but it certainly had the desired effect of making them look mean as hell. I always like aircraft which convey their purpose in their looks.

 

Al

+1 for the hind!

 

that scene in red dawn when it pops into the frame from below... Looks like a rabid beast pouncing on prey. And such effortless confidence and grace in the air. love it!

Helicopters are aero-dynmically unstable, that's why it is hard to fly them. I wrote some comments on the game here:

http://forums.x-pilo...k-what-i-found/

P.S. They released new flight model for the helis. See the updates section.

Wow... does that include Take On Helicopters? Welcome to the forum by the way and thanks for the post - thanks to all who replied. My expectations might have been a bit off, but they were based on a lenghty article I once read, not just armchair logic.

 

I did some more reading up on TOH in the forums there. Apparently there were horrible FM issues in the beginning, but I know they've addressed many of them thru the updates, after a few actual helo pilots brought them up. I may take a look at it soon when I get some time. Could be fun; seems kinda like the helicopter version of Flight.

Tried the 1.05 patch last night..they may have fixed the FM, but the controls are so broken its hard to tell.

I've seen a rumour that all the sensitivities have been adjusted to fit the Xbox controller, to the significant detriment of joystick users.

So far have spent all my time getting the joystick right again, and getting the PoV hat working properly, and no time on 'the game'.

Definitely not the 'kick the tyres and fly' experience that Flight offers.

Seems to be deliberately unneccesarily inconsistently awkwardly difficult for no good reason :(

Still need a helo for Flight. :)

Cheers

Keith